Somewhere in the Skies - Future Tech, Frontier Science, and UFOs

Episode Date: December 27, 2021

On episode 245 of SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES, we are joined by head science writer at The Debrief, Christopher Plain. We discuss all the latest news he's been covering, including a company who is weeks away from launching its own one-person flying saucers, a new telescope that will search for ET life in Alpha Centauri, NASA's plans to build a nuclear reactor on the moon, and exciting news about the creation of the world's first warp bubble. We also discuss all the latest UFO news and end with Alzheimers-curing coffee, narcissistic astrologers, and what we can expect from The Debrief as we hurdle closer to 2022! Follow Christopher Plain on Twitter : @plain_fiction Follow The Debrief on Twitter: @Debriefmedia Read Ryan's latest article, "Encounters in a Cornfield" : https://bit.ly/3HPcrbN Patreon: www.patreon.com/somewhereskies Website: www.somewhereintheskies.com YouTube Channel: CLICK HERE Official Store: CLICK HERE Somewhere in the Skies Coffee: CLICK HERE Order Ryan’s book in paperback, ebook, or audiobook by CLICKING HERE Twitter: @SomewhereSkies Instagram: @SomewhereSkiesPod Somewhere in the Skies Subreddit: www.reddit.com/r/SomewhereSkiesPod/ Watch Mysteries Decoded for free at www.CWseed.com Opening Theme Song, "Ephemeral Reign" by Per Kiilstofte SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES is part of the eOne podcast network. To learn more, CLICK HERE Copyright © 2021 Ryan Sprague. All rights reserved. Copyright Disclaimer: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/somewhere-in-the-skies. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As the crispy chicken sandwich from 7-Eleven, people always call me loud. And I'm like, yeah, I know. I'm crispy. Did you expect me to whisper? If you want quiet, go eat some soup and reflect. Like, I know I'm a handful. I'm bold, I'm juicy. Throw some pickles and barbecue sauce on me, and baby, I'm a whole meal.

And with seven rewards, I'm just $4. Quiet. No. Krispy, saucy, and $4? Very. Only at 7-Eleven. Valley through 62326, participating stores only while supplies lastly out for full terms.

This is Somewhere in the Skies with Ryan Sprague. Hey guys, Ryan Sprag here from Somewhere in the Skies. We have joining us in just a moment, Christopher Plain, the head science writer for the debrief. We're going to talk all about all his latest articles, what's to come at the debrief, everything from space and tech and defense, UFOs, even coffee and astrology. But we will get to that shortly. Before we do any of that, I got a little talk shop. here for you guys. Check out this new t-shirt I just got in the mail today from Black Triangle Coffee, who you guys know I have an intimate relationship with, not in an appropriate way, but in a business

sense of the word. I have my own coffee, my own coffee roast, that's somewhere in the sky's coffee roast, which is available at blacktrianglecoffee.com. So head on over there, check out all their other amazing roasts they've got, and check out the very dark and bold somewhere in the guys roast right now. So thank you to everyone at Black Triangle Coffee for the free merch. I love it. If you can't tell, the coffee cup is actually Area 51, which I thought was really cool design. So yeah, go check them out. Get your morning and evening buzz with Black Triangle Coffee. But enough of that. Let's get to it. He needs no real intro. He is one of the funniest guys I've ever met. He's one of the smartest guys I've ever met. And that is why he is the,

lead science writer over at the debrief. So without further ado, let's bring him in. Christopher Plain. Welcome to the show, my man. What's going on, my good man. Good to see you, as always happy to be here. I'd just like to point something out before we get started. People, if you are watching live, Ryan has made it clear that he doesn't live off of this. The superchats, those sort of money things, money he makes off of his books. He reinvested and going out, meeting other experiencers, putting on these podcasts. So you're not paying dudes rent. You're paying for more content for yourself.

So don't be afraid to click on those things. And I don't get up any of it either. Not yet. We'll see. Not yet. Yeah, right. You'll get your cuts noon, man. Yeah.

Yeah, once we hit it big time. But no, I really appreciate that. Chris, let's get to the meat of things, man. Sure. We're going to talk about all your latest articles over at the debrief. You have so many coming out per day. It's insane. I don't know how you do it, man.

I honestly don't know how you do it. But I love, love, love reading all of them. But look, we are a UFO show. So we might as well talk about the latest elephant in the room, the news about this new Pentagon group. Before we do that, though, Chris, were you able to catch the press briefing yesterday with John Kirby? You know what?

I caught a clip of it on Twitter. So I would love if you would share it, my man. Absolutely. I'm going to go ahead and play that clip right now. Jazz is here. Chrisie Newton. Welcome. We got a bunch of the details. I have Newton. I love it. I love it. It's a party. Well, let's get the party started with John Kirby, the press secretary over there. Excuse me, not press. Pentegon spokesperson. I hate getting titles wrong with people. So let's go ahead and play that, Chris. And we'll be back on the other side. Travis. Thanks, John. I wanted to ask you about this new UAP office that was created by Deputy Secretary Hicks and announced last week.

the aerial object identification and management synchronization group. Was there any... It's a mouthful. Was there any coordination with lawmakers on Capitol Hill they're proposing related legislation like Representative Gallego and Senator Gillibrand? And secondly, some former Pentagon officials who had worked on this issue, Chris Mellon and Lou Elgin.

as on to have said that this is an effort for the Pentagon to be less transparent on UAPs. And I was just wondering if you had any response to it. On the first one, I can't speak to pending legislation. Obviously, I'd refer to those members, but we absolutely kept members of Congress informed as we fashioned this group together and announced it. And it is, to your second question, it is really, designed to help us better coordinate the reporting processes, the actual reports themselves, and the analysis of those reports.

So that rather than getting them sort of piecemeal and ad hoc as we've been getting them from the services, this is a way to coordinate the input so that we can, there's a common set of parameters for how to report them and to analyze them and then to assess what we've got. and not all reports are going to manifest themselves in something that we consider a national security threat. So this is a chance for us to be much more organized in the way we process these reports. And as we have, we will certainly continue to be as transparent as we can about these phenomena and the impact that they may or may not be having on our ability to operate. There is any specific commitment to release some data or information on these two?

the public at some point? Something beyond a briefing to Congress of a closed point? Yeah, I mean, I don't have a specific report to announce today that on any kind of a frequent basis that we would do, but I can assure you that our intention is to be as transparent about this phenomena as we can. Again, Travis, understanding that there will be national security considerations that we have to keep in mind, but we'll be as transparent as we can. But not, I don't want to leave you with the impression that there'll be sort of a regular

drumbeat of, you know, of some kind of report that, uh, that gets posted on the website, you know, every couple months. All right, man. So again, we're getting UAP questions asked at Pentagon Press briefings. This has been happening for about a year now. So while it's, uh, exciting, it's kind of becoming a new norm, which is really cool. And, you know, kudos to that journalist, um, for doing his homework, knowing Melon, knowing Elizondo, bringing up their names.

I was told, um, um, um, We only saw the reporter doing that clip, but when he mentioned the names Mellon and Elizondo, apparently John Kirby had the biggest smirk on his face. Really? That's what I heard from another reporter that was in the room that day. The room where it happened. The room where... Sorry.

That's my Hamilton. I can't imagine Elizondo and Mellon are super popular with these guys. They all got forced into doing a bunch of work. Maybe they didn't want to do. And having press conferences, maybe they didn't want to do. and talking about a topic they've successfully avoided talking about for a long time. So I can't imagine one of those guys is super popular in the Pentagon right now. Exactly.

Well, you know, and Kirby, again, kind of talking around the question, as they always do, not making any promises that anything will be transparent with this. Let's get the name right. A-O-I-M-S-G, the airborne object identification and management. Synchronization group. Jesus, man. Like, what an acronym. Oh, and if you're trying, I mean, like, I don't know how intentional it is.

I'm not a conspiracy guy, but if you're trying to, like, remove attention from something, giving it all a super unpronounceable, uncool name. I mean, A-Swap was easy, A-Tip was easy. Galileo is memorable. A-O-I-M-S-G? I can't, I have no way to pronounce it to keep it up and tip on my tone. No way. I know. I feel like we're eating Chinese food or something.

Yeah, right? America, unwise. his new MSG. Or Medicine Square Garden. Yeah, I guess. Yeah, right? Yeah, totally. What do you think, man?

Now, we have, you know, currently we have this Gillibrand amendment, which I believe is being toiled over as we speak within Congress, with this Authorization Act. Hopefully something will come of it because from the wording in that amendment, it sounds amazing. Apparently worded by Christopher Mellon himself and adopted by Jillabrand. Many senators are backing her up on this thing.

And I know right now it's one of those ones being argued over in Congress. That's going to hold a lot of intelligence agencies and departments and military branches accountable for bringing UAP information forward that they may have. A lot of groups that haven't done so in the past kind of gave the UAP task force the cold shoulder when they asked them for information. But she said, no, nope, you're not getting out of it easy. time. But then all of a sudden, out of nowhere, right before Thanksgiving, the defense department drops this news. This is the successor to the UAP task force. So we kind of knew it was coming in so much, in so many words, but not like this and not in such a vague, weird way. Like why? Why do you think they dropped this news right when we're in the middle of this

Gillibrand amendment thing? What do you know? The timing is a weird question. There's no doubt about it. I don't know that I have a good answer, but here's what I picked up from that little clip you just play. And it kind of goes with what you're saying. He talked about the fact that they've been working on this for a while, and I think those of us that read the UAP Task Force report got the impression that more work was going to come from that, that we were going to get some sort of follow-up there. And when he's talking about it, he mentioned that members of Congress have, I don't know, the wording he used, but kind of been kept up to date or kept apprised of this process.

And what's so weird about that? I don't know which members of Congress he's talking about, but one of the co-signers on the Gillibrand Amendment is Marco Rubio. And he's one of the people that seems to have been at the spherehead of getting the UAPTF to even happen in the first place and to get the issues studied by the Pentagon in the first place. So it seems weird that you would be keeping you know, Rubio and others

apprised as you're making progress towards this announcement, towards this creation of the AOMSG, and at the same point, that senator is independently working with other members of Congress to get a congressional oversight sort of office in place that's looking at the same thing.

So I found that really odd and interesting that he would say that. It does make you know, you know, Tim McMillan, who I work for, over at the debrief, and I don't want to breach any confidences, but one of the comments he made about all of this recently in our group chat at work is that people don't, especially in government, the right hand doesn't always know what the left hand is doing. So I think when in doubt, when choosing between conspiratorial thinking and disorganized procedure, I usually tend towards people just being disorganized and not having their act together.

That's what it seems like, yeah. Yeah, I do think here's what I would tell everyone. The place we continue to put our energy and support is the amendment. And this is why. And I'm not against this Pentagon program. I think it's a great idea if they want to pursue it and follow up on the work they were assigned to do. I mean, that UAPTF report more or less said, more information, more work, more budgets, more to do. So having them follow up on that is fine.

The way I see this is two competing opportunities here. One seems very American. One is run by Congress, who are the representatives of the people, that offers congressional oversight, which is effectively the oversight of the people. And by creating that and by telling us there will be regular reports and regular analysis, we're all grown-ups. We can take a report from that group that says, okay, we blacked out a few things. here for national security or

a couple of these cases we're not going to talk about that were unidentified before because, you know, whatever top security reasons. We're adults, we can handle that. What we're not going to sit tight for is the Pentagon swooping in, taking the whole thing over,

and sending us back into the chamber of silence, because that reeks of not just cover up, but of many possible things going on. Every conspiracy theory from the U.S. Air Force has a secret project to some military contractor like Batow

Lockheed Martin has some secret craft to we're in collusion with aliens. You name the conspiracy theory. You slam that cone of silence back down on this thing. That's where we're going. And I think it's going to get really uncomfortable for people in the Pentagon because I don't see this backing off. This pressure's only been going one direction. So I think they've put themselves in an interesting situation. But I can tell you as an outsider, I highly prefer the one from Congress that offers

reports and accountability and the ability to vote the people out of Congress that aren't doing the job we like and put the people in there doing the job we want. That feels American to me. The military is swooping in and saying, we're going to take over this whole investigation. We're going to keep it all in-house. We may or may not share stuff with you guys. We may or may not, but we're taking over. That's very draconian and very scary and smells like the last 70 plus years to me. Exactly, man. It's just echoes of everything we've seen and heard before. Christy says, Ryan and Chris, do you think it's going to get worse? I don't know. I mean, when I first heard about this thing, this new group with the ridiculous acronym, I was super pissed. And I'm like, are you serious? Like, really, you're going to do this right now?

And of course, it's what mainstream media picked up. No one picked up on the Gillibrand Amendment barely, maybe for like a day. But then, you know, I mean, what happens? I go home for Thanksgiving. I've got my dad being like, did you see this? And showing me the CNN article about this dumb MSG thing. And I'm just saying, no, that's not the real story here. That's not the real story.

Ryan, you know, you work over with me at the debrief, a little peek inside the news business since I'm still pretty new to it. But in a lot of ways, places like CNN and these other places, they reported so heavily on the UAPTF coming out at the end of June that in many ways, this is a natural thing to do in news is when the Gillibrand Amendment came out, it was kind of collaterally related. But this was direct. This is the Pentagon. The same people that issued that first report are coming out saying, here's the action steps we promised in that report. So it's a natural news thing to cover it as a follow-up. The timing, I agree, is definitely suspect.

It's a little weird. It feels like I think a lot of us would have liked to see the amendment pass. And then if the Pentagon jumped up with this a week or two later and said, hey, by the way, we're still following up on the work we were assigned to do and the work we promised. And we're putting the whole task force on it. We've given it a stupid name, but we're going to do it. I think we would all feel like, all right, you guys are on to something here. But yeah, coming out as Congress is fighting to get this amendment through,

and again, an amendment that offers public reports and mechanisms of accountability for the American public. Yeah, it's definitely not a good timing. That's for sure. Not only that, Chris, you got this whole idea of Transmedium Craft as well in the Gillibrand Amendment, which was, in my opinion, historic for a Congress person to say, we want to look at Transmedium Craft, we want to look at crash retrievals. I mean,

those things were blowing my mind, and you're not hearing any of that with this Pentagon thing. They're just, again, talking about national security threats with aerial vehicles, blah, blah, blah, China, Russia drones. And it's so boring, man. But then we've got this ambitious thing

happening on the side that just, I don't know, I'm worried. You know, the more I speak to Jazz Shaw, who has covered this, immensely and also Tim McMillan at the debrief immensely. I just hope it doesn't lose steam. And I hope it passes. I'm waiting minute by minute to hear what's going on.

If Jazz has any updates for us, let us know, my man. I wouldn't be surprised on this. And keep in mind, the military's job is to do what they're doing, right? Look for threats. So I wouldn't be surprised if the military's job, if the military would love to be done with this, right? They would love to do their own internal study and come out and say either, okay, China or Russia or somebody has leapfrogged us and we're seeing some scary drones that can go Mach 15 and have no propulsion or these other things,

or come back and say kind of what the UAPTF said, which is there's stuff out there. We're not really sure if it's a threat, so that makes it not our problem. And I think the military would love to do that. I think they would love to be done looking at this issue. Because the truth of the matter is, for most people that have been following this, they know that the military has been dealing with this since the late 1940s. I mean, I tell people all the time, go watch the documentary UFO. It's a dramatized documentary from 1956.

And what they did is looked at the problem that they were having, you know, and they were analyzing in Blue Book. And that whole movie is really the military seeing stuff flying around. It has maneuvers we can't replicate. They have observables. And the end of that, the documentarian who made that, pretty much makes a speech that says, if it's not ours and it's not rushes, what's left?

Right? And I still think that the military would love to get to, that point where they can say we have ruled out a threat. We know it's not Russia. We know it's not China. And if it is our own secret project, we're not going to tell you because that's not a threat. And if it's something else, they haven't blown us up in the 70 years or 7,000 years or whatever it is they've been visiting if it is of them. So that's not our problem. You guys, scientists go figure it out. Congress, you go figure it out, not our problem. So that's where I'm I'm hopeful here. I'm hopeful that the military will do their job and either rule in or rule out Chinese, Russian, or other foreign drones.

And if they come to the conclusion that it's not that, and that it's not ours or at least not ours they're willing to report on, and they wash their hands at that point and say, that's all we'll give you. We're the military. We don't know. It's for scientists and NASA, another to people to figure out, well, what do you know? We got scientists and NASA looking at the problem. And we have potentially Congress looking at it. I wouldn't be surprised to see us go along two tracks for a while and then have the military say, all right, we're out of this problem. The flipside of that, of course, is if the military has all these videos and photos and things that guys like Elizondo and Reed and others have pointed to, at some point they're going to have to deal with that.

That's an information bubble. We know it exists. Too many people have pointed it out. So that is a problem that they have for sure. Absolutely, man. And like you mentioned science. which is what we're going to talk about a lot tonight, which I'm really excited about. Sure. We have scientists looking at UAP now more serious than ever. We have the Galileo Project.

I know you have covered this over at the debrief, and we have, you know, a bunch of people. Scientific coalition for the SEU. Yeah. Yes. So that's what excites me most, man. Again, it's not about the military and the third. threat angle. For me, it's

actually empowering a lot of these scientists to now be like, huh, there might be something to this. It's not as crazy to talk about. Maybe we could get some funding to look into it more. Right. If you're somebody who thinks it's not a threat,

if you're somebody who thinks it's not Russia and it's not China or a foreign adversary, and you think it is potentially a non-human technological intelligence, the more More people looking at it, the better. So, yes, I still feel like there's this big box of goodies.

The military isn't sharing with everybody. But I do feel like if we go down the path of the Gillibrand Amendment, if we continue down the path of NASA and these other organizations, somebody will get to evaluate that information. At some point, we will all get our hands on it. That's my belief. I hope so, man. I'm with you, and I believe strongly that.

It's going to be a crazy 2022 and probably even a crazier 2023. But we're getting ahead of ourselves. I want to rewind, if you don't mind. Let's go back to the beginning, the very beginning of Christopher Plain's existence. The glimmer in your mother's eye. How did you first get interested in UFOs? What brought you into this crazy community that we call euphology? So I've talked previously about my own, if you want to call it, experience or whatever.

It really just was. I was seven years old. It was the spring of 77. And I saw what can be described as the exact triangle from the photo that Tim McMillan, that artist's rendering, like the three lights in the corner, going really, really, really high up in the sky, like airplane height and just cruising along the sky. and there was someone else there, a couple other people there, and I've confirmed with at least one person that it's not some made-up childhood memory

is something I really saw. But I didn't really ever have perspective. You know, at that point in time, it was right before Star Wars and Close Encounters of the Third Kind both came out that year. So although there was science fiction things about aliens and people from other worlds from the 50s or whatever, there wasn't really a UFO culture, at least that I was,

of at age seven. In that fall, after I just turned eight years old, and I've mentioned this before, a television, network television show came on, called In Search of. And what In Search of was, the easiest way to describe it is, it was the

predecessor to ancient aliens. It was hosted by Leonard Nimoy who played Spock in the original Star Trek series, and they would look at UFOs, Lochness Monster, ghosts, Bermuda, triangle, pyramids, you name it, stuff that all falls under that kind of ancient aliens,

you know, mystery, scientific mystery sort of phenomenon. But there's no doubt that the bulk, the topic they covered the most was UFOs. And they covered it right there in that first season. And I saw it with my father, and we were watching it together. And it just became something we were both interested in. We both went, you know, it seemed viable that beings from another planet might be here and it also seemed viable that secret technology was being

developed. My father impressed upon me at a very early age. In 1980, in that same series, Jesse Marcel came on. And he gave that interview clip that we see a lot, those interview segments, where

he went out to Corona Ranch and he walked around where he had found the crash debris outside of Roswell, New Mexico. And it was so compelling to hear him talk about trying to burn it, trying to cut it, the memory metal, and his firm belief that it was not a crashed balloon or human craft. And that stuck with me. And that added that fuel on top of everything else.

And I tell people all the time, in a pre-internet era, I lived in the bookstore, I lived in the library in the 80s as well as in the 90s, but particularly in the 80s, getting everything I could, gathering every John Mac book and Bud Hopkins on abductions, gathering every Jay Allen Hineck book or Stanton Freeman's work, any of that stuff I could get. Because there wasn't really, there wasn't podcasts, there wasn't UFO channels, there was no Ryan Sprague somewhere in the skies out there talking about it, bringing on top researchers and people to talk about it. You really had to kind of piece this story together on your own. And it was a pretty lonely exploit. I wasn't a, I wasn't a lonely kid, but when it came to my UFO interest, I could discuss it with my father. He would definitely help me get books and entertain the interest. But yeah, it really wasn't until, you know, last couple years, really last summer. I tell people all the time, I kind of rode this thing all the way through the, the, um,

Press Club event in 2001, the Dr. Greer Press Club event. So for a good 20-plus years, I followed it really close. And when that event kind of brought all these great witnesses, pilots and air traffic controllers, military witnesses, police officers to one place, and they laid out to that point the most compelling case for a real phenomenon, a real situation, crafts displaying the observables, the five, six observables, whichever you like. And that being a real thing. As a matter of fact, even back in the 70s, when George

Lucas made, I'm sorry, Stephen Spielberg made close encounters of the first, third time, there's a scene really early on in the movie, right near the beginning, where you see a room full of air traffic controllers. And the air traffic controllers are talking to a plane and the one pilot kind of spots a light. It's a really, it's a really gripping well-done scene that shows what these guys are going through, talking to pilots of two different planes who are seeing this, and it zips by one of the planes, and we kind of hear the static through the radio and everything. And the reason I find that

so compelling is Stephen Spielberg cast those were all real air traffic controllers in that room. And they all said that they've either. witnessed or talk to pilots or other air traffic controllers who have witnessed that exact same circumstance. So rather than Spielberg creating something out of whole cloth, he went to people who have experienced it and essentially wrote the scene off of what they experienced. And anytime that movie is on, even if I don't get through all of it, I try and watch that scene because you see and hear the voices of these real air traffic controllers, essentially reenacting what they've experienced in the 19th.

70s with these craft. It was really an awesome sequence. That is so cool, man. I know. I remember vividly that scene. They report, they sort of say what's going on and then in the control room, it's like, do you want to report a UFO? Yeah. You want to report a UFO.

And then there's a big pause and then no. And it goes, no, I don't want to report. You can't get more real than that. You go to the other pilot and the other plane. You want to report. And he goes, I don't want to report one of those things either. And then they come back to the first guy,

And they go, would you like to file any sort of report? And he goes, I wouldn't know what kind of report to file, Howard. Oh, God. And I didn't know that through their traffic controllers until the magic of Amazon X-ray. I was watching the movie on Amazon one night. I was moving my cursor around to check the date on X-ray and had this whole paragraph about the real traffic controllers and their real experiences. So I'll pick that up 45 years after the first time. 50 years after the first time or whatever, I first saw that movie.

Yep. Close Encounters of the Third Kind trivia. Some 40 years later. I love it, man. Well, and you know, people point out that Francois Truffaut in that movie essentially was playing. Who am I thinking of? That was Jacques Valet. It's basically portraying Jacques Valet.

Jay Allen Heinek appears in the movie. I mean, Spielberg had as much information as you could have in the sense. 70s when he put that together on the five observables, on the thing interfering with electronics and the vehicles. He portrayed all those things in that movie. So there's definitely some horror, corny kind of 70s elements in that movie and some, some Kramer versus Kramer kind of family drama in the movie. But at its core, it's my favorite UFO movie by far.

Well, and it made me look at mashed potatoes never the same again. Well, Chris, before we move on, what do you make of that what Spielberg did with this movie? Why do you think he made this movie? Do you think a lot of people... I really think... You know, isn't... I believe he's...

He's the... Yeah, I think James Fox once said that Stephen Spielberg was the one that pointed him to the Ariel School incident. Right. Yeah. And I think that, you know, when you're in show business,

the people I have the chance to work with and be around that are actually on camera, types. People love telling you stuff. You're a celebrity. You can't wait to tell you. I think there's even a famous story about President Nixon telling Jackie Gleason or so, you know, JFK, one of these

guys telling Jackie Gleason about UFOs and bodies or something. But it's true. And so in putting that movie together, Spielberg was talking to, I mean, if it's 1976 and you're working behind the scenes on that movie, and you're talking to Jay Allen Hynek

and Jacques Valet, I mean, pretty much as high up the UFO ladders you're going to get in the 70s. And yeah, I think he really tried to portray what people were really experiencing in a dramatized fashion with his own

kind of neat take on what the conclusion might be. Yeah. Yeah, and you've got shades of Project Serpo in there as well. So as usual, it's fact blending with fiction when it comes to UFOs. But, well, hey, before we move on to

how you got into the debrief. We should mention the blaster and the poster in the background. People in the comments are commenting on such. I love the revenge of the sorry, Revenge of the Jedi, the original title. So I assume you're a big

Star Wars fan. I'm just going to... I don't know what Star Wars is, Ryan, but I keep hearing about it. Sounds great. Yeah, you know, when I was young, again, you go back to 1977, I was 8 years old, so I was perfectly primed for Star Wars to come out.

And back in those days, a good movie could stay in the theater for a year. So there was basically a 12-month con of me trying to get my parents to take me to that movie over and over. And I successfully saw it six times in the theater in 1977 and the beginning of 78, which was a huge accomplishment among the other

third and fourth graders, I'll have you know. But, yeah, Star Wars, it's just, I like epic storytelling. I like that hero's tale. I like the structure of the Iliad and the Odyssey, which is what he used for those movies. He bases it more on the serialized Buck Rogers from the 50s sort of things

he watched as a kid. But there's no doubt it's a traditional humble beginnings epic hero tale that rises up to more or less a destiny to embrace it. As a matter of fact, directly above that gun, I'm going to tip this up, is my first book, Whispers of Fate.

It's an epic fantasy novel. And one of the reviewers who wrote a review on it when it first came out, compared it to Star Wars. I don't see it. But I do have a humble heroine who starts from humble beginnings and rises up to meet her potentially destined the future. So there's a small element there. Yeah, the return of the Jedi poster,

which is luck and timing, man. And I was just a member of the Star Wars fan club in 1982 or so when that came out. I was kind of right the tail end of that run for the Star Wars fan club. And you had the opportunity to buy these posters before the movie came out and I got one. And now it's worth a couple of Gs. So anybody who wants to break in, that's probably the most expensive thing in the home office. Yeah, I'm going to put your address here in the comments. Yes, right.

Exactly. Somebody docks me now and you can come get this poster. You are going to have to go through a very large science writer to get it. I'm not much too much. Especially with that blaster in the background. But yeah, if anyone wants to do the super chat, this will go towards the 4Gs to get that beautiful poster in the background. That's right. And this blaster was bought in the 1970s.

Oh, wow. That's in my boxes. My brother recently bequeathed me. the box of quote-unquote Star Wars stuff that we saved since we were little boys. And it's got all kinds of neat memorabilia characters and fan club notices and all kinds of cool stuff in there. But I went ahead and put the blaster, and then right next to it was a like a little R2D2. Card somebody gave me as a birthday again when I was like eight years old. So that's like a like a 40-something-year-old birthday card right there.

Love it. That's awesome, man. You know, well, okay, I guess we'll move on from Star Wars, even though I could talk about it forever. I should mention a little quick story, Chris, when I was in middle school or elementary school, excuse me, I had that moment in the lunchroom. I went from a Catholic school to a public school, and I was terrified. I had no friends. I showed up to school the first day and like a button down with a tie because I was used to that at Catholic. Catholic school and everyone made fun of me. But I remember getting my lunch and having that moment of every table, who do I sit with? What do I do?

I don't know. So, of course, I went and sat by myself. And then these three guys came over and sat down next to me. And they were like, hey, can, do you mind if we sit here? No, no, not at all. And they bust out these cards and they start playing this card game. And I'm just looking at this. Like, what? These aren't, like, regular playing deck cards.

So what is this? And I start seeing that each of the cards is a character. And then you got Darth Vader, you've got Yoda, you've got Han Solo, you've got Boba Fett. And I'm like, oh, what is this? And right then and there, they explained to me what Star Wars was. I didn't know what it was at the time. And that this was like a, what do you call those? Like, almost like Magic the Gathering.

Yeah, it wasn't, you know, the original ones. It came out in the late 70s and early 80s. I have quite a pile of those. They were literally just called Star Wars cards, and they were like baseball cards. The front would either have a character or a scene from the movie, and then you would flip over on the back, and it might have some information. Some might be about behind the scenes, about the costume or the set, but typically they were kind of the history of that character

or just a simple description of what you're seeing. But, yeah, Star Wars cards, and they had different colors. red outline ones, the yellow outline. Oh, it was the thing when I was a little kid and those were new, man. Forget about it. And they changed my life. I started playing. I made friends. I became obsessed to Star Wars. And yeah, man, it's made me who I am today as I know it as you too. But how, let's get to how you became this head science writer at the debrief. I mean, were you always, I know you're a writer. Obviously, you've penned many books. But what really got you? you into, you know, interviewing scientists and working with a degree.

How'd that all start? Ryan, it's something I've always followed as a fan, but I don't have any advanced degrees in science or anything. So I went to school at UCLA, my shirt for political science. So that's, you know, it's technically science, right? When I saw, I joined UFO Twitter, I would call it last summer. I had opened a Twitter account a couple of years before, but animated looks in my timeline. see, I never used it.

And last summer, I just decided to jump on there for fun. And the second season of Unidentified with Lou Elizondo and the guys were up. And it wasn't as satisfying as the first season. And I think like a lot of people that had ridden the roller coaster from 2017 to 2020, I wanted more. I wanted that next big bomb to drop. And I saw it wasn't coming. So I jumped on Twitter.

I knew there would be activity there. and I started following UFO Twitter and very quickly I stumbled upon one lieutenant Tim McMillan and he was somebody I started following and I started following the other guys in and around the debrief not aware that that project was coming

and I had an interaction with Tim about the UAPTF about this idea of what that report might look like and what the conclusions in that report might be. So I threw out my top three guesses on Twitter. And Tim swears he remembers this, although we didn't know each other at the time. And I put out my top three guesses. And, you know, I forget what they were, but one of them was more or less what they reported.

And Tim tweeted back to me, and he said, two of these three guesses are incorrect. And that started a firestorm because everybody on Twitter went, oh, crap, one of these three is correct. So he and I, I mean, for a week straight, my Twitter notifications were 20 plus every time I opened Twitter, right? It was this firestorm a conversation. And so on the selfish level, I went, hey, I write books, I need a place to sell books. I'll start interacting over on UFO Twitter because I have some knowledge. It's something I followed my whole life. And maybe UFO fans will be interested in fantasy and ultimately science fiction novels.

What I didn't realize is it would actually work the other way. I got sucked in. So I was following those guys, and it became clear that on November 30th, which is today, one year later. Oh, wow, happy birthday. Yes, that on November, well, it's for the debrief. For the debrief, yeah.

It came out, but yes, November 30th, the debrief was going to kick off, and there was some big UFO something on it that was coming. And we were all like, this could be the other shoe to drop. So I'm a writer. I work late, and I'm often up to writing until 11 o'clock, midnight even. And so at midnight, I said, all right, it's 3 a.m. November 30th on the East Coast. It's now November 30th on the West Coast.

Let me jump over to this debrief. And it wasn't up, right? Refresh, refresh, refresh. I was doing the same thing. Ryan, that turned, I'm sure you recall. that turned into a multi-hour odyssey. And at like 3 a.m., my wife looks in, and I'm still in the office, and she goes, what are you doing? And I'm sure I was bleary-eyed at this point.

I'm like, I'm waiting for the debris. Waiting for a disclosure, yeah. Yes, exactly. Yes, the UFOs are coming, and I don't want to sleep through it. So that article came out. I was blown away. I was like, okay, this guy knows his stuff, and he's reporting. I mean, I tell anyone, if you're ever feeling like things have

happened in the last year, just reread that first story about transmedium vehicles and objects of unknown origin. I forget the exact title on the debrief that came out the opening day. Tim recently retweeted it, I think. Just huge. Just revelation after revelation from the military about what they're dealing with, both in the air and underwater. And tons of great data.

So I started interacting with the guys there just staying in touch. And on December 8th, I had an interaction with M.J. Benayas, editor-in-chief at the debrief. And it turned into a, hey, you're a writer. Would you be interested in doing some writing for us? So I took an assignment as a trial run, and I'm now about 180 stories later. So I guess I got the job. You got the job, man. And you are a shining star.

Like I said, you publish like some days, even two articles in a day. It's crazy. Lately, it's been three a day, Ryan, because I've been doing the news feed. So not to pat myself on the back here, but the last three, four weeks or so, and it's going to continue that way for a while. But yeah, it's, you know, the thing I feel like I bring to the debrief is this. I read these science articles anyways. It's what I told MJ when he brought me on. I said, I don't know that you really need me to write.

UFOs and he said, no, no, no. I have Ryan Sprague, Jazz Shaw, the three partners here, Graham Randall, I have plenty of guys covering the UAP topic. I need somebody to cover these cutting age breakthrough, science, technology, propulsion,

bioscience, this rebelliously curious stuff that the debrief covers. And so I started doing that. I started covering, and as I told him at the time, this is what I read anyway. Before I go to bed at night, the wife's already sacked out, I go on fizz.org and Eureka

alert and these other places that nerds go and I look up science stories to find out, hey, are we building laser guns? Or I wrote about a rail gun the other day that you can carry around like a handheld rail gun. Like, this is the stuff I would read anyway. So I told MJ, I said, if this is what you want me to report about,

I'll try and bring that bridge. I'll try and be somebody who's able to understand what he's reading for the most part and translated into English for our readers who don't want to spend 30 years reading science articles like I have. So, yeah, rather than having a science degree, I feel like being an every man who, you know, looks at it the way someone like me, when someone says, oh, we've invented a warp bubble, I go, well, what does that mean? And they start talking about Casimir effects, something.

my head rolls. So I get these scientists to explain it to me, to make me understand what they're talking about. So I can write about it and tell everybody, hey, listen to this amazing thing they're doing. And that's been a total treat. My favorite part of the job, everyone is while it does overflow UFOs. There is some more of that coming to. And yes, I mentioned the work bubble. That's a big story. People have been waiting on. I was trading emails with the researcher today, getting some final images and stuff so that thing's right around the corner. Awesome. Nightgazer just asked, when's the warp bubble article dropping? Yeah, yep.

So if everything goes right, I hand it to MJ tomorrow and it runs on Thursday. Today's Tuesday and it runs on Thursday. In the worst case scenario, he has to edit it over the week and it comes out Monday. But I'm hoping for Thursday because I'm going to be over there with a singing. I'm a singularity Mike and the gang over at the Singularity Lab. And I hope to be in the afterglow of that story coming out Thursday morning so I can take a break. I can't wait. Well, the researchers sending me, the quotes this person's sending me.

I'm reading these going, oh, I can't wait to put this story out. So, yeah, there's a few who popped through while we've been talking because I was putting the finishing touches on it today. So we are right there with that article. It's an any day sort of thing, guys. Perfect, Chris. Well, let's move to some of your articles at the debrief. I swear I didn't even mean to do this episode on the birthday of the debrief. That's pretty cool.

Yeah, I was ticked when I heard it. I put right in the work group chat. We have some new video content providers and some other people that have been joining the team lately. And I tweeted out private message people. And I said, hey, guys, it's the one-year anniversary. Chrisie Newton's been doing that. Christina Gomez has been doing that. Letting the world know it's our one-year anniversary.

and I figured I'd come on here and talk about it since you invited me off. So, yeah, it's a good timing for sure. Absolutely. It's always in the timing if I've learned anything. Well, let's talk about this first article I want to cover here. Flying Saucer for one only weeks away from its first flight. Now, the headline obviously grabbed me, as I know it did, a lot of UFO people. So, yeah, man, while you're telling us a little bit about this,

I'm going to pull the article up on the share screen. But yeah, give it to us. What is this one about? So the new marketplace for private transportation, a lot of companies are working on self-driving cars, but what we're seeing is because of battery technology and because of drone technology, we're basically seeing drones for people, right?

We're seeing the idea of a drone that carries packages or carries a camera or whatever being scaled up to human size and letting humans get inside it and fly somewhere. company called Jobi, I mentioned in the article, and they've already gone through thousands of hours of manned flights and testing and working with the FAA. So there's a couple of companies that are really close to bringing these things to market. Now, imagine a drone that's parked, say, you live in the city, right, Ryan? So say it's parked on top of the nearest skyscraper building or whatever. And you take the elevator up and you climb in this thing,

and you put in the destination in the GPS and it literally takes it from there. It takes off vertically like a drone with four propellers down. Now, this isn't the one I'm talking about yet, the one you have on the screen. This is just the theory behind the technology. You get in it, it flies you where you want to go,

and it lands vertically. We've now removed the need for runways, right? For these private, even driving cars, it's something people my age have dreamed about people older than me forever. Terafugia and Aeromobile and some of these companies that have made flying cars, they're essentially

airplanes you can drive, so they still need a runway to take off and land. You can't just pull out these things you can pull out of your driveway. So with that in mind, this company called Zava, and that's the article you have up there, what they developed is

and they have it, there's a video of a scale model being flown on their website, and then there's a video of a testing of the full-size one, I believe. It's basically a flying saucer-shaped drone that takes advantage of some of the aerodynamic principles of that shape. And you climb in the thing, it takes off vertically, like you see on the edge.

It tips and flies like a flying saucer. Now, while it's flying like that, you are facing face down. So you basically fly like Superman. It takes you and again, a pre-programmed destination. And when it gets there, it tips back, and it lands back, and you open the doors, and you just step right out. So it's a point-to-point one person flying saucer-shaped drone. And the thing flies, it works,

and they've been flying the real full-size one on the tether for a safety reason. But that's what my article mentioned is they are only weeks away from doing these first flights without the tether. And the founder of the company, I don't remember his name from the article, but he said they're only a few months away, meaning before the end of the upcoming year, they will be doing test flights with people in them. There will be people flying these one-man flying saucers. So they're not going to display any observables. They're not going to break the atmosphere. and they're not going to take you to outer space. But if you're looking for a personal drone,

it'll take you from point to point a single person, I mean, the thing goes 160 miles an hour, and it's good for, I'm trying to remember, but maybe about 20 minutes of battering charge, so you could go about 50 or 60 miles. So for someone who commutes to the city back and forth or whatever, things like that, it's an awesome vehicle.

One other aspect I'll point out about this thing that's in that story is because of the increase of this type of vehicle, the owner points out that those tops of buildings and those places where you can land, those are going to become prime real estate. And the big companies that fly tons of these basically urban air taxis, they're calling them, are going to scoop that real estate up. And people that have this little one-man flying saucer may not have the most ideal place to take off and land from. So they've designed a bracket that will let you mount it to the side of your building.

So basically, you could be in your skyscraper, open the window, climb into your one-man flying saucer, go to your destination, and when you return, it will land in that bracket and let you step back out. And they point out that it's basically like Batman hanging off the side

of the building vehicle. So I think I concluded the article by saying you fly like Superman, you hang on a building like Batman, and it's in your own flying saucer. So yeah, I'll take one. I think sold, brother. Anything to get me to work quicker.

Well, let's move on to the next story over at the debrief. This one is a little more recent, I believe. I could be right. wrong, actually. We're going to talk about new telescope to search Alpha Centauri for E.T.'s home. Let me read a little recap here. It's hoping to launch in the next two years. Earth's closest stellar neighbor, Alpha Centauri, for signs of exoplanets, capable of supporting

ET life. So who did you talk to for this one, Chris? And yeah, give us a little background about this telescope. All we're hearing about now is James, you know, the web telescope. Web, web, web, web, web, this isn't web. So what is this? Yeah, this is called the Tolemann telescope. I think it's a Native American name for, or an ancient name for that star pairing that is Alpha Centauri. And basically, if we're going to look for life on planets outside our solar system, the best first place to start is the closest star to us. And there happens to be three stars right there.

There's a pair known as Alpha Centauri. It's a binary star system. And then there's a third smaller red dwarf star known as Proxima Centauri. And we've already spotted a planet around Proxima Centauri that lies within the habitable zone that is probably a rocky planet based on measurements. And that's just from work from the Hubble and other telescopes. So we've already seen that, but we saw that with what's going to be. called the transit method. And it's what it sounds like. You're looking at the star through your telescope and the planet goes in front of it. Now, you can't actually see that movement,

but that planet caused the star to dim a little bit because it blocks some of the light as it moves in front. Telescopes that are finely tuned enough can actually see that dimming. And if they see it at the right rhythm and often enough, they can go, yeah, that's something in orbit around that star. And based on the effect it has on the star and some other characteristics, they can usually determine whether or not it's a giant planet like Jupiter or Saturn whether it's a mid-sized planet like Neptune or what they call sub-Neptune planets which are like Earth, Mars, Venus, these smaller rocky planets that could host life. So this telescope said, well, hey, this team putting this telescope, I can't remember where

they're from because I write a lot of stories, but basically the goal is it might maybe somewhere New Mexico or Arizona? I'm not sure. So basically what they decided was let's see if there are planets around Alpha Centauri

using the wobble method and the wobble method so if the planet, if you're not right in the perfect plane to see that planet go across, say it's orbiting the star this way or any number of different angles that doesn't have it cross right

in front of our eye line, you can't see it in the transit method. But what you can see is the star will wobble as the planet goes around it, or planets, because they will affect very small effects, but they will have effects on the position and orbit of the star itself. So the way you normally do that

is you look at that dot of light and measure it. Well, telescopes we have are not always so great at doing that. So what they're doing is something called a diffractive pupil effect. It takes the light from that star and

spreads it out. So it's not just one little point of light, but it looks like a big plume of a flower. And when the planet or planets, if they exist in Alpha Centauri are orbiting there, then it should perturbate.

You should have the wobble effect. And they think, it'll be much easier for their telescope to spot using that diffracted pupil effect. So basically, it's a mission to see, are there planets around our closest star? And if they are, what type of planets they are, and if they are potentially rocky exoplanets that fit right in the habitable zone, meaning the distance from the star where liquid water can exist, we think that's a key indicator of life. So this is a big step towards not just looking for life outside our solar system,

but looking for it literally the closest star system to us to Alpha Centauri. Which is crazy to think, you know, our search for, you know, E.T. Life, we always think, oh, well, it's got to be super far away, possibly interstellar even. Yet it could be literally one of our closest neighbors. That's just astounding to me. You know, and Ryan, I talk about this in articles I've written, but I have a story coming out in the next month or so about a type of directed energy propulsion.

It's basically put a laser up in space. You pointed at the ship you want to, and you basically push it with laser light, so that the ship doesn't have any rocket fuel on it. It's just being pushed by a, you know, a laser sitting in orbit that's pushing. Kind of like a solar. wind? Absolutely. The exact same concept is a solar sail, but instead of using the pressure of the sun, we just use a laser that we point at the craft, and especially designed sail or surface on the craft

designed to take that laser light and be pushed by it. And the beauty of that is, as long as we have power to our laser right there in orbit, you can just keep pushing that thing and pushing that thing and pushing that thing. And there's some various laws of physics and other things involved, but it's pretty realistic for us in current technology with the will and the money to make a spacecraft that goes about 20% to speed of light. That's, that's, you know, traveling through relativistic Einsteinian space without getting into the math of it. That seems to be from everyone I talk to. That's the limit, about 20%. But if you think about that, if we're looking at a star system like Alva Centaur, it's four light years away. If you can go 20% the speed of light, you can get there

in 20 years. Right? That's not that too bad, to be honest. Each light year takes you five years to go and you got four light years. I mean, we send missions, you know, the first Mars rovers that I really followed regularly were spirit and opportunity. They went up over 20 years ago and they just quit working recently. You know, the Voyager spacecraft went up in the 70s, and we're still swapping signals with them, and they've left our solar system completely.

So the idea of sending a pro, if we see. see planets there, and we see planets that can support life, and we point one of these other telescopes at those planets and see elements in their atmosphere that seem that there might be life there, it's within the range, at least theoretically, of us sending a probe and taking a picture and going, what the heck's going on there. Love it. That's so cool, man. Well, let's talk about another neighbor of ours. Now, you know, this planet ain't doing too well let's be honest you know we we have more and more signs leading to global warming and catastrophes and this that we're destroying our planet is what we are being told

by the visitors who have you know come into contact with people here on earth you guys got to shape up or ship out is what we hear in these ET contact stories and um what better place to ship out to then the moon. And now we're learning that there is oxygen on the moon. And you recently wrote about this, how much oxygen is already on the moon. And will we ever be able to basically habitat the moon? So yeah, tell us a little about this story, if you don't mind. So first of all, when we are causing significant damage to the biosphere on Earth, there's a good argument for that. There's even scientists have talked about changing the current era to the Anthropocene, which would mean anthropomorphic or, you know, human effect. So like the Pleistocene era,

the Mesozoic, or these other ones here, this will be the Anthropocene. So keep in mind, the planet Earth, we're not going to screw the planet up. The planet is the planet. We're not powerful yet enough to do it. But basically, when you start a few thousand meters underground, and you go out to the outer edges of our atmosphere, that little skin we live on, you know, the surface of our planet up to maybe the top of Mount Everest, right? And maybe down to the deepest parts of the ocean, that's where we live,

that little thin orange peel of the planet. We can definitely screw that up. We definitely seem to be doing damage to it. So the planet will be just fine. They're just the area that we live in may not be there or be permanent if we don't do something about it. So, yeah, there's a lot of talk by guys like Elon Musk and other people about colonizing the moon or colonizing Mars. This study was really interesting because basically what they determined was,

if you go to the moon, right, all you see is rocks and dirt, right? That's what's there. Rocks and dirt. They call it Reguliffe. And according to astronauts who walked around on the moon in the 70s, the crap gets everywhere. It's like the worst dust, the worst beach sand ever. I mean, it gets everywhere, it fowls up everything. But what's amazing about that rock and that dirt is it is made up of 45% oxygen by volume.

So it is almost half oxygen. Now, on Earth, if we want to split oxygen away from other molecules, we use a process called electrolysis. Like, I tell people, drop a battery in a cup of water, and you'll see a little stream of bubbles coming off at each end. And one of those is oxygen, one's hydrogen. but it's basically an electrolysis process, the way we split oxygen. So we have the technology to split that oxygen out of those rocks. You've got to use power to do it. And so there's talk of nuclear reactors or solar reactors,

and we can talk about that a little later. But basically, if you have a mechanism on the moon that can, you know, if you have equipment to do that electrolysis, you can free that oxygen. And you can use it. And so how much is there? This study basically determined that the real scoopable part, right? The top maybe 20, 30 feet or whatever, covering the planet has enough oxygen embedded in the rocks and dirt to support the entire population of Earth. That's about 8 billion people right now for 100,000 years.

So the bottom line is, if we're going to colonize the moon, I won't talk about terraforming because it's just so far in the future and so unlikely. But if we're going to live in caverns, if we're going to live in domes, if humans are going to move to the moon and permanently inhabit it, they're going to need oxygen. And as it turns out, there's just tons of it there. So cool, man. Nothing I ever would have expected to be completely.

Me either. I didn't know that, right? I told you, I read science articles my whole life. And if you would have asked me how much oxygen is in the rocks on the moon, I would decide, I don't know, what, 1% or whatever stuck to it when it rolled through? But no, it's almost half oxygen. There's so much they could pull out of there. Well, Rodrigo has a question here for you.

Let's see here. What are Chris's ideas about the probability for the existence of oxygen-based, atmospheres, carbon-based life, and convergent evolution in planets other than Earth? That's a loaded question, but do you have any thoughts on the end? Humans have done a lot of study on life, and for the longest time, we more or less felt that the vast majority of life would operate using oxygen as its catalyst still does on Earth. We have found these things termed extremophiles that operate from other, you know, that was the big discovery in the atmosphere of Venus, was they found this area where they said, hey, if there were creatures like we have on Earth that live on phosphine gas, which is a type of phosophene gas, which is a type of. phosphorus gas. If they lived on that rather than oxygen, here's

the perfect warmth and radiation and everything part of Venus's atmosphere they would live in. And so we looked there and sure enough, there were signs of phosphine gas there doesn't mean that there's life there, but it definitely happened to match what we're looking for. Here's what I would tell, here's my

thought about concurrent evolution, carbon-based life, those sort of things on other planets. In science fiction, whether you're watching Star Trek or Stargated, any of the shows I grew up watching and loving. Humans go to other planets all the time with no masks on and, you know, everyone speaks English or whatever, you know. And everyone's pretty much human. I don't know about the evolution side. I have my feelings that physics constrains evolution in such a way that I wouldn't be surprised if a complex life we saw on other planets. stood on two legs, had something the equivalent of hands and fingers that they could manipulate

their environment with, had bilateral symmetry like most of the land and air-based creatures on the planet Earth have. So I do think we might see some sort of relatively similar evolution. I wouldn't be surprised about that. And I talk to enough scientists to say the same thing. We are of by and from this planet. I mean, your parents create you, but the material your mother in. the food and drink and everything that is the raw material that builds you.

And then when you're on your own, the material you ingest, you are from this earth. We are all part of it. And there is a huge, complex system of microbiology operating inside our body. From our gut bacteria to microbiology on our skin, in our blood, you name it. we are a big collection of billions of little organisms all working together create this human body. So even if we found a planet that had the exact atmosphere is ours, had the exact atmospheric pressure is ours, similar enough gravity, similar enough radiation, had enough of the components that you say, man, we could go live there.

It's got trees. It's got everything. More likely than not, the minute you took your mask off, even if the air was breathable, the microscopic organisms on that planet would not jive with your body and you'd be dead in weeks. It's pretty much what happened to the Native Americans when Christopher Columbus came over. And the vast majority of people that were existing on this continent, their bodies just weren't adapted to the microbiology and diseases being brought to them from settlers on the same planet. So I'm dubious about our ability to live on another planet as we are. Do I think there's an ability for science down the road to get to a point where there's a new planet you want to live on?

And they go, yeah, we got to put you through like a year of inoculations and microbiology treatments and stuff so your body can live there. But yeah, once we're done, you'll be able to live there. So, yeah, maybe, I'm not sure if that's the exact question that was being asked, but that's my take on it. I love that. I never would have thought, yeah, like even if everything was the same, the carbon makeup, everything about the plant. planet, that it's that minuscule, microscopic stuff that could really be different.

Oh, I mean, it's so critical. You have to take Earth with you if you want to be an earthling living somewhere else. Whether it's in a habitat, you know, in the habitat on the International Space Station, a habitat on the moon, a habitat on Mars, we will essentially

have to foster an environment that has those microorganisms. So when we eat food, we're getting that bacteria that digest the food the way you want to, that works on your blood and your brain and everything else in your body. So yeah, whether we like it or not, we're connected to this planet as biological beings. Do you think we're from here, Chris? Do you think we came here from somewhere else? I got to ask.

I know it's a, oh, yeah. No, so I tell people this all the time. So there's a zero to one argument and there's a one to now argument. So zero to one is what is the origin of life? And one to now is microscopic organism evolving to us. I'm very comfortable with one to now. I think that evolution just is. We see it in microbiology.

We see it with viruses. I mean, all dogs came from one wolf about 10,000 years ago. And now look at all the different dogs you have. And that's just evolution over 10,000 years of some traits being selected, other traits not being selected, things like lactose intolerance, things like that, that we can actually see where it came into our genome and evolved over time.

So I'm very comfortable with the idea that everyday humans walking around evolved from apes, which evolved from proto-apes, which evolved from, you know, simple organ, all the way back to that single-celled organism. Now, the idea that's put out in the movie Prometheus, I think it is, where basically an alien organism donated their DNA as that starting block. And that is the zero, the one, the inert planet of rock, water, and minerals that has no life to that first spark of life, that zero life to life.

Once you have life, evolution just takes over and life goes where it goes based on environmental, in my opinion, on what I've seen from science. environmental influences, what you eat, what you do, but for all forms of life. And that evolution takes place. We see animals that are identical, we can see tree squirrels that are virtually genetically identical, live in two different habitats. And over a couple of hundred years, these tree squirrels can only eat this type of nut. These ones can't eat that type of nut or it makes them sick. Or all these other, just your body's constantly and biology is constantly adapted. So who put the life here, right?

Like, was it God? Is it a simulation? Was it aliens? I don't know. You know, we still haven't in a lab been able to take lifeless matter and throw the right amount of electricity and other stuff. I'm like Dr. Frankenstein go, okay, we created a living cell from non-living material. We just haven't done that yet. And we have had no success trying.

But once you have something living, watching it compete in the environment to gather resources to use energy efficiently, to replicate, to create more of itself, and over time evolve to a more sophisticated life form, that just happens all day, every day, happens all around us, and I'm highly confident that there's enough in the archaeological record and the biological record. You can find DNA and your own DNA from fishes. I mean, we can find stuff from the most ancient of beings that just don't express anymore, because those aren't the DNA strands that are chosen by, you know, biology to express themselves. Interesting.

We are, again, we are the greatest and biggest reality competition show for all other life out there in the universe. I love that. And why wouldn't we be? I'm a firm believer that the Fair My Paradox has it backwards, that if there's intelligent life, that's even one minute more advanced than us, the last thing they want to do is interact with us. And not for any weird safety humans might blow us up, although we are pretty stupid and blow stuff up.

But more from the sense of the most value we offer is look at us, look at this planet, and it's a scientific analysis. The most value we would offer in intelligent species is going back in time and looking at a place in time where 200 years ago we had no electricity, the most sophisticated technology was like a bicycle. And now we're flying around in space and talking about a 20-year mission to Alpha Centauri, right? So this is the most interesting time to watch humans and say, hey, do it. Maybe it's just a textbook. They're like, oh, yeah, this blow themselves up. So we're going to keep watching until they blow themselves up, because that's interesting.

Or this is the point, and we get past the great filter, and we end up as an interstellar, you know, interstellar, non-warfaring modern whatever species that is and that's my Star Trek hope I'm not dystopian I'm utopian I still think we can get there love it man yeah let's keep our channel on the screen for all out there for sure well let's say hello to uh we got the

unidentified celebrity review that is that good there's that good looking chap he's talking about you not me we got him I'll be with him and Mikey on Thursday I'm Thursday. Awesome. I'll be there. I'll be in the chat. Awesome. Awesome. Nightgazer says all the way back to Dino Beaver's. Good, good shout out, Nightgazer, to the Skinwalkers at the Pentagon book that just came out. Hey, Matthew Riots here. One of our very favorite people. Oh, my favorite here. Yep. Looks like Brian. Let me see. I think I got everyone. Oh, we actually have someone named Mr. Hans Solo. I love that.

Yes. it. Hey, Rodrigo's got a good question here again. Dune presents the idea of folding space and the navigator, evolved humans who can pilot the ships, thought hyper-advanced calculations. Does Chris see something like that in our future? Interesting. So, Rodrigo, I wrote an article for the debrief about two weeks ago, I think,

and I interviewed Dr. Kevin Grazier. And Dr. Kevin Grazier, along with being the consultant on movies like Gravity and a number of science fiction, TV shows. He wrote a book, or I'm sorry, he edited a book, it's under his name as the writer, called The Science of Dune.

And what he did was, is he reached out to scientists in all these different areas and had them, basically they put a book together of the sciences that are in that book series. And so I went ahead and I interviewed him, and I wrote about it, and the very last segment of that article,

I addressed folding space. And he had a very interesting quote where he said to me, he said, Chris, to me, folding space is exactly what Albert Einstein was talking about when he was talking about the idea of using gravity

to move space closer together, so your travel distance is a lot shorter. And basically in that article I said, So if you combine the idea of a remote viewer of somebody who psychically has the ability, if such a thing exists, to envision a remote location, and you have people in a ship that's designed to get there,

could you meld those two phenomena together and come up with a Dune-style folding space drive? I don't know that it's something on the horizon, I can tell you that warp drives in and of themselves is something that's being worked on by a lot of different researchers, at least in theory. And as everyone knows, who's in my Twitter DMs for the last month and a half, I have a big warp bubble story coming out about that. As far as folding space, go look at what Dr. Grazier says in my article. I have some good quotes from him. And if you're really interested, go read his book, because there's a whole section.

my scientists pretty much addressing that in a much more complex way. So for my personal feeling, it's not something that's right around the corner, but it is something that you can draw a line to from work technology and remote viewing and see that it's not the most unrealistic, if somewhat unlikely approach. Interesting. I love that. Bringing kind of the paranormal into the science or pseudoscience, want to look at it that way. But you know, when he talked about the spice, yeah, when Frank Herbert wrote Dune,

and he talks about that spice, that magical chemical that lets the navigators do what they do, that lets people see in the future, things like that, he was really, like, interested in writing about mushrooms, psychedelic mushrooms that were really popular

in the 60s. And there was all, I haven't read it, but there was a whole feature story on the debrief. One of the other writers wrote about that. And it basically said, Herbert was talking about mushrooms.

And the reason I clarify, I haven't read it, because I don't know if he was taking them or he was writing about people taking them, and I don't want to be spurred the name of my favorite science fiction writers. Could be both. We don't know. Could be both. Well, hey, Mr. Hans Sulla says, speaking of blowing stuff up, can I have my blaster back, Chris?

Right? Exactly. It's right. I love that. Well, let's move on. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. On fire first. I'm just saying. On fire. Oh, you're one of the first. those are you? I'm just saying. I was in the theater, man. I thought it was the coolest thing ever that he fired first. It was like the first hero, anti-hero. He was actually just a little bit of bad guy in that good guy. Yeah, yeah. Have they ever truly determined that? Has it been like, um, oh yeah, I mean,

I never come forward and said yes. There's a whole controversy with George Lucas in those first three movies, but basically when he went back and he re-edited them all and he put in the video graphics and he, potentially changed that scene. He added the episode four thing in the opening credits. It used to just say Star Wars, the episode four and New Hope wasn't up there. He added a lot of that. So the I want to get this right. I think

it's the National Film Archive or the Library of Congress. It might be the National Film Archive within the Library of Congress. Has asked him for copies of the first three movies because what they do is and you give them the actual real, like ones that ran in the theater.

the physical film in the canister. And, you know, obviously there were thousands of those that went out to theaters around the country and around the world. And they say, as the filmmaker, you have to provide us one of those and we'll put them in the archive to keep a permanent copy. And he said no, because he doesn't want to provide those original films. He wants history to remember the edited ones he did later,

that have the silly characters added in, have the scene with Jabba the Hut, but back in the original. All of these things that he added in, it depends on your taste. He always felt like they were made for kids, and I always tell people, I fell in love with the movies as a little kid, so I can't argue that. But it does feel like, it does feel like, you know, the original artist went back and painted a mustache on the Mona Lisa and said,

ha, it's finally finished. Exactly. So, yeah, there is some controversy about that for sure. He will not provide those original copies. There is some for people that, a stream stuff. There used to be a copy run around online a number of years back where some guy took all the original

Blu-ray and laser disc or whatever and kind of made an original one. But yeah, Lucas has fought that truth from being out there that Han fired first. That's fair enough. That's fair enough.

I mean, Greta had a gun pointed at him. I don't know. You did. What did? What do you? If there's a gun pointed at you and somebody's telling you, uh, party's over, buddy. I don't know that

firing first isn't still self-defense. I mean, I don't mean to get all political in a Star Wars here. Hey, hey,

they went political in those prequels, man, which have really grown on me. Yeah. Prequels have definitely grown on me. Yeah, they take time

because you're seeing something completely different. But yeah, I've, I've moved into the zone of liking all the Star Wars movies on some level for themselves.

Really found, myself like in Rogue One more than I thought after multiple games. Dude, I love that movie so much. So underrated. Yeah, I love it the first time I saw it. And yeah. But yeah, that last, one of those last scenes with Vader, again, spoiler alert, if you haven't seen Rogue One, Vader at his most badass or he was amazing, amazing. Speaking of George Lucas, Ryan, when he did those prequels, people always said, well, hey, how are, you know, the three prequels kind of ended with him becoming Vader, right?

Like, he's Darth Vader kind of the end of, what is that, the Revenge of the Sith, right? And a lot of people were complaining, and I seem to remember a quote from Lucas at the time saying something to the effect of, well, for all of you that wanted to see Darth Vader wreaking havoc on the galaxy and running through, killing people with the power of the force. That's not the type of movie I'm interested in making. And I remember thinking at the time, yeah, somebody will. And sure, nothing, Rogue One,

we see Darth Vader kicking a little butt. It's kind of cool. I love it. I love it. Matthew Riot with the super chat. Both of you, Discord. You want us to join Discord. I'm really late to the game on that stuff.

I still don't know how it works. Matthew, I'm going to reach out to you after this show, buddy, and you're going to get me on Discord because I need to be there. Chris, you need to be there. The debrief has it. I'm on Discord. I'm just very picky with the ones I join. That's all.

I'm the old man in the room then. Right. You know, in what Discord is. Well, we were on this group chat at work at the Debrief. You remember, we all start on something called Signal. Yeah, and then all got dumped. And somewhere along the way Christina Gomez came in and said,

hey, dummies, Discord's free. And we can have a private meeting room there. So. Yep, yep. And we haven't been waiting for you to show up. I'm coming. I'm on my way. I know. I haven't written at the debrief in a while, but I will say I wrote a huge piece for the debrief that hopefully is going to get a special unveiling in a top secret project yet to be announced by the debrief.

Yes. Yes. Mr. Hanks has passed along that he has received said item from you. And that it's quite spectacular. So I haven't had a chance to look at it yet either. But yes, top secret project coming early next year. Coming your way at the debrief 2022. I've been working on this article for over a year. I've pissed off some people at the Defense Department and the Navy. But it's going to be worth it. It's going to be worth it.

Let's move on, my man, to nuclear reactors. NASA wants Patel to put a nuclear reactor on the moon. This is terrifying. Tell me what's going on, Chris. Oh, so there was a space treaty back in the, the 70s, 80s, whenever it was, that pretty much said, we can't put nuclear weapons in space. But it didn't eliminate the idea of nuclear reactors. And there have been various satellites and other things, very few, but over the years,

that have included nuclear fuel with some sort of another. This is the first real talk of putting them on Mars or putting them on the moon. If we're going to colonize the moon and we're going to colonize Mars, shipping 8 million solar panels up there to gather that bleak sunlight coming in, ain't going to do it. We're going to need resident power. We're going to need our own power. And pretty much every other form of power just doesn't crank enough juice out for the weight.

Even the densest power, rocket fuels and things, you just would have to ship tons and tons and tons of it to the moon to run any sort of habitat. But if you have a couple of nuclear generators there, I mean, those things will run forever. And once everyone on Mars dies, those things will run forever, too, just like Fukushima, right? So they reached out to Battelle and said, figure it out. And so what Battel did is they put out an RFP, a request for a proposal to the industry and said, submit your ideas. We're open.

We want to put a nuclear reactor on the moon or on Mars. we know it's a dicey proposition. We know there's a lot of danger involved. We're looking for ideas. And literally it was an open RFP. I mean, Ryan, if you wanted to, you could submit one that says, I have an idea for a nuclear reactor

that runs on a, you know, bubble gum or whatever. If it works, yeah, yeah, you could submit that idea. So they are... Mine would run on beer, my man, for sure. That's right. The nuclear reactor that runs on beer. He'd be like, how come the reactor is it working? and Ryan would be in the corner surrounded by bottles going,

I don't know. It's how much the one we got here, right? Don't worry about it. Don't worry, but what's the big deal? It's going to be involved tonight. Who cares? I love you guys. I love the moon.

Yep. So that is, that was what I call a one-story story story. I'll tell my wife and Shigua, what are you writing? And I say, it's a one-story story. And the story is they put out a request for these reactors. What they're going to get back? what breakthrough ideas. I mean, nuclear reactors are pretty

for better worse, pretty straightforward technology. So what they're hoping to find, what ideas, I don't know, but I can tell you, I talk to people working on fusion reactors and fusion science all the time, because that's so cutting edge. And they are

constantly coming up with new methods, and new ideas and new approaches. So may very well be the case in nuclear fission reactors, which are typical nuclear reactors. But yeah, maybe the case that they're looking for, maybe they'll look at thorium reactors using molten salts that don't have nuclear spills, a little more complex to run. But there's some technologies out there that I'm definitely sure they're going to look at. And what they'll come up with, I don't know.

But, yeah, if we have habitats, permanent habitats on the moon and permanent habitats on Mars, and they have anything more than like a little ISS crew, a two, three, four, five people at a time, but they actually grow up, they will more than likely be powered by a nuclear react. Lots of places can expose you to identity theft. Oh, no. That's why LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats to your identity,

which is way more than anyone can do on their own. If we find anything suspicious, like new loans or changes to your financial accounts, we alert you right away, all through text, phone, email, or the LifeLock app. Get the alerts that could make all the difference. Save up to 40% your first year at lifelock.com slash special offer. Terms apply.

We got nuclear reactors, we got oxygen. We're on our way. It's right, right? Totally. We can live on the moon, man. I mean, there's cosmic rays and radiation. And we don't know if we can survive in one sixth Earth's gravity for very long. We know that astronauts that have been on the ISS for a year in zero gravity have all kinds of health effects from it.

We know we sent the twin brother of the one up. there and they compared their biology. The one twin that astronaut went to the ISS for a year and the other one didn't remember their names. But yeah, there's swelling of the eyes and effects of the blood, affects to the size of the brain,

affects to muscle atrophy, effects to function of organs like the kidney and pancreas. I mean, all kinds of stuff. Because again, as I said, we're earthlings. We're meant to be here and we're meant to be with this exact amount of gravity too.

So we don't know. Living on the moon, I can tell you if there's multiple generations of people living on the moon and they do survive and they're able to replicate and prosper, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if they all end up way thin and way light because of the lighter gravity environment within only a handful of generations. Hey, man, I could use that diet for sure. Yeah, right. Sent me to the moon just for like six months, yeah. Let's do it. Let's do it.

Well, okay, man. So this next one, we're going to move a little bit more into the lighter realm of some of the science stories. You've written over at the debrief. And this one really caught my eye because this is a big thing here in New York. I know it is on like Instagram and YouTube. Astrology. It's like this big thing. It's become a, you know, everyone's doing it.

Everyone's a part of it. And you wrote this article with one of the best titles I've ever heard, astrology believers less intelligent and more narcissistic. I know that's going to piss off some people probably watching this, and I'm sure it has, man. So tell me what prompted you to write about this, and what do you think about astrology? So I think it's always a push and pull at the debrief, where we're trying to be as scientifically accurate as we can, but we're constantly reporting on fringe science. I'm reporting on guys with fringe theories and physics,

French theories and warp propulsion, all kinds of areas. So I'm really careful when I write something about something that is labeled a pseudoscience, which is what the researchers labeled astrology in the study I talked about. In this particular case, what they did was really simple. They created a questionnaire. They put it out on, they look for volunteers on Facebook to respond to it. and it had a bunch of questions. And the questions were,

A, to determine whether or not you believe in astrology, to determine the big personality characteristics that are part of a lot of personality tests now, to determine narcissism, and then to determine a level of intelligence. So they were just trying to get, like, a breakdown of people that were into astrology for their personality, all their different personality traits,

as well as whether they were more or less open-minded, whether they were more or less likely to believe in pseudoscience or conspiracy theories, and just see where this falls down. And unfortunately, for people that subscribe to it and follow it and believe in it, there was a strong, the single strongest correlation in the study with the belief in astrology was narcissism. Now, keep in mind, just the simple idea of the planets, the movement of the planets, the movement of the stars affect my personal life and my personal well-being, simply could just that could be what that's reflecting of. It's just people that think that are likely to think that, hey, I'm more important, right?

Like the study was titled something, I mentioned in the article, but the study was like, even the stars think I'm special. I think that was literally the name the researchers used in the headline of the article. So I think for that particular component, I don't know that there's a lot of argument you can make about that, other than they're just saying, well, what they found in the study. The correlations with less intelligence, conspiracy theory, and pseudoscience, Unfortunately, it just, you know, astrology looks like science, right? It has all this information.

It has all this mathematics. And this goes here on this day and this goes there on that day. It has the structure of a scientific system. But the analysis, people that have tried to analyze astrology over the decades, have never been able to correlate what an astrologer says. a person's personality or tendencies or likely behaviors with their astrological sign or the position of the star or the moon or any of those things. So from a scientific standpoint, yeah, I don't, you know,

I talk to some astronomers here and there, and I would guess that among that group, astrology is not very popular because they're trying to understand astronomical bodies from a scientific standpoint. They're trying to figure out what they're made of, what their orbits are, how they were created and where they are in space, all those things. So I would suspect that that is something that astronomers themselves do not love astrology. I haven't had anyone say that to me directly. I'm just suspecting that.

So it really was just the study. It wasn't anyone's opinion. It wasn't somebody coming out and gone, ah, people that believe in astrology are idiots. It was studies saying we found a number of correlations to a belief in astrology. Now, was the goal to set out and show, hey, I think astrologer, people that believe it are dumb and believe in... I don't know. That wasn't indicated anywhere in the study.

That's tough. It was just indicated they wanted to know what was the personality breakdown of somebody? What was the intelligence of somebody who's into this system that's been around for millennia? That is really hard to even trace the background, too. The arguments of, like, where astrology comes from and the astronomical signs, I mean, they seem to go back. thousands of thousands of years before recorded history. So trying to take a system that's literally been around that long and analyze it for validity has been done.

So once we've kind of said, it seems to not be real. It seems to not indicate that if you were born on this day and the moon is in this house and this thing's in retrograde, that you should skip driving to work that day because you're more likely to get in an accident or whatever. Those correlations just didn't seem to hold up. So, yeah, this follow-up study, this was, and again, it's just a questionnaire on Facebook. It's just a couple of hundred people.

But, yeah, MJ told me, our editor told me that the feedback epitabreep has been extreme. There's a lot of attention to it. So I'll admit I'm a little biased. As a guy who writes about science and writes about people who actually use scientific method to figure things out, I personally, I'm not an astrology guy. I don't see a scientific correlation. I will say this, and I have this discussion with Chrissy Newton the other day. If you were born in the United States or Canada in the second half of the 20th century,

your calendar has a rhythm to it. And by that I mean, in the fall we start school, in the winter we have the holidays, the school year ends in May or June, and we have. the summer off and that system's more or less been in place in American education since World War II Canadian education to some degree as well and social scientists have looked at this and said sure enough if you're in that group if you've been born in the US in the last 70 years 60 years when you were born what time of year you were born may very well affect you may very well affect your personality your social interaction

your growth because children, when you're down at first grade, second grade, third grade, or God forbid the start of puberty in middle school and high school, that difference between three months, six months, nine months older than somebody else in your same class or even a year older. I had friends in my senior high school that were born in September and friends that were born in December, but a full year later, they were 15 months younger than these kids in some situations. That that has a dramatic effect. I know I have a summer. birthday so I never got to celebrate my birthday in class, right? Literally, like, all through elementary school, all the kids that were born in October, November, January, you would have a cake in class

and everyone's saying, I just never went through that. I remember at that age going like, this sucks, right? I don't get to have cake in school because my birthday's at the end of June. And I hated that. So yeah, there's a good argument to be said for a correlation between birth date and some personality traits across the general population of North America. But as far as it happened to do anything with the Scorpio and Taurus and where stars and planets are positioned, yeah. This study found that. I think it's important to note in an era of

conspiracy and pseudosciences that finding hallmarks that might help you point to somebody who can maybe benefit from a little more science education is not a bad thing. Not at all. Not at all. And, you know, the correlation, I can understand that. I mean, you have a chaotic world in an uncertain world, especially right now in the middle of a pandemic. I wouldn't blame a lot of people for either buying into conspiracies or buying into astrology. I'm personally not one of those people. I don't promote either of those things, conspiracy theory or astrology. But I can understand, you know, They both, astrology and conspiracy theory, want to make sense of things that simply don't make sense or are simply so uncertain that we have to make a truth. We have to find control within that chaos.

So why not? Why not? Oh, I was born on this day. This means this. I'm going to be safe. I'm fine. Or, oh, we're not being told the truth about a vaccine. So there's clearly a conspiracy.

And this person didn't take it and they're alive. And this person did. And they died. that doesn't make sense to me, so there's clearly a conspiracy. No, it's just the world is a chaotic place. Science isn't perfect. Medicine isn't perfect. And we try to make sense of those things.

So again, I'm not promoting conspiracy theory or astrology, but a part of me understands why some people do and how it can come off as narcissistic. Because at the end of the day, you're interested in that conspiracy or astrology for yourself and how it's going to affect your life personally. And I think, you know, like cold readers, like people that pretend to be psychic but aren't really, and they do that for a living, they call it cold reading. If you go through a cold reading event or even a warm reading where they know little information about you, you tend to grab onto the stuff that's right and kind of dismiss the stuff that's wrong.

So if you're reading a horoscope about yourself in the morning and says, you're somebody who really doesn't like to go to work and you're like, God, they're right. I really ain't going to work. You're going to grab onto that. And if you read that enough days in a row, you go, man, this astrology is really on to something. They've really got me figured out. Even if within the same thing, it says, you tend to be shy, and you're the person at work that won't shut up. Everybody goes, well, yeah, I'm shy. Celebrity say in interviews all the time, oh, I'm really a shy person.

You're in an attention-speaking profession on camera with lights on you doing an interview, and you're telling people you're shy, because we all, on some level, feel that, right? So all of these personality traits, I think, exist in everyone. So you can look at those and cherry picket and go, man, this thing's really nailed me. I better listen to it. So, yeah. Yep. Yeah.

And they told me it's created quite a firestorm on social media and our emails and so forth. So sorry if they offended anybody just reporting on the study. Yep, that's what the debrief is for. I've got one more story of yours at the debrief. I do want to cover Chris. but before we do that, let's rewind. Byron has an interesting question here, Super Chat. Are you following alt energy projects like Sapphire, Arian.C.A., brilliant light power and NJ company.

Any of these come to mind, Chris? I am not. You know, I cover a lot of alternate propulsion. And even when I covered like fusion energy projects, those are in the realm of propulsion. so that's more what I do. But I will screen grab those names or Byron is it? Byron, if you remember, drop those in my DMs on Twitter if you're over there. And I will either look into it or I will see if we can assign it to one of the writers there to research it

and see if we can get to the bottom on what's going on. If there's something there, our audience will respond to. Alternative energy sounds interesting as heck to me. Yeah, man. He said you need to check them out, definitely. There we go. Getting some new material for Chris. Thanks, Byron. I appreciate that, man. Thank you for the super chat. Thank you. All right. Well, again, before we get to the last article, Chris, Rodrigo wants to know the ingenuity helicopter has been performing extremely well. 16th flight, I think. What does Chris think is next for flight missions on Mars in other planets? We can be sending up any more helicopters? I love talking about this helicopter. because I get a complaint. Can I complain again? Of course you get. I interviewed Jock O'Carris. He's a roboticist at NASA, and he's the one who designed and built that ingenuity helicopter.

And I interviewed him before the ingenuity helicopter went for its first flights. And so at this point, it was on its way to Mars. It hadn't even landed. We didn't even know it. The rover was going to survive, much less the helicopter. But in that interview, two questions I asked of him that, It turns out I was on the right track, but he told me he didn't, he fibbed a little bit. So I asked him, I said, are there any secret messages built on to the ingenuity helicopter? Because I talk to engineers and scientists all the time.

And they love signing their work. They love putting a cryptic message or something. And he kind of laughed and hemmed and hon and said, no, you know, all the guys that worked on it, women that worked on it, all the energy and effort we put into it. That's our signature. Well, sure enough, when the thing landed, we find out that it had a piece of the Wright Brothers plane original wing attached to it because it was this Wright Brothers moment on another planet. So I knew it, and I asked the right question, and Jacko, you like to me, buddy. So then, right near the end of the interview, I told him, I said, you know, with previous rover missions, because I've been following rovers, as they said, since Spirit and Opportunity landed on Mars in the late 90s.

And I said, I've noticed with previous rover missions that when they're done, like for instance, Spirit and Opportunity had 90-day missions, and that was it. But they one ran for seven years, one-bra, I don't know how, I mean, years and years for both of those. So what they do is they have a backup plan. They say, okay, if we get to 90 days and we burnt up all of our experiments, we go to the B-book of experiments. And then if we burn all those up, we do another 90, another. And you constantly have these like alternates of if we keep working,

And then the thing keeps going, what do we do? So I asked Jocko, I said, you guys have X-N-I-N-I forget how many it was at the time, but they had a handful of test flight schedule. And I said, when you finish those flights and you finish that book, if the helicopter's still working, what is the B-book? What are the, what's that next set of missions? What do you guys have planned? And he told me that at that point, the Mars Perseverance Rover,

which is how they communicate to the helicopter. They talk to an orbital, sad thing. It talks to the rover, and the rover talks to the helicopter. That's how we do it. He said, it will have to move on to its own science missions. So that will be it. The helicopter will do those first few flights, and that'll be it. So, of course, it had those first few flights.

And then NASA announced, oh, we have a B set of missions since it's still working. So I got him twice in that article telling me not the truth, because there were things he just didn't want to give up. He didn't want to give up the right mother's wing, which I get. And he didn't want to say, we have backup missions because he wanted everyone focused on those primary missions. So what's going to happen next? I literally don't know. I asked the guy directly, and he told me there weren't any, and the thing is still doing test flights.

As far as future projects like that, we're talking about a submarine on Titan, which is one of Saturn's moons. Saturn's moon Titan is one of the most interesting places in the solar system because it has a dense atmosphere like Earth and it has the atmospheric pressure almost identical to ours. As a matter of fact, other than the fact that it's about, you know, depending on the temperature and time of day, it's like freezing there. You could stand on the surface of Titan in your bathing suit and as long as you have a breathing mask on to protect your eyes, ears,

and face and stuff and breathe proper air, the atmospheric pressure and the environment would actually support us there. What they also have on that moon, on the moon Titan, is a bunch of lakes and, not oceans, but actual huge

bodies of liquid lakes. Now, they're not water. They're hydrocarbons. So they're, you know, like gasoline and stuff. You know, they're flammable hydrocarbons here on Earth. But they're fully liquid lakes.

We've talked about putting a submarine up there because of that dense atmosphere. If we put a little helicopter like the one on Mars up there, you wouldn't even have to turn the helicopter blades very fast and the thing would fly. I read an article that said the atmosphere is so good and dense there, and the gravity is light enough that if a man had wings taped to his arm and you'd get a good run and flap them, you could fly on tight. That's between the atmosphere density and the low gravity. So that is a place that I think we will plan robotic missions for.

As far as another helicopter, I think that was the goal of ingenuity. It was what they call a technology demonstrator. And the goal was to prove that we could put a helicopter on another planet and fly the thing around. And sure enough, we did. So we're going to do it, man. There are going to be more helicopters, fly into more places. That thing was just a proof of concept. I love it.

And it could not have been more successful. We're living in crazy times, man. I can't believe it. I feel so blessed to, like, be living in this age. This next 50 years of science, Ryan, you know, setting aside that we may be on the cusp of the hugest story in mankind regarding UFOs and alien life. Just setting that aside, the progress we are making, the progress humans are making in science, understanding technology and developments is just changing. the progress we are making, the progress humans are making in science, understanding, technology, and developments is just incredible and amazing. And it's growing in an exponential rate.

You know, back in the times of the Apollo moon landings, the population of Earth was like 20% of what it is now. So we just have a lot more people working on it. We have scientists working on it. They're scientists in China and Korea and Japan, scientists in Europe, South and Central America. are people that write master's thesis and PhD thesis about things like warp drive and wormholes and time travel. All of these cutting-inth scientists,

all these amazing things you can think of, people are working on them and people are trying to make them happen. And that's never been like that in history. It's amazing. And you're bringing us the most up-to-date information that those scientists are. I'm trying to write about the coolest stuff. I love it.

Warlock says, great show, guest, Ryan. Thank you, Warlock. I know I wasn't as comedic today. I didn't know as much comedy as I usually do, but you were asking a lot of science questions. And that's what I wanted, man. I will do the stand-up show another time. Maybe for the Patreon will do that.

But the last story I want to cover with you here. Now, I by trade, am a bartender. When I'm not a playwright, screenwriter, or euphologist, I tend bar here in New York at the Broadway show. shows. But I also have a history in specialty coffee. I'm a coffee snob. I opened a coffee shop in Los Angeles when I was living out there. Not I didn't own it, but I helped open it called coffee for Sasquatch. So I love me some coffee, man. It's in my blood every second of every day. And now I'm learning, you know, you always hear on the news every night, it's coffee will cause

cancer. No, it won't. Yes, it will. No, it won't. Yes, it will. No, it won't. Yes, Well, no, it won't. It's good for you. It's bad for you. It's good for you. It's bad for you. And you just came out with an article about coffee and Alzheimer's disease. So could you tell us the correlation and what you discovered in this article, if you don't mind? Yeah. First, let me start with this, Ryan. Coffee is good for you. Keep drinking. So you have to tell me twice. The biggest controversies around coffee historically have been around caffeine and caffeine addiction. Because if you're drinking six, seven, eight cups a day, and you're feeling dragged down if you don't drink that many, yeah, you might have a caffeine problem or a stimulant problem.

And, you know, you're a mini tweaker, a coffee tweaker. But as far as the bean itself, the coffee bean really is a magical bean. It's full of these things called bioflavnoids, which have tons of health benefits. It's full of antioxidants that have tons of health benefits. And for some people, the caffeine is beneficial. As a matter of fact, there's been a lot of studies showing health benefits for diabetics for drinking coffee. And in many ways, it really is just doing what you do. It just amping up your metabolism a little bit, helping your body process out that sugar and stave it off.

This one about Alzheimer's was really interesting because they basically took about 10,000 people that they studied over. a couple of decades and looked at the onset of Alzheimer's and dementia and Alzheimer's like symptoms and they found a correlation to drinking coffee and the delayed or no onset of the symptoms and the thing that was most exciting for people like you, Ryan, is they found that the more coffee, the better. So two cups had a better effect, three cups had a better effect. They didn't target an upper limit in the study, but the more coffee, the better for preventing Alzheimer's. What the exact mechanism is is being looked at, I can tell you this, that most studies that study

Alzheimer's focus on those amyloid beta proteins that build up on the brain like plaque and just kind of interfere with everything working right, and that this may reduce the growth of those or reduce the size of those. It may just be the anti-inflammatory effects of the bean itself, but they found a real measurable benefit to it. And what's interesting is they found it with decaf coffee as well. So it was definitely not a caffeine-related benefit, but it was specifically to the benefits in the coffee bean itself,

which I will reiterate is a very healthy bean with a lot of it. I'm not a big coffee drinker, my wife loves it, But it's, for every study that says, don't drink coffee, I'll find you 20 that explain why it's good for you. Yep, the coffee industrial complex, which I am a part of. That's right. I love it, man. That's exciting to hear because, you know, every day I think of quitting. Because, yeah, I probably have a small bit of an addiction.

But I also really appreciate coffee for, you know, the artistry of it and the different beans and everything. And now knowing that the things are being magical. I love it. Yep, there's a lot of breakthroughs in Alzheimer's coming because we've really put a ton of money of research into it. And because research has been able to really zero in and target on this protein, there's a couple more treatments. There's one that's been announced recently that's all over the news everywhere. It's a new drug. I can't remember the name.

But if you take this, it will essentially over time eliminate or greatly reduce. reduce those. So they're looking not only as a preventative, but actually a reversing of Alzheimer's. I can tell you my father's suburbs with Alzheimer's. So it's not a pretty picture, and it's definitely something that even an extremely expensive treatment

is a welcome one. They're also working on an Alzheimer's vaccine. And this is something I'll be reporting about in the coming weeks. But basically, the idea is if we have these new treatments to eliminate these proteins,

What if we could trigger our body's own immune response to just prevent those proteins from building up in the first place, to prevent that amyloid beta from building up around the brain and causing these problems. And that's the idea behind this vaccine. And I wouldn't be the least bit surprised, Ryan, by the time I'm having to face the possibility of that, my 60s or 70s, or you, a guy who's a little younger than me having to face that, that there's just a vaccine you go and get just like you can get the, you can get the, the shingles vaccine now, or you can get the, I hear there's some other vaccine in the news.

I don't remember which one it is. Yeah, that's really interesting. Well, and then, you know, we also have a huge problem with diabetes, at least here in America. Oh, yeah. So again, if something like a vaccine or a coffee bean can help, like, amazing. Like, why not? Why not just embrace these things?

The only thing I would, and I'm no doctor, and the only thing I would warn people about coffee and excessive coffee drinking, and this is going to stink for those people. But if you're pregnant, there's a decent number of studies that kind of go both ways. So the effects that could have on your kid

could be positive, could be negative. So if you are a coffee drinker and you can skip it for those nine months, which would be insane for most people that drink coffee regularly, you know, it's at least something to talk to your doctor about and looked into the studies. but for the vast majority of scenarios, coffee is constantly shocking us with its health benefits.

Love it. Love it. I'm all for it. Well, hey, man, let's end with what to look forward to. We're heading into 2022, hopeful of many things, new discoveries. So twofold question for you before we go, Chris. What do you hope to see in 2022 when it comes to space exploration and the hunt for aliens. And the second part of that, what do you hope for in terms of the UAP topic? So hit us with what you hope for in 2022, if you don't mind. So on the UAP topic, I will say that I think we're on the precipice of something. So the people I work with that report on this stuff exclusively, try and temper expectations all the time, because we really don't know what's coming out. I'm a firm believer that 2022 is the year. We hear somebody in official capacity say a non-human

technological intelligence. I just think that's going to happen. I think we're there. I think we've eliminated. You know, there were always three ideas. UFOs are a hallucination, not real, misidentification, whatever you want to call it, but they're not a thing. They're secret military or they're a non-human technological intelligence of some sort aliens, whatever trans dimensions. That first one's pretty much done. The idea that all UFOs, that every pilot reports and every radar season, all these things are just misidentifications or atmospheric phenomena or other things, I think that's over. Leslie Kane said it with her last story she wrote in the New York Times, that the question of if UFOs are, real is over. And I do agree with her. I think that that has been set aside. We're now entering an

area where those in the position to know, those people with more information, with more pictures, with more videos are going to be put in a position to either say it's us or it's not us. And if they say it's not us and they say conclusively it's not another human intelligence, that only leaves the alternative. And so I think that's that's coming. I do. I think 2022 is the year. I think a lot is built to that. I think guys like Melon and Elizondo lit that flame and however you feel about them. And I always cover my bases with their former intelligence community people. And it could definitely be human technology that they're just not telling us about their job is to distract. But if that's not the case, if we do ultimately

land on it's not human and not not ours and not an adversaries. Not human becomes the last option. And I think this 2022 may be the year that that breaks open. And I've never said that. As I said, I've been following this topic. And next year, it'll be 45 years of my life. And I never felt that was coming other than when I was a little kid. And I saw in search up and went, okay, we're going to get the truth about UFOs because the guy just said it. I'm 11 years old. But In the time in between, even after Stephen Greer's press club event, other big things that have happened, the Wilson Davis documents coming out, all of these sort of things. I just never felt like we were on the precipice. I think with NASA looking at it, with Galileo looking at it, with the military looking at it, with maybe a congressional office set up through the Gillibrand Amendment, I think too many people are looking.

and I think we've proven that the phenomenon is real. It's the phenomenon's real, and that many people are looking, somebody's going to figure it out. And I think we're on the precipice of that answer. At first, I didn't think it was real. I woke up to this blinding light, and I was transported to another place. Pluto TV.

Then I heard a voice. Come with me if you want to live. There were thousands of movies and shows, and they were all free. The truth is our city. It's just so beautiful. Pluto TV free streaming of Terminator 2, Fringe Arrow, the 100 NX files may cause excitement, loss of sleep, and sudden belief in extraterrestrials. No credit cards or alien encounters necessary. Pluto TV, stream now, pay never. I love that, man.

Well, okay, so that gives me hope with UFOs. How about alien life? What are you looking forward to most in the search for that? This is why this is so crazy, Ryan. In many ways, there's a race, right? when we were little kids and there were UFO reports and people would go, well, can't be secret technology because we're just not evolved enough, right? Like, we're still flying, you know, we're barely getting rockets to the moon.

We're definitely not flying around it at Mach 10 with no sonic boom or whatever. So there was this constant move to a while there will be a day when technology, human technology is so sophisticated that you could just reliably say, ah, it's probably a secret project and we just don't know about it. We're getting there. But what's happening at the same time is an entire wave of people that are my age and younger, some a little older, but more or less Gen Xers, millennials, and Gen Zers are growing up in a world where the idea of going to another planet is not only not crazy, it's something we do. The idea of traveling his face is something we do. The idea that there are planets around other stars is something we just know now.

In the 90s, we were still, I was an adult in 1990s, still at 21 years old, go, are we ever going to find it? And by 95, we found the first one, and now there's thousands that we found. So the technology and the science keeps moving towards that discovery. And what I think is going to happen is if we don't get a big UFO breakthrough in the next year or two years, it won't matter because science will catch up on his own. I think the James Webb telescope, I think the giant Magellan, I think the Louvoire, which has been proposed to search for Earth too, I think all these other observations and all of these scientists programs,

I think things like Galileo, what we're going to find is we're going to find multiple planets with signs of life in their atmosphere, meaning an atmospheric composition that really seems to imply there's stuff living there. And then you get into a real simple question. If the cosmos is for our galaxy is 13 and a half billion years old and Earth's only been around for the last four in change,

what about all these planets, many of which had a big head start on us? If we start finding signs of life in their atmosphere, are you going to tell me those are more primitive even though they got here first? I mean, if you don't believe in evolution, maybe. But yeah,

so I think these two worlds are getting ready to collide. I think we are going to find signs of life in the atmosphere. The planets in the Trappist system potentially. We have seven planets to look at there, at least four of which are probably rocking in the habitable zone. And then there are proposed missions to send a telescope or observatory out to a little over 500 AU from Earth, which is an AU is the distance from Earth to the Sun. And without getting in all the technicalities, when you go out there, you can take advantage of something called gravitational lensing, and you can directly image a planet.

So we can send a telescope out to this spot, and it can take pictures of these planets. It can look right out of. Imagine you take a night picture of Trappist 1C, and you see city lights in there, right? Like imagine that. They're not. Right?

And that's coming, man. Those things are coming in our lifetime, right? So even if the whole UFO thing just went to crap and the military never did anything. And Avi Lowe came out and said, yeah, I didn't find anything, you know. And NASA came out and said, yeah, it was a bunch of weather balloons. And everybody told us the worst answer,

I don't think it'll matter. I think we're going to find signs of life through good old-fashioned mainstream science. Then what happens if we find the signs of life around a thousand different planets? Do we all sit around and go, none of them have intelligent life? And they've all evolved after us. Or do we start looking at the possibility that in a 14 billion-year-old cosmos, where we're here for the last four, that some intelligent of life evolved elsewhere before us and has the technological know-how to come here and visit, even if it's just with probes,

which is something we do all the sticking time. Right. That gives me so much hope, man. That's where we're at, man. That's where we're at. It's good stuff is coming, people. Science is going to answer these questions. I promise you.

Well, good stuff is coming, Chris. That's how we're going to end it, man. Please tell us what comes next for you over at the debrief, what we can expect in the coming week, month maybe, and yeah, where we can find everything you're up to. Tease us a little bit if you don't mind. If you see me on Twitter tomorrow, tell me, Chris, quit tweeting and go back to work. Because I have all the information came in today.

The last photos, videos, links, everything I needed for the one. The short bubble story is in my hand. So tomorrow, when I wake up and I have my first couple cups of Alzheimer's preventing diabetes fighting coffee, I will get launched into the stratosphere and I will finish that story. I will turn it into MJ. And he'll either run it on Thursday, Friday, or Monday, depending on his whims, times, and availability. But I can tell you that a story I've been excited about, a story I couldn't believe it when the research, excuse me,

when the researcher involved told me about it is finally here. I've been working on it since August, pretty much. And I am a day, two days away from turning that sucker in. So that's why I agreed to come on here today and go on Mike's show on Thursday. That big sucker's coming. I have some potential gravity, anti-gravity sort of. stories coming and I know the guys over there that report on UIP type stuff are working on stuff. So stuff is coming.

We're always working. We're always, always working. It's never a dull moment at the debrief. So again, everything can be found at the debrief.org. Everything Chris is doing, Tim, Micah, MJ, me. My girlfriend is written, excuse me, my fiancé is written for the debrief as well. Jane, you can check out her stuff over there. And everyone else, we have a lot of new faces and names over there as well.

Always looking for writers. So hit up MJ, hit up Chris, if you're interested in any of the topics we discussed tonight. And you think you've got what it takes to write for the debrief. We would love to have you over there. And we are paying writers. This is not a volunteer job. So if you have skills in writing about science and you're interested, reach out to MJ at the debrief.org.

Or you can DM me on Twitter. or Christopher at the debrief, and I'll hook you up with them, and if you've got the goods, he'll put you to work right. We've added a bunch of writers in the last couple of months. We've added some more YouTube content creators, so 2022 is going to be the biggest year yet for the debrief,

seeing us how it's our second year. Yep. Happy birthday to the debrief. Chris, I'm going to let you go, brother, before I do my little ending spiel here. But thank you. Thank you for being so gracious with your time and teasing us with all.

all of your amazing articles. Please everyone go read them. They're so in-depth and so well-researched. And he has some amazing interviews, exclusive interviews, with a lot of people over there. So, yeah. And one thing, Ryan, one last thing. If you're a fan of Ryan Spray,

I wrote a feature called Canadians Hate Thanksgiving and four other things, bizarre things I learned while working at the Brough. It's going up there for a few days. And there's a section in there that says, I want to come back in my next life as Ryan Spray, and I lay out the case, and I beg anyone to read that and argue with me, because dude is living his best life. Don't get me wrong. I make great cases for coming back as Christina Gomez and Micah Hanks, too. But when push came to shove, it's Sprague first and everyone else follows behind. So you live in the life, man. Keep doing what you do. Can't tell you how happy I am to hear that you're writing screenplays. Every time I see that stuff, stuff on Twitter and your writing plays again. Dude, put that passion and that heart into it. That's where the magic happens.

With you and that computer and that screen, you have the ability to make magic rind. So I can't wait to see what you come up with. Thank you, Chris. And I can't wait to see what you come up with as well, brother. So again, thank you. Thank you for joining me today. And, of course, have a great night and get back to work, all right?

Right. Right, work story. Write it. Get it out. All right, brother. Have a great night. Thanks, brother.