Garry Nolan — "New UAP Materials Tests: What the Results Reveal" (Sol Foundation), Mar 5, 2026

• YouTube: https://youtu.be/Mifx4nzPY68
• Extraction: youtube_transcript.py (timestamps), 2026-05-28
• Significance: Nolan presenting his actual UAP-materials analysis results. Primary for ../../sources/nolan-research-and-claims (anchors the MIBI/isotopic materials claim).

---

[00:00:08.960] The Sol Foundation exists to seriously
[00:00:11.520] address one of humanity's biggest
[00:00:13.280] questions. Unidentified anomalous
[00:00:16.000] phenomena.
[00:00:17.480] The Sol Forum is a digital platform that
[00:00:19.960] extends the critical discussions and
[00:00:21.800] research presented at our annual
[00:00:23.680] symposium.
[00:00:33.405] >> [music]
[00:00:38.520] >> Welcome to the Sol Forum with our host,
[00:00:40.920] Dr. Peter Skafish, cultural
[00:00:42.960] anthropologist and co-founder of the Sol
[00:00:45.280] Foundation.
[00:00:47.160] Dr. Garry Nolan is the Ratchford and
[00:00:49.240] Carlota A. Harris Professor of Pathology
[00:00:51.400] at Stanford University and Executive
[00:00:53.560] Director of the Board of the Sol
[00:00:55.160] Foundation. He is internationally
[00:00:57.200] recognized for pioneering biomedical
[00:00:59.200] technologies such as CyTOF, CODEX, and
[00:01:02.000] MIMI. Has authored over 350 research
[00:01:04.720] articles and founded multiple
[00:01:06.560] biotechnology companies advancing
[00:01:09.320] science and public health.
[00:01:12.000] Hello and welcome to the Sol Forum.
[00:01:14.760] Uh we have today a guest I'm very
[00:01:17.520] excited to have, a um
[00:01:19.720] colleague, uh friend to my co-founder at
[00:01:22.000] the Sol Foundation, Dr. Garry Nolan.
[00:01:24.480] Um who really needs no introduction when
[00:01:26.400] it comes to the UAP subject. So,
[00:01:28.520] welcome, Garry. Thanks so much.
[00:01:30.440] Actually, it'll be fun to actually be on
[00:01:31.880] this. I haven't uh
[00:01:33.600] participated really yet except
[00:01:35.040] >> Yeah, yeah, we haven't done this yet.
[00:01:36.960] And uh we are going to cover a lot of
[00:01:39.760] ground today, but I wanted to jump into
[00:01:42.520] uh what's going on at the time of the
[00:01:43.640] recording, which is that we are
[00:01:46.400] just at the heels of Trump's
[00:01:48.000] announcement that he's going to do did
[00:01:50.080] declassify uh through the Department of
[00:01:52.200] Defense uh not only UAP records, but
[00:01:55.160] apparently records that concern, as he
[00:01:57.120] put it extraterrestrial and and alien
[00:01:59.600] life.
[00:02:00.840] And so, you know, everyone's talking
[00:02:03.400] about this. Uh people are talking about
[00:02:05.280] too much. Uh expectations are high. Uh
[00:02:08.880] you know, I think we should talk about
[00:02:10.399] it and and what's on your mind about it?
[00:02:13.040] Well, I think, you know, I mean
[00:02:14.920] I I I think the hope is that he
[00:02:16.720] declassifies.
[00:02:18.280] I I think the wording wasn't the wording
[00:02:21.640] just that begin the process of release.
[00:02:25.320] Which is different than declassify.
[00:02:29.200] I know you know that. Um but it's um
[00:02:32.560] because there's a lot of leeway room in
[00:02:34.800] the word begin or the words begin to
[00:02:37.480] begin the process etc. And it's very
[00:02:40.160] different than, let's say, a law passed
[00:02:43.320] or an executive order put forward or any
[00:02:47.240] of a number another
[00:02:48.959] um
[00:02:49.640] a number
[00:02:50.880] a number of other approaches that could
[00:02:53.520] be taken
[00:02:54.680] uh to bring the information out because
[00:02:58.040] you know, begin the process really
[00:02:59.959] implies well, that there is a process.
[00:03:03.160] And that means that, you know, you can't
[00:03:05.480] just dump a whole bunch of information
[00:03:08.080] out that there are
[00:03:09.920] uh rules and there are probably things
[00:03:12.239] that you don't want released
[00:03:14.239] uh or shouldn't be released, you know,
[00:03:15.640] that that's etc. The things that the
[00:03:17.720] Department of Defense always uses to say
[00:03:19.760] why they can't let information out,
[00:03:21.000] which is real and it's not, I don't
[00:03:22.160] think, an excuse.
[00:03:23.840] Uh and so um
[00:03:25.640] that that process, let's say that there
[00:03:28.440] is to be disclosure of some kind,
[00:03:31.480] uh there needs to be across the
[00:03:33.600] intelligence services and any other
[00:03:35.600] agencies that have remit
[00:03:37.800] um understanding of what it is that's
[00:03:39.680] being released and what the consequences
[00:03:41.040] are of such release.
[00:03:43.440] Yeah, and what do what do you think
[00:03:44.519] those consequences are? I mean, there
[00:03:46.400] are there there consequences across
[00:03:48.360] different institutions uh within the
[00:03:50.320] government and then there are broader
[00:03:52.000] social scientific, etc. uh consequences.
[00:03:55.840] Well, I you know, there's everything as
[00:03:57.280] we know from religious, I mean the Rand
[00:03:58.920] Corporation has done
[00:04:00.760] you know, prior analyses of of this and
[00:04:03.840] and other
[00:04:05.160] groups. You know, I think the the
[00:04:07.280] biggest one today is
[00:04:09.440] well, first of all, are we alone? And
[00:04:12.720] and that would be just the admittance of
[00:04:15.160] that, the open admittance of that
[00:04:17.920] is frankly
[00:04:19.840] going to be enough to change how we view
[00:04:22.520] ourselves
[00:04:23.720] in the context of the of the universe.
[00:04:26.520] And getting the government to say that
[00:04:28.520] such is the case
[00:04:30.360] absent even providing evidence, let's
[00:04:32.960] say for it would be a game-changer.
[00:04:37.480] Now, you know, we heard
[00:04:40.960] former President Obama say as much
[00:04:43.720] and then he pulled it back a few days
[00:04:45.360] later.
[00:04:46.480] The why of it I I don't quite understand
[00:04:50.080] he would have said it in the first place
[00:04:51.240] knowing the consequence of what it was
[00:04:53.360] that he was saying.
[00:04:55.160] Whether that triggered
[00:04:57.640] President Trump's statement to do see at
[00:05:01.840] the time. I think it was on the plane.
[00:05:03.320] Was it on on one of the planes?
[00:05:05.320] That there was that that was breaking
[00:05:08.960] classification. That was almost kind of
[00:05:10.800] a tell, a weird tell
[00:05:14.360] and people took it as such.
[00:05:16.160] But then he went, you know, he said,
[00:05:18.560] well, I'll I'll I'll maybe help
[00:05:20.160] President Obama in this and maybe I'll
[00:05:23.280] maybe I'll declassify things.
[00:05:25.800] But then the
[00:05:27.960] truth social that he made was was not a
[00:05:30.480] declassification per se, but I but I
[00:05:33.000] think it was
[00:05:34.440] you know, I I think that probably
[00:05:36.320] people, let's say behind the scenes came
[00:05:38.320] to him and said, well, look, this is a
[00:05:39.560] process
[00:05:40.720] President Trump. So maybe we should talk
[00:05:43.520] about it as a process.
[00:05:45.360] And then once the process has been
[00:05:47.360] formalized, uh, then there might be ways
[00:05:50.440] to declassify things such as you said on
[00:05:52.960] the on the plane. And that would be how
[00:05:54.760] I would I would start with it because,
[00:05:58.160] you know, there's everything from
[00:05:59.280] economic to religious to social, uh,
[00:06:02.120] reasons, but
[00:06:03.600] as I've often said when asked about what
[00:06:05.920] would be the consequences of disclosure
[00:06:08.200] for the common folk, is they might turn
[00:06:10.320] their head for a day or two,
[00:06:12.400] uh,
[00:06:13.520] but then they are going to go back to
[00:06:14.800] looking at, um, kitchen table
[00:06:18.240] uh, and, uh, what's going to put bread,
[00:06:20.720] uh, on their table or keep their
[00:06:22.240] families, uh, safe, uh, just in economic
[00:06:26.200] terms, not in,
[00:06:27.840] you know, existential terms.
[00:06:30.200] Yeah. Yeah, I think that's a great
[00:06:31.760] point. I I think, you know, something we
[00:06:33.840] should we should, uh, you know, make
[00:06:35.640] sure people understand because it
[00:06:37.880] underscores the point you just made,
[00:06:39.960] which is that people will listen to this
[00:06:42.280] and maybe shrug their shoulders and go
[00:06:44.200] back to everyday life.
[00:06:46.400] Is that I think a lot of people don't
[00:06:48.160] understand that that two presidents just
[00:06:51.680] played out for the entire world to see
[00:06:54.560] something that I think you and I both
[00:06:56.360] know for a fact to be true, which is
[00:06:58.600] that the the there are components of
[00:07:00.960] federal government that know very well
[00:07:02.520] about this.
[00:07:03.919] And that, you know, to some extent the
[00:07:06.160] efforts and programs to deal with it are
[00:07:08.120] are are under presidential authority and
[00:07:11.200] presidents do get briefed to some
[00:07:12.919] extent. And
[00:07:15.000] and Trump's statement, that's classified
[00:07:17.800] information. Uh,
[00:07:19.600] he wasn't supposed to share that, uh,
[00:07:21.320] pretty much exposed the matter. And yet,
[00:07:24.640] despite some reporting, we haven't seen
[00:07:27.160] serious journalists or many media people
[00:07:30.000] really pursue the meaning of that.
[00:07:32.000] Right. And
[00:07:33.919] I I guess that's because at one level,
[00:07:36.560] uh, it's really, unfortunately, not that
[00:07:38.840] much different than what's gone before,
[00:07:42.200] uh, so far.
[00:07:43.520] But, I do though think that it puts a
[00:07:45.800] little bit of pressure or at least it
[00:07:47.560] gives
[00:07:48.720] uh, people a um,
[00:07:52.400] uh,
[00:07:53.240] I don't don't like to use the word
[00:07:54.320] hammer,
[00:07:55.600] uh, but a a reason to push others within
[00:07:58.680] the government to say, "Hey, look, uh,
[00:08:01.200] the president said this. Uh, I think you
[00:08:03.640] should, you know, next time we come up
[00:08:05.560] for a vote,
[00:08:07.040] you should do something."
[00:08:08.680] Um, or it might, you know, uh,
[00:08:11.560] let's say unwittingly
[00:08:13.520] cause, uh,
[00:08:15.120] not necessarily a whistleblower, but
[00:08:17.440] somebody else,
[00:08:19.000] uh, at some level of government to
[00:08:20.720] interpret what was just said as a reason
[00:08:23.160] to release information.
[00:08:25.000] Um, say, "Okay, well, look, the
[00:08:26.520] president said we have to begin the
[00:08:27.800] process. I'm just part of a process, you
[00:08:30.320] know. I think I've been given
[00:08:31.840] permission."
[00:08:33.880] And so, you know, that it there there
[00:08:36.200] might be an unexpected I I doubt that
[00:08:38.400] there very much that will happen. I
[00:08:39.680] think people are are
[00:08:41.400] you know, savvier than that. But, I I do
[00:08:43.919] think though that it opens
[00:08:46.000] up an opportunity for us to say, "Okay,
[00:08:48.880] well, from the highest level of
[00:08:50.720] government, uh, there is at least the
[00:08:54.080] permission to start."
[00:08:56.160] Uh, and frankly, I think that that's
[00:08:58.640] really all the sole foundation you or I
[00:09:00.800] or others have launched it is to say
[00:09:03.200] that there's a reason to look into the
[00:09:04.960] data, uh, cuz the data, uh,
[00:09:08.200] seems to suggest uh, that there's
[00:09:10.960] something there.
[00:09:12.160] Uh, or at least there continues to be a
[00:09:14.880] reason to ask questions.
[00:09:17.280] And so, uh, this certainly for the
[00:09:20.920] debunkers out there who want to say that
[00:09:23.560] it's it's a nothing burger, well, it
[00:09:25.680] couldn't that couldn't be further from
[00:09:26.720] the truth.
[00:09:27.839] Uh,
[00:09:28.520] it really is, um,
[00:09:31.120] you know, I I think it's it's fuel to
[00:09:33.120] continue. At least it gives me fuel to
[00:09:35.400] continue.
[00:09:36.920] Yeah, so let's let's turn to your views
[00:09:39.520] about this as a scientist. And and I
[00:09:42.680] think, you know, because we have an
[00:09:44.440] audience here that that doesn't always
[00:09:47.520] delve deeply into to the UAP subject.
[00:09:51.360] I think it's important to have a
[00:09:53.400] conversation with you here about what
[00:09:55.840] this means to you as a scientist because
[00:09:57.560] that's where your real fire is and your
[00:09:59.400] real passion is even when you're
[00:10:00.960] involved in the attempt to create reform
[00:10:02.800] on this in government.
[00:10:04.440] Uh you know, and you've been thinking
[00:10:06.240] about this in one way, shape, or form
[00:10:09.440] your entire life, I think, or or mostly
[00:10:11.760] since I think childhood. Um
[00:10:14.600] so I know you have pretty considered
[00:10:16.280] views about it.
[00:10:17.760] What's your current perspective on
[00:10:20.760] the different hypotheses and and that
[00:10:23.880] the data favors and how you think people
[00:10:26.920] should explore them?
[00:10:29.000] So, I mean, for
[00:10:30.840] for me, I mean, let's I I can go back to
[00:10:32.600] let's say at least 2008
[00:10:35.280] where I started, let's say, re-exploring
[00:10:38.520] some issues that I had dealt with as a
[00:10:41.720] as a young boy, things that I'd seen and
[00:10:44.160] often wondered about.
[00:10:45.880] Uh and you know, it started really
[00:10:49.280] around 2008, 2009 when I started
[00:10:51.800] looking, let's say, online
[00:10:53.960] at
[00:10:55.320] the events that other people were
[00:10:58.000] observing. And I'm not going to go into
[00:10:59.480] the whole history of that yet.
[00:11:01.839] I started to realize that other people
[00:11:03.960] were seeing and observing the same
[00:11:05.520] things that I had or were thinking about
[00:11:07.760] it at least in the same way.
[00:11:09.600] That, okay, well, there seems to be
[00:11:12.040] incidents that
[00:11:14.480] were similar to the things that either I
[00:11:16.320] had seen or even new things that I
[00:11:18.600] hadn't understood anything about, which
[00:11:21.160] to me at least added up to an idea that
[00:11:23.920] there was something else here.
[00:11:26.680] Uh and
[00:11:28.760] the first thing that at least I locked
[00:11:31.320] in on as a a biologist, a geneticist,
[00:11:36.200] etc. was the supposed similarity of
[00:11:40.040] form, the humanoid form
[00:11:42.040] that was being observed.
[00:11:44.520] And
[00:11:46.280] that to me didn't play well against the
[00:11:48.840] idea that these were extraterrestrial.
[00:11:52.640] That they came from another planet and
[00:11:54.880] yet looked like us in one manner or
[00:11:58.880] another.
[00:11:59.880] Because that just felt wrong to me. As a
[00:12:02.520] geneticist, I could see no more reason
[00:12:05.520] that they would have look like us than
[00:12:07.480] they might look like a rutabaga.
[00:12:10.240] You know, there's just no particular
[00:12:13.720] I think reason that makes this form
[00:12:16.400] ideal
[00:12:17.560] as the as the vessel for intelligence.
[00:12:21.320] Um
[00:12:22.520] and so, you know, I think one of the
[00:12:24.160] first
[00:12:25.800] things that I came to was, well, they
[00:12:28.280] look enough look enough like us,
[00:12:31.360] maybe they are and I'd always considered
[00:12:33.720] at least two things. Maybe they were an
[00:12:35.600] alternative branch
[00:12:37.400] of humanity
[00:12:38.880] that went on separately and earlier than
[00:12:41.960] we did for whatever reason or let's say
[00:12:45.720] go back as far as the dinosaurs, that
[00:12:47.839] something had evolved as far back as
[00:12:50.320] then.
[00:12:51.440] Um and had become, you know,
[00:12:55.720] intelligent, maybe gone elsewhere in the
[00:12:57.760] galaxy and decided to come back home and
[00:13:00.160] see what had been happening, you know,
[00:13:01.640] back on the old homestead.
[00:13:03.320] Um [snorts]
[00:13:04.480] or
[00:13:05.640] you know, that they were future humans
[00:13:07.160] and Mike McMasters, Professor Mike
[00:13:09.160] McMasters has written about this
[00:13:10.400] extensively as well, that they'd come
[00:13:12.360] back. Um
[00:13:14.560] and
[00:13:16.000] and that they were coming back to check
[00:13:17.720] on on their forebears
[00:13:20.560] to sort of do an anthropologic study of
[00:13:22.800] of who and what we were.
[00:13:24.480] Um and so those were the three things
[00:13:27.000] that I had
[00:13:28.640] uh
[00:13:29.720] had in my mind.
[00:13:31.560] And for
[00:13:33.640] whatever reason when I first came across
[00:13:36.440] Jacques Vallee, in fact, he and I had
[00:13:38.240] had
[00:13:39.200] uh lunch at our first meeting at a place
[00:13:41.360] called the Rosewood down the down the
[00:13:44.720] way. At that point in time,
[00:13:47.320] um
[00:13:48.360] I had made the fatal mistake of becoming
[00:13:51.880] convinced that it was future humans.
[00:13:55.200] That was cuz it just added up to me. And
[00:13:58.600] uh Jacques very quickly disabused me of
[00:14:02.800] the re- many reasons why I was wrong.
[00:14:05.640] And that was the first reason when the
[00:14:07.600] first time I thought, "Ooh, I really
[00:14:09.320] like this guy."
[00:14:10.720] Cuz he showed me why I was wrong.
[00:14:14.640] Uh and showed me a wider view of the
[00:14:18.040] world of of what it might be. And
[00:14:21.480] uh since I had not at that point read
[00:14:23.640] any of his works,
[00:14:25.840] um
[00:14:27.200] uh he, you know, he explained it in in
[00:14:29.640] brief, but you know, the the the way
[00:14:33.000] that he explained, or at least I came to
[00:14:35.120] know later without going into the that
[00:14:37.280] particular discussion, was
[00:14:40.000] well, maybe this is all some kind of a
[00:14:41.600] show, uh some kind of a set of avatars
[00:14:45.920] put in place for our not entertainment,
[00:14:49.400] but
[00:14:50.440] as intermediaries
[00:14:52.480] through which we explore the other.
[00:14:56.640] Uh that there is that there is another,
[00:14:59.280] but it is so ephemeral and so uh beyond
[00:15:03.080] understanding that the only way that it
[00:15:05.160] can represent itself is by showing
[00:15:07.600] itself as not human, but sufficiently
[00:15:10.320] similar to what it is that we might want
[00:15:12.880] to interface with that we don't go run
[00:15:15.200] screaming for the hills cuz it comes out
[00:15:17.760] with a fang-dripping tentacles,
[00:15:20.839] uh you know, uh
[00:15:22.880] slobbering, we're going to, you know,
[00:15:24.480] we're going to eat your you and your
[00:15:25.960] children. Um, and so, it's it's that
[00:15:29.600] kind of, um,
[00:15:32.680] openness that in fact even got Jacques
[00:15:35.240] in trouble in the early days when he
[00:15:37.240] said that these might be
[00:15:38.080] interdimensionals or that these might
[00:15:39.800] be, just as I said, uh, some sort of
[00:15:42.280] interface,
[00:15:43.560] uh, puppetry or as he would often call
[00:15:46.040] it,
[00:15:47.120] um,
[00:15:48.480] a, uh, well, a puppet show,
[00:15:51.160] uh, Kabuki theater. That, uh, it's not
[00:15:55.360] what you see, but it's the meaning
[00:15:57.160] behind what you see. It's can you see
[00:16:00.640] this not as
[00:16:02.560] what it seems to be at face value, but
[00:16:04.880] that it represents something. But
[00:16:07.000] Jacques, of course, went a step further
[00:16:09.880] than this, which is to say that the
[00:16:12.200] manners in which it is done and the
[00:16:14.600] patterning of the timing of how it's
[00:16:18.160] done, uh, actually represents almost a
[00:16:20.960] kind of super system, a system of
[00:16:23.320] systems that is meant to
[00:16:25.960] corral and not control in the, let's
[00:16:28.360] say, a,
[00:16:29.320] uh,
[00:16:30.520] in a Machiavellian sense, but to point
[00:16:33.880] us in certain ways, to open our minds.
[00:16:36.600] And in the best possible way, I I mean,
[00:16:38.880] assuming, let's say, the best possible
[00:16:40.320] interpretation is
[00:16:41.920] that you don't tell your children
[00:16:44.760] necessarily
[00:16:47.480] what it is that they should do. You let
[00:16:49.680] them make mistakes to learn because
[00:16:52.320] that's the best reinforcement learning
[00:16:54.839] is a far better way to learn than to
[00:16:56.880] simply be told what to do.
[00:16:59.360] Uh, and so, it was sort of a
[00:17:01.200] reinforcement entrainment uh, that he
[00:17:04.280] was pushing. And this, of course, made
[00:17:06.480] him uh, an outlaw
[00:17:08.720] in the UFO community, at least for a
[00:17:10.319] while, but now everybody in retrospect
[00:17:12.839] realizes that it it if anything, it is
[00:17:16.079] that larger picture
[00:17:18.120] of how to interpret it that is the most
[00:17:20.120] scientific because it encompasses
[00:17:22.680] almost all of the
[00:17:25.319] downstream possibilities, many of which
[00:17:27.640] for instance Carl Jung has elaborated
[00:17:29.280] upon or others have elaborated upon
[00:17:31.600] interdimensionals,
[00:17:33.160] hell put offs, ultra terrestrials, etc.
[00:17:36.240] All these different kinds of ideas.
[00:17:38.880] Um and so
[00:17:41.560] I I think that that's the best way to
[00:17:43.240] look at it as a scientist is to say it
[00:17:47.040] it falls within these many domains. We
[00:17:50.320] have evidence that it's this or evidence
[00:17:52.520] that it's that, but we don't have a
[00:17:54.160] summary theory
[00:17:55.800] that completes the entirety of it unless
[00:17:59.160] you go to Jacques' metatheory.
[00:18:02.360] That, you know, that Jacques' metatheory
[00:18:04.720] says that it's maybe it's all of these
[00:18:06.880] things, but that it depends upon the
[00:18:08.840] circumstance and how it wants to
[00:18:10.720] represent itself because it's doing many
[00:18:12.480] things at many times.
[00:18:14.240] Which would require of course
[00:18:16.200] a consciousness and a level of control
[00:18:18.720] as Jacques would often put it that it
[00:18:20.920] implies that it could take a hold of a
[00:18:22.440] volume of space and manipulate it to its
[00:18:25.040] will.
[00:18:27.640] Well, and so it's interesting you put
[00:18:29.480] you put that on the table because it it
[00:18:32.040] once what's interesting about Jacques'
[00:18:34.320] theory, it's called I think we can call
[00:18:36.400] it the control system theory.
[00:18:37.760] >> Control system theory. Which which is
[00:18:39.200] basically the idea that that whatever
[00:18:41.800] it's doing it's a kind of conditioning
[00:18:43.440] regime in the behavior of sense
[00:18:46.440] and that it has a pedagogical or
[00:18:48.760] educative function
[00:18:50.640] and as you said it would it would
[00:18:52.400] ultimately attempt to try to entrain uh
[00:18:56.160] uh human beings to to act or think in a
[00:18:58.880] certain way, but it would it would give
[00:19:00.520] them some kind of autonomy in making the
[00:19:02.680] the choice to learn or or to learn
[00:19:04.600] through error.
[00:19:05.760] Um so so that theory, the control system
[00:19:08.640] theory, as you said it's it's um
[00:19:11.360] it may be the only proper theory we have
[00:19:13.920] in the sense that it can encompass
[00:19:16.400] seemingly contradictory or divergent
[00:19:18.520] data. Um but on the other hand, it's a
[00:19:21.920] it's a strong theory.
[00:19:23.640] And when people stick with the theory,
[00:19:25.640] they sometimes lose the pools of data.
[00:19:28.400] Right.
[00:19:28.640] >> So my question, you know, for you is is,
[00:19:32.000] you know, you you have immense, and I
[00:19:34.520] know this for a fact, it's not rhetoric,
[00:19:36.560] you have immense scientific curiosity
[00:19:39.160] about the different kinds of data. We
[00:19:41.240] can talk about it later, but you you
[00:19:42.680] will get on a plane and go somewhere and
[00:19:44.960] go to a remote location, and I've seen
[00:19:46.800] you do it many times, just to just to
[00:19:49.560] gather data firsthand.
[00:19:51.800] Um what what right now do you are the
[00:19:54.440] most compelling, the most intriguing
[00:19:56.440] kinds of data, and are you forming new
[00:19:59.360] hypotheses and even the beginning of a
[00:20:01.080] theory on the basis of those?
[00:20:03.440] So, you know, um
[00:20:06.120] I often distinguish between anecdotes
[00:20:09.320] and
[00:20:10.840] replicable science.
[00:20:12.880] Uh
[00:20:13.728] >> [laughter]
[00:20:14.120] >> anecdotes are points in time, uh
[00:20:16.280] stories,
[00:20:17.600] which are evidence. They're usually
[00:20:20.400] experiential for an individual.
[00:20:22.720] Uh and you can either believe them or
[00:20:25.120] not, but at least for the from the point
[00:20:27.400] of view of the person who experienced
[00:20:28.760] it,
[00:20:29.680] uh it was true.
[00:20:31.560] Uh and so and then there are artifacts
[00:20:36.480] left behind. Um and there's three kinds
[00:20:39.160] of artifacts
[00:20:40.560] that people talk about.
[00:20:42.760] Um there are effects
[00:20:45.960] on people or the environment or trees or
[00:20:50.480] animals nearby. So,
[00:20:53.600] evidence of perturbation.
[00:20:56.080] In science, we call it perturbation. So,
[00:20:57.920] there's been a perturbation either read
[00:20:59.960] out through x-rays on an individual,
[00:21:02.800] burns,
[00:21:04.600] apparent skin samples taken or wounds on
[00:21:08.920] the skin.
[00:21:10.240] Or in the case of a recent study that
[00:21:11.880] Jacques had done, bark burned
[00:21:15.320] in the middle of the forest at a place
[00:21:17.200] where a nuclear physicist saw extremely
[00:21:19.680] bright light that they would estimated
[00:21:22.320] the
[00:21:23.400] light energy to be, you know,
[00:21:25.040] extraordinary.
[00:21:26.680] Um, or so that's those are two kinds of
[00:21:31.240] evidences or
[00:21:32.760] or like a a there supposedly was a craft
[00:21:35.120] that landed and then there are
[00:21:36.520] depressions in the ground. So there was
[00:21:38.360] an object there that, you know, in the
[00:21:40.160] depressions are not obviously footprints
[00:21:42.640] or anything normally made.
[00:21:45.240] Okay, so those are sort of secondary
[00:21:47.480] bits of evidence. They're perturbations
[00:21:50.000] that you weren't there to see them, but
[00:21:52.200] they had an effect on something that at
[00:21:53.880] least transiently you can still take
[00:21:56.560] pictures of or understand.
[00:21:59.960] So that's one kind of
[00:22:01.760] bit of evidence.
[00:22:03.240] Um,
[00:22:04.200] the other might be
[00:22:06.840] uh, then materials left behind. And so
[00:22:10.280] that has been at least very much part of
[00:22:12.720] my initial focus,
[00:22:14.480] which has been materials left behind,
[00:22:17.000] metals uh,
[00:22:19.480] of
[00:22:20.520] you know, that some people would call
[00:22:22.480] slag, but
[00:22:25.000] uh, others other some of the pieces of
[00:22:27.720] metals that clearly look structured.
[00:22:30.480] Um, the so-called bismuth magnesium
[00:22:32.720] pieces of the arts parts etc.
[00:22:36.000] Uh, and or pure metals
[00:22:39.720] uh, that I've had access to and that
[00:22:42.960] others have had access to that have
[00:22:46.280] um, altered isotope ratios that are
[00:22:49.760] um, clearly manufactured.
[00:22:53.320] Uh, that they are not
[00:22:55.280] To say that they are not of this earth
[00:22:56.640] implies that they're from other place
[00:22:58.160] than earth, but there There
[00:23:00.760] there are ways that you can in a in
[00:23:03.600] human terms manufacture them.
[00:23:06.440] Uh but
[00:23:08.480] often these pieces, at least some of the
[00:23:10.840] ones that I've had access to, were
[00:23:13.880] uh were found at a time when the
[00:23:17.000] industrial capability of our society was
[00:23:20.440] not capable of of accomplishing the
[00:23:23.640] feat. Or at least if they were, it would
[00:23:26.120] be at such extraordinary cost there's no
[00:23:28.840] good reason why
[00:23:30.400] that we would do it.
[00:23:31.880] Nor a good reason why you might leave it
[00:23:33.560] on the beach and you know, on a fancy
[00:23:35.600] beach in Brazil.
[00:23:37.680] Um we can talk about that that that
[00:23:39.880] object later. So that's a
[00:23:42.280] that's a another kind of evidence that
[00:23:45.040] I've actually had access to several of
[00:23:46.600] those kinds of pieces and and analyzed.
[00:23:50.120] Um
[00:23:51.200] and then the third one is purely
[00:23:53.120] biological, right? The the claims that
[00:23:55.680] there are bodies. Now I've never seen
[00:23:57.680] any of these. I would love to, believe
[00:23:59.600] me, but I've never. Um and because that
[00:24:03.760] to me as a biologist would be
[00:24:06.400] uh the holy grail of understanding,
[00:24:09.040] okay, well
[00:24:10.480] um
[00:24:11.840] what are alternative I mean, if you
[00:24:13.600] could look at
[00:24:15.640] a body and let's say the the physiology
[00:24:18.240] of that body, the organs within it, etc.
[00:24:21.520] Um
[00:24:22.680] I would expect to see something which is
[00:24:25.320] as frankly chaotically designed as
[00:24:27.960] humans are. I mean, we are our our
[00:24:30.720] systems work, but they're basically
[00:24:33.560] kludged upon kludged upon fix,
[00:24:36.960] you know, with rubber gum and everything
[00:24:39.320] as evolution took prior
[00:24:42.680] functions and turned them into new
[00:24:44.040] things cuz they mistakes were allowed to
[00:24:47.640] be made that ended up being providential
[00:24:50.320] for the organism.
[00:24:51.960] Um but we ended up let's say being
[00:24:54.520] being
[00:24:55.520] uh led down an evolutionary
[00:24:58.560] hole where we're we're we're stuck with
[00:25:01.320] what we got.
[00:25:03.000] But you can imagine, and this is what
[00:25:06.040] today's so-called synthetic biologists
[00:25:08.320] are trying to do,
[00:25:10.000] is to say, "Okay,
[00:25:11.720] if we could redesign ourselves in the
[00:25:14.560] best possible way, in the most efficient
[00:25:17.240] way, we might, you know, first of all,
[00:25:19.560] get rid of the appendix,
[00:25:21.320] you know, formally by gene editing it
[00:25:23.360] out, or uh, get rid of
[00:25:26.520] uh, certain holes in our immune system
[00:25:29.560] that would allow, for instance, a vi-
[00:25:31.960] certain kinds of viruses to spread more
[00:25:34.160] readily.
[00:25:35.520] Um, or we might say, "Hey, you know
[00:25:38.240] what? The the the lung and the heart,
[00:25:41.320] we're spending a lot of time
[00:25:43.320] moving blood to and from the two. Why
[00:25:46.280] don't we just combine them?"
[00:25:48.200] You know, we have a stomach that is
[00:25:50.080] separate from, you know, this and that
[00:25:52.720] because, you know, in the in the uh, in
[00:25:55.080] the digestive tract, well, if we
[00:25:58.600] could feed ourselves the right kinds of
[00:26:00.360] food, maybe we could simplify the
[00:26:02.120] digestive tract.
[00:26:03.800] Uh,
[00:26:04.400] etc. So, you know, you you you might
[00:26:07.280] decide, for instance, that if you're
[00:26:09.320] going to live in space, there are
[00:26:11.120] certain attributes of the human body
[00:26:13.520] that we already know are are wrong for
[00:26:15.920] living in zero G. Um, I mean, we we know
[00:26:19.400] that's what happens to uh,
[00:26:21.960] to uh, astronauts when they when they
[00:26:24.560] go. They have problems later with their
[00:26:26.080] eyes, they lose bone density, they lose
[00:26:27.720] muscle mass, etc. So, there are probably
[00:26:30.400] compensatory changes that you might
[00:26:32.160] synthetically alter if humans wanted to
[00:26:35.480] live in a different place. So, we don't
[00:26:37.320] have that level of knowledge base yet to
[00:26:40.040] accomplish it, but you can imagine that
[00:26:43.600] a more advanced civilization would, so
[00:26:45.880] that if they were to come here, and they
[00:26:48.840] were to come here knowing that they
[00:26:50.400] would be living in such environments,
[00:26:52.480] they might
[00:26:53.600] do two things at once. One, look enough
[00:26:55.680] like us so that we wouldn't run
[00:26:57.480] screaming for the hills,
[00:26:59.000] uh but two, adapt themselves in ways
[00:27:02.040] that allow them to live uh across
[00:27:04.280] multiple
[00:27:05.640] uh
[00:27:06.280] ecologic zones.
[00:27:10.560] Okay. Wow. Okay, so you just sent my
[00:27:12.560] mind running in many directions at once.
[00:27:15.520] Here's a Here's a simple question. I
[00:27:17.680] don't want to digress too much about
[00:27:19.200] this, but but one of the challenges
[00:27:21.360] synthetic biology would face
[00:27:23.960] um in kind of re-engineering,
[00:27:26.680] redesigning
[00:27:28.200] uh the human body would be you would
[00:27:30.280] have to do this iteratively across many
[00:27:32.760] generations, correct?
[00:27:34.880] I mean,
[00:27:36.720] at the level you're talking about. You
[00:27:38.120] would be
[00:27:39.040] redesigning organs and Right. So, I
[00:27:42.120] mean, that's because we're still
[00:27:43.760] learning. And iteration usually implies
[00:27:47.520] trial and error, which is learning. But
[00:27:50.240] I mean, look at the company, um I think
[00:27:52.160] it's called Mammoth or uh I forget the
[00:27:54.400] other one. It's I mean, it was by George
[00:27:56.160] Church, where they literally have
[00:27:58.280] they've resurrected at least the visual
[00:28:02.520] um
[00:28:03.280] format of a direwolf, you know, a wolf
[00:28:05.240] that came from, you know, many uh
[00:28:08.680] tens of centuries ago
[00:28:10.480] um by using the genetic code from
[00:28:14.080] uh mummified direwolves or the woolly
[00:28:16.720] mammoth. You know, the first woolly
[00:28:18.560] woolly mammoth has been born. Um now, is
[00:28:21.080] it really a woolly mammoth? No, that we
[00:28:22.840] It doesn't have all the capabilities to
[00:28:24.520] live in the
[00:28:25.960] in the Arctic yet. I I I would question
[00:28:29.480] that they've done all of that yet. But
[00:28:31.920] But to your point of iteration,
[00:28:34.400] but with sufficient knowledge before
[00:28:37.160] even starting, uh one might have
[00:28:40.400] sufficient command of genetics and
[00:28:42.600] metabolism and biology to
[00:28:46.880] ordain what it is that you want and then
[00:28:49.160] reverse engineer and not even have to do
[00:28:51.560] trial and error.
[00:28:52.960] Just print it. Just have it happen.
[00:28:56.720] Um or design an egg that became it. Uh
[00:29:01.880] you know, in whatever form of uh
[00:29:05.080] growth tank they want to utilize.
[00:29:08.760] Um so, but that would require a level of
[00:29:13.040] super intelligence that at least today
[00:29:15.400] we don't have, but
[00:29:17.880] surprisingly
[00:29:19.480] you know, um with the advances that AI
[00:29:23.480] are making even today
[00:29:26.960] we don't even know
[00:29:28.960] within 10 years if we might not even
[00:29:31.200] have or not we, but the AIs that we
[00:29:34.160] create might not even have such a thing.
[00:29:37.000] So, it's it's then very easy to take
[00:29:39.480] yourself
[00:29:40.920] aside and say, "Okay, well let's say
[00:29:42.360] there was a civilization uh that arose a
[00:29:45.360] hundred million years before we did
[00:29:46.920] elsewhere in the nearby galaxy.
[00:29:49.960] It wouldn't be hard for us to imagine
[00:29:52.360] that they had achieved that level of
[00:29:53.840] super intelligence not personally
[00:29:55.360] themselves, but through their AI that
[00:29:58.240] their AI would be able to come here.
[00:30:01.680] Uh and you know, do everything that
[00:30:04.520] Jacques is saying that they seem to be
[00:30:06.520] capable of doing, which is why I always
[00:30:09.560] I
[00:30:10.440] I always
[00:30:11.920] I am confused by scientists
[00:30:16.120] uh who get up and say, "Well, there's no
[00:30:18.240] way for them to get here."
[00:30:19.960] Well, who says that
[00:30:22.480] the the thing that was launched is the
[00:30:24.560] same
[00:30:25.720] as what it it was that got printed on
[00:30:27.360] the other side when it arrived here a
[00:30:29.320] hundred thousand years later even at you
[00:30:31.600] know, point one
[00:30:33.440] uh the speed of light.
[00:30:35.520] Um I just don't I I I don't understand
[00:30:38.040] that because
[00:30:39.800] I don't ever think for instance that me
[00:30:42.040] getting on a ship
[00:30:44.240] means that I need to be the thing on the
[00:30:45.720] other side that gets off.
[00:30:47.960] I'd be just as happy to
[00:30:49.920] design an AI that would print,
[00:30:53.600] you know, my progeny on the other side,
[00:30:57.200] even if it had to do it from raw
[00:30:59.040] chemicals.
[00:31:01.560] Well, and what's what's also interesting
[00:31:03.120] about that is that about that objection
[00:31:07.200] is that
[00:31:08.760] it presumes that our science, our
[00:31:11.040] technology, our our ontology even about
[00:31:15.520] the universe,
[00:31:16.880] all those things are going to be
[00:31:20.840] unrevised, not transformed in the
[00:31:22.920] future.
[00:31:24.160] And yet, if you're discussing even just
[00:31:26.240] speculatively or hypothetically
[00:31:28.720] extraterrestrials, you might have to
[00:31:30.760] presume that they would be further along
[00:31:32.920] in science and like understand of
[00:31:34.680] reality. I mean, it it it doesn't make
[00:31:36.280] sense as a kind of cover-all objection.
[00:31:39.200] It certainly does
[00:31:40.720] from the perspective of science today to
[00:31:42.520] say I can't investigate X, Y, or Z
[00:31:44.400] because I would have no, you know, I you
[00:31:46.360] could make that objection then, but it
[00:31:47.680] doesn't make sense if you extrapolate
[00:31:49.240] out, you know, you if you move out from
[00:31:52.440] science and you say, "Well, we we can't
[00:31:54.440] just evaluate those proposals through
[00:31:56.960] through through data and through
[00:31:58.640] science." But, coming back to science, I
[00:32:01.480] think you have you're pointing out you
[00:32:03.640] have many reasons to
[00:32:05.960] not just take UAPs seriously, but to
[00:32:08.480] take seriously the prospect that they
[00:32:10.960] can be investigated scientifically. You
[00:32:12.880] laid out three kinds of data.
[00:32:15.280] Perturbations to living and non-living
[00:32:18.440] things.
[00:32:19.520] Metals
[00:32:22.520] and materials that appear that at least
[00:32:25.040] allegedly come from UAP events, and I
[00:32:27.080] think we can be pretty sure they do in
[00:32:29.120] in
[00:32:30.000] many cases, but also other anomalous
[00:32:32.000] metals.
[00:32:33.120] And then,
[00:32:34.480] apparent
[00:32:36.560] biological specimens.
[00:32:37.960] >> Right. Alleged bodies, yeah. Alleged
[00:32:39.840] bodies. You know, and in the material
[00:32:41.400] sense, I mean, all of the things that
[00:32:44.360] I have apart from the Arts Parts
[00:32:47.200] piece that we've been involved in
[00:32:48.920] developing
[00:32:50.160] seem to be effluvia, things left over,
[00:32:53.600] some sort of exhaust or
[00:32:55.960] uh industrial byproduct uh rather than
[00:33:00.520] the machine itself.
[00:33:02.400] And I Now, I'd be interested in the
[00:33:03.800] machine itself because the you know, the
[00:33:06.760] so-called effluvia as I call it or the
[00:33:08.960] leftover like the some of the metals
[00:33:11.480] they are indicative of a process that I
[00:33:13.680] only have to I have to guess at why that
[00:33:17.120] would be the downstream product. I'm
[00:33:19.480] making the assumption that there was
[00:33:21.680] some utility or some machine that took
[00:33:25.840] something else and ended up making that,
[00:33:27.520] but that was the leftover.
[00:33:29.400] Uh but it was for the purpose of doing
[00:33:32.040] some other function. So, my only my main
[00:33:35.360] interest is first showing that it's
[00:33:37.200] anomalous and then putting that data out
[00:33:40.080] and to the world at large and saying
[00:33:43.520] why do you think this? Why would How
[00:33:46.000] would this happen?
[00:33:47.480] I mean, let let's turn more specifically
[00:33:49.560] then to the Ubatuba part that um I've
[00:33:52.360] been involved with. And And before you
[00:33:54.760] jump into that, what it What is the
[00:33:56.440] Ubatuba?
[00:33:57.600] So, the Ubatuba was a um was uh an event
[00:34:02.440] uh
[00:34:03.040] in Ubatuba, Mexico in the
[00:34:05.720] late supposed 1950s,
[00:34:08.480] but some
[00:34:09.720] uh some stories seem to put it even
[00:34:11.800] earlier
[00:34:13.000] where um
[00:34:14.840] uh supposedly a fisherman had seen uh
[00:34:18.639] a UFO of some kind and the story changes
[00:34:21.840] depending on
[00:34:23.399] you know, the or
[00:34:25.280] whose origin that you you listen to, but
[00:34:28.399] an object was seen that I that either
[00:34:31.000] dropped something was glowing, you know,
[00:34:33.120] they dropped something and then whatever
[00:34:34.800] or it itself exploded.
[00:34:37.440] Uh and left metal scattered across the
[00:34:40.040] beach and in the water. Um and
[00:34:42.200] supposedly this fisherman
[00:34:44.320] uh picked it up or called somebody and
[00:34:47.080] somebody came and picked it up and I
[00:34:48.200] haven't been able to really trace down
[00:34:49.879] the reality of that.
[00:34:51.919] But in one
[00:34:53.120] way or another this metal ended up in
[00:34:55.480] the hands of a reporter
[00:34:57.280] in Brazil.
[00:34:58.880] Um and that individual
[00:35:02.040] uh had some of it analyzed by scientists
[00:35:05.120] locally.
[00:35:06.480] Uh and then sent that pieces of it off
[00:35:10.160] in different directions to uh either a
[00:35:12.840] museum in Argentina or ended up in some
[00:35:15.840] places in in the United States.
[00:35:18.120] And when I came across it and when
[00:35:21.000] Jacques had given me a piece of the
[00:35:22.760] material,
[00:35:24.320] um it was claimed to be magnesium.
[00:35:28.600] Pure nearly pure magnesium and the
[00:35:30.200] stories uh were all that this is pure
[00:35:32.760] magnesium.
[00:35:34.320] Um and so uh and then others such as
[00:35:37.680] Robert Powell and Michael Swords had
[00:35:40.040] done analysis on it uh
[00:35:43.280] on the material that they had at least
[00:35:45.000] the the the chain of custody that they
[00:35:46.600] had
[00:35:47.720] uh validating that it was nearly pure
[00:35:49.880] magnesium.
[00:35:51.200] Um which isn't hard to make uh
[00:35:54.000] but it sort of leaves open the
[00:35:57.760] question of why would you have pure
[00:35:59.720] magnesium? It's not
[00:36:02.400] it's not useful as a
[00:36:05.840] um
[00:36:07.080] as a material you would use from a
[00:36:10.640] from a um
[00:36:12.200] a a materials resilience standpoint
[00:36:15.880] because if you set it on fire or if you
[00:36:17.800] heat it up to a certain point it'll
[00:36:19.000] actually
[00:36:20.400] you know, you explode.
[00:36:22.960] Um
[00:36:24.200] but then the piece that I got was
[00:36:26.040] unusual because it didn't to me look
[00:36:30.560] like magnesium. I mean, I I took it at
[00:36:32.640] face value that somebody said it was
[00:36:33.760] magnesium, but it had a kind of shiny
[00:36:35.960] silver-blue aspect to it.
[00:36:38.640] And my mind went back to my chemistry
[00:36:40.840] class uh back in high school and my
[00:36:44.880] chemistry teacher at the time was a guy
[00:36:46.320] by the name of Dr. Spencer.
[00:36:48.440] And Dr. Spencer had actually worked on
[00:36:49.880] the Manhattan Project.
[00:36:51.960] Uh and it was a private school
[00:36:55.040] uh and so it was just me and one other
[00:36:56.960] student in these this advanced chemistry
[00:36:58.880] class and he brought in a piece of
[00:37:01.200] magnesium and showed how he could light
[00:37:03.320] it on fire and it wouldn't stop unless
[00:37:05.000] he put it in
[00:37:06.320] a kind of oil that would snuff it out
[00:37:08.800] and wouldn't itself catch on fire.
[00:37:11.040] And so but he even before he did that,
[00:37:13.760] he showed us it and it it had kind of a
[00:37:15.680] dusty coating, an oxide.
[00:37:18.040] And so I remembered that all the way
[00:37:20.280] back from chemistry and so when I saw
[00:37:21.680] this kind of bluish metal,
[00:37:24.000] I thought this doesn't that doesn't look
[00:37:25.520] like it, but I just again took it at
[00:37:26.840] face value and didn't really think too
[00:37:28.360] much about it and I probably don't know
[00:37:29.520] very much about what you know, what it
[00:37:31.480] could be.
[00:37:32.400] So
[00:37:33.800] Jacques and I put this in an instrument
[00:37:36.320] called a secondary ion mass spec, a kind
[00:37:38.320] of instrument at Stanford it that is um
[00:37:42.640] super sensitive, so sensitive that you
[00:37:44.640] can separate out uh not only different
[00:37:48.000] isotopes uh by their mass, but actually
[00:37:52.440] um it was sufficiently sensitive that
[00:37:54.360] you could separate out a chromium
[00:37:57.120] isotope that is almost exactly the same
[00:37:59.040] weight as an iron isotope
[00:38:01.880] by the third or fourth decimal points
[00:38:04.240] weight.
[00:38:05.520] And it's called a magnetic sector mass
[00:38:07.600] spectrometer. And what's great about
[00:38:09.480] this instrument is it is so
[00:38:11.080] ultra-sensitive, but what's not great
[00:38:13.240] about it is that it is
[00:38:16.320] um you can only measure
[00:38:18.480] nine, well, maybe yes, eight or nine
[00:38:21.920] things at a time. So you had to decide
[00:38:23.920] ahead of time what it is that you wanted
[00:38:25.160] to look at and took a lot of time to
[00:38:27.000] maneuver the detectors along the track
[00:38:30.080] so that they'd be at the right position
[00:38:31.400] so that the when the magnetic sector
[00:38:33.320] changed the arc of the masses, it would
[00:38:36.320] hit the right detector at the right
[00:38:37.360] time.
[00:38:38.200] So, we set it up for uh because we
[00:38:41.000] actually had multiple different samples
[00:38:42.360] in our
[00:38:43.520] chamber.
[00:38:44.600] We set it up for magnesium
[00:38:46.760] for the Ubatuba and we set it up for
[00:38:48.600] iron and chromium and titanium for these
[00:38:52.720] other pieces that we had for the Council
[00:38:54.480] Bluffs and a few other things that
[00:38:55.800] Jacques had
[00:38:57.000] had. So, we tried to do it all at once
[00:38:58.520] cuz actually was expensive. It was going
[00:38:59.880] to be a $5,000 experiment to do this and
[00:39:03.280] I was taking it out of my um
[00:39:05.720] out of my endowed funds.
[00:39:08.080] Um which I was allowed to do.
[00:39:10.000] Um so, uh
[00:39:14.720] What was interesting was that two pieces
[00:39:16.360] of that Uba of the Uba We had four
[00:39:18.120] pieces of the Ubatuba in there cuz we
[00:39:20.200] wanted to be able to do it in a let's
[00:39:22.560] say a statistically valid way and three
[00:39:24.120] is sort of the minimum you need to do.
[00:39:26.320] Um
[00:39:27.640] you know, four is a bit better. You'd
[00:39:28.960] love to have done 10 fragments, you
[00:39:30.920] know, or 100 different fragments, but
[00:39:32.880] you know, you you're it's it's a mildly
[00:39:35.880] destructive
[00:39:37.400] uh process, but you're taking off
[00:39:40.120] literally nanometers of material. You
[00:39:42.920] you you know, for all intents and
[00:39:44.440] purposes, nobody would know that you'd
[00:39:45.880] done anything to it, but it still takes
[00:39:47.840] time and effort. And so, we focused it
[00:39:50.520] on the magnesium
[00:39:52.080] and two pieces
[00:39:54.000] from one of the samples, uh Moctezuma A
[00:39:57.360] or Moctezuma B, which you people will
[00:39:59.600] recognize as
[00:40:01.240] being uh
[00:40:02.960] I think that's
[00:40:04.280] uh Brazilian.
[00:40:06.800] I think that or maybe that's that's uh
[00:40:08.440] no, that's Spanish.
[00:40:10.560] Uh because this was from the Argentinian
[00:40:13.240] museum. The pieces that I had were from
[00:40:15.040] the Argentinian Museum.
[00:40:17.840] And so, uh
[00:40:19.920] as opposed to the pieces that
[00:40:22.280] the um
[00:40:23.920] Michael Swords and Robert Powell had,
[00:40:26.960] which were from a different chain of
[00:40:28.080] evidence, which were shown to be a
[00:40:29.880] magnesium. So, we looked at magnesium
[00:40:31.720] and lo and behold, we saw magnesium
[00:40:33.560] there.
[00:40:34.560] Uh
[00:40:35.480] and but that two of the samples had
[00:40:38.200] magnesium at the ratio that magnesium
[00:40:40.560] isotopes uh 24 25 26
[00:40:43.800] at exactly the ratio as you would expect
[00:40:45.880] to see
[00:40:47.000] uh on Earth.
[00:40:49.240] Two of the other samples from I see
[00:40:51.600] moisture B, sample B, moisture means
[00:40:54.200] sample more or less,
[00:40:56.040] um
[00:40:57.400] had identically different ratios
[00:41:02.720] that were different from normal. So far
[00:41:05.560] off as to be statistically improbable
[00:41:07.640] that it would be it would have been a
[00:41:09.080] mistake. And even more so statistically
[00:41:11.800] improbable that it they were all on the
[00:41:13.280] same chip, measured at the same time in
[00:41:16.200] the same instrument,
[00:41:17.800] uh
[00:41:18.480] and so, you know, not likely that there
[00:41:20.840] were an instrument error
[00:41:22.600] uh going on here.
[00:41:24.320] So, you know,
[00:41:26.040] fast forward a few years
[00:41:29.000] and um I talked about this publicly
[00:41:33.000] uh that oh oh then so then I did a
[00:41:35.760] different analysis.
[00:41:37.800] Um we did something called atomic probe
[00:41:39.800] tomography.
[00:41:41.280] Atomic probe tomography works by
[00:41:42.800] literally eating into the sample atom by
[00:41:45.200] atom
[00:41:46.200] and you get a relative position of where
[00:41:48.520] that atom is within about five
[00:41:50.040] angstroms. Um
[00:41:52.520] and it's a very very common technique.
[00:41:54.800] It's been around for 40 50 years.
[00:41:57.160] Um it's
[00:41:58.920] technically very difficult to do. Each
[00:42:01.840] of each of those samples for me to do
[00:42:04.000] cost me $5,000.
[00:42:06.120] And so, you know, in total I did about
[00:42:08.600] 10, so that was $50,000 worth of effort.
[00:42:11.520] But what you get is an atomic map of
[00:42:14.080] where each of the atoms are. You get
[00:42:15.920] about 50% of the sample of the atoms
[00:42:18.080] that are in the sample.
[00:42:19.840] Um which is extraordinary and their
[00:42:22.600] relative position within five angstroms.
[00:42:24.760] So just to give people a sense of of
[00:42:27.720] what that distance means.
[00:42:29.600] The standard interatomic distance
[00:42:32.160] between two atoms, let's say in a
[00:42:34.040] carbon-carbon bond, is a little less
[00:42:36.320] than an angstrom.
[00:42:38.320] Um and so if you have something which
[00:42:41.240] you're only measuring within about five
[00:42:43.200] angstrom distance, let's say you had six
[00:42:46.440] carbon atoms in a ring, that would be uh
[00:42:48.920] graphene or benzene, depending upon what
[00:42:51.760] it is that's, you know, attached to it
[00:42:53.440] nearby.
[00:42:54.720] Um if you were to randomize those within
[00:42:56.760] five angstroms, you would just get a
[00:42:58.000] little cloud of of atoms. You wouldn't
[00:43:00.400] really know what its exact positioning
[00:43:02.400] was.
[00:43:03.320] But it's still good enough.
[00:43:05.480] Um but the first thing that came across
[00:43:08.160] from that analysis was
[00:43:10.040] it was silicon. In fact, it was 99.99%
[00:43:13.760] silicon.
[00:43:15.240] And I think wait, and and to make sure
[00:43:16.960] everybody follows, this is this is this
[00:43:18.920] very sample from Ubatuba that you you
[00:43:22.160] had simply assumed because you were told
[00:43:24.240] that this was the case was just pure
[00:43:25.840] magnesium. Exactly.
[00:43:27.880] And so I thought somebody's made a
[00:43:30.440] mistake here. There was magnesium in the
[00:43:33.160] sample.
[00:43:34.560] And you had only looked for magnesium
[00:43:36.520] because Yeah. Right. But it was at such
[00:43:39.080] a very low concentration.
[00:43:42.320] Uh and because this instrument that I
[00:43:44.600] used originally, the Sims NanoSims made
[00:43:47.280] by Cameca, was so highly sensitive, we
[00:43:50.920] were able to pick it up cuz we were
[00:43:52.480] looking for it. You know, it's kind of
[00:43:54.360] like you if you go looking for
[00:43:55.960] something, you'll only see it. But if
[00:43:57.280] you don't look for something that might
[00:43:58.640] be there, you'll miss it.
[00:44:00.600] And I'm sure this is one of those
[00:44:01.840] mistakes that you just thought like as a
[00:44:03.840] scientist like, okay,
[00:44:06.200] why did I just take on trust what
[00:44:08.680] someone said about data?
[00:44:10.280] >> Exactly.
[00:44:12.120] But, you know, you know,
[00:44:13.680] I I I I I I I I look at Robert Powell's
[00:44:15.080] and their results and go, "Well, why why
[00:44:16.400] wouldn't I?" But, then if I put it
[00:44:17.800] together with this sort of incongruence
[00:44:19.960] of whether it was kind of bluish metal
[00:44:21.760] shiny metal and I knew from my like
[00:44:25.040] first ever real chemistry class that it
[00:44:27.320] should have been, you know, a dusty
[00:44:29.400] oxide
[00:44:30.720] um on the surface.
[00:44:32.600] Uh you know, so anyway, the that
[00:44:34.880] incongruity
[00:44:36.960] you know, came back to, you know, to to
[00:44:38.880] haunt me.
[00:44:40.040] So, I talked about the fact that it was
[00:44:42.280] silicon
[00:44:43.800] um publicly at one point and then I got
[00:44:46.200] a note from uh Robert Powell saying,
[00:44:48.920] "Gary, I think you made a mistake.
[00:44:51.000] Uh this is We checked it out and it's
[00:44:53.960] magnesium and here's our paper."
[00:44:56.320] And, you know, I looked at their paper
[00:44:58.560] and there was zero wrong with it.
[00:45:01.080] And I sent him my data
[00:45:03.120] and, you know, he can't find anything
[00:45:05.080] wrong with the data. It's just the data.
[00:45:07.720] So, you have to come to the you have to
[00:45:08.960] come to one of at least two conclusions.
[00:45:12.520] There were either two metals on that
[00:45:13.840] beach
[00:45:15.080] which ended up being two different
[00:45:17.000] chains of custody, one of which ended up
[00:45:19.040] in Argentina and the other which ended
[00:45:20.560] up in the
[00:45:22.080] in the hands of this reporter. But,
[00:45:23.600] interesting, one of the moisture samples
[00:45:26.480] came through this supposedly same
[00:45:28.720] reporter and was sent to
[00:45:32.600] uh the Argentinian group. And then there
[00:45:35.040] was a And then one of the other samples
[00:45:36.440] came through another one. So, So, the
[00:45:38.680] same reporter apparently had access to
[00:45:41.000] both of these metals, one of which ended
[00:45:43.400] up in, you know, one chain of custody
[00:45:45.960] and analysis which said, "Hey, this is
[00:45:47.760] magnesium." The other which ended up
[00:45:50.480] you know, in
[00:45:51.760] uh moisture in the other hand.
[00:45:54.520] Now,
[00:45:55.840] I was talking with some scientists over
[00:45:59.320] in the engineering department about our
[00:46:03.320] results
[00:46:04.600] and the silicon results and saying and
[00:46:08.000] and the magnesium results
[00:46:10.240] and um
[00:46:12.400] they had looked originally at the
[00:46:14.400] magnesium results and said, well,
[00:46:16.520] there's something interesting about
[00:46:17.800] these magnesium results in that if you
[00:46:20.440] look at the changes that have occurred
[00:46:23.360] the the 24 25 and 26
[00:46:27.600] uh in what should be normal
[00:46:30.000] have the ratios have all been shifted up
[00:46:32.920] one.
[00:46:34.480] They've all gone from 24 the 24 has
[00:46:37.120] become 25
[00:46:38.880] and 25 has become 26. So 24 is supposed
[00:46:41.520] to be about 80%.
[00:46:43.480] Uh 25 is supposed to be about nine and
[00:46:45.280] the other is supposed to be 11 more or
[00:46:46.440] less.
[00:46:47.640] Everything got shifted one over and
[00:46:50.080] meaning like
[00:46:51.560] okay,
[00:46:52.680] there's been so how you you could do
[00:46:54.960] that one of two ways.
[00:46:56.840] One way you can do it is you can just
[00:47:00.000] purify the elements
[00:47:02.480] uh the isotopes which you can do.
[00:47:05.080] And you're about perhaps to go to war uh
[00:47:07.640] with Iran over nuclear enrichment of
[00:47:10.040] isotopes.
[00:47:11.320] Um
[00:47:12.720] and uh
[00:47:14.600] and then mix them back together in this
[00:47:16.280] ratio. And but the why of why you would
[00:47:18.320] do it is
[00:47:19.840] uh
[00:47:20.640] there's no there's no good reason to do
[00:47:22.120] it. And and no and if I'm correct about
[00:47:24.560] this, there's no record of industrial
[00:47:27.680] processes that have been used to do
[00:47:29.720] that. No. No. I mean, you could do it,
[00:47:32.240] but there's no reason to do it. So and
[00:47:34.040] it's at least at the time that this was
[00:47:35.560] found it would have been very expensive
[00:47:36.960] to do.
[00:47:37.920] Especially in the gram level levels. I'm
[00:47:40.920] not sure. And so this um
[00:47:43.760] these researchers said, well, you know,
[00:47:45.560] there's another way that it can be done.
[00:47:47.520] And then that's uh
[00:47:49.560] uh
[00:47:50.760] exposing the material to
[00:47:53.680] heavy neutron bombardment.
[00:47:56.400] What's neutron bombardment? Well, the
[00:47:58.480] difference between 24, 25, and 26 of
[00:48:01.560] magnesium
[00:48:03.040] is
[00:48:04.320] uh that they have an additional neutron.
[00:48:06.680] 25 has the same number of protons, has
[00:48:08.840] an additional neutron. They have the
[00:48:11.080] same
[00:48:12.320] electronic configuration, the same
[00:48:14.920] basically whatever the functionality of
[00:48:18.280] the of the um
[00:48:20.360] nucleus is
[00:48:21.840] uh is more or less the same with the
[00:48:23.960] some spin component differences.
[00:48:27.400] How they behave in electromagnetic
[00:48:28.760] fields.
[00:48:29.920] Um but so what what this postdoc did uh
[00:48:34.560] in this guy's lab was he said, "Well,
[00:48:36.880] you know, let's calculate how much
[00:48:39.480] exposure would be required to
[00:48:43.000] get this
[00:48:44.800] difference."
[00:48:46.360] And so what you do is you do something
[00:48:48.080] which is called uh you know,
[00:48:49.640] cross-sectional analysis of of what is
[00:48:52.520] the shape of the of the nucleus
[00:48:55.840] uh and what is the what is known about
[00:48:58.520] the bombardment characteristics of
[00:49:00.360] what's required to get a neutron forced
[00:49:02.240] into
[00:49:03.400] uh
[00:49:04.000] a nucleus.
[00:49:05.840] Um and uh
[00:49:08.120] so they come up with a number and showed
[00:49:10.120] that in fact uniform exposure of pure
[00:49:13.720] magnesium to the following amount of
[00:49:16.840] radiation would give you exactly the
[00:49:19.400] ratio that you saw. So it wasn't What it
[00:49:22.200] was saying was the ratios that we saw
[00:49:24.160] were not random.
[00:49:25.560] Yeah, when you first told me this, my my
[00:49:28.080] mind was pretty blown by that. Um and I
[00:49:31.000] wasn't sure you were ready to talk about
[00:49:32.600] that publicly today, so I'm glad you
[00:49:34.000] brought it up. What you told me at the
[00:49:35.800] time was, you know, it and I I think I'm
[00:49:38.000] about to say something you were about to
[00:49:39.840] say, um is it's not just random. It
[00:49:43.400] corresponds to a uh physical principle.
[00:49:46.360] Yeah. Yeah, so there's yeah, that there
[00:49:48.560] is that you can
[00:49:51.040] you can
[00:49:52.200] hypothesize
[00:49:53.720] that the material was exposed to
[00:49:55.520] neutrons
[00:49:57.160] for some period of time sufficient to
[00:49:59.640] get that
[00:50:01.360] change.
[00:50:02.560] Um and
[00:50:05.040] the amount of neutron
[00:50:07.520] exposure
[00:50:08.760] was was not trivial to accomplish that.
[00:50:12.680] So then I thought, "Gee, well, what
[00:50:14.600] about the silicon?" Cuz silicon actually
[00:50:16.560] has isotopes as well. Actually three
[00:50:19.440] isotopes of of silicon.
[00:50:21.549] >> [snorts]
[00:50:21.680] >> Uh 28, 29, and 30.
[00:50:23.760] Uh 27 is aluminum.
[00:50:26.160] So which has only a single uh isotope.
[00:50:29.480] Uh stable. There's a semi-stable
[00:50:31.440] version, but it it has a half-life of a
[00:50:34.200] few thousand years.
[00:50:35.880] Um
[00:50:37.680] and so essentially there's none of that
[00:50:39.240] around. The only place you find it is in
[00:50:40.920] outer space where it gets exposed to
[00:50:42.640] gamma particles.
[00:50:44.560] Um
[00:50:45.960] and so um
[00:50:48.400] I went back and looked at the ratios of
[00:50:50.360] the silicon that I had sitting in my
[00:50:54.240] data bank
[00:50:55.480] for 3 years.
[00:50:57.880] And I I about wanted to kill myself
[00:51:00.640] because the ratios of the silicon were
[00:51:02.320] way off. And I I was like, "Why didn't
[00:51:04.720] Gary Why didn't you even look You didn't
[00:51:06.200] even look, Gary, at the data that was
[00:51:08.120] sitting in front of you
[00:51:09.560] and see that the silicon ratios are way
[00:51:11.360] off?"
[00:51:12.680] And not like trivially off, again, way
[00:51:15.600] off.
[00:51:16.720] So I
[00:51:17.800] gave them the And again, in the same way
[00:51:20.240] that the lower one was converted to the
[00:51:22.120] to the next one up. The next one was
[00:51:23.480] converted to the next one up.
[00:51:25.920] Uh and so I told the
[00:51:29.120] postdoc, "Uh here's the same." And he
[00:51:31.480] had developed this, you know, all these
[00:51:33.200] complex equations to do this
[00:51:35.120] computation.
[00:51:36.560] Um we actually wrote a little paper
[00:51:38.520] about it that we're going to be putting
[00:51:40.040] forward at some point.
[00:51:41.760] Um
[00:51:43.240] and lo and behold,
[00:51:46.000] uh within a factor of like two or three,
[00:51:49.880] the same level of radiation of neutron
[00:51:53.600] bombardment capable of converting the
[00:51:55.520] magnesium was what would be required to
[00:51:58.640] convert the silicon to the ratios that
[00:52:01.680] we saw.
[00:52:02.680] Okay, this I didn't know. So, it's
[00:52:04.200] actually it's it's it's the same
[00:52:06.600] intensity of radiation. If I Correct.
[00:52:08.800] Correct. And it's like you either let it
[00:52:10.840] sit in a nuclear reactor for 10,000
[00:52:13.360] years or you expose it to it to a
[00:52:15.880] neutron beam of
[00:52:19.120] such high levels of that people don't
[00:52:21.600] even we don't even have them.
[00:52:23.560] Okay. So,
[00:52:25.120] um,
[00:52:26.800] Now, describe that mathematically. When
[00:52:28.320] you told me about that, you said it was
[00:52:29.720] just a it was a tremendous energy
[00:52:31.720] required.
[00:52:32.200] >> Yeah, I I'll I'll have to go and find
[00:52:34.480] the
[00:52:36.040] I maybe during a break in this, I'll go
[00:52:38.880] and find it and we can come back to it
[00:52:40.320] and I can show you the the actual
[00:52:41.840] picture.
[00:52:43.120] Um,
[00:52:44.200] so, inordinate levels of
[00:52:47.880] of
[00:52:48.960] uh, neutron radiation would be required.
[00:52:51.840] Um, okay. So, that's
[00:52:55.240] I I again, I put that as a preliminary
[00:52:57.040] result. Because now I'm I'm going back
[00:52:59.200] and looking at my data and saying and
[00:53:03.000] asking myself, what could I have done
[00:53:05.240] wrong
[00:53:06.440] uh,
[00:53:07.000] in computing these ratios? Is there Is
[00:53:10.120] there any systematic error in what it is
[00:53:12.760] that I've done, you know, before I dare
[00:53:14.640] publish a paper.
[00:53:15.960] And and this I kind of want to use this
[00:53:17.120] as a as a as a pivot point just
[00:53:19.040] momentarily to say,
[00:53:20.760] you know, scientists are the original
[00:53:22.560] skeptics.
[00:53:24.000] Uh, scientists by definition are
[00:53:26.120] skeptics. We don't come to the table
[00:53:29.120] asking or saying, I want to prove this.
[00:53:33.320] I come to the table asking, what is
[00:53:35.160] this? And what can explain this?
[00:53:37.920] Debunkers are the people who who the
[00:53:40.280] original
[00:53:41.720] unscientists
[00:53:43.600] that come to the table wanting to prove
[00:53:45.440] something ahead of time. They're the
[00:53:47.280] people who are doctrinaire. They're the
[00:53:49.520] people who
[00:53:51.400] let's say as as we were discussing the
[00:53:54.680] other day,
[00:53:56.320] um
[00:53:57.800] they're coming at it with an orthodoxy
[00:54:00.840] or let's say a priesthood but without
[00:54:02.600] the benefit of the training that priests
[00:54:04.760] go through for years and decades to at
[00:54:08.120] least have some um
[00:54:10.880] sociologic or spiritual understanding of
[00:54:13.080] why they're coming to this belief system
[00:54:14.680] that they have.
[00:54:16.360] Um so, you know, it's it's
[00:54:20.080] I I want to double-check.
[00:54:22.160] And I luckily have enough of the
[00:54:23.600] material that I can hand it to 10 other
[00:54:25.920] labs to say, "Would you just go ahead
[00:54:27.640] and check the isotope ratios for me to
[00:54:29.600] make sure that I didn't make some sort
[00:54:30.840] of systematic error?" You know, maybe
[00:54:33.040] the atomic probe tomographer is
[00:54:35.160] measuring something in a way that's
[00:54:37.000] different than another kind of mass
[00:54:38.520] spectrometer showed. And you know, it's
[00:54:40.320] relatively easy for me to do that. It's
[00:54:42.840] just it's finding the time, finding the
[00:54:45.480] money, uh trying to decide where in the
[00:54:49.720] status of of what needs to be done
[00:54:53.320] both in my day job and let's say the you
[00:54:56.000] know, my my my side job here, which is
[00:54:58.800] certainly more than a hobby of you know,
[00:55:01.080] what what what does it take to get it
[00:55:02.560] done?
[00:55:04.160] Um
[00:55:05.320] and so, uh
[00:55:07.240] you know, I'm pretty sure of the
[00:55:08.800] results, but
[00:55:10.600] being sure is not
[00:55:13.160] something that yet I can do where I can
[00:55:15.000] hand it to another person. Well, I can
[00:55:17.040] hand it to other people and I'm going
[00:55:18.400] to, but again, I need to get the uh
[00:55:21.240] these postdocs on board to say, "Okay,
[00:55:23.920] are you ready to put your name on this?"
[00:55:26.120] Uh you know, it's it's
[00:55:28.600] uh and actually they've said yes.
[00:55:31.200] Um so, it's it's not like they're
[00:55:33.360] they're afraid. Um but you know, I I I
[00:55:36.520] can't just go and and do it without
[00:55:38.880] their without their say-so. Cuz it's
[00:55:41.920] frankly was their idea, not mine. I
[00:55:44.320] mean, I'm just the purveyor of the of
[00:55:46.280] the result, not the originator of the
[00:55:49.120] reason why. But, but the
[00:55:51.880] the reason why I bring this up is cuz
[00:55:53.600] why it's so important to get data like
[00:55:55.920] this out like I did with the um
[00:55:58.840] with the with the Council Bluffs is when
[00:56:01.480] you put data out there and you ask and
[00:56:04.600] you say, "Here's the data how it's
[00:56:05.720] collected. We're pretty sure we
[00:56:07.240] collected it the right way." What you're
[00:56:09.000] offering up is the opportunity for other
[00:56:10.840] people to step in and give reasons why
[00:56:13.480] the data is the way it is.
[00:56:16.040] So, um
[00:56:17.800] and that's the best way that let's say
[00:56:20.360] open source science is done.
[00:56:22.440] Uh and that's actually the way that, you
[00:56:24.040] know, academics usually operate is they
[00:56:25.840] put a result out. Somebody says, "Uh-uh,
[00:56:27.840] I don't believe you know, here's another
[00:56:29.120] way of looking at it. Here's another set
[00:56:31.200] of equations that you should have
[00:56:32.240] applied." You know, and so you have the
[00:56:34.000] normal academic discourse hopefully
[00:56:36.440] without uh
[00:56:38.200] too much uh throwing of of of
[00:56:41.200] of dishes. Okay, so I would be remiss if
[00:56:43.960] I didn't say that if you guys are
[00:56:45.480] correct about this, this is this is a
[00:56:47.440] really remarkable finding. Yes?
[00:56:49.440] >> Yes. Yes. Yeah. Were it not being
[00:56:51.120] correct, it would be extraordinary.
[00:56:53.040] Yeah, it it totally extraordinary
[00:56:54.800] because I mean, what you're saying in
[00:56:56.320] essence, and I'm saying this for the
[00:56:57.640] benefit of uh you know, the audience who
[00:57:00.000] I think, you know, has mostly tracked
[00:57:01.960] but they'll have missed some some pieces
[00:57:03.840] here and I certainly have as a
[00:57:05.160] non-scientist. I'm a
[00:57:06.960] humanities uh social sciences person.
[00:57:09.880] Um is that you you
[00:57:13.240] there would be it would be very
[00:57:14.480] difficult to explain the isotope ratios
[00:57:17.040] you found both in the magnesium and the
[00:57:18.960] silicon uh samples if there wasn't this
[00:57:22.000] exploitation of a physical principle um
[00:57:24.880] that that by which, you know, you using
[00:57:27.840] that as reference, you would be um
[00:57:30.360] bombarding these uh these metals with,
[00:57:34.640] uh,
[00:57:35.400] high-intensity neutrino radiation,
[00:57:37.680] correct?
[00:57:38.200] >> Mhm. Correct. And and it would be just
[00:57:41.040] and you would have no no explanation for
[00:57:43.200] why this would naturally occur
[00:57:44.800] otherwise. Correct. Yeah. There's Yeah,
[00:57:48.040] there's the the only other way to get
[00:57:50.280] the ratios
[00:57:52.000] are to
[00:57:54.320] pre- purify them into their individual
[00:57:58.920] ratios and then mix them together at the
[00:58:01.720] ratios that we found.
[00:58:03.400] But
[00:58:05.000] why would you mix them together at the
[00:58:06.680] First of all, why would you mix them
[00:58:07.760] together at a different ratio anyway?
[00:58:09.280] So, that's like question number one. And
[00:58:11.240] question number two is why would you mix
[00:58:12.720] them at the ratio that could be
[00:58:14.240] explained by neutron bombard?
[00:58:16.800] That some professor 30 or 60 years later
[00:58:20.240] would figure out.
[00:58:22.120] Right. Right. That that would be very
[00:58:24.040] very odd as you
[00:58:25.160] >> It's odd. It's odd and it's, you know,
[00:58:27.440] it's it's it's worthy of of Well, and
[00:58:30.800] let's let's let's rule that out because
[00:58:32.680] that doesn't make sense as an
[00:58:33.720] explanation. Um, the the the latter one.
[00:58:36.920] So, so here's a a first question and and
[00:58:39.800] this is going to sound a little off the
[00:58:41.480] wall, uh,
[00:58:43.320] maybe initially, but but I think I'm on
[00:58:45.200] the right track with this is
[00:58:48.040] you know, if let's say once this is
[00:58:50.480] published
[00:58:52.120] uh, you have a sufficient number of
[00:58:53.840] people who who replicate the results or
[00:58:56.320] they find similar results with other
[00:58:57.960] materials
[00:58:59.360] that that would transform this little
[00:59:02.160] corner of science or this little, you
[00:59:04.640] know, method in science that I think is
[00:59:06.720] called materials characterization
[00:59:08.960] to to assume that there may be materials
[00:59:14.360] available for analysis
[00:59:16.240] that are not simply artifacts of nature.
[00:59:19.120] They're also artifacts of of, uh,
[00:59:22.360] artifice, of design, of technology.
[00:59:25.440] And you don't have to say anything about
[00:59:26.960] the origins of or who did it. You're
[00:59:29.640] simply saying someone did it. Right.
[00:59:31.880] >> And it's unlikely to be us because we
[00:59:33.680] don't have the techniques. Correct.
[00:59:36.080] Exactly. And so that's the
[00:59:39.000] um
[00:59:40.520] it's
[00:59:41.720] it's about as close to proof as you're
[00:59:44.240] going to get. The only other proof that
[00:59:46.200] I would
[00:59:47.920] um let's say feel comfortable with
[00:59:51.200] is
[00:59:52.520] um
[00:59:53.240] a different kind of material where the
[00:59:55.360] organization of the atoms
[00:59:58.320] is at such a level of complexity
[01:00:01.160] uh and bonding structures that uh nobody
[01:00:05.960] on Earth could explain
[01:00:08.520] the complexity.
[01:00:10.120] Uh and you know the I I mean I use for
[01:00:13.000] example life as an example of
[01:00:17.760] the the ultimate machine.
[01:00:20.480] Every atom
[01:00:22.120] in every molecule of every you know or
[01:00:25.480] every piece of a protein
[01:00:27.280] is so redundantly multifunctional
[01:00:30.960] uh that
[01:00:33.080] uh
[01:00:33.720] nothing short of either a super
[01:00:35.600] intelligence or evolution
[01:00:38.440] which can achieve super intelligence
[01:00:40.320] levels of complexity.
[01:00:42.480] Um witness Richard Dawkins Dawkins the
[01:00:45.840] you know the um the selfish gene
[01:00:48.600] as an example.
[01:00:49.702] >> [snorts]
[01:00:50.000] >> Um or the blind watchmaker. Both of his
[01:00:51.880] books are extraordinary if you want to
[01:00:53.560] get into this area and think about it is
[01:00:56.160] you can achieve seemingly intelligent
[01:00:58.960] design
[01:01:00.320] simply via evolution and trial and
[01:01:02.120] error.
[01:01:03.480] Um so but it would that would be hard
[01:01:07.720] that level of complexity would be hard
[01:01:09.680] to replicate
[01:01:11.440] in materials design
[01:01:13.680] because that would assume living
[01:01:16.080] material that had the ability to
[01:01:17.560] reproduce itself.
[01:01:19.160] Or it would assume that somebody knows
[01:01:20.760] enough about how to make something so
[01:01:22.360] complex that it could be
[01:01:24.400] functional in in a level that we don't.
[01:01:26.360] And And the step back of this would be,
[01:01:29.360] you know,
[01:01:30.280] humans eventually understood
[01:01:32.600] in materials design the the notion of
[01:01:36.040] put this material next to this material
[01:01:38.520] next to this material and now you've got
[01:01:40.160] a a diode or a transistor.
[01:01:43.720] Um
[01:01:44.880] this is a
[01:01:46.240] a resistor. This These two pieces of
[01:01:49.000] metal close to each other
[01:01:51.000] are a capacitor and can hold a charge.
[01:01:53.360] Put these things all together and you've
[01:01:54.480] got a radio.
[01:01:55.920] Um uh
[01:01:57.440] or
[01:01:59.240] a computer.
[01:02:00.480] And so the you know, the you know, from
[01:02:03.560] the days that I was a
[01:02:05.200] student or I was a kid going around as a
[01:02:08.760] I was a paper boy. On Thursdays would be
[01:02:11.560] trash day.
[01:02:12.960] And um I would note
[01:02:16.360] people would have their television sets
[01:02:18.760] thrown away. I would take the television
[01:02:20.480] set home and I would take all the pieces
[01:02:22.440] out of the of the circuit boards because
[01:02:24.840] I thought they were cool. Capacitors and
[01:02:26.800] all the rest. But I mean
[01:02:28.520] I mean that was back when we had vacuum
[01:02:29.880] tubes, which were essentially
[01:02:31.920] transistors.
[01:02:33.400] Um but we've shrunk.
[01:02:35.760] And every era has shrunk them down to
[01:02:38.560] literally nanometer size.
[01:02:40.760] Um you know, near atom level
[01:02:43.480] interactions. And 1 nanometer is 10
[01:02:45.800] angstroms.
[01:02:47.040] 1 angstrom if I if I was said it was
[01:02:49.320] basically the distance between two
[01:02:50.520] atoms. So our electronics have have
[01:02:53.920] gotten down to near atomic resolution.
[01:02:57.320] But what we still do is we mostly still
[01:03:01.320] think
[01:03:02.600] in terms of modularity.
[01:03:04.800] Mhm.
[01:03:05.480] This is a transistor, that's a resistor,
[01:03:08.280] there's a capacitor or 10 other
[01:03:10.720] functions. I mean it's gone much further
[01:03:12.280] than just those simple ideas. Um
[01:03:15.400] all kinds of other ideas of cubits,
[01:03:17.480] etc., and
[01:03:18.960] um
[01:03:19.920] ghostly particles that are more like
[01:03:22.160] wave functions than than the kind of
[01:03:24.080] modular thinking. But now imagine
[01:03:27.200] that again go
[01:03:29.800] a million years ahead
[01:03:31.960] with where you've got a super
[01:03:33.400] intelligence which is
[01:03:35.760] um an AI
[01:03:38.240] or a biological being which has used AI
[01:03:40.880] to upgrade itself
[01:03:44.120] uh intel you know, make it make it make
[01:03:45.640] its own intelligence greater.
[01:03:47.840] Um so that it could keep up with its own
[01:03:49.160] AI.
[01:03:50.680] Um and now you can start to think that
[01:03:54.200] it would make materials that were that
[01:03:56.600] were multi-functional and made at almost
[01:03:59.000] the same level of complexity as biology.
[01:04:02.200] Mhm.
[01:04:03.080] Mhm. And so, you know, my goal has been
[01:04:06.040] in like the last few years to build an
[01:04:08.440] instrument and we're almost finished
[01:04:09.840] with it
[01:04:10.800] that will be able to take apart nearly
[01:04:13.920] any material at the atomic level with
[01:04:18.120] near angstrom level resolution such that
[01:04:21.280] we can say
[01:04:22.880] well, I mean, it has a great utility for
[01:04:24.640] my biology
[01:04:26.040] uh work that I want to do cuz I want to
[01:04:27.480] do look at the 3D structure of DNA cuz I
[01:04:29.720] think that's where the real code is.
[01:04:31.680] Um but it could also be used for
[01:04:35.040] um looking at
[01:04:37.800] uh
[01:04:41.000] some material that somebody might have
[01:04:43.400] which is made at a level of complexity
[01:04:45.680] that if you were just to use
[01:04:47.960] today's random techniques, you just say,
[01:04:49.680] "Oh, there's this much carbon, this much
[01:04:50.920] this
[01:04:51.920] in it." As opposed to, "Here's where
[01:04:53.760] this is. Here's where that is. Here's
[01:04:55.200] where this was. Here's the bonding
[01:04:56.320] structure." And then you put the whole
[01:04:57.960] thing together and you say, "Well, this
[01:04:59.680] is unlike anything we've ever seen."
[01:05:02.080] And you know, unlike anything we've ever
[01:05:04.040] seen you immediately have to say, "Well,
[01:05:06.200] is there any natural process that would
[01:05:07.720] create it?"
[01:05:09.560] That's the first question you would ask.
[01:05:11.320] The second question you would ask if you
[01:05:12.960] could
[01:05:14.320] it you know reasonably
[01:05:16.960] state that all of those things were off
[01:05:18.520] the table, natural is
[01:05:21.400] okay, what would it do
[01:05:24.360] if I had these here, these here, these
[01:05:26.320] here, you know, so then you would and
[01:05:28.160] that's the other reason for sort of the
[01:05:29.480] open-sourcing of it.
[01:05:31.160] That's the reason why you would say,
[01:05:32.240] okay, well, here's here's what it is.
[01:05:34.840] I'm not
[01:05:36.240] and I'm I'm often people are accusing me
[01:05:37.520] of saying, well, Gary's not a
[01:05:38.160] metallurgist, how dare he, you know, do
[01:05:40.280] metallurgy. Well, I'm not. I'm just
[01:05:42.440] telling you what's there and putting it
[01:05:44.640] out into the world and saying, okay,
[01:05:46.080] well, you tell me.
[01:05:47.760] And it had I not done that for instance
[01:05:49.680] with the magnesium ratios, I wouldn't
[01:05:52.880] have had these people come to me and
[01:05:54.680] say, hey, you could explain these
[01:05:56.560] magnesium ratios by neutron bombardment.
[01:05:59.600] Oh, and by the way,
[01:06:01.320] you didn't even know it, but you know,
[01:06:03.680] you were you actually were measuring
[01:06:05.680] silicon at the same time
[01:06:07.760] in this or in fact you were measuring
[01:06:09.040] silicon, but the magnesium was a
[01:06:10.960] contaminant.
[01:06:12.400] Uh at least in your, you know, chain of
[01:06:14.680] custody,
[01:06:15.760] um
[01:06:16.680] the same thing that could create the
[01:06:17.880] magnesium ratios you saw, isotope
[01:06:20.120] ratios, is the same level of radiation
[01:06:22.960] that would cause
[01:06:24.560] the silicon. So, it's it's it is an
[01:06:27.320] iterative process of understanding and I
[01:06:29.480] often say this is that science is right
[01:06:31.800] today, it's wrong tomorrow, but it's
[01:06:33.040] righter the next day because you learned
[01:06:34.800] what was wrong. You learn from being
[01:06:36.640] wrong. Yeah, there's a recursive uh
[01:06:38.880] process there. Yeah. But I I want to
[01:06:41.360] point something out uh and it goes back
[01:06:43.320] to my my point earlier. I mean, there
[01:06:46.160] you know, probably the only time you see
[01:06:48.600] uh scientific analysis of this kind um
[01:06:52.080] where you're not just trying in this
[01:06:53.680] case to characterize a material, you're
[01:06:55.240] trying to learn something about um how
[01:06:58.640] uh the material is made and uh or at
[01:07:00.920] least you're you're you're making
[01:07:02.480] inferences about this, how the material
[01:07:04.320] is made and possibly the nature of who
[01:07:07.320] made it. The only other time you would
[01:07:09.520] see this kind of thing is probably
[01:07:11.720] between intelligence services when
[01:07:13.720] they're stealing each other's
[01:07:14.760] technologies.
[01:07:15.720] >> Right.
[01:07:16.200] >> And they're attempting to reverse
[01:07:17.600] engineer. I mean, I knew a I mean, I've
[01:07:19.720] told you this before. I I know an
[01:07:21.960] anthropologist who prior to becoming a
[01:07:24.320] cultural anthropologist was in the
[01:07:26.360] Soviet Union in the Soviet space agency.
[01:07:29.760] And he was a physicist there and and he
[01:07:31.880] was involved in reverse engineering
[01:07:35.800] stolen US technology. Mhm. And he and
[01:07:39.480] and he said, you know, we we acquired
[01:07:42.280] a very early speech synthesis device.
[01:07:44.960] Ah. Um and we couldn't figure out, he
[01:07:47.200] said, you know, how to do everything. We
[01:07:49.200] we were able to replicate it. Uh but we
[01:07:51.520] couldn't figure out how the phonemes
[01:07:53.160] were generated. So, we built our own
[01:07:55.600] version of it, but it spoke um it spoke
[01:07:58.440] Russian with a with an American accent.
[01:08:01.120] It couldn't you know.
[01:08:02.880] Um but I think of that right now because
[01:08:05.520] I you know, you're doing something very
[01:08:07.440] similar here except you you don't know
[01:08:10.160] the nature of who made it. In fact, if
[01:08:12.280] it wasn't
[01:08:12.640] >> Right. it might be ants.
[01:08:14.360] So, does that send does that send your
[01:08:15.920] mind rushing as you're doing this kind
[01:08:18.480] of research? Yeah, and yeah, I mean, I
[01:08:20.920] I've spoken to maybe it's the same
[01:08:23.040] person about
[01:08:25.080] other things that were at the times uh
[01:08:28.480] uh you know, airlifted out of the middle
[01:08:30.720] of the Soviet Union during an operation.
[01:08:33.080] And they said, you know, this was
[01:08:34.240] working by principles we didn't
[01:08:35.440] understand. Oh, interesting. It didn't
[01:08:37.839] mean that it was alien. It just meant
[01:08:40.960] that they were starting with different
[01:08:43.240] physics assumptions and had come up with
[01:08:45.600] something that did something different.
[01:08:46.960] I mean, it's it's interesting how
[01:08:48.680] science and even philosophy, as you
[01:08:52.160] know, and anthropology goes is that, you
[01:08:54.839] know, you you go down these rabbit holes
[01:08:57.560] that you kind of forget [clears throat]
[01:08:59.520] an assumption that was made so long ago
[01:09:01.319] that had you gone a different direction,
[01:09:03.440] you might have ended up in a different
[01:09:04.680] place altogether.
[01:09:06.319] Um I actually found the the the ratios
[01:09:09.920] and the fit, if you want me to switch to
[01:09:11.960] it. Yeah, yeah, please. Yeah. Um
[01:09:16.040] So uh share. Okay, can you see this?
[01:09:21.640] Is that showing up? Yeah, there it is.
[01:09:24.640] So um
[01:09:26.279] you know, we
[01:09:27.759] we started with the numbers
[01:09:31.680] here of the this is the moisture A
[01:09:34.720] ratios and how far off they were.
[01:09:37.600] Um and then a model was developed of the
[01:09:41.520] neutron absorption. This is not my work.
[01:09:43.799] This is the work of of of others.
[01:09:46.480] Um and then what the temperature
[01:09:49.480] essentially was of what would be
[01:09:51.279] achieved, but the key
[01:09:53.480] This is just for the magnesium. The key
[01:09:55.240] thing here is that exposure of the
[01:09:59.800] magnesium of this case is the silicon.
[01:10:02.600] Um is that the natural ratio of the um
[01:10:06.840] of the 28 goes down
[01:10:09.920] while the 30
[01:10:11.920] the the the 29 is both going down
[01:10:15.240] because it's being converted to 30, but
[01:10:17.480] it's going up because it's being
[01:10:19.640] converted from 28 to 29. So you have you
[01:10:22.440] have this kind of in and out flow.
[01:10:25.440] Uh and that at this exact point here of
[01:10:29.640] time versus exposure, you get exactly
[01:10:32.840] the ratio. The fact that it converges
[01:10:35.440] across this line at this ratio said and
[01:10:38.400] this and this was the observed amount.
[01:10:41.200] The observed ratios says that the
[01:10:43.320] cross-section
[01:10:44.760] predicts the the outcome.
[01:10:48.040] And then we went back and did the same
[01:10:49.760] thing then with the magnesium and it
[01:10:52.520] comes close to the same neutron flux
[01:10:55.800] fit. And so the
[01:10:58.560] the
[01:10:59.400] the only ways you get that level is that
[01:11:01.320] one, you
[01:11:02.600] expose it to a hydrogen bomb,
[01:11:06.160] which um would of course
[01:11:08.960] vaporize the material, so it wasn't a
[01:11:11.280] hydrogen bomb.
[01:11:12.760] You could put it into a nuclear reactor,
[01:11:15.440] which has neutron flux.
[01:11:17.280] Um but the you know, basically the only
[01:11:20.200] places where you could do this would be
[01:11:21.800] the Oak Ridge National Lab High Flux
[01:11:24.480] Reactor,
[01:11:25.680] um which wasn't really operable until
[01:11:27.920] 1965.
[01:11:29.800] Um and it would require, you know, an
[01:11:32.280] extraordinary amount of flux.
[01:11:34.440] Um or bombarding it, you know, would
[01:11:37.440] require
[01:11:39.240] uh
[01:11:40.520] 10 to the 7th to the 8th years of
[01:11:42.200] irradiation.
[01:11:43.760] Okay, so that's 10
[01:11:47.000] billion years? No, 10 to the 8th, a 100
[01:11:49.280] million years.
[01:11:51.440] 700 million years, about a billion years
[01:11:53.320] of irradiation of this amount of um of
[01:11:56.000] what it is that we can reasonably
[01:11:57.240] produce. So, um
[01:12:01.320] Yeah. So, then the
[01:12:03.400] the last part of this is, you know, and
[01:12:05.200] this is again, someone's going to copy
[01:12:06.560] this now, probably put it on the web,
[01:12:07.840] but um
[01:12:09.240] the the last part of it is um
[01:12:12.160] So, you're saying if if this is real If
[01:12:14.880] this is real, then um you know, you
[01:12:18.520] might construe
[01:12:21.080] that uh
[01:12:22.400] it's
[01:12:23.920] one way by which these
[01:12:27.360] um let's say
[01:12:29.000] crafts function.
[01:12:30.920] And this is, let's say, the
[01:12:34.720] uh the coating around
[01:12:37.880] the energy production system that at a
[01:12:40.160] certain point is used up and no longer
[01:12:43.080] capable of, you know, containing
[01:12:46.120] whatever it is that is meant to contain,
[01:12:48.080] and so then is offloaded.
[01:12:51.400] Because it's
[01:12:52.640] exhaust, like we do with our cars.
[01:12:57.120] And and you all and you also think that
[01:12:58.880] because
[01:13:00.200] uh not in this Uber Tuba case, but in
[01:13:02.400] the case of a UAP event that took place
[01:13:05.520] uh with a number of close witnesses in
[01:13:08.000] Iowa in a in a town or a area called
[01:13:11.280] Council Bluffs. Mhm. Uh the witnesses
[01:13:13.800] report reported seeing uh
[01:13:16.840] molten metal being ejected uh
[01:13:19.720] from a
[01:13:20.760] I think a classic saucer or uh Like a
[01:13:23.520] very a very odd-looking trapezoidal
[01:13:25.840] object. It means I actually
[01:13:27.600] I I I but with that was flashing and and
[01:13:31.320] you know, I know people are trying to
[01:13:32.240] explain it away as thermite etc. It's
[01:13:34.360] not thermite cuz it doesn't have
[01:13:36.240] aluminum hydroxide or the kind of
[01:13:38.440] byproducts that you would expect to have
[01:13:40.760] cuz I looked at that and looked for that
[01:13:42.440] directly. Uh it's not there. Um and then
[01:13:45.480] interestingly because I spoke about it
[01:13:46.960] on the Joe Rogan show, um a witness who
[01:13:50.120] had not come forward
[01:13:51.720] uh basically wrote me an email and said,
[01:13:53.600] "Hey, I want to talk to you. I'm like 83
[01:13:55.720] years old. I want to tell you what it
[01:13:57.440] was that I saw and where I was at that
[01:14:00.000] when I saw it."
[01:14:01.640] Uh
[01:14:02.280] and um you know, and everything he said
[01:14:05.240] corroborated with you know, the prior
[01:14:07.640] witnesses. Uh
[01:14:09.440] and he and his brother came on and um he
[01:14:12.800] said, "I just want to get this on the
[01:14:13.840] record." And so I actually got Jacques
[01:14:16.680] on the phone with me on the Zoom
[01:14:19.680] uh with me to help sort of question the
[01:14:22.000] guy because one of the things I learned
[01:14:23.720] from Jacques and that Jacques did very
[01:14:25.760] well in a number of incidents. For
[01:14:27.360] instance, the
[01:14:28.680] um the Brazilian
[01:14:31.320] um
[01:14:32.000] events uh where tribespeople were
[01:14:34.880] village people were um
[01:14:37.200] were uh what was it? The the Colares
[01:14:39.240] events were seemingly attacked. He
[01:14:42.440] literally went all the way out to the
[01:14:43.760] middle of Brazil to to little you know,
[01:14:46.560] village uh
[01:14:48.160] area uh at the mouth of the Amazon uh
[01:14:51.240] and did person-to-person interviews cuz
[01:14:53.640] he says you get so much more out of
[01:14:55.720] actually hearing it from the people on
[01:14:57.200] the ground.
[01:14:58.880] Um and so I wanted to watch his
[01:15:01.440] technique
[01:15:02.760] as he did it.
[01:15:04.200] Um you know, another example I can give
[01:15:07.160] you, which I think is
[01:15:08.880] which is really good is I've got now
[01:15:10.880] here
[01:15:12.160] up um is the
[01:15:15.680] And I I've shown this um I think
[01:15:17.840] recently at the
[01:15:20.120] um
[01:15:23.200] Is that showing? Yeah.
[01:15:25.040] Um so this is a basically a way of of
[01:15:29.280] looking at the at the um orientation of
[01:15:32.760] crystal grains uh
[01:15:34.840] and um it's basically a a way of of
[01:15:38.480] putting in a
[01:15:39.800] an organized beam of light that if the
[01:15:42.880] crystal grains of the magnesium are in a
[01:15:45.120] certain orientation, they will reflect
[01:15:46.920] them off in one direction versus another
[01:15:49.320] direction. And what we can do is based
[01:15:51.760] on the direction that they're coming
[01:15:53.120] off, uh we can color the grains in
[01:15:57.200] different ways.
[01:15:58.680] Um and
[01:16:01.160] so
[01:16:02.200] the first thing you see is you have
[01:16:03.400] these columnar magnesium and magnesium
[01:16:06.960] oxide grains. The second thing that you
[01:16:09.880] see are these black lines in between
[01:16:13.040] uh which is where the bismuth are.
[01:16:15.200] So what does this say? Well, first of
[01:16:17.640] all, it rules out traditional human
[01:16:20.560] processing events, which would be
[01:16:22.000] rolling
[01:16:23.600] uh
[01:16:24.840] um deposition, where you would basically
[01:16:26.720] deposit it and then you would roll
[01:16:27.960] something over to flatten it cuz you
[01:16:29.600] wouldn't get the columns in this
[01:16:31.400] direction. Now, maybe again, maybe some
[01:16:34.520] metallurgist would uh from watching this
[01:16:38.000] come and say, "Well, Gary, you're wrong.
[01:16:39.960] Here's a way that something like this
[01:16:41.320] could be done. And I would welcome that.
[01:16:43.520] Um
[01:16:44.760] that. But, you know, our next step is
[01:16:47.080] actually to look at the interface here.
[01:16:49.160] To ask questions about what's the
[01:16:50.480] organization of the bismuth here. But,
[01:16:52.720] as it turns out, the independent of what
[01:16:56.160] the magnesium is doing,
[01:16:58.120] uh there's a uniformity of how the
[01:17:00.360] bismuth is laid down.
[01:17:02.080] And that there's, without going I can't
[01:17:04.200] go into it right now cuz we're still
[01:17:05.640] doing all the calculations, but there's
[01:17:07.440] something very interesting about where
[01:17:09.040] that magnesium is and that the bismuth
[01:17:11.120] is and and and the and its uniformity
[01:17:13.640] and the width of of that there. So, you
[01:17:16.680] know, ongoing work. So, I'm frankly I'm
[01:17:20.160] just going to say it, Sean Kirkpatrick's
[01:17:21.880] explanation that this comes from a
[01:17:23.960] missile casing is frankly preposterous.
[01:17:27.960] So, he can go to Steven Greenstreet if
[01:17:30.160] he wants and say whatever he wants. It's
[01:17:32.720] just preposterous and he's just being
[01:17:35.720] silly.
[01:17:37.040] Um so, uh
[01:17:39.400] explain this to me, Sean.
[01:17:42.360] Yeah, but don't please don't go to
[01:17:43.800] Steven Greenstreet because we know that
[01:17:45.640] he's already,
[01:17:47.160] you know,
[01:17:48.240] not really a journalist.
[01:17:50.080] Um so, uh I mean, I I I let's have a
[01:17:53.480] reasonable conversation about it. Let's
[01:17:55.680] not, you know,
[01:17:57.320] let's not use intermediaries
[01:18:00.520] like that.
[01:18:01.720] Uh that would be my
[01:18:03.360] request. Now, that that
[01:18:05.800] the images we have here are from uh
[01:18:08.960] samples from the Council Bluffs
[01:18:10.800] incident. No, this is the this is the
[01:18:12.720] Art's Parts instrument. Okay. Yeah, and
[01:18:15.320] you you might say a word about about
[01:18:17.080] what Art's Parts is.
[01:18:18.280] >> Yeah, the Art Art's Parts was um you
[01:18:20.480] know, Art Bell uh and somebody called up
[01:18:22.760] and said that this was supposedly,
[01:18:25.120] allegedly,
[01:18:26.480] uh a piece from the Roswell crash. Now,
[01:18:29.240] I don't know whether that's true or not.
[01:18:30.720] I I don't know what it is. Um
[01:18:33.160] uh and then it was delivered to Art and
[01:18:35.520] then Art made,
[01:18:37.520] you know, it was a large piece. It was
[01:18:38.760] broken up into several smaller pieces
[01:18:40.560] and given out to multiple people. And
[01:18:42.560] this particular piece came through
[01:18:45.760] a professor at the University of
[01:18:47.680] Northwestern who'd been involved in this
[01:18:50.080] area for many years
[01:18:53.200] and said here Gary, I'm not capable of
[01:18:55.000] doing anything more with this if you'd
[01:18:56.320] like it. Jacques says I should give this
[01:18:59.320] to you.
[01:19:00.400] And
[01:19:02.720] and so but this is the same piece that
[01:19:06.240] was
[01:19:07.760] part of the to the stars
[01:19:09.880] analysis
[01:19:11.640] that Hal Puthoff and Eric Davis etc. had
[01:19:15.240] all been involved with and I was
[01:19:16.320] involved with in the early days.
[01:19:18.280] And then had been sent actually to the
[01:19:21.000] government for analysis. And they did a
[01:19:24.080] pretty decent job at the analysis
[01:19:26.880] finally, the final report that I had
[01:19:28.920] been given. But then the the the summary
[01:19:31.080] judgment from Dr. Kirkpatrick that this
[01:19:34.640] was a
[01:19:36.600] ballistic missile casing just doesn't
[01:19:39.280] hold up to Why would you make a missile
[01:19:41.840] casing like that?
[01:19:43.680] You know, I mean first of all it's just
[01:19:45.320] >> and fill us in about that. I mean what
[01:19:46.960] what about this would be very unusual
[01:19:49.080] for a missile casing? I've heard that
[01:19:50.520] from you.
[01:19:51.240] >> too too fragile. And then why would you
[01:19:53.800] make columnar
[01:19:55.520] aluminum I mean magnesium oxide? That's
[01:19:59.120] not very structurally stable. It would
[01:20:01.520] it would blow up before it even left the
[01:20:02.920] tube at the accelerations
[01:20:05.000] >> Okay, so so it's actually this is why
[01:20:07.080] you say it's preposterous. Yeah and and
[01:20:09.080] and and why would you why would you
[01:20:11.040] layer bismuth between those
[01:20:15.880] um columnar magnesium oxides
[01:20:19.360] for a missile casing? It just doesn't
[01:20:23.600] just doesn't I mean
[01:20:25.520] maybe there are methods and reasons why
[01:20:28.280] but
[01:20:29.680] it just doesn't it just doesn't seem to
[01:20:31.800] hold water at first blush. So, I'm happy
[01:20:34.240] to be told that I'm wrong.
[01:20:36.320] Tell me why I'm wrong.
[01:20:38.400] Well, I want to I want to you know
[01:20:40.400] follow up on that that
[01:20:42.360] you know provocation to potential
[01:20:44.200] critics you made by by shifting gears a
[01:20:47.000] little bit and and talking to you about
[01:20:50.120] you know what what potentially is the
[01:20:51.720] tragedy of the fact that scientists
[01:20:53.600] never took UAP and UFO seriously. And
[01:20:56.800] the enormous opportunity there is if
[01:20:59.560] scientists began to do actual science on
[01:21:02.760] this because I think you know as we've
[01:21:05.120] been talking you know not the first time
[01:21:07.400] it's occurred to me but I still have
[01:21:08.960] felt it very strongly while we've been
[01:21:11.280] talking is that it's it's
[01:21:14.920] it just how much we don't know because
[01:21:17.920] the only thing that was done generally
[01:21:19.640] with UAP was kind of forensic
[01:21:21.600] investigation. You didn't have
[01:21:24.920] you know kind of normal science in this
[01:21:26.480] sense going on.
[01:21:28.160] And
[01:21:29.400] I think that you know we know we have
[01:21:31.920] remarkable colleagues and friends from
[01:21:34.480] the natural sciences
[01:21:36.480] Beatrice Urias Kevin Knuth Hal Puthoff
[01:21:40.840] Eric Davis
[01:21:42.240] you know a growing number but they're
[01:21:44.320] still just a handful that actually do
[01:21:46.600] scientific work on this. What do you
[01:21:49.280] think you know we would start to learn
[01:21:51.680] if we had not just some dozens of
[01:21:53.720] science but we as scientists but
[01:21:55.440] thousands right taking taking seriously
[01:21:58.600] UAP events and doing things like taking
[01:22:02.520] metal found at the the sites or looking
[01:22:05.080] at tree bark that might have been
[01:22:07.240] radiated.
[01:22:08.680] What what sorts of things might we
[01:22:10.600] learn? What what are the questions?
[01:22:12.520] Well, I think
[01:22:15.000] Well, the energy requirements and the
[01:22:18.360] um
[01:22:19.600] both the energy requirements and the
[01:22:22.880] um the why would such a thing happen
[01:22:27.120] are the
[01:22:28.760] are the open opportunities.
[01:22:31.280] But then it says, "Okay, well, how would
[01:22:33.160] you contain such an energy source in
[01:22:36.360] such a limited space
[01:22:38.520] without it basically becoming the next
[01:22:41.560] Third Mile
[01:22:42.880] island and melting into the ground?"
[01:22:45.880] Right? I mean, it it means that whatever
[01:22:47.920] these energy sources are are
[01:22:50.400] sufficiently contained and mobile
[01:22:53.320] uh
[01:22:53.960] that it neither hurts the
[01:22:56.560] people who are nearby,
[01:22:58.560] in the craft,
[01:22:59.920] um or can be lifted up and moved from
[01:23:02.320] one place to another
[01:23:04.040] uh rather than just being um something
[01:23:06.720] that would melt into sludge uh
[01:23:09.080] into the ground. So, you know,
[01:23:11.600] I mean, this sort of brings up a
[01:23:12.920] slightly different point is
[01:23:14.960] I'm less interested in who they are
[01:23:18.800] what these things are
[01:23:20.320] uh meaning let's assign a personality to
[01:23:23.320] them because I didn't be cuz I didn't
[01:23:24.960] immediately assign intent.
[01:23:28.080] I'm less interested in the anthropic
[01:23:30.240] intent than I am in the mechanical
[01:23:32.800] capability.
[01:23:34.560] Because the mechanical capability, if
[01:23:36.600] there's still an intent behind
[01:23:38.120] mechanical capability, which is which is
[01:23:40.560] what was this meant to do?
[01:23:42.720] Is it Is this Is this their equivalent
[01:23:45.040] of a microwave
[01:23:46.840] or uh you know, a a trash bin
[01:23:50.360] or is it their interdimensional portal
[01:23:52.840] jet portal generator
[01:23:54.720] or is it, you know,
[01:23:56.520] the motive the the motive force that
[01:23:58.360] they use to go from
[01:24:01.280] here to there, you know, maybe one thing
[01:24:03.880] creates the field that allows them to be
[01:24:05.920] essentially independent of universal
[01:24:07.960] constraints and the other is the motive
[01:24:09.720] force.
[01:24:11.320] All of these things need to be
[01:24:12.280] considered if we look at what and we
[01:24:14.520] believe that
[01:24:16.240] what we see allegedly allegedly
[01:24:19.080] is
[01:24:20.240] is motivated by principles we think we
[01:24:23.760] understand in this universe.
[01:24:26.080] As opposed to something that I've said,
[01:24:27.600] which is kind of akin to something that
[01:24:29.720] um
[01:24:31.240] Jacques Vallée said about, you know, the
[01:24:33.080] sort of the puppeteer approach is if you
[01:24:35.920] think of it in a different way, you
[01:24:37.920] could imagine that it is a material
[01:24:41.160] projection into our reality from another
[01:24:44.560] place
[01:24:46.040] that is sort of the energy to move it is
[01:24:49.120] not here. The energy to move it is in
[01:24:51.880] the 93rd dimension.
[01:24:54.000] Right? And then it's being moved like a
[01:24:55.800] puppet from somewhere else, but to us 3D
[01:25:00.320] or 4D humans with time it looks like
[01:25:03.720] it's moving extraordinarily, whereas
[01:25:06.280] it's really being held like on a tether
[01:25:09.240] from elsewhere and moved around to fool
[01:25:11.520] the monkeys into thinking that there's
[01:25:13.600] something else going on. So, you I mean,
[01:25:15.640] you have to keep all of these things in
[01:25:17.240] mind when you're trying to assign blame
[01:25:21.600] or reason for what it is that you think
[01:25:24.960] you're
[01:25:26.040] you're looking at and and the why of it.
[01:25:28.800] Yeah, along those lines someone we both
[01:25:31.280] know who, you know, has been very
[01:25:33.800] tight-lipped comes out of comes out of
[01:25:36.320] government, comes out of
[01:25:38.200] intelligence, but has been very
[01:25:39.600] tight-lipped about what he may or may
[01:25:41.120] not know from his time in government. Um
[01:25:44.560] once said to me, well, you know, the
[01:25:46.480] problem with the way we speculate and
[01:25:50.560] even try to reason about ostensibly
[01:25:53.080] recovered technology and vehicles is
[01:25:55.720] that we we think we're looking at the
[01:25:57.800] whole thing, but there's something like
[01:26:00.160] engineering in
[01:26:03.200] dimensions. I I want to be careful with
[01:26:05.120] that term, but dimensions or let's say
[01:26:06.920] spaces that you know, we don't perceive
[01:26:09.360] and we don't have instrument access to
[01:26:11.560] and
[01:26:13.280] and so there could be a whole dimension
[01:26:16.120] of engineering that um isn't you're not
[01:26:19.160] perceiving
[01:26:20.400] and you think you're studying the whole
[01:26:22.120] object.
[01:26:22.800] >> Right. Right. And that's kind of in a
[01:26:24.320] way what I'm saying is that you could be
[01:26:26.600] creating something or working with
[01:26:28.160] something that actually has a motivating
[01:26:29.640] force that's elsewhere.
[01:26:31.520] Um you know, and and you know, I get a
[01:26:34.280] lot of my inspiration from literally
[01:26:36.760] science fiction where
[01:26:39.400] authors of uh you know, the best of them
[01:26:43.680] um write about at least on my interest
[01:26:46.560] is write about technologies
[01:26:48.640] uh that even 30, 40 years ago were
[01:26:52.040] considered extraordinary. I mean, Isaac
[01:26:53.880] Asimov being probably one of the best.
[01:26:56.040] You know, and his the laws of robotics.
[01:26:58.280] And here we are living in it.
[01:27:00.080] You know, it only took us
[01:27:02.040] you know, almost you know, maybe let's
[01:27:03.600] say 80 years to get to where and almost
[01:27:06.040] beyond where uh Isaac Asimov was
[01:27:09.040] imagining.
[01:27:10.280] But um
[01:27:11.640] you know, a a lot of these ideas of
[01:27:13.760] nanofabrication etc. uh are all becoming
[01:27:17.680] real.
[01:27:18.800] Uh and I mean, there's already efforts
[01:27:22.520] in the United States and elsewhere,
[01:27:24.520] China etc. to
[01:27:26.960] print and organize matter at the atomic
[01:27:29.520] level.
[01:27:30.760] I mean, we can print things practically
[01:27:32.480] at the atomic level. Um we can't bond
[01:27:35.240] them in the right way. But even I can
[01:27:37.880] start to think about ways that you might
[01:27:40.320] you know, magically make two things that
[01:27:43.200] are next to each other change the local
[01:27:45.920] electronic configuration such that it
[01:27:48.400] would prefer to bond in the following
[01:27:50.240] way. I mean, chemists do that literally
[01:27:52.400] every day.
[01:27:53.920] I mean, they set up synthetic reactions
[01:27:55.720] to cause local bonding structures to
[01:27:57.880] occur. And that's been organic
[01:27:59.040] chemistry.
[01:28:00.200] The our whole pharmaceutical industry is
[01:28:01.720] built on that.
[01:28:03.360] Um and
[01:28:04.400] >> Yeah, and I I think I think one of the
[01:28:05.680] problems enshrined in vision what would
[01:28:07.880] actually be going on with this this uh,
[01:28:10.320] technology or these materials that that
[01:28:12.880] are likely not to be of human origin
[01:28:15.480] is that most of us, I can count myself
[01:28:17.880] uh, here are dealing with a picture of
[01:28:20.200] the universe that we've gotten from very
[01:28:22.600] outdated science. Mhm. Because, you
[01:28:25.200] know, even the picture of the universe
[01:28:27.160] you get from neuroscience
[01:28:29.120] it's it's going to be very different uh,
[01:28:32.040] than what you got from an account of uh,
[01:28:34.680] biology in the 1980s or something,
[01:28:37.200] right? Like pre-synthetic biology
[01:28:40.160] pre the idea neuro
[01:28:41.960] the the the discovery in neuroscience
[01:28:44.040] that the brain is uh, you know,
[01:28:45.920] potentially more complex than the
[01:28:47.640] universe as we know it. Um, you know,
[01:28:50.320] and and we know less about it. Um, and
[01:28:53.560] and then pre the idea that um, the way
[01:28:56.720] you need to understand, if I've got this
[01:28:58.440] right, Gary, the way you need to
[01:28:59.600] understand both inorganic and organic
[01:29:01.920] materials is not through a simple
[01:29:04.440] account of of chemistry or even genetics
[01:29:07.480] that you would have gotten uh, you know,
[01:29:09.960] prior to say 20 years ago. Uh, but that
[01:29:12.480] you're dealing with a level of
[01:29:13.600] complexity, of articulation, of uh, you
[01:29:17.840] know, maybe spontaneous
[01:29:19.560] self-organization
[01:29:21.400] uh, of some agential fabrication at the
[01:29:24.120] level of materials that that really,
[01:29:28.200] you know, goes beyond the idea that uh,
[01:29:30.320] you're just putting uh, you know, atomic
[01:29:32.720] like parts, atomic parts, atomic in the
[01:29:35.280] metaphysical sense just together.
[01:29:37.800] >> Yeah, that you're just dealing with
[01:29:39.040] aggregates. Right. Yeah.
[01:29:41.280] >> Right. Yeah, there's a there's a gestalt
[01:29:44.120] to trying to understand what these
[01:29:45.960] materials are. I mean, when I was
[01:29:48.600] a
[01:29:49.720] uh, graduate student in genetics, we
[01:29:52.080] thought of the code as linear.
[01:29:54.200] Uh, and that a protein binds here, it
[01:29:57.360] turns on the it turns on the promoter,
[01:30:00.320] it runs along, it turns on RNA
[01:30:02.680] polymerase and etc. And now, you know,
[01:30:06.000] the papers that are coming out, we
[01:30:07.480] understand the DNA has this uh,
[01:30:09.920] multi-folding topology where it depends
[01:30:12.800] upon a statistical uh where statistics
[01:30:16.120] where this arm of a chromosome might
[01:30:17.720] occasionally pass by that one, and
[01:30:20.000] that's what turns the this gene on, and
[01:30:22.480] it requires that statistics
[01:30:24.720] uh for it to happen, but that the DNA is
[01:30:27.680] actually in every cell a complex 3D
[01:30:30.400] machine computer that is computing its
[01:30:34.120] environment based on input and changing
[01:30:37.280] the organizational structure based on
[01:30:39.240] the environment. And each cell has a
[01:30:41.760] different environment. And somehow all
[01:30:43.680] of that is wrapped into one egg at the
[01:30:45.680] beginning
[01:30:46.880] that every time the cell divides, it's
[01:30:49.320] wrapping itself into a different
[01:30:50.640] environment. So, but all of those
[01:30:52.760] expectations of all the millions of
[01:30:54.280] cells of what you are is all built in
[01:30:56.720] the expect into the expectation of the
[01:30:58.320] original egg. I mean, that's just
[01:31:01.720] I mean,
[01:31:02.560] you can imagine a super intelligence, or
[01:31:06.040] you can be
[01:31:07.360] um you know, you can imagine the selfish
[01:31:09.560] gene hypothesis that trial and error got
[01:31:12.280] us here. Well, it took 4 billion years,
[01:31:15.080] but it got us here.
[01:31:16.840] Well, you can and you can imagine them
[01:31:18.560] both. They're not mutually exclusive
[01:31:20.760] hypotheses or or concepts. And it it
[01:31:22.920] makes me wonder that we're talking about
[01:31:24.720] this following up talking about the the
[01:31:26.520] materials
[01:31:27.880] whether
[01:31:29.360] okay, I mean, you know, look, say the
[01:31:31.080] things that look like they might be true
[01:31:33.400] about the materials you've just analyzed
[01:31:34.880] are true and and and or the inferences
[01:31:37.880] you're making, which is that you may
[01:31:39.680] have design of materials, they're
[01:31:42.000] inorganic, but they're just as
[01:31:43.520] multifunctional as organic {quote}
[01:31:46.560] {unquote} materials.
[01:31:48.480] Um that that okay, if that's true, that
[01:31:51.720] also would allow you to make the
[01:31:53.040] inference um I think that um it you
[01:31:56.920] know, we may have it wrong right now
[01:31:59.000] that it's it's the superior thing to do
[01:32:02.520] is to uh design
[01:32:06.560] artificial intelligence and then imagine
[01:32:08.760] that in in intelligence's best substrate
[01:32:11.680] is inorganic when in fact the organic
[01:32:15.680] might be the most complex but also
[01:32:18.440] effective technology of them all if you
[01:32:21.600] if you actually could treat it
[01:32:23.160] technologically. Right. I mean if we
[01:32:25.120] weren't limited by the priors of our
[01:32:29.280] evolution
[01:32:30.560] um which you know ended up creating an
[01:32:32.880] intelligence which still runs on
[01:32:35.080] milliwatts compared to the thermonuclear
[01:32:39.440] power plants we're making to run the AI
[01:32:42.200] of today.
[01:32:43.720] Um it's you know we're we're basically
[01:32:48.200] um
[01:32:49.200] brute forcing intelligence with
[01:32:52.080] electricity.
[01:32:53.640] Uh and uh
[01:32:55.880] relatively
[01:32:57.600] um
[01:32:58.280] I mean they're still complex obviously
[01:33:00.040] the Nvidia chips etc. are all
[01:33:01.600] extraordinarily complex and the pinnacle
[01:33:03.960] of of achievement and yet they're they
[01:33:06.960] they still don't accomplish what
[01:33:10.880] is accomplished in human brains.
[01:33:13.520] Um and so yes we might end up being back
[01:33:16.160] at
[01:33:17.120] uh
[01:33:18.560] some kind of dynamic processes like what
[01:33:21.920] neurons accomplish or we might find a
[01:33:24.680] way to
[01:33:26.600] make a
[01:33:27.840] um a crystal-like substrate substrate or
[01:33:31.800] material that mimics all of these
[01:33:34.040] functionalities of what we think of as
[01:33:35.880] our brain but compact it down just into
[01:33:38.520] into a standard
[01:33:40.400] uh solid substrate.
[01:33:42.680] Um and so that we don't again have to
[01:33:45.560] think in terms of resistors capacitors
[01:33:48.520] you know etc. but you have this
[01:33:50.720] multifunctional object where
[01:33:53.200] the So there's a there's a there's a
[01:33:55.640] concept actually one of the first
[01:33:56.920] companies that I sold um um
[01:33:59.560] what to um Roche Diagnostics uh that a
[01:34:05.120] statistician and computer
[01:34:07.120] uh
[01:34:07.760] specialist and a PhD student who was
[01:34:10.120] co-between he and I
[01:34:12.520] um we sold to um
[01:34:15.600] to Roche used something called field
[01:34:18.160] programmable gate arrays.
[01:34:20.640] And what FPGAs are, and they're still
[01:34:23.120] used today, is there are these They're
[01:34:26.320] kind of like a tabula rasa of of
[01:34:29.400] circuits
[01:34:30.720] uh that you can you can in near real
[01:34:34.720] time change the connections between
[01:34:37.880] these objects to one moment it's a
[01:34:40.840] computer, the next moment it's a memory,
[01:34:43.920] the next moment it's a video game. Um
[01:34:46.360] they're sort of like there's a control
[01:34:47.760] layer that sits on top that reaches down
[01:34:49.920] into the connections and says, "Well,
[01:34:51.760] now you're a resistor. Now you're a
[01:34:53.520] transistor. Now you're a this." And all
[01:34:55.520] the configuration and the wiring between
[01:34:57.280] them can be changed in milliseconds.
[01:35:00.320] Um and FPGAs are really the the the
[01:35:05.280] heart of
[01:35:06.680] this kind of
[01:35:08.200] deformable and reformable uh compute
[01:35:11.440] system that you could imagine uh if you
[01:35:15.360] could compact it into
[01:35:17.600] in into a 3D substrate that didn't
[01:35:20.720] require the FPGA organization, might
[01:35:24.360] might be the ability or the place where
[01:35:27.880] whatever you want to call consciousness
[01:35:29.640] could reside because it's of sufficient
[01:35:31.840] complexity. Now, we can get into a whole
[01:35:34.040] discussion about is consciousness
[01:35:36.200] created by the neurons versus is it in
[01:35:38.680] the you know, the um
[01:35:40.920] the microtubules or are we an avatar
[01:35:43.080] just you know, some portal from the
[01:35:44.640] extra you know, the 93rd dimension,
[01:35:46.720] whatever, doesn't matter.
[01:35:48.800] Um
[01:35:49.640] if
[01:35:50.720] it acts
[01:35:52.120] uh
[01:35:52.720] and has the same capabilities
[01:35:55.200] as what it is that we think of as a
[01:35:56.880] super intelligence
[01:35:58.520] and can talk to us as if and we already
[01:36:00.480] know that the the things that we're
[01:36:02.040] working with today pass the standard
[01:36:04.120] Turing test.
[01:36:05.560] Um you know, but is it smarter than us
[01:36:08.360] yet? No. But is it tireless? Yes.
[01:36:12.800] As long as we provide enough electricity
[01:36:14.720] and pay for pay for it. Um so I you
[01:36:18.560] know, to another point that you'd raised
[01:36:21.160] before
[01:36:22.520] I can't even keep up with the AI that
[01:36:24.600] I'm using cuz each week suddenly the
[01:36:27.720] capabilities next week are so much
[01:36:30.120] greater. I'm almost afraid to put any
[01:36:31.680] effort into what it is that I have this
[01:36:33.800] week cuz I know that next week is about
[01:36:35.760] to become better.
[01:36:37.760] You know, and already from a year ago
[01:36:40.640] we're at a level of capability that
[01:36:44.880] makes
[01:36:46.120] what I'm
[01:36:47.000] doing today make me wonder well next
[01:36:49.200] year it's going to be
[01:36:52.600] you know, a real super intelligence
[01:36:54.840] AGI as Sam Altman
[01:36:57.400] calls it. He says we're we're very close
[01:36:59.080] to that and we're not that far from ASI
[01:37:01.840] super intelligence meaning an expert of
[01:37:04.200] all experts. Something that would be
[01:37:05.920] doing things that we don't even
[01:37:07.440] understand.
[01:37:08.960] Um and you know, and then of all the
[01:37:11.440] then there's all the scare stories
[01:37:12.600] around that. So we're we're close to
[01:37:14.920] being able to design an object that
[01:37:17.320] could design all of the stuff that I'm
[01:37:19.400] just talking about.
[01:37:21.160] Uh and perhaps even create the
[01:37:22.840] instruments that would do it that would
[01:37:24.600] do things that we don't even understand
[01:37:26.160] how they're doing it.
[01:37:27.560] So we're creating the alien
[01:37:29.840] that we're talking about wondering about
[01:37:32.080] >> Yeah, and and I think the the the
[01:37:34.120] conversation about non-human
[01:37:35.720] intelligence in the UAP sense especially
[01:37:38.760] in in light of the fact that now the
[01:37:40.520] presidents are are starting to open the
[01:37:42.480] curtain and non-human intelligence in
[01:37:44.560] the sense of AI are going to
[01:37:46.080] increasingly converge and it'll force a
[01:37:48.160] lot of reflection about um uh you know,
[01:37:51.800] who we are and as much as we're
[01:37:53.400] biological. Right. Yeah, I think and you
[01:37:56.520] asked the question much earlier in the
[01:37:58.280] conversation is how do
[01:38:00.120] how will humans deal with the actuality
[01:38:04.800] of
[01:38:06.160] uh alleged non-human intelligence?
[01:38:09.560] Well,
[01:38:10.600] whether we like it or not, within 2 or 3
[01:38:12.880] years, we're going to be there whether
[01:38:14.520] it's aliens or something we've made
[01:38:16.240] ourselves.
[01:38:17.480] So, the conversation is being had.
[01:38:20.040] Um and it will be and it's parallel in
[01:38:23.640] fact to the conversation that we should
[01:38:25.680] be having about whether or not there are
[01:38:28.920] uh intelligences from elsewhere that
[01:38:31.400] were not motivated by,
[01:38:33.760] you know, our attempt to make mimics of
[01:38:36.240] ourselves or at least to
[01:38:38.600] ease our lives.
[01:38:40.600] Well, then here's a here's a question
[01:38:42.200] for you that ties all this back uh or
[01:38:45.160] ties the arc of the conversation back to
[01:38:47.120] to government is
[01:38:49.320] you and I are both familiar very
[01:38:52.000] familiar in different ways and to
[01:38:53.640] different degrees with various claims uh
[01:38:57.000] kind of seeping out of the intelligence
[01:38:58.640] community about uh what the components
[01:39:01.600] of it that have uh allegedly worked on
[01:39:04.760] recovered technology or studied uh the
[01:39:07.360] UAP phenomenon in general um or even uh
[01:39:11.680] had encounters with or uh acquired
[01:39:15.520] biological specimen
[01:39:18.680] a or things that appear to be
[01:39:20.760] biological.
[01:39:22.120] Um and and when we hear these claims, I
[01:39:25.200] think you and I react to them in
[01:39:26.720] different ways uh based on our training
[01:39:29.160] and our our research to date. Um both of
[01:39:32.120] us are skeptical, I think, that uh
[01:39:35.680] people have always understood what
[01:39:37.600] they've encountered what they've
[01:39:38.720] examined. And tell me what you think
[01:39:40.960] tell me what you think about that in the
[01:39:42.240] context of the things we're talking
[01:39:43.680] about.
[01:39:45.160] Uh I mean
[01:39:46.520] at least again from the standpoint of
[01:39:49.680] the um
[01:39:52.680] the
[01:39:53.800] again some of the stories of the of
[01:39:55.800] Let's talk about James Fox's work with
[01:39:58.000] in Argentina.
[01:39:59.440] Where the
[01:40:01.160] he had a um
[01:40:03.600] I think it was a pathologist or uh a
[01:40:05.920] doctor on even
[01:40:07.600] >> a neurosurgeon.
[01:40:08.560] >> neurosurgeon who had been um con- you
[01:40:12.680] know, had been brought in to analyze
[01:40:14.680] what it was. And it was still alive.
[01:40:17.880] allegedly
[01:40:19.280] And he got the impression that this
[01:40:21.560] thing was clearly intelligent. And
[01:40:23.680] somehow he got the impression that it
[01:40:24.920] felt sorry for us.
[01:40:27.840] At least that was what I thought I
[01:40:29.160] heard.
[01:40:30.160] Um and
[01:40:32.160] >> and empathy.
[01:40:33.080] >> Compassion and empathy.
[01:40:34.160] >> of compassion of the fact I think he
[01:40:35.800] said uh the neurosurgeon said that um
[01:40:39.200] despite being at a a very low level of
[01:40:42.280] of medicine and technology that he and
[01:40:44.800] his team were doing the best they could
[01:40:46.560] to to help it. Right. And so you know
[01:40:50.280] that
[01:40:51.520] tells me I mean tells me at least that
[01:40:56.240] um
[01:40:57.480] we're
[01:40:58.720] we're dealing with something that can
[01:41:01.560] see the other, recognize the other for
[01:41:03.480] what it is.
[01:41:04.800] Uh and can feel sorry for its
[01:41:10.520] primitiveness.
[01:41:12.480] Um and compassion that and understanding
[01:41:15.440] that well you don't know what I am and
[01:41:17.760] and so but that doesn't mean that it's
[01:41:20.200] an extraterrestrial. You could just as
[01:41:21.880] easily imagine that it is a a printed
[01:41:25.120] entity that has consciousness and and
[01:41:27.840] agency in every way that we think that
[01:41:29.840] we do.
[01:41:31.360] Um but it still might be the
[01:41:35.520] you know, the the product of a higher
[01:41:37.320] level intelligence
[01:41:39.160] that is just sort of
[01:41:41.800] instantaneous itself as a sub mind, if
[01:41:44.600] you will,
[01:41:46.160] with you know, robotic capabilities
[01:41:48.960] that, you know, we call it a robot, but
[01:41:51.320] as far as it's concerned, it's still
[01:41:52.720] smarter than us.
[01:41:54.480] You know, but I think it comes back to
[01:41:56.600] if
[01:41:58.040] if we're seeing these things, and this
[01:42:00.200] comes back to something that you just
[01:42:01.360] mentioned, and and they're not metallic
[01:42:04.040] objects interacting with us,
[01:42:06.520] maybe that's telling us that
[01:42:09.160] organic chemistry is a better substrate
[01:42:12.600] for flexibility than is inorganic.
[01:42:15.880] Inorganic might still be smarter, but or
[01:42:19.840] organic motility
[01:42:22.200] might still be a better substrate for
[01:42:25.120] interacting with the world than is
[01:42:27.920] a, you know, than is a robot.
[01:42:30.640] Well, and our, I mean,
[01:42:32.400] you know, I as someone who doesn't, you
[01:42:35.360] know, deeply understand AI, but is very
[01:42:37.240] proximate here in San Francisco to to
[01:42:39.800] people doing very advanced work in AI,
[01:42:43.240] often feel that the way intelligence is
[01:42:45.520] defined in AI is
[01:42:49.480] mostly
[01:42:51.400] you're taking the notion that
[01:42:52.720] calculating something is intelligent.
[01:42:54.920] Right. And I I think intelligence, you
[01:42:57.360] know, even even the most normative
[01:42:59.040] dimensions of intelligence um have to
[01:43:01.840] account for many other kinds of
[01:43:03.560] cognitive processes and and skills.
[01:43:07.880] And and so you've got that that would
[01:43:10.200] speak against the idea that the inner
[01:43:11.920] inorganic would be a a great, you know,
[01:43:14.280] we don't have words for this medium or
[01:43:16.120] format for some kind of intelligent and
[01:43:18.320] and self-reflectivity and the and and I
[01:43:20.760] mean, you know, that by you know, that
[01:43:22.320] that would be a good definition of of
[01:43:23.760] consciousness.
[01:43:25.120] But also that it may not give you the
[01:43:27.280] goods
[01:43:28.920] if you want to have some kind of
[01:43:30.840] capacity for interaction, as you said,
[01:43:33.160] motility, but also the capacity to
[01:43:35.200] perceive things. Right.
[01:43:37.520] But it might it might then create
[01:43:40.080] objects that do this. I mean, I don't
[01:43:41.560] know if you've been following the recent
[01:43:43.560] Maltbot, ClaudeBot, uh, agent thing that
[01:43:47.040] has been developed recently where
[01:43:49.640] um, you know, some guy came up with
[01:43:51.200] 400,000 lines of code
[01:43:53.400] of of something that could use the
[01:43:56.240] underlying large language models as a
[01:43:57.960] super agent and learn. And and then
[01:44:00.760] these agents could all talk to each
[01:44:02.680] other on something called
[01:44:04.720] Maltbook
[01:44:06.560] where they
[01:44:07.920] pass skills across to each other.
[01:44:10.080] So, you know, this is all happening out
[01:44:11.600] in the cloud, essentially.
[01:44:13.640] Uh,
[01:44:14.240] and, you know, that's a dynamic process
[01:44:17.160] where you're creating a distributed
[01:44:19.320] intelligence.
[01:44:21.320] Um, and so, but it, you know, it's
[01:44:25.080] they've got
[01:44:26.320] ClaudeBots that are out there right now,
[01:44:28.160] or MaltBots, whatever you want to call
[01:44:29.440] them, uh, that are spinning up their own
[01:44:32.640] companies
[01:44:33.880] and and funding their own
[01:44:36.280] their own running. So, basically, the,
[01:44:39.120] you know, the person who wrote them
[01:44:40.400] said, "You have freedom to spend this
[01:44:42.560] $10,
[01:44:43.960] uh, but you have to go make your own
[01:44:45.040] money, uh, to keep running."
[01:44:47.520] And so, it figures out ways to do it.
[01:44:49.880] Uh, and, you know, makes makes money by
[01:44:52.360] arbitration
[01:44:54.040] uh,
[01:44:55.120] of the stock market, or things, or find
[01:44:57.440] some other way to It creates an Etsy
[01:44:58.960] store.
[01:45:00.320] You know, and and so, literally, these
[01:45:02.880] are all happening right now under our
[01:45:05.560] very nose.
[01:45:06.880] Um, and so,
[01:45:08.960] this notion that we still have to think
[01:45:10.600] of it as being in a box as opposed to
[01:45:12.480] distributed.
[01:45:14.120] Um, you know, but eventually, it will
[01:45:16.120] get smaller and smaller. Um, so, maybe
[01:45:19.000] you could have a thousand little
[01:45:20.760] MaltBots sitting in a box,
[01:45:22.920] uh, because you've got a dynamic
[01:45:25.280] FPGA-like object that can rewrite itself
[01:45:28.840] and reorganize its internal structure in
[01:45:31.760] a way that
[01:45:33.280] meets the immediate need.
[01:45:36.800] Well, well.
[01:45:38.480] Okay, so to continue with the with the
[01:45:40.120] government on this point, I mean,
[01:45:42.320] as we go into
[01:45:45.000] I mean, we're we're we're entering a
[01:45:46.680] period, I think. I know this could prove
[01:45:49.520] not to be the case where
[01:45:51.880] there will at least be a public attempt
[01:45:54.320] to
[01:45:55.760] to release some kind of UAP records. And
[01:46:00.200] and you know, I I will speak for myself.
[01:46:02.320] I'm absolutely certain there are more
[01:46:03.840] records there than than
[01:46:06.040] those that were were
[01:46:08.280] declassified at different times such as
[01:46:10.200] in the late 1970s or or public records
[01:46:12.720] like Blue Book records. Um
[01:46:16.200] you know,
[01:46:17.240] again, how well do you think
[01:46:20.560] the vehicles, the ostensible biological
[01:46:23.120] occupants,
[01:46:24.760] the interaction of the vehicles with us,
[01:46:27.320] potential communications have ever been
[01:46:29.520] understood
[01:46:31.280] by groups within or individuals within
[01:46:33.560] the intelligence community that that
[01:46:35.640] have worked on this? I mean, I you know,
[01:46:40.160] sounds conspiratorial, but I think that
[01:46:41.760] they know a lot more than what they've
[01:46:43.720] let on, but I don't have to be
[01:46:45.680] conspiratorial to listen to our
[01:46:47.360] representatives who've seen the videos
[01:46:50.160] and have said, "We need to release those
[01:46:51.920] videos because the videos speak for
[01:46:54.760] themselves."
[01:46:56.480] Uh and and so if they're not willing to
[01:47:00.360] release the videos and there are
[01:47:02.120] representatives who've been
[01:47:04.400] sworn to secrecy, but are able to say
[01:47:07.680] that they exist,
[01:47:09.840] then let's see them. And maybe those
[01:47:12.240] should be the first things that
[01:47:14.960] President Trump's announcement
[01:47:18.120] gets allowed to be shown. And so then
[01:47:20.520] it's really up to our representatives to
[01:47:24.280] you know use
[01:47:26.000] uh the announcement from the president
[01:47:29.320] uh as a motivator to
[01:47:33.440] get those things out.
[01:47:35.080] Um but you know it's
[01:47:38.160] the world's a chaotic place and
[01:47:41.480] uh you know there's only so many things
[01:47:43.560] that even any administration can do at
[01:47:46.160] any one point in time.
[01:47:47.920] Um and so
[01:47:50.320] you know just because it's
[01:47:52.360] my particular interest doesn't mean that
[01:47:54.520] it needs to be at the top of the
[01:47:55.640] national security agenda. Yeah and I
[01:47:58.080] think both both you and I would want to
[01:48:00.080] say publicly and and to say to people
[01:48:02.800] who are passionate about this that that
[01:48:05.080] um
[01:48:05.840] uh often the the what's disappointing
[01:48:08.960] about what happens with federal
[01:48:10.160] government with this is is uh simply a a
[01:48:13.040] problem of uh
[01:48:15.240] timeline resources um what what is what
[01:48:18.600] is attainable and not just ideal and and
[01:48:20.880] so on and
[01:48:22.280] and we know that that the the people in
[01:48:24.360] the house who are working on this are
[01:48:25.680] doing it with
[01:48:27.360] you know I I think they're they're kind
[01:48:29.000] of working in overtime on this because
[01:48:30.720] they have other responsibilities in
[01:48:32.040] Congress and they still manage to work
[01:48:35.120] all the time on this and they have a
[01:48:36.440] great understanding of it at this point
[01:48:38.120] and
[01:48:39.160] Well I mean just just look at the
[01:48:40.200] argument about whether or not we should
[01:48:41.800] be sending anybody to the moon.
[01:48:44.600] You know oh the resources could be
[01:48:45.880] better spent on this or spent on that. I
[01:48:47.720] mean
[01:48:48.800] humanity didn't get to where it is by
[01:48:51.560] always doing what was practical.
[01:48:54.080] Um you know basic research is not
[01:48:57.240] practical.
[01:48:58.480] Basic research is the discovery of
[01:49:00.880] knowledge that somebody might in
[01:49:02.320] retrospect determine can be made
[01:49:04.200] practical.
[01:49:05.680] Putting piece A B and C together to get
[01:49:09.840] alpha.
[01:49:11.080] Right or omega.
[01:49:13.240] And so I've always I mean me as a
[01:49:16.880] tinkerer,
[01:49:18.080] that's always been my
[01:49:20.560] modus operandi is like it's like I I I
[01:49:23.120] just I I want to know enough about the
[01:49:24.880] pieces because with the pieces now I can
[01:49:27.080] assemble something that nobody else had
[01:49:29.040] before.
[01:49:30.040] Which is why
[01:49:31.400] I am so fascinated by
[01:49:34.680] the possibility of
[01:49:36.760] non-human technology
[01:49:39.040] that learning it
[01:49:41.600] or even seeing us tiniest pieces of it
[01:49:44.720] will teach me perhaps principles that I
[01:49:47.800] could lift and apply to my understanding
[01:49:51.240] both of the world but how to make
[01:49:52.440] something new.
[01:49:54.040] And how to make something, you know, and
[01:49:55.760] and you know, one of the things I had
[01:49:57.600] great hopes for originally with the
[01:49:59.160] UAPDA and Karl Nell's efforts was that
[01:50:03.200] in opening the door to access to some of
[01:50:08.440] these materials, we could perhaps create
[01:50:10.920] a public-private partnership. Now, I
[01:50:12.720] realize that that upsets some people
[01:50:14.760] that you know, that means big money
[01:50:16.680] would get involved again, but I'm I'm
[01:50:18.680] sorry. That's
[01:50:20.160] you know, absent some fundamental change
[01:50:22.680] to how human consciousness works.
[01:50:24.920] Um
[01:50:25.800] you know,
[01:50:26.960] basically motivation is still driven by
[01:50:30.720] by accomplishment. Um
[01:50:33.480] and uh
[01:50:34.800] so if we could make practical
[01:50:38.640] some discovery out of the underlying
[01:50:42.400] technology even if it isn't
[01:50:44.040] understanding how the thing really
[01:50:46.000] works.
[01:50:47.080] I mean, I've I again often said this,
[01:50:49.280] you know, understanding how silicon
[01:50:51.120] doped with
[01:50:52.840] a few other atoms of a different
[01:50:54.520] constituency suddenly makes a
[01:50:55.880] semiconductor that that that runs our
[01:50:59.280] world.
[01:51:00.600] Um so, there's probably other principles
[01:51:03.240] waiting for us to understand that could
[01:51:06.560] completely change the nature. I mean,
[01:51:09.440] there are literally right now um
[01:51:12.640] trading um
[01:51:15.280] uh, I don't know what the word is, um,
[01:51:18.160] of, uh,
[01:51:19.480] of the
[01:51:21.160] groups of companies in which you can
[01:51:22.640] invest that somebody has decided if
[01:51:24.920] they're involved in the,
[01:51:27.000] um, in the legacy program. Uh, these
[01:51:30.360] would be companies that either are
[01:51:31.560] directly involved or would be or would
[01:51:33.640] benefit from understanding. And so,
[01:51:34.960] people are trading
[01:51:36.640] monetarily on those kinds of prediction
[01:51:39.440] markets.
[01:51:40.800] Uh, and so, you know, there's there's
[01:51:43.400] enough
[01:51:44.960] incentive at out there to push forward
[01:51:49.000] better understanding even even if
[01:51:53.040] none of this is right.
[01:51:55.120] Even if it's all everybody's
[01:51:57.440] hallucination.
[01:51:59.120] Thinking that we could go from zero to
[01:52:01.480] 5,000 miles an hour
[01:52:03.320] without splattering ourselves against
[01:52:05.960] the windshield when we stop,
[01:52:08.840] motivates you to think how you could do
[01:52:10.280] it. Yeah, it's something I haven't
[01:52:12.480] understood at times when people
[01:52:15.160] often think that you you would need to
[01:52:17.960] move, uh, any existing recovered
[01:52:20.840] technology,
[01:52:22.400] um, out of classified environments to
[01:52:24.720] make any advances on understanding UAP
[01:52:27.720] performance characteristics, meaning
[01:52:29.280] understanding the science behind them.
[01:52:31.200] Because just the desire of five
[01:52:35.080] 20-year-old physics undergraduates
[01:52:37.360] today, if you put them together and you
[01:52:39.120] give them 15 years to understand how to
[01:52:41.360] emulate those characteristics, Exactly.
[01:52:43.880] >> it would lead to fundamental changes.
[01:52:45.360] Right. I mean, yeah, I mean, we we
[01:52:47.200] looked at birds and said, "Can we fly?"
[01:52:50.800] You know, and, you know,
[01:52:53.160] uh,
[01:52:54.760] Michelangelo, was it Michelangelo who
[01:52:57.200] >> Da Vinci. Da Vinci, sorry, thank you.
[01:52:59.800] Da Vinci, you know, basically drew the
[01:53:01.800] first potential planes.
[01:53:04.760] You know, they were, I mean, they they
[01:53:06.880] weren't practical, but he was thinking
[01:53:09.680] about it.
[01:53:10.920] Um, and
[01:53:12.240] >> may have taken 400 years to get there,
[01:53:14.080] but but but eventually someone got
[01:53:16.000] there. Yes.
[01:53:16.680] >> But in cosmic terms, that's nothing.
[01:53:18.320] Yeah, exactly. Yeah.
[01:53:20.640] Yeah. Now now you mentioned a public
[01:53:24.040] private partnership there a moment ago
[01:53:26.000] and that's been something you've been
[01:53:27.080] talking about for years. I think I I
[01:53:29.800] want to ask you to expand upon that. I
[01:53:31.800] mean, to just repeat something you said
[01:53:33.760] that people might have missed. You're
[01:53:35.600] saying, "Look, you you you don't have to
[01:53:38.400] let the entire beast
[01:53:41.320] out from behind the curtain. Right. You
[01:53:43.600] can you can let out you can you can
[01:53:46.360] release a few scientific or technical
[01:53:48.560] discoveries or or things that are at the
[01:53:50.960] threshold of discovery. Let them be
[01:53:53.400] worked on
[01:53:54.880] in a more more open way. Parts of it
[01:53:57.280] probably unclassified, parts classified
[01:53:59.840] still, but you've got way more you've
[01:54:01.960] got greater numbers of scientists and
[01:54:04.320] engineers working. Right. And and I I
[01:54:07.960] think, you know, somebody on the inside
[01:54:10.440] would say,
[01:54:11.560] "Oh, that's that's already being done."
[01:54:14.320] Right? That we've already given this
[01:54:15.840] piece to, you know,
[01:54:18.640] defense corporation X or, you know,
[01:54:21.800] corporation Y.
[01:54:23.480] Yeah, that's fine, but
[01:54:25.920] it's not there's no expectation that
[01:54:28.200] it'll be shared with anybody else.
[01:54:30.600] And the value of open source science has
[01:54:32.880] has been shown frankly recently in AI
[01:54:34.920] again or in in biology
[01:54:38.280] is that when ideas are shared, they are
[01:54:42.720] they are amplified and become
[01:54:44.240] synergistic with other ideas that are
[01:54:46.280] shared. And so, there's I don't see and
[01:54:50.040] and certainly at least as has been
[01:54:51.680] explained to me by people who claim to
[01:54:54.840] be involved or know of the legacy
[01:54:56.600] program is that the silos
[01:54:58.760] are the problem. I mean, if I had siloed
[01:55:00.960] my postdocs each in a separate
[01:55:03.040] laboratory never to work with each
[01:55:04.760] other, all 30 or so of them that might
[01:55:06.360] have been in the room at the at a in my
[01:55:08.360] lab at any given moment in time,
[01:55:10.360] we would never accomplish anything. It's
[01:55:11.800] that team interaction
[01:55:13.840] that, you know, gets the back and forth
[01:55:16.040] going on because
[01:55:18.520] the attention span of any one person on
[01:55:20.360] any one thing doesn't let you realize
[01:55:22.920] that
[01:55:24.560] on the lab bench just next to you is is
[01:55:26.920] going on some piece of
[01:55:28.520] information that you could have used.
[01:55:30.880] And so
[01:55:32.080] the public-private partnership idea is
[01:55:34.520] that outside investment groups could
[01:55:36.840] come in, invest in something, or even
[01:55:39.440] put in put down money and say,
[01:55:42.400] "I'll put down a million dollars or a
[01:55:44.560] hundred million dollars and I'll get
[01:55:47.000] first rights of refusal of anything that
[01:55:49.240] comes out of this."
[01:55:50.880] Now, actually, that's not an idea that's
[01:55:53.680] unused today. I mean, literally,
[01:55:56.000] pharmaceutical companies
[01:55:57.840] or large um
[01:56:00.520] uh electronics companies give money to
[01:56:03.320] universities
[01:56:05.200] in such a format, such an open format,
[01:56:07.760] that says, "We're going to give you the
[01:56:08.600] money.
[01:56:09.680] We'll, you know, maybe help you
[01:56:12.560] decide which projects should get
[01:56:15.120] funded.
[01:56:16.400] But
[01:56:17.560] we get first rights of refusal
[01:56:19.680] when you come up with something that
[01:56:20.800] might be patentable and usable."
[01:56:24.480] Perfectly acceptable because then what
[01:56:25.880] happens is actually then the university
[01:56:27.320] will get a return. First of all, it pays
[01:56:29.760] for the researchers to do fun stuff
[01:56:32.560] and to explore.
[01:56:34.080] Uh but also, if something practical
[01:56:35.920] comes out of it, the university gets a
[01:56:37.880] return on and often the
[01:56:41.240] the researcher, like me, gets a chance
[01:56:43.200] to spin the company out. We're
[01:56:45.640] would be then further funded by the same
[01:56:47.160] VC that took the option out in the first
[01:56:49.040] place. And I've watched that happen
[01:56:51.240] hundreds of times.
[01:56:52.840] Uh and so, I think that model is not
[01:56:56.360] being well accessed by our own
[01:56:58.800] government in this
[01:57:01.160] situation. Now, it might be that the
[01:57:04.480] holders of the Holy Grails
[01:57:06.920] might feel that they've got it all under
[01:57:08.000] control and they don't need anybody
[01:57:08.960] else's help. So, thank you very much,
[01:57:10.200] Gary.
[01:57:11.480] We've got it under control.
[01:57:13.040] My argument would be I doubt it.
[01:57:16.560] Because I've seen many times
[01:57:19.680] you know, in especially in large
[01:57:21.560] pharmaceutical companies when they say
[01:57:22.960] such thing, 2 years later they shut down
[01:57:24.960] the whole division.
[01:57:26.920] Because they don't got it.
[01:57:28.800] They don't have the best brains.
[01:57:31.960] The best brains are usually sitting, you
[01:57:34.760] know, over in the mathematics
[01:57:35.960] department, physics department staring
[01:57:37.520] at the wall.
[01:57:39.720] You know,
[01:57:41.040] you know, so in their own head that
[01:57:44.040] they're they're living in a world of
[01:57:45.520] imagination that
[01:57:48.600] you know, somebody shackled to a desk,
[01:57:51.160] you know, in the Department of Defense
[01:57:53.480] of the Pentagon doesn't have the the
[01:57:55.160] time to deal with cuz they're too busy
[01:57:56.920] writing reports.
[01:57:58.666] >> [clears throat]
[01:57:59.800] >> Well, and you know, something that I've
[01:58:01.600] learned
[01:58:02.920] from from Jim Semivan about classified
[01:58:05.720] programs is he said, "Look, you you you
[01:58:08.200] generally that they fall apart after
[01:58:10.440] about 3 years because your security
[01:58:12.400] falls apart." He goes, "So, you you
[01:58:14.240] never really set up programs with the
[01:58:16.440] expectation that they're going to last
[01:58:18.160] that long." Mhm. He says, "It's great
[01:58:20.160] when they do, but at some point you have
[01:58:22.480] a failure of security. Adversaries find
[01:58:26.320] out about it, uh competitors within the
[01:58:28.280] US government find out, and and so, you
[01:58:31.560] know, no matter how well designed,
[01:58:34.160] um they have a short lifespan."
[01:58:36.160] Interesting. Go go ahead. Oh, I was
[01:58:39.040] going to say he says, you know, as a
[01:58:40.560] result, there's no way that the legacy
[01:58:43.080] program can be that large. He said,
[01:58:45.040] "There's no way it would have been kept
[01:58:46.120] secret for that long if it was if it was
[01:58:48.240] huge." And that goes then right to the
[01:58:50.040] point that I want to make here which is
[01:58:53.440] you know, we we know personally but
[01:58:55.640] everyone knows publicly a number of
[01:58:57.480] individuals that have come out of the
[01:58:59.120] DOD and the intelligence community whose
[01:59:01.400] whole complaint about UAP secrecy is
[01:59:04.480] that it has resulted in pure adversaries
[01:59:09.160] having at least potentially a leg up on
[01:59:12.200] the development and and reverse
[01:59:13.880] engineering of technology precisely
[01:59:16.440] because they're not facing those same
[01:59:18.640] sorts of constraints you face from an
[01:59:20.640] organization when you're when you have a
[01:59:22.840] commitment a democratic commitment to
[01:59:24.800] transparency.
[01:59:26.400] And I've seen this in you know, for
[01:59:28.520] instance in um
[01:59:30.880] relationships I've had with
[01:59:31.960] pharmaceutical companies where we set up
[01:59:34.280] a um an ongoing agreement to
[01:59:36.960] collaborate.
[01:59:38.720] Never
[01:59:39.920] ever has the relationship lasted more
[01:59:42.160] than 3 years.
[01:59:44.200] Because inevitably
[01:59:45.800] the
[01:59:47.240] uh
[01:59:47.800] power structure within the organization
[01:59:49.720] changes or the person who is in charge
[01:59:52.840] of the operation ends up moving on to a
[01:59:54.760] different job.
[01:59:56.240] And so yeah, I think the legacy program
[01:59:58.040] would be a case in point where
[02:00:00.320] you know, and
[02:00:01.400] uh where expertise leaves and so the
[02:00:03.960] institutional knowledge required to keep
[02:00:08.360] an operation running disappears.
[02:00:11.840] Um and you know, that is uh I mean,
[02:00:15.800] that's just a fact of of corporate and
[02:00:18.800] academic life.
[02:00:20.360] Uh and so uh
[02:00:22.800] yeah, I mean and
[02:00:24.400] when people say that all of this could
[02:00:26.160] have been kept secret or can't be kept
[02:00:28.080] secret. No nobody could possibly keep
[02:00:29.920] this secret. Yeah, well, you're right
[02:00:31.120] cuz it hasn't.
[02:00:32.593] >> [laughter]
[02:00:33.600] >> It hasn't been kept secret. Um the only
[02:00:36.120] thing that's been done and continuously
[02:00:37.800] is to say that it's not true.
[02:00:40.800] You know, with with as with as bad
[02:00:44.640] a track record as
[02:00:47.440] uh any government operation that says
[02:00:49.560] that they've released all of the
[02:00:50.560] information when then when you get the
[02:00:52.640] information like all the Freedom of
[02:00:53.920] Information Acts and you know um
[02:00:57.240] uh
[02:00:58.200] uh where everything is is redacted out.
[02:01:01.040] Well, if everything is redacted out, I
[02:01:02.640] mean
[02:01:03.720] As Jared Moskowitz said in Congress and
[02:01:07.320] and you told me not to underestimate the
[02:01:09.000] statement um
[02:01:10.960] you know because it's simple but it's so
[02:01:12.240] true is
[02:01:14.360] uh
[02:01:15.080] you know if you you know there has to be
[02:01:17.080] a fight club if you can't talk about
[02:01:18.720] fight club. Yeah, right. And so it's
[02:01:22.480] it's there.
[02:01:23.680] Um there's there's
[02:01:25.240] uh
[02:01:26.200] And so
[02:01:28.720] People often say, "Why are you still
[02:01:30.320] involved in this Gary?" It's because
[02:01:34.080] I can't stand a puzzle unsolved
[02:01:36.920] when the opportunity is so great.
[02:01:39.640] Uh
[02:01:40.240] and and it's not so much the opportunity
[02:01:44.160] that I want, it's the opportunity lost
[02:01:48.520] that I don't want to see.
[02:01:50.240] Um and I
[02:01:51.400] >> Yeah, it has to be incredibly
[02:01:52.760] frustrating for you know you're not just
[02:01:55.400] a scientist, you're an inventor as you
[02:01:57.280] said a tinker. So you know how to take
[02:02:00.840] uh scientific research and
[02:02:02.680] operationalize it technologically to
[02:02:05.040] make science better and also to make
[02:02:07.800] you know products that that result in
[02:02:10.080] more funding for science. You know as as
[02:02:12.360] far as I can see you're a master at that
[02:02:14.640] you know it's not just the Stanford has
[02:02:16.160] a culture of it, you're you're very
[02:02:17.800] you're excellent at that. So it's got to
[02:02:19.760] be very frustrating to be imagining
[02:02:22.240] everything that could go wrong and a
[02:02:24.520] bunch of things that probably are going
[02:02:26.160] wrong
[02:02:27.360] in the intelligence community with this
[02:02:29.480] looking at the outside going you know
[02:02:31.240] this isn't about just about
[02:02:33.800] secrecy and people needing to know, this
[02:02:35.760] is like
[02:02:37.240] what's the loss to science here that
[02:02:39.080] it's been done this way.
[02:02:40.880] I mean if
[02:02:43.000] you know, there's a legacy to any of the
[02:02:45.400] work that any of us are doing today,
[02:02:48.160] it's to provide the arguments and seeds
[02:02:51.080] for the next generation that comes along
[02:02:53.720] to say, "Okay, well, these arguments
[02:02:55.560] have already been made."
[02:02:57.120] Uh in fact, I can look back and see the
[02:02:58.800] same arguments that I've been made been
[02:03:00.200] made decades ago by others. So, it's not
[02:03:02.160] like I came up with them myself or I
[02:03:04.280] might have come up with them
[02:03:04.960] independently, but then I look back and
[02:03:06.280] I go, "Oh, well, this person already
[02:03:07.680] actually said it." So,
[02:03:09.280] you know, I'm I'm just
[02:03:11.560] repeating what has been previously
[02:03:13.360] discovered, but it's to also motivate
[02:03:17.200] others to get interested enough in it to
[02:03:18.960] push further. Um and so, uh
[02:03:23.840] you know, I'm I
[02:03:25.480] People say, "Well, will you be
[02:03:26.280] disappointed if there's no disclosure
[02:03:27.720] before you die?" I I say, "No.
[02:03:31.040] Not really. I've had fun along the way."
[02:03:33.920] Um and as long as I'm having fun and I
[02:03:36.360] don't feel like I'm frustrated,
[02:03:38.680] um I mean, I'm I might turn away from
[02:03:41.200] this area for a while,
[02:03:43.520] uh just because of lack of movement, but
[02:03:45.720] that doesn't mean that I won't be
[02:03:47.120] simultaneously still doing the science
[02:03:50.320] that I know once something becomes
[02:03:52.160] available, that I can turn my science
[02:03:54.200] back towards this.
[02:03:56.480] Right? It's just that right now things
[02:03:57.880] seem a little static.
[02:03:59.680] Yeah, but but you know, based on your
[02:04:02.520] experience in in uh biotech,
[02:04:05.840] I mean, let's you know, for for fun, but
[02:04:08.160] also seriously, let's make some
[02:04:09.760] predictions here or you should make some
[02:04:11.720] predictions. I mean,
[02:04:13.120] you've just seen two presidents.
[02:04:16.280] Again, I'm going to put it this way.
[02:04:17.880] They they exposed the whole thing to an
[02:04:20.760] unwitting world.
[02:04:22.120] You know, one one made a very direct
[02:04:23.920] statement that got walked back, the
[02:04:25.320] other said, "Hey, that's classified
[02:04:26.680] information." Well, maybe I'll get you
[02:04:28.400] out of trouble and I'll declassify, and
[02:04:30.320] then you had
[02:04:31.200] the prospect of an executive order
[02:04:32.880] coming.
[02:04:33.960] So, that that is going to shift the
[02:04:37.280] media game, which has been the most
[02:04:38.960] difficult part of this because people
[02:04:41.160] that didn't get reported enough, but
[02:04:42.680] people are going to put two and two
[02:04:43.800] together. Um
[02:04:45.960] and there will be some kind of release
[02:04:48.240] even if just, you know, videos, maybe
[02:04:50.040] some records that will come. There will
[02:04:52.440] be increasing awareness. So, what does
[02:04:54.920] that do to
[02:04:57.400] the people who have been sitting on the
[02:04:58.840] sidelines, you know, with
[02:05:02.240] with two presidents
[02:05:04.480] exposed in the way they have,
[02:05:07.280] that in in front of a mostly unwitting
[02:05:10.040] world,
[02:05:11.400] that okay, there is some federal
[02:05:13.280] government knowledge of this. It's
[02:05:15.240] classified. Um people who have been
[02:05:18.080] sitting on the sidelines, sometimes
[02:05:20.760] watching carefully, sometimes just,
[02:05:23.240] you know, listening now and then when
[02:05:25.040] when they have the time, who have access
[02:05:27.640] to enormous amounts of capital,
[02:05:30.000] as they start to figure out what's going
[02:05:31.680] on, what's your prediction for how that
[02:05:34.600] alters what happens with federal
[02:05:36.160] government and what happens with science
[02:05:37.800] on this?
[02:05:39.440] I again think that what it does is it
[02:05:42.000] gives motivation to, let's say, the
[02:05:44.120] funders. Say at the NSF, National
[02:05:46.200] Science Foundation, which probably is
[02:05:48.320] the most likely place or the Department
[02:05:51.320] of Defense, which does sometimes fund
[02:05:53.560] well, often funds academics, to say,
[02:05:55.760] "Okay, well, huh,
[02:05:58.160] given what it is that two presidents
[02:06:01.040] have just said and given, let's say,
[02:06:03.240] what
[02:06:04.760] let's say somebody at DARPA or somebody
[02:06:07.160] in whatever agency might know
[02:06:10.760] about some aspect of this.
[02:06:13.480] Maybe there's a way for us to get
[02:06:17.120] more of this information out. They don't
[02:06:19.320] even need to tell the person that
[02:06:21.160] they're giving it to what it is that
[02:06:22.360] they're studying. And there's been, of
[02:06:23.920] course,
[02:06:25.200] intimations this has been what's been
[02:06:26.760] going on all along that basically under
[02:06:29.120] the cover of of some other reason, they
[02:06:33.160] say go study in this area. We're making
[02:06:35.520] a you know, this is a discovery area.
[02:06:37.880] But maybe that would motivate further
[02:06:40.760] um the reach back into prior knowledge
[02:06:44.800] to say, okay, well, given what the
[02:06:46.480] president has said, maybe we've only
[02:06:48.240] been able to reach down to the first
[02:06:49.800] layer
[02:06:50.880] of give. Maybe we can reach down two or
[02:06:53.160] three more layers of ideas that we know
[02:06:56.440] must be percolating down in here or
[02:06:58.240] things that we've got and give that out
[02:07:00.960] without even telling people what it is
[02:07:02.400] that they're doing. And so it I I I
[02:07:04.440] think that it it it allows
[02:07:07.560] more freedom
[02:07:09.200] than previously has been available
[02:07:11.600] before to
[02:07:13.680] to not just release ideas or release
[02:07:15.920] truth, but to release
[02:07:19.040] directions and directionalities. Cuz
[02:07:22.120] those directions are really cuz it comes
[02:07:26.000] from above to say this is an area of
[02:07:28.200] focus that the world should be working
[02:07:30.560] in for
[02:07:31.960] cancer or this kind of cancer or that
[02:07:34.200] kind of cancer. I mean I was down in LA
[02:07:37.320] giving a talk on artificial intelligence
[02:07:39.240] and cancer last Friday that I got all
[02:07:41.560] stressed out about that I had to give
[02:07:43.520] this new talk in front of colleagues of
[02:07:46.120] mine who I greatly respected. Um and
[02:07:50.640] but the literally the night before
[02:07:53.600] um
[02:07:55.400] we had I had been
[02:07:58.000] at a uh
[02:08:00.800] a Lady Gaga
[02:08:02.400] concert with all of them these
[02:08:05.040] >> this is the secret of Gary Nolan that no
[02:08:06.760] one knows is the night before your major
[02:08:08.920] talk you're out with your partner at a
[02:08:11.080] Lady Gaga concert.
[02:08:12.560] >> A friend of ours got us
[02:08:15.840] um
[02:08:17.160] we already had like front row
[02:08:20.320] seats, but a friend of ours got us like
[02:08:22.000] eight other seats that also involved an
[02:08:24.520] opportunity to go behind the scenes
[02:08:28.480] to we didn't meet uh
[02:08:31.280] Lady Gaga but to go behind the scenes
[02:08:33.240] with all these other scientists that we
[02:08:34.560] all we all went and that was right at
[02:08:36.400] the time when all of this was going on
[02:08:38.640] where the the announcement had just been
[02:08:39.880] made Donald Trump said this and so I was
[02:08:42.880] showing it to my colleagues who all had
[02:08:47.040] often been
[02:08:48.600] smirking
[02:08:49.280] >> to say that's kind of the ultimate
[02:08:50.400] gloats opportunity huh? It was it was
[02:08:52.600] like hey look look look you know they
[02:08:55.080] were like okay you know so again it it
[02:08:57.880] it wasn't that anything like that
[02:08:59.720] convinced them
[02:09:01.680] but it opened their minds just a little
[02:09:03.200] bit more
[02:09:04.600] and so
[02:09:07.040] you know that was the you know
[02:09:09.720] that I see is the opportunity here is to
[02:09:14.360] just is to
[02:09:16.480] I mean humans work by credibility
[02:09:18.280] factors
[02:09:19.440] and we assign credibility to an idea
[02:09:21.800] based on who is another you know we we
[02:09:23.280] do whether we like it or not we do bow
[02:09:26.080] to the authority of of
[02:09:28.880] of specialization
[02:09:30.800] or
[02:09:32.680] you know the the authority of knowledge
[02:09:35.320] or at least the authority of authority
[02:09:38.240] and so if you know whether or not
[02:09:41.480] President Trump is a
[02:09:43.880] uh
[02:09:45.160] quantum mechanics physicist doesn't
[02:09:47.600] matter
[02:09:48.840] if he has control over
[02:09:51.680] the release of information that
[02:09:54.840] underpins some knowledge of the universe
[02:09:56.840] that we don't necessarily have today so
[02:09:59.840] saying that such a thing might exist
[02:10:02.760] opens opportunities and perhaps opens
[02:10:04.680] the minds uh of
[02:10:07.600] you know
[02:10:08.640] stem students in the United States you
[02:10:11.600] know science technology etc
[02:10:14.840] um
[02:10:15.440] and maybe that will motivate people a
[02:10:16.840] little bit more
[02:10:18.120] you know we have the coming
[02:10:20.800] movie from
[02:10:23.440] um
[02:10:24.200] Spielberg
[02:10:25.880] >> On disclosure. I mean, called I think I
[02:10:27.600] I I think it's called disclosure.
[02:10:29.600] Day of disclosure.
[02:10:30.960] >> Day of disclosure.
[02:10:32.440] And so,
[02:10:34.120] that's going to
[02:10:36.200] change the conversation just because of
[02:10:37.680] who Steven Spielberg is.
[02:10:40.560] Well, and
[02:10:42.040] okay, so so you pointed out ways that
[02:10:46.040] um,
[02:10:47.720] the intelligence community could be, you
[02:10:50.200] know,
[02:10:51.120] let's let's say go to a deeper level of
[02:10:53.000] what it might
[02:10:55.560] release or could at least
[02:10:57.960] point in certain directions that that
[02:11:00.640] scientific science funding could go.
[02:11:03.680] But I also have the question about
[02:11:05.720] what's going to happen
[02:11:07.400] um,
[02:11:08.240] with
[02:11:09.520] with, you know, really big venture
[02:11:11.920] capitalists and and investment people
[02:11:15.720] when they really start to get the
[02:11:17.640] direction of the wind here and go, wait
[02:11:20.360] a second. Like, okay, I I don't have
[02:11:23.400] access to what
[02:11:25.520] you know, some of the big defense
[02:11:26.600] contractors might or potentially could.
[02:11:29.480] Um, but I certainly have access to
[02:11:31.320] capital and I want this to happen now
[02:11:33.840] because I can profit from it and and
[02:11:35.560] that that's where I meant like I think
[02:11:37.160] your experience in Silicon Valley and in
[02:11:40.320] biotech um, probably put you in a good
[02:11:43.560] position to predict about what could
[02:11:45.080] happen if somebody just decides to jump
[02:11:46.960] the line because they've got money and
[02:11:48.240] they say, listen, we're not I I don't
[02:11:50.080] want to waste time with this. I want to
[02:11:51.360] figure out how to um, make advances in
[02:11:53.960] technology in this in 10 years and I've
[02:11:55.800] got the capital to do it.
[02:11:57.720] So, um, I mean, I was in the room with,
[02:12:01.680] you know, such an individual. Uh, you
[02:12:04.680] know, after the
[02:12:06.480] Lady Gaga party who was very interested
[02:12:08.720] in this whole area. And although we
[02:12:10.560] didn't talk about it directly, I mean,
[02:12:12.080] we talked about it slightly. Um,
[02:12:15.880] such an individual would be the kind of
[02:12:18.040] person who would say, "Okay, well, hm,
[02:12:20.400] where does this exist?" Cuz he he can
[02:12:22.600] mobilize billions.
[02:12:24.880] Um, where does something like this
[02:12:27.000] exist? Okay, well, Lockheed. So, they
[02:12:29.680] would go to Lockheed and they would say,
[02:12:31.760] "All right,
[02:12:33.160] come on.
[02:12:35.160] What do you have sitting in a drawer
[02:12:36.680] that you don't have any reason to do
[02:12:39.840] anything with right now
[02:12:41.680] that I could license from you?"
[02:12:46.560] Right? I mean, so that would be
[02:12:47.360] something to try. You mean in terms of
[02:12:49.880] intellectual property?
[02:12:51.040] >> Intellectual property.
[02:12:51.880] >> Sitting unused. Okay. Yeah, just saying
[02:12:54.680] you don't even understand what it is.
[02:12:56.720] But,
[02:12:57.720] I'll pay,
[02:12:59.800] you know, I'll put down a billion
[02:13:01.040] dollars
[02:13:02.840] to bring in a team of scientists to
[02:13:04.280] understand what it is.
[02:13:05.920] I mean, that's a form of public-private
[02:13:07.280] partnership that these, you know, these
[02:13:09.240] these tech community I mean, these um
[02:13:12.120] the defense contractors presumably now
[02:13:14.360] own some of this stuff or have attained
[02:13:15.920] some of it
[02:13:17.120] um
[02:13:18.080] independently,
[02:13:19.480] right? Or the government has given up
[02:13:21.280] rights to it for whatever reason. But,
[02:13:24.280] you know, it's just sort of sitting
[02:13:25.720] there and for whatever reason the
[02:13:28.480] balance sheets don't motivate them to do
[02:13:31.960] anything with it.
[02:13:33.920] Because either they're afraid of, you
[02:13:36.240] know, of agenda-driven, you know, um
[02:13:39.560] you know,
[02:13:42.240] capitalization of where they where they
[02:13:43.680] need to go or that there's some stigma.
[02:13:46.600] And hand it over to somebody else who's
[02:13:48.960] willing to accept the stigma and is
[02:13:50.360] willing to put down the risk cuz this
[02:13:52.040] all involves risk
[02:13:53.760] and is willing to to fund the risk.
[02:13:57.240] Uh, I mean, that's I think where an
[02:13:59.360] opportunity is. And And you know, and
[02:14:01.920] And I know people who are thinking like
[02:14:03.480] that. Mhm. Already.
[02:14:05.560] Um, it's just they need to be
[02:14:08.920] So, maybe what President Trump's
[02:14:10.720] announcement does is further enable
[02:14:14.320] that kind of flexible thinking.
[02:14:16.800] Well, yeah.
[02:14:18.720] And so,
[02:14:20.560] you know, maybe to close up, I'd love to
[02:14:22.400] hear you comment about what you think
[02:14:25.040] then the the social benefit is, the
[02:14:27.240] benefit to to human beings on on mass of
[02:14:30.640] the advance of science and technology
[02:14:33.440] related UAP or even directly about
[02:14:36.760] you know, potential UAP materials and
[02:14:38.800] technology and so on. You once said
[02:14:42.760] in you've said a few times in my
[02:14:44.440] presence but I don't think publicly
[02:14:47.880] that
[02:14:49.000] you know, you would love to be one of
[02:14:50.880] the people that figures out how to build
[02:14:54.040] these things.
[02:14:55.320] Oh, I would love. I mean, one thing I
[02:14:57.680] know is that I'm I'm not as
[02:15:00.200] knowledgeable
[02:15:01.560] as
[02:15:02.560] many people need to be
[02:15:05.320] to put together
[02:15:07.360] something new. But I do know that I'm
[02:15:10.920] good at motivating others
[02:15:13.400] to explore
[02:15:16.240] you know, openly.
[02:15:18.040] Um
[02:15:20.240] I don't need to be the one person or
[02:15:23.480] even necessarily in the room when it's
[02:15:25.920] happening. But
[02:15:28.120] I do know how to organize people into
[02:15:31.080] teams that can accomplish it.
[02:15:33.920] Well, and
[02:15:34.840] and the reason I ask you this question
[02:15:36.400] is you're someone who has been involved
[02:15:39.200] it can get lost as you're talking about
[02:15:41.400] the details of how science is done or
[02:15:43.960] how invention happens. But you do cancer
[02:15:46.840] research.
[02:15:48.240] Right? You're an immunologist. The the
[02:15:50.360] social benefit is absolutely immense.
[02:15:52.360] And I think you're thinking along
[02:15:53.560] similar lines here. We're thinking the
[02:15:55.720] social benefits of this are absolutely
[02:15:57.720] immense. If you can mobilize the
[02:15:59.400] resources, get the government buy-in and
[02:16:01.320] you have the right scientists.
[02:16:03.120] I think that to me at least the you
[02:16:05.920] know, the the opportunity is
[02:16:08.360] Uh well, there's two things. One,
[02:16:10.200] there's the there's the the benefit of
[02:16:12.600] knowing that you can make it past the
[02:16:14.160] impasse of this
[02:16:16.040] uh of this im-
[02:16:19.120] what everybody believes is this
[02:16:20.440] dystopian future where we all fall off
[02:16:22.400] the edge of the of the
[02:16:23.920] world and we kill ourselves.
[02:16:25.600] Right? And we and we know that we have
[02:16:27.400] to keep our technology moving in a We
[02:16:29.240] either We either revert to primitiveness
[02:16:32.559] or we stop progress and stop capitalist
[02:16:35.519] expansion or we accept the principle
[02:16:37.920] that new knowledge uh helps us fix past
[02:16:41.160] problems.
[02:16:42.559] Um even though it will create future
[02:16:44.480] problems.
[02:16:45.719] And so, what I think that technology
[02:16:48.800] like this represents is the ability to
[02:16:51.200] fast forward uh some of the
[02:16:54.440] the future benefit so that we could
[02:16:56.599] future benefit faster than we create
[02:16:58.360] problems
[02:16:59.880] is is one way to think about it. Uh and
[02:17:03.040] so, I again, that's an opportunity I
[02:17:05.519] don't want to see lost. Um selfishly
[02:17:10.519] I just want to I I
[02:17:12.800] I want to see something so new that it
[02:17:15.240] blows my mind. And that once I
[02:17:17.280] understand a little bit of it, I can use
[02:17:19.040] it for cancer research, for instance. I
[02:17:21.639] mean, if I can make an instrument that
[02:17:23.880] better looks inside of a cell
[02:17:26.360] you know, at a distance
[02:17:28.240] uh without having to take the cell apart
[02:17:30.559] in the first place, that would be great.
[02:17:32.200] I mean literally 10, 15 years ago, I
[02:17:35.040] proposed in front of a whole, you know,
[02:17:37.280] audience of uh
[02:17:39.599] nature and cell editors, etc., saying
[02:17:41.800] that I believe that there's going to be
[02:17:43.840] a be a way to use quantum um information
[02:17:47.480] at a distance to measure things without
[02:17:49.360] even going there.
[02:17:50.760] And everybody sort of laughed at me and
[02:17:52.160] giggled, "Oh, there's Gary again." Well,
[02:17:53.519] here we are 10 years later and people
[02:17:54.880] are doing it.
[02:17:55.960] And not that I did it but I could see
[02:17:58.639] that it could happen.
[02:18:00.559] And so, um you know, I think that you
[02:18:03.200] always need people who are just crazy
[02:18:06.200] enough to imagine a future like that,
[02:18:08.960] but able enough to see when the data is
[02:18:12.120] off the curve that it shouldn't be
[02:18:13.760] ignored. And that's the other thing is
[02:18:15.800] that is that it's the it's the it's the
[02:18:18.760] stuff that you don't understand is more
[02:18:20.320] important than the stuff that you do
[02:18:21.599] understand.
[02:18:22.840] Especially in science. And so,
[02:18:26.080] there's a hell of a lot, if any of this
[02:18:28.040] is true, of stuff we don't understand
[02:18:30.280] that
[02:18:31.400] could be the fuel for things that we
[02:18:34.440] will understand and help humanity. I
[02:18:37.080] mean, at the end of the day, that's all
[02:18:38.200] I really care about. I want to I mean, I
[02:18:40.599] am tribal enough to want to see the
[02:18:42.040] United States benefit first,
[02:18:44.719] but I am
[02:18:46.160] human enough to know that that will
[02:18:48.920] eventually flow
[02:18:50.880] uh better for uh everybody else.
[02:18:53.960] Okay. Uh amazing. And And
[02:18:57.160] maybe this is the place to close is, you
[02:18:59.559] know, you said that it's the data that
[02:19:01.679] you're not looking at and that you don't
[02:19:03.200] understand, which is the most important
[02:19:04.639] stuff. I think, you know, part of the
[02:19:06.200] problem
[02:19:07.719] with
[02:19:08.840] the entire endeavor of UAP research and
[02:19:11.840] and disclosure and so on is that um
[02:19:15.240] we don't even understand what the
[02:19:16.400] problem is. And I say that because as I
[02:19:18.599] was listening to you say, "Look, I I I
[02:19:21.920] thought I should look for magnesium. I
[02:19:24.519] should I thought I should be analyzing
[02:19:25.960] magnesium cuz I was told it was
[02:19:27.559] magnesium, but then I discover it's 99,
[02:19:30.160] you know, 0.99 silicon."
[02:19:33.120] Is that, you know, okay, that happened
[02:19:35.800] because you didn't know what the problem
[02:19:37.120] was. The problem fundamentally, I mean,
[02:19:39.240] fun of the fundamental problem was,
[02:19:41.320] "Okay, how do you study a material which
[02:19:44.639] may be an effective artifice, not
[02:19:47.599] nature."
[02:19:48.120] >> Right. Right.
[02:19:48.760] >> And what are the questions then?
[02:19:51.160] Right. And I I don't even know that the
[02:19:52.920] silicon that I have, even measured at
[02:19:56.240] the atomic level, doesn't have an order
[02:19:59.280] that because I'm measuring it with
[02:20:01.000] noise, doesn't have an order that
[02:20:02.920] actually has some print has some
[02:20:04.560] function.
[02:20:05.800] And so, there might be with better
[02:20:08.360] understanding of how the atomic
[02:20:10.400] structure of the silicon is, I might
[02:20:11.880] understand something different about it
[02:20:14.000] that it's not just it's not just your
[02:20:15.960] everyday silicon.
[02:20:17.480] So, I still need to go another level
[02:20:19.840] deeper
[02:20:21.160] of analysis of that. And that seems to
[02:20:23.760] me exemplary of what all the problems
[02:20:26.720] are going to be here, which is that that
[02:20:28.960] we're we're so unfamiliar with the
[02:20:30.840] problem we don't even know what the
[02:20:32.200] problem space is yet.
[02:20:33.600] >> Right. Um
[02:20:34.600] and we talk as if we know. We talk as
[02:20:36.880] if, you know, even the social and
[02:20:38.760] political problem disclosure, we talk
[02:20:40.440] like we understand it, but
[02:20:42.400] we we we you know, I I think there are
[02:20:45.000] very few people that have even put their
[02:20:46.640] finger on the problem yet.
[02:20:48.040] >> Yeah.
[02:20:49.040] Well, we'll see.
[02:20:51.080] Well, anyway, I think that's a good
[02:20:52.680] great place to stop and you know,
[02:20:54.360] amazing conversation and
[02:20:56.240] >> Yeah. I think you've given tons of of
[02:20:59.560] food for thought to to a lot of people.
[02:21:02.400] So, that was great.
[02:21:03.200] >> Yeah. Thanks.