Somewhere in the Skies - Senate UAP Hearing and Post-Discussion

Episode Date: November 20, 2024

The Senate Armed Services Committee held a closed hearing, followed by an OPEN hearing on November 19th "to examine the activities of the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office," (AARO) on Emerging Threats & Capabilities. Subcommittee Chair, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) met with new director of AARO, Jon Kosloski. This is the entire broadcast of that hearing, followed by a post-discussion with former attorney and moderator, Suzanne Landers. Follow Suzanne on Twitter: https://x.com/csuzannelanders Patreon: www.patreon.com/somewhereskies ByMeACoffee: buymeacoffee.com/UFxzyzHOaQ PayPal: [e-mail] Website: www.somewhereintheskies.com Store: http://tee.pub/lic/ULZAy7IY12U YouTube Channel: CLICK HERE Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/somewhereskies/videos Order Ryan’s new book: https://a.co/d/4KNQnM4 Order Ryan’s older book: https://amzn.to/3PmydYC Twitter: @SomewhereSkies Read Ryan’s Articles by CLICKING HERE Opening Theme Song, "Ephemeral Reign" by Per Kiilstofte Produced by LIONSGATE Copyright © 2024. Ryan Sprague. All rights reserved. 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

Looking to see what's happening around your home? Rings battery doorbell helps you track packages and see who's at your door in real time. The outdoor cam plus protects your yard at night with a wide field of view and clearer retinal 2K video. Or upgrade to 4K cameras and doorbells with retinal vision for ultra clear zoom in detail. Your door, your yard, your home. With Ring, it's protected. Shop cameras, doorbells, and more at ring.com now. This is somewhere in the skies with Ryan's bread.

This hearing will come to order. I'd like to first thank our witness, Dr. John Kozlowski, for testifying. He is our newly appointed director of the All-D-Mobile Resolution Officer Arrow, an office Congress established in the fiscal year 2022 NDAA, to investigate this very serious problem of unidentified anomalous phenomenon or UAP. Dr. Kozlowski comes to Arrow from the Research Directorate of the National Security Agency, where he worked in areas of optics research and crypto mathematics. He previously served at the DOD Special Communications Enterprise Office. We look forward to regular engagements between you and the committee.

When unidentified anomalous phenomenon enter our airspace, we need to know about it. We need to identify it, but in order to do that, we need to reduce the stigma and credibility challenges associated with these events. Our service members, scientists, foreign, partners and the general public need to know that their reporting, research, and analysis will be taken seriously and acted on in good faith. In the spirit of transparency, Arrow recently released a consolidated annual report just a few months after releasing the first volume of the historical record report in March of this year. These public documents help highlight the challenges still

facing this office, including the lack of timely and actionable sensor data, the need to the need to revisit cases placed in the active archive and the importance of improving reporting sources, both in the interagency and internationally. In this hearing, I want to probe a series of specific issues. First, as incidents at Langley and elsewhere have demonstrated, unmanned aerial systems or UAS continue to pose significant threats to our national security. In addition to safety of flight issues, these UAS create for our own pilots and aircrew, the UAS present clear and undeniable counterintelligence concerns around some of the most sensitive airspace. While standard UAS are not part of ARO's mission, your work on sensors at military installations across the country will be critical

to making sure that we have the domain awareness necessary to accurately identify and track these objects. I expect your office to also play close attention to any anomalous characteristics that these systems could present in the future. Second, I look forward to your presentation of three case studies demonstrating cases that Arrow has resolved, including the GoFAST, which is one of the most prominent UAP cases. However, I believe it is important to acknowledge ongoing public interest in the Nimitz incident, the Gimble video, and other prominent UAP cases, and for Arrow to share what it can about. those cases as well. It's also important that ERO speak to unresolved cases and what types of anomalous activity have merited further analysis. And while I know ERO has gone through a period of

transition over the past year, it is important to share these disclosures, both resolved and unresolved cases with the public, even when a Senate hearing is not scheduled. Lastly, while some have been hesitant to come forward to ERO in the past, I hope that potential individuals with firsthand knowledge of unreported programs, view your arrival in this position as an opportunity for a new start. Arrow was created by Congress to do this work. Congress waived non-disclosure agreements for those who disclose information to Arrow and gave Arrow the authority to go and turn over every rock. I hope those with information to share use this opportunity so that we, as your senators who represent you, can do our jobs. I look forward to hearing more.

on these issues from Dr. Kozlowski and for members to start a dialogue on this important topic. With that, I would like to turn to Senator Ernst for her opening statement. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Dr. Kozlowski. Our hearing today is about identifying UAPs and understanding their potential implications, which could range from technological advancements to potential threats to our national security. Are these phenomena tied to foreign adversaries such as China or Russia, leveraging advanced technologies beyond our current capabilities, or do they represent unknown scientific phenomena that challenge our current understanding?

We must answer these critical questions to ensure that our national security is not compromised. It is vital that all agencies work in tandem to aggregate data, identify patterns, and develop robust analytical frameworks. Our ability to detect, track, and respond to UAP. requires the latest technology and full cooperation from all government branches. Thanks very much, Dr. Koslowski, for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to the valuable insights that you and Arrow can provide to our committee, and I yield back. Thank you.

Dr. Kazasi, please make your opening statement. Thank you, Chairwoman Gillibrand, Ranking Member Ernst, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is a pleasure to be here on behalf of the Department of Defense as the new director of the All-Domain Anomily Resolution Office. I appreciate the opportunity to provide a status update on Arrow's work and respond to your questions about unidentified anomalous phenomenon or UAP. On behalf of the department and the entire Arrow team,

I want to say how grateful we are to Congress for its continued support. Unidentified objects in any domain pose potential threats to U.S. safety and security. Reports of UAP activity, particularly near national security sites, must be treated seriously and investigated with scientific rigor, by the U.S. government. By way of introduction, I'm John Kozlowski. I'm a researcher at my core with an academic background in mathematics, physics, and engineering. I've spent most of my career at the National Security Agency leading advanced research in the areas of optics, computing, and cryptomathematics. By nature, I am drawn to tough scientific problems, which is what brought

me to Arrow and the UAP mission. Since I arrived at Arrow in August, I've been impressed by the breadth and depth of my team's experience and the framework they've established to rigorous analyze UAP reports. Arrow has taken meaningful steps to improve data collection and retention, bolster sensor development, effectively triage UAP reports, and reduce the stigma of reporting UAP events. Last year, Arrow worked with the DOD's joint staff to issue guidance to defense personnel worldwide on how to report UAP observations

and is working with the military services regarding implementation. Arrow has also launched a public website that features UAP imagery, UAP imagery, case resolutions, material analysis, archival records, and more. These are only a few examples of ERO's recent progress and were just getting started. To date, Arrow has over 1,600 UAP reports in its holdings from across the U.S. government. I'll share a slide in just a few minutes with updated UAP analytic trends. You'll see that many reports resolve the commonplace objects like birds, balloons, and unmanned systems, while others lack sufficient data for comprehensive analysis.

Although only a small percentage of reports received by Arrow are potentially anomalous, these are the cases that require significant time, resources, and a focused scientific inquiry by Arrow and its network of partners. It is important to underscore that to date, Arrow has not discovered any verifiable evidence of extraterrestrial beings, activity, or technology. To accomplish Arrow's national security mission, I have set three priorities for the office, building strong. partnerships, promoting transparency, and scaling up the work of the office. Arrow cannot do its work alone. Building partnerships across government, academia, industry, and with the public is essential to the success of the office. Strong cooperation with the military services is particularly important. We rely on their support to implement our reporting

guidance and to amplify the message that there should be zero stigma associated with UAP reporting. We also rely on partnerships with the national labs, the office, of the Director of National Intelligence, FBI, Department of Homeland Security, NASA, all of which play a role in the whole of government effort to address UAP. Recognizing the talent and expertise that reside outside of the government, Arrow will continue to explore new ways to partner with the academic and scientific communities to investigate its most complex UAP cases. A related priority for Arrow is transparency. Our ability to collaborate with key partners, including the scientific community, and the in the public relies on information sharing to include downgrading and declassifying UAP related information. In some cases, it may be unclear to the public why the DOD classified a piece of information

in the first place. Why are photos of seemingly benign objects such as balloons classified? It's often the case that an object or phenomenon isn't itself a security concern, but the location, source, or method used to capture it is still sensitive. Many cases are difficult to quickly release to the public, but are reported to the appropriate committees in Congress that are authorized by law or House and Senate leadership to receive the information. It is important to note that Arrow does not unilaterally declassify information. Instead, we work with the originator of a classified record to ensure that declassifying that record does not inadvertently harm national security. This can take time.

Nonetheless, the department is committed to declassifying and publicly sharing more. information on UAP while protecting sensitive sources and methods. I'll be sharing some newly declassified imagery in just a few minutes. Give me a break, give me off a piece of that Kit Kat bar. Give me a break. Give me a break. Break me off a piece of that Kit Kat bar. That chocolate crispy taste is going to make your day and wherever you'd be off a piece

of that Kit Kat bar. Have a break. Have a Kit Kat. ARO is also working closely with the National Archives and Records Administration to make UAP-related documents publicly available in a digitized collection. Meanwhile, Arrow continues to review the U.S. historical record relating to UAP. We welcome any former or current government, civilian, contractor, or military service member with relevant information to reach out to us at www. My final priority is scaling up Arrow's work to match its mission. Arrow needs to bolster the quantity, quality, and diversity of data that it acquires and examines.

This means tapping into existing data sources within the interagency while deploying Arrow's own organic sensor capabilities. To the extent that UAP results from the domain awareness gaps, more and better data will help us fill those gaps and help us understand what is being encountered. In closing, Arrow is committed to the highest standards of scientific integrity. We will not foreclose on any explanation for UAP prematurely. We will continue to follow the science and data wherever they lead. We will continue to have an open and frank dialogue with Congress in settings like these and in classified briefings. We will continue to keep you fully and currently informed of all UAP information, active or historical.

And finally, we will share as much information as possible at the unclassified level to inform the public of ARO's activities and its findings. For now, I'd like to turn to a brief presentation of UAP trends and cases, and then I'd be happy to take questions. Okay, this chart represents the UAP reporting since 1996, and as has previously been discussed by ARO, that sensor placement seems to have caused a bias in our data, both geographic and at altitude.

And we're working to resolve that bias in 2025 or reduce that bias through broader engagements with the DoD as well as the IC and the rest of the government, also by incorporating broader sensors into our data and through a public reporting mechanism that we hope to have live in mid-20205. On the left side, it shows the altitudes and we'll see it's a bit cut off. We'll see that most of the reporting occurs between 15,000 and 25,000 feet. that happens to be where most of our sensors are. And the reporting above and below that is also often coming from those same platforms. In the center, we'll see that the resolved cases have the vast majority being balloons and UAS. We're seeing a great increase in satellites recently, particularly with the launch of mega satellite constellations such as Starlink, where the satellites are catching what is called satellite flage.

or glint off the sun just after sunset or just before sunrise. And on the right most, we'll see the morphology or the shapes that have been reported. The majority have been lights or orbs. We think that there's going to be a increase in the lights with the megacostulations, but our most interesting cases, some of which I'll discuss later, are actually the shapes such as the triangles or the cylinders. And at the bottom, we'll see the geographic bias. that I mentioned before, where most of the reports historically had been near the government

sites. This bias has been reduced recently by reporting from the FAA. We now get weekly reports from them. And great thank you to our aviators for making those reports. It helps our analysis quite a bit. Okay, a case that we thought would be a transmedium case as it was reported is well known on the outside, known as the Puerto Rico case. It was data collected in 2013 when a Customs and Border Patrol

aircraft observed an object flying near an airport in Puerto Rico. The green line in this diagram is the track that the airplane was taking, and those many crossed lines are the directions that the camera was facing at the time that the airplane was flying around the airport, and we'll watch the video in just a moment. The orange arrow in the center is where we assess that the UAP was actually flying, and transmitting means that it goes from one domain into another. In this case, it looks like it goes from the air into the water and then back into the air. We assessed that it was actually flying over the airport the entire time. And this video was taken with infrared, and what appears to be the transmedium part where it goes into the water is actually where the temperature of the water is equal to the temperature of the object,

and the camera can no longer distinguish between the two. It's not that the object actually goes into the water. And so we assessed that the object likely a pair of balloons or sky lanterns was floating at about seven knots over the airport and descending to about 200 meters. And this video will be released and our report will be released later this year. The Go Fast was captured the public attention and congressional attention when it was made public in 2017. Looks like an object flying very fast over the water, very close to the water. through a very careful geospatial intelligence analysis using trigonometry, we assess with high confidence that the object is not actually close to the water, but is rather closer to 13,000 feet.

Diagram here shows as the platform is flying and capturing the object, if it is closer to the platform at a higher altitude, a trick of the eye called parallax makes it look like the object is moving much faster. And so we've written a detailed paper on Parallax, released that on our website, so that the public can literally check our math on this analysis. An interesting case, which I don't believe the public is familiar with, is captured in 2018 from a UAV flying in the Mediterranean,

watching Mount Etna as it was erupting, and it appears that that object is flying through the plume of superheated gas and ash. This was a rather difficult case to resolve, we had to pull in support from a number of IC and S&T partners and even reach out to a volcanologist. And through very detailed 3D modeling and pixel-by-pixel analysis of the object as it's traversing across the clouds, they assess that the object was actually 170 meters away from the plume and not flying through it. And to be clear, Arrow does not believe every object is a bird, a balloon, or a UAV.

We do have some very anomalous objects. It's just the nature of resolution. We can only resolve things that we understand. So we're now working on additional products where we can inform the public, Congress, and others of the objects as we're studying them, rather than once we've resolved them. With that, I'll take your questions.

Thank you, Dr. Kuzlowski. I appreciate your testimony. It's been widely reported that individuals claiming first-tail and knowledge of unreported UAP programs have been reluctant to engage with Arrow. What message do you have for those individuals? and how we work to gain their trust?

I would let them know that Congress has gone out of its way to create the organization Arrow specifically to conduct these sorts of investigations and has uniquely empowered them to have access to all UAP related information, whether that's historic or current. And we take that responsibility and those authorities very seriously. And so we have been reaching out to a broader community, encouraging folks who had talked to Aero personnel in the past and maybe felt uncomfortable to come back to us. We've met with several of their interlocutors and a couple of firsthand witnesses, and we are making great progress in those firsthand witnesses that we have talked to do feel comfortable

coming back to us. And so we hope that more folks that do have information would go to www. arrow.mill, fill out the form, send it to us so we can bring them in for interviews and add their information to our investigations. Thank you. I recently just read your report from March, your historic report, and I would encourage anyone who's interested in this topic to read the report, because when I was asked by a reporter about it, they said, well, it doesn't show any evidence of secret programs that have aliens. That's not how I read the report. What I read the report is the U.S. government took sightings extremely seriously over the last 75 years, put some of the

greatest minds ever to analyze these cases because they assess them as some deeply unknown phenomena that may or may not cause threats, that may or may not be related to adversaries, but are certainly something that the U.S. government need to know about. And what I read from this report is that we resolved numbers of cases, but in almost every instance, whether it was in the 40s, the 50s, the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the nots, half the cases were unresolved. So I don't think this is an example of the government not taking these cases seriously. I think this is an example of our government spending 75 years taking these cases very seriously. And interestingly, for the group that put together this report, they didn't

have access to any firsthand reporting. And so from my perspective, for whistleblowers and people who want to come in, please come in because the purpose of Arrow is so that the senators can do our job to provide oversight, accountability, and transparency. We find it very concerning that our pilots, that are Navy officers, that people who have sightings of UAPs are denigrated, are somehow dismissed or disregarded. They need to be protected. This is a huge issue for national security because, number one, we don't have domain awareness, which is very problematic.

Number two, we don't have domain superiority if we don't understand how different UAPs are flying, what technology they're using, what their mission is, what. mission is, what their purpose is. And at the base level, we have so many UAPs around our bases, around our military sites, around our nuclear sites, that it's deeply disturbing that adversaries at a minimum could be using these opportunities to spy, to glean intelligence that will harm our long-term national security. So I'm grateful that you're taking the whistleblowers very seriously. I'm grateful that Arrow is trying its best to integrate the private sector, the public, to their work.

Interestingly, in this hearing, we heard that the FAA is now working hand in glove, which is very helpful. We want this public-facing accessibility to be put in place by 2025 so that people can upload their videos, their data, their reports. I've met with people who have followed this issue for decades, and they have thousands of examples, thousands of pieces of data that ultimately I want uploaded into arrows so you can cross-reference historic information with current information because this group at Arrow are the best scientists that we can find anywhere and they will do the work that's needed to be done. So I just want

to thank you for that. And then with my last 42 seconds, can you tell us about any of the cases that merit further analysis by your I.C. and science and technology partners? What is it that makes these cases anomalous? And a large number of reports are placed in the active archive because Arrow does not have enough information. What might prompt you to reopen a case like that? And do you have any examples? Sure. I'll start with the active archive case. So that is just the place where we put cases where we don't have enough scientific information to resolve them at that time. But we're always looking for opportunities to correlate them to new cases that come in as the new cases come in, as well as enrich those cases with additional data. We do have one example that I'm aware of where we were able

to correlate a number of observations of interesting lights in the sky. And, Eventually, we concluded that it was multiple people observing Starlink flares, just as an example. Three cases that merit analysis that we're working on right now. One, we might be in the process of resolving, but nonetheless is still interesting. The first one was brought to us by a law enforcement officer out west where he observed a large orange orb, floating several hundred feet above the ground a couple miles away. He went to investigate what was going on with that orb. and as he was pulling up to the location where he thought would be below the orb,

about 40 to 60 meters away from some object, the area was well lit. He saw a blacker than black object. He said it was about the size of a Prius, four to six feet wide. And as he got 40 to 60 meters away from the object, it tilted up about 45 degrees, and then it shot up vertically.

He says 10 to 100 times faster than any drone he's ever seen before. and it did that without making a sound as far as he could tell from inside of his vehicle. And just as it left his field of view through his windshield, then it emitted very bright red and blue lights that he illuminated the inside of his vehicle as brightly as if someone had set off fireworks just outside his vehicle or street flares. So that's anomalous because of the size of the vehicle with the great acceleration. And when he came back to investigate that area, he found no disturbance of the ground beneath it.

So that's one interesting one. Another one comes to us from Southeast U.S. There was a U.S. facility where two cars of government contractors were leaving the facility around 9 o'clock in the morning. They looked up in the sky and saw a large metallic cylinder about the size of a commercial airplane, and it was stationary. They observed that there was a very bright white light behind or around the object. They saw it stationary for 15 to 20 seconds, and then it disappeared. Obviously, an object that large, stationary, unless it's a blimp, is unusual,

but then disappearing, we can't explain how that would happen. And then the last case was interesting. We had a aircraft that was flying parallel to another aircraft, and it was capturing imagery of it, and a small-looking object appeared to fly between the two of them much faster than them. Through very careful analysis, we think that the object might have actually been further aware,

way than the object that it was videotaping, but it requires very careful analysis to come to those conclusions, and we don't have the metadata to support that yet. Senator Ernst. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. And Dr. Kossoslowski, you mentioned that you do work with the intelligence community. You're working with the FAA. Has Arrow involved academia? Have you gone to universities? Do you have outside organizations that you are working with?

And if so, can you walk us through some of that collaboration? Sure. Right now, most of our collaborations that are veering towards academia are with university-affiliated research centers associated with universities or with FFRDCs. Our partnership with universities, I would say, is lacking right now. We have some one-off associations with universities. professors, however, that's our fault, and it's largely because of the need to declassified data. We need to give the professors something to work on before we can really engage them. So we're working significantly on a declassification effort. We've hired a number of declassification experts, and we're going to be trying to get cases like the ones that I just discussed here, declassified, so that we can engage with the universities on a regular basis and provide them

the data. Talking to a scientist without data is going to be rather disappointing. So hopefully in 2025 will be increasing those efforts. Right. Well, I appreciate that. I think there's a huge pool of talent out there that you should tap into. Given the public's growing concern and interest in UAPs,

how do you balance the need for the transparency that our public is demanding with the potential risks of revealing classified defense information? Yeah, that's always a concern that's on the front of our minds. We want to make sure that we're

deconflicting both on potential U.S. programs and what the IC might be tracking for adversarial programs as we're aggregating that information and preparing to share it. However, oftentimes we can remove the discussion of the unidentified and anomalous activity from the sensitive information that our partners are concerned with. And that's usually going to be the platforms that the information was collected with if it is a truly anomalous. And so we have our partners working alongside in the declassification of that data. Very good. And then without having to explain the UAP,

what do we need to begin really doing about them? What precautions can we take? What should we be doing about them? I think that removing the stigma, reducing the stigma, is the first step. We need to make sure that we're having honest and transparent conversations about them, because if we're hesitant to discuss them,

then it opens the opportunity for, an adversary, as you had mentioned earlier, Senator Jillibrand, to come in and conduct some activity. So we need to do that, and we need to have more persistent monitoring and understand that whether it is a UAP or a counter-UAS issue, that we need to have that complete domain awareness around our national security facilities. Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a couple of follow-up questions. We didn't discuss in this setting the most recent UAP or UAS encounter with bases like Langley. I know that the incursion by UASs that were publicly made available through the press that took over two

weeks was fairly alarming to senators because there was a question about what technology they were using. There was a question about why it was so hard to detect. Can you speak to how Arrow will be integrated into the review of these kinds of cases and how you can be helpful to both the intelligence community and the Department of Defense in analyzing or being able to more quickly analyze what's knowable and what's not knowable? Because once you do identify it as a drone, for example, it then goes to the right department at DOD or the intelligence community to assess, deal with, or take down as the incident might be. but talk to us a little bit about what role you can play for both the DOD and the IC community in these kinds of incursions that are happening when we don't know what tech is being used and we don't understand a flight pattern or we don't understand how they arrive and depart in the way they do. Yeah, we are generally going to be supporting them through an advisory capacity

as an organization that naturally needs to conduct baseline experiments of the environment. to see what normal looks like, whether it's balloons, birds, anomalous activity, or drones flying through an environment, we're going to gather a lot of data that will allow us to characterize an environment very well, and then detect and follow those tracks, hopefully rather efficiently. There's also a lot of overlap in the type of sensors that are going to be used for the counter-UAS mission and the UAP mission, whether that's active detection like radars or passive like cameras. And so as Arrow is trying to push the bounds on detectability for UAP, we're hopefully going to have best practices that we can also provide to the counter UAS. And potentially we might have additional technologies that we can offer them to support.

I'd like to just address a little bit of reporting and feedback. As you know, Arrow is required to develop a mechanism for the public to report UAP information. now that that mechanism for current and former military civilian and contractor personnel has been established, can you speak to Arrow's plans for a public reporting mechanism and how did Arrow arrive at this approach and were other options considered? And second, for pilots and operators who have reported a UAP, what feedback, if any, has Arrow provided to these individuals related to what Arrow is doing with their report and how the report has been resolved? How does such feedback or lack thereof impact the frequency of UAP reporting? Yeah, the public reporting mechanism that we've decided to go with is going to look similar to the reporting mechanism that we currently have for historical events, where we're going to

ask folks to go to our website, download a PDF form, put in the narrative for their account, and then email that to us with accompanying media. Usually it'll probably be imagery. We went with that option because we thought, one, we could do it rather quickly, we could do it efficiently, make it very cost-effective for the taxpayer, but also we think we can gather all the data that we're going to need to conduct our analysis, and then we're going to have that feed into an automated processing system that will cross-correlate that against all the other public reported cases as well as the U.S. government cases.

We did consider a number of other reporting mechanisms to include automated online forms as well as cell phone apps, and we ultimately decided that this would be the safest, cheapest, and easiest to make. in the future while protecting the private information of the individuals who are reporting. For the, regarding the feedback from the resolved reports, right now we don't have a good feedback mechanism. It's fairly informal. We're working on building a case management system that Arrow will use at all classification levels and hopefully in that we'll be able to provide feedback as the case is going through the resolution process. The we have multiple phases, then the folks who report that, whether it's a pilot at the classified

level or someone potentially reporting through another mechanism, they'll get that automated feedback. And then it is not determined at this point yet how much information will be able to include in that feedback where it is in the process. It'll depend on the classification of the resolution of the case. My final question is, is there anything that you need to tell the Senate that you need from us, whether it's funding, whether it's support, whether it's legislation, is there any requests that Arrow has of us or anything else you need to brief us on for us to be able to do our jobs to protect our service members as well as integrate public interest and public data and information into the future analysis efforts of Arrow.

So first of all, I want to say thank you again. I think that the authorities that we have are remarkable and I think that we are well resourced as an office. The only ask that I would have is that you continue to champion us particularly with witnesses, encourage them to come forward and report to us so that we can have a more fulsome investigation of the potential historic or ongoing legacy programs. Thank you so much. Hearing adjourned. Well, that was brief. Huh, guys? Suzanne put in the chat. That was brief and concise. Yeah, it was. As it should be. I'm just going to say it off the bat.

90% better than whatever that circus was the other day. I'm just going to say it. No offense to the witnesses at the House Congressional hearing. But, yeah, this put that to shame. Let's bring in Suzanne because I saw her taking notes. I was too busy trying to be funny in the chat. little too desperate on my part. I'm not a comedian, guys. You know this. But I want to get her thoughts on how this went and your thoughts, too, guys. Put it in the chat. Help us reach our super chat goal of five super chats, and we will feature your comments and questions. Fail, Ryan, fail, Jason says. Oh, you're supposed to be my friend. You're all supposed to be my friends. Somewhere in the courtroom. A I was waiting for it to do like this squeaky sound.

Like a rubber, rubber, not mallet, what a, gabble, gable, gavel, gavel, gavile. Oh, my God, Suzanne, I'm bringing you in. Oh my gosh, you're on mute. I think you're still on mute. You know, always, I'm not breathing if I'm not on mute. How is that spelled? G-A-V-E-L? Yeah, I think so.

Okay, okay. Maybe it was gobble, like for Thanksgiving. I don't know. Gobble. I love it. Well, as the chat was noticing, 152% better than what just happened. And the same with regard to the prior arrow director.

So I loved reading the facial expression and body language. He was nervous, but I'm going to give him that. Because that's a big, that's a big thing being there under oath in front of a congressional congressional. committee. So, you know, I thought he did really well. I thought he read as fairly open. I know he can't tell us everything, but I was happy to hear those examples of things that were not resolved, just putting him out there. Boy, that's a different day. That's a different deal than what we've

been hearing from Arrow. So I was pleased. I mean, I know we didn't hear, yeah, it's all real, and we've got the bodies and blah, blah, but, you know, I thought step in the right direction today. Would nothing burger with a side of blah, blah, blah, blah. Pat. He had high expectations. I understand, buddy. I do. But, like, I don't see this as a nothing burger.

I see this as, and Jason McClellan, who I want to give a special shout out to, love you, buddy. Good to see you in here. That this is the Armed Services Committee. Like, guys, what did you expect? This is about defense. This is about national security. Like, I'm sorry, this isn't about aliens. It's just not.

Jilaband has been pretty upfront about that from the very beginning. So just we have to accept that. Like, Arrow is not the place to go if we want to really have these conversations about, are UFOs, NHI or not. We can have them on somewhere in the skies all the time. That's what I do. That's what I love. But like, that's not what this is.

It's just not those unexplains, those witness testimony, that of the law enforcement officers and whatnot. Like, those are the ones that we can keep, you know, open for. That's right. And like we said, like they don't, they still don't have like a resolution mechanism set in place yet for a lot of this, which is interesting. You would think with the funding they have and the time spent on this, that they would have some sort of feedback or resolution thing set in place.

But hey, that's what John is here for. That's exactly right. And maybe he can turn it around. You know, his background is fascinating. His backgrounds and communications. Could you read that for us, Suzanne? I know you have his bio there. Yeah.

Let's give a little bio on him if you don't mind. Sure. So he got a bachelor's degree. from in mathematics and physics, and that's from California State at San Bernardino. And then he went on to get his PhD in electrical engineering at Johns Hopkins. Interestingly, his doctoral thesis was, and I'm just going to read this, because I'm not sure I even really understand all this, and maybe the chat can help.

I Googled what I could Google, but it's a mouthful. The invention of novel devices that leverage principles from quantum optics to receive very weak phase encoded signals. I know. He is also a graduate of the NSA cryptanalysis development program, and that, of course, is the study and the process of analyzing and decrypting ciphers, codes, encrypted text without using the actual key. Sounds complicated and interesting.

Yeah. After his doctorate, he worked at the National Institute of Standards and Texanors. technologies. And his goal was to demonstrate the abilities of his design to achieve what he calls record sensitivities. And I couldn't find a whole lot around exactly what that meant either. But I think all of this is based on stuff and a bit of a quantum level on communication and information retrieval in a more scientific way than humans trying to decode, is how kind of the overall. He also served as an expert in the field of free space optics. So I find, you know, he is all over this. And that is, in fact, light at a quantum level. You send messages through light

and through transmediums without traditional, you know, speaking it, emailing it. It's very different. And of course, he has a couple of patents, which I've found interesting. as well. He got one in 2019. It's not, it's the method and a device for measuring the relevancy of a document to a keyword. And then he got another one in 2017. It's another device and method for measuring word pair relevancy. So he's, he's a communications guy on, on a very interesting level. So I can see him sifting through things like, what is our response going to be to the these people who are reporting to us, you know, and I'm looking at those apps and looking at options, because I bet he's really focused on communication. So, okay, communication. That's a great word to start with. And I want to go back to Transmedium for a minute to, that's interesting. I didn't know he had some patents. I thought you were going to say he, like, invented shamwau or something like that. Yeah, I don't think he's there. Yeah.

We don't know. We don't know. John, can you help me solve whatever the stain is on my rug, man? Exactly. It just won't. Highest and best news right there. Greetings, everyone. Ryan Sprague, our host of Summer in the Skies. For over seven years and more than 400 episodes,

the Summer in the Skies podcast has always been free to listen to, but it's not free to create. So we offer several ways to help support our efforts and get rewards in return. If you listen to the podcast on Apple, you can click the subscribe button at the top of your Summer in the Sky's feed to become a premium Apple subscriber or you can join our Patreon campaign with several tiers available. Both of these options give you the same benefits and rewards, add free episodes, early access to the main show, and bonus episodes and content.

Help keep the lights on at the Summer in the Sky's HQ and help us continue to grow by becoming a Patreon subscriber at patreon.com slash somewhere skies or by clicking the subscribe button at the top of your Apple feed. Thank you for your continued support. And keep looking up. Picture this. Me, Reese Witherspoon in London. Ordering fish and chips so often they might start wrapping me in paper. I'm traveling with my Wells Fargo autographed journey card, so I earn rewards wherever I book travel. Five times points with hotels, four times with airlines, three times with Three times on restaurants and other travel and one point on other purchases. Imagine getting rewarded for eating a toad in the hole.

Wait, what is a toad in the hole? Visit wellsfargo.com slash autograph journey. Terms apply. Communication. I already feel like we are going to be hearing more from Arrow. I might eat those words like after today even. Like, you know, we might never hear from him again. Michael Huntington said in the chat, like y'all like him now, give him two months.

Y'all liked Sean Kirkpatrick and he first started. I didn't like Sean Kirkpatrick from the beginning. I gave him a grace period and they like, no. I liked his pinky ring. Like he was giving me super soprano's vibes at that first hearing. You just sitting there like that thing was like, listening in the lights. And I'm like, oh, man, we are going like mafia up in the UAP. space and then it ended up being what it was.

Communication. Now, they mentioned that there is a place where the public can report their quote-unquote what he called narratives, which was interesting. So basically like your witness testimony. And then this will all be eventually compiled. And what I sort of extrapolated from that is it'll all be put into like some sort of AI or something to, like you said, find keywords. Yes.

Find things that, find patterns within the narratives of witness testimony. Yep. And then maybe put it towards some of the military cases they're looking at or resolve some of these civilian cases. But I don't know. I think I'm getting maybe two pie in the sky. No pun intended with that. I don't know.

You know, you want to hope that, especially when you hear, that's why I thought it was really important to know about his background to see where he is coming from. as he analyzes this. You know, we all bring to our perspectives, our backgrounds and life experiences. And so when you know his, you can see he is looking for a tangible,

easier way to spot and solve. And I like that. I like that. Maybe he can figure that out. I also really like the open discussion about what was unresolved because it made me feel like he's not afraid to acknowledge

what's unresolved. and it can be unresolved, and it doesn't mean it's been stuck in a vault. They're still working on it. I think he said, you know, we look for ways basically to reopen one of those unresolved ones and try to resolve it as more data comes in. So I see a healthier global picture today than previously. Yes, agreed. Agreed.

It seems like a lot more cooperation. And that can really help in terms of like, They've been trying, even Jay Stratton said back during the UAPTF days, like I tried to get like clearances to certain things, the DOE specifically, and they wouldn't say a word to me. Not Avenue. Right. Not having it. Interesting that he started today, but thanking Congress for opening all the avenues they had opened. So it makes me wonder if something has changed or if he found a workaround or, you know, he didn't elaborate.

Right. So there's no way to know. But it sounded interesting that he mentioned it. I did too. The other thing. Oh, yeah, sort of retrospectively, like you said, like looking at cases from the past and whatnot. Now, they brought up obviously the Nimitz. I know we're all sick of hearing about it. But that is what it is. I know people have different theories on what the Tic Tac was and all that. But the Aguadilla, the Puerto Rico. That was fascinating. The 96 matter? Yeah.

Well, the 96 thing was interesting. Yeah. That's the years they picked. But the Aguadilla video in specific that he talked about with the temperature of the water being the same as the object. That's why it looked like it was going into the water. Right. I didn't know that. Was that new?

Like someone in the chat, let me know. Was that a new? I had never heard of that. She doesn't mean anything. But I think it was new. And I also don't, not sure I understand the science around that because I think you posted, you said something in the chat about, well, really they needed to be the same temperature to be the same color or something like that.

So I'll take a look at all that and try to figure out. Yeah, I kind of said like, oh, well, it's quite a coincidence that the object in the water were the same temperature. Right. But maybe it doesn't have to be exactly the same. Maybe it's like some wiggle room of like 10 to 20 degrees. Or, like they said, it could be an optical illusion. It could be literally the degradation of the footage itself.

Like, we just don't know. We just don't know. But still a heck of a video. And I know that the SCU, Robert Powell, specifically, has been looking at that video for years now. I'm going to have him on the show tomorrow. I'm recording an interview with him tomorrow. So we'll be able to talk about this. arrow explanation of the Aquadilla case because if there's anyone who's done civilian

investigation and analysis of that video, more than anyone, it's the scientific coalition for UAP studies. So I'm looking for fascinating. And I saw that you put out a call for questions to him. So I'm running your email across the bottom. If anyone has questions for Ryan, send them to the email below. Ryan. Sprague.51 at gmail.com and he'll look them over him.

Thank you. Yes. I've got some wonderful listener questions already from our Patreon subscribers. They get priority. So if you guys want your question to definitely be answered by Robert Fowell. You can join our Patreon campaign and help support us. I had to do it. I had to do it. One more begging for money from y'all. I know times are tough. We'll run the Patreon. Times are tough for everyone. Trust me. I know.

I enjoyed hearing Jill Brand talk about how disconcerted she was by the Langley drones because I find them disconcerting too. And Gareth and the chat and I were talking earlier both the other day after yesterday, after the first live stream and then before this one today, about whether the problem is that they don't want to tell the truth because they can't tell. us they can do anything about it. And those Langley drones hit that for me. They don't know what they are. They don't know what to do with them. I think. Did you hear too there was a drone swarm over area 51? Yes, I did. Yes, I did. That's scary. And that it went on, I think, for a couple of

nights. They were reporting out of, out of the Vegas area that that was happening. These drone swarms have been happening for years at this point. They'd be. Did he did some wonderful, wonderful reporting on that in the past. But yeah, that is obviously, like we mentioned, the biggest reason for something like this, the services to get involved. Like they want to know are we in danger? Ryan, you may know, but, I mean, can't we take drones down? If they're just like, if I send up a drone over Area 51, wouldn't they be able to take that thing down?

So you would think, I mean. We took down freaking weather balloons. Right, right. With a sidewinder missiles this past year. So, and, you know, and then there's also non-lethal or non-militaristic ways of taking down drones too. Like, they can literally like deprogram them from the ground, stuff like that. So, I mean, yeah, there's technologies, whatever, fourth, fifth generation at this point where they can, they don't even have to intercept them from a fighter jet or shoot something up at them.

Just like it's like a independent state. Just give it a virus. Give it a cold. Yeah, give it a cold. But I think if they had been able to do that and did that, they would say that. And so again, one of those things that's not being said that might have some substantive value. Jimmy Chichowski says use direct energy weapons. And that's probably exactly right. Yeah, exactly. Michael Huntington, too. The reason you know about CIA incursions is because the CIA wants you to. They want the corridor lockdown. I gotcha.

Yep. Since to me. Let's see. Jason says, more classification remains because release might reveal the sources methods. Yeah, they talked about that a lot tonight. That is the ongoing, I don't want to say excuse, but it's a viable concern. Like, we can't give away too much information on the. sources and methods.

And that's, I'm sure, that's tough. But I always want to push back with that because, I mean, not so much with the Arrow report. I think they did a better job this time. Yeah, get it in the right direction for sure. Better job in terms of like shapes and stuff like that. Like when they're blacking out the shape of the object and stuff, I'm like, come on. Why?

Come on. And it's just hard to imagine, too, that even sensitive things could not. not be redacted in a way that preserves the secrecy needed for, say, military, and yet show us what they're watching, you know, in terms of the object. So I find that hard to believe, too, that it's not redactable in a usable way. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Drone COVID. I know. I love our group. They're just so funny. You guys are the best. They are just the best. We got to get what is it warp speed, Mr. Warp Speed on that

and solve the drone COVID? Let's do that. I'm going to go to a few of our starred stuff here. Okay. If you don't mind, Susan. No, go for it. Then we'll go back to some of this stuff. Let's see. Michael Huntington brings up a very good point. Arrow funding needs to be transparent.

It isn't. We still don't know. We still don't know. How much funding they're getting. That should be publicly of that. Agreed. For sure. Especially since we're the ones paying. for it. And especially since all the allegations are around basically black box funding, you know, all the concern is around funding. So open that up as well and show us. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. He also says, uh, Jillibrand is a believer, but she is also a senator.

Political stigma still remains. Amen. I can totally see that. Yep. I think she has hope. She's a trekkie at heart. What they say vulcanizing? Vulcanology? What is that? Something like that. I don't know. Vulcanized. Somebody. Like a verb. Yeah. Let me know what volcanology is, please. Oh, gosh.

I'm not going to read this one out loud. Thanks, Matthew. Yeah. We could always have a good laugh here. Oh, Ruth. Hello, Ruth. Good to hear from you. This hearing seemed to be relevant questions being asked by someone in a position to answer them,

unlike the last hearing. I think that's well. said. Very well said. And the body and facial expression goes along with that. Yes. Yes. He was nervous. It's still better.

Well, yeah. Talk about that a little. Like he was nervous. I think he really got his stride a little bit later. But other than that, did you pick up on anything else? I didn't. I did. You know, he was like pinching one hand with the other hand, which is nerves.

It's what lawyers see in the courtroom. It's, yeah, you will hold on to yourself. Yep. And almost a self-soothing way. And so he was doing that. But his shoulders were back and he's most of the time, you know, looking at who's at who he's speaking to. And so all the signs of openness were there. He was just nervous.

Yeah. Yeah. You could tell. I mean, it's the first time we've heard his voice. You know, I always get like when people finally see me on camera, they're like, whoa, you look way different than what I thought by your voice. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

So it was good to finally hear his voice. Right. That was interesting. I was pleased. What do we have here? Christopher. I do wish that they would stop going straight and no evidence of ET and start addressing if they ruled out entertain the possibility of NHI in these cases to me be more transparent. That's a good, that is a good, a good question. I think, you know, the problem is a lack of evidence, a lack of data. So they can't do that.

They can resolve if it's a balloon because maybe they can actually like pick up the balloon or whatnot. But funny that they don't do that either. They don't do that either. Yeah. Speaking of which, I don't think we ever brought up, they found something at Lake Huron. That's right. They found something that they thought was shot down. But then it's gone silent again because I've got, Ryan will tell you, in my compulsivity,

I set up news alerts for things that interest me. Awesome. And so I've got a news alert set up for whatever that object was, and it's crickets right now. Yeah, they're not positive if it was the object that was shot. This beer is not good. I'm sorry. I'm showing your beer model. I'll show it here.

Let's go full screen for a minute. Guys, I bought this tonight at my local beer distillery. Look at that. I love this. I can't really get it in focus. It's like a cherub with a beer riding a donkey, a goat, I think. Is that a goat? I think it's a goat. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I thought it was going to be super Christmassy and like spicy cinnamony. And it tastes like Coors Light. I'm not going to lie. Oh, disappointing. Well, disappointing. But it is. Jay L. Inecon says you should have gotten ice cold and refreshing Hineken. Jay Ellen, good to see you, buddy. I know, I know. Next time.

Volcanoes, dude. What's that in reference? That's when we were talking about vulcanize. Oh. Oh my God. I feel like an idiot now. Volcanology. It makes sense now.

Yeah. You went straight to Vulcans. I did. I had Star Trek on the mind, I guess. Right. Study of volcanoes. Wow. So thank you guys.

Thank you. Thank you. That makes me wonder what's next? Are we going to go crickets again like we did last year? Well, I do wonder, you know, now that we got the annual report by Arrow, we got this immediately. Is that going to be it? Is that it? What comes next? Like I don't know what is due to the public.

What they have to release to the public by this point? Is it just the annual. report or isn't there going to be a part two of the historical report or something? I don't know, but they have, they have constant reporting obligations under the statute that created them. So we will see more. I don't remember off the top of my head how frequently that was, if it was every six months or every 12 months, something, but they do have an affirmative obligation to continue to report and to continue to do things like open lines of communications with other areas of DOD and government.

And then we heard him talk tonight about connecting with academia, which just makes perfect sense to me based on his history. So, you know, maybe we'll hear, as those things actually happen, perhaps, maybe we'll hear more. Yeah, that was interesting to hear. That was a good question by Ernst about the academia thing. I think, you know, the more academics we get involved, the better, honestly. You know, and I did bring up in the chat, like, what better place to go than Harvard and the Galileo project.

But Avi wants nothing to do with the government. Because, I mean, you look at what happens when, like, the government gets involved. Look at what happened when they went to Skinwalker Ranch. Like any of that data goes to the government and then it's never heard from it. Black ball, isn't it? Yep. Yeah. So I understand why Avi would want to keep his stuble.

unclassified and transparent as it is because he's getting donations from benefactors from the public to continue the Galileo project. So you better darn well hope that we get to know what he finds and what he discovers, unlike Arrow in its last iteration. And look, like, I know we talk negative about Kirkpatrick a lot, but it's not all his fault. Like it's not just his call on a lot of that stuff, but a lot of it was.

And I don't know. I just get a good vibe from this guy. We might come back to this live stream in like six months. And I'm going to be like, I was so wrong. Disappointed, right? Right. No way to know to you know. Yeah.

He started off so much better. Yeah. I know. Well, and I'm sorry at the beginning, guys. Like literally the official. Armed Services website was late starting their stream, but ABC News was already streaming it. So I had to, like, quickly go back and forth. So apologies.

We missed, like, kind of the beginning. But we had hides and long grass in the chat. He was there. He was there. And he was in our chat while he was there. I know we lost him at one point, which is probably good. Like, he was there. It's like, you know, taking video at a live concert.

Like, no, just enjoy it while you're doing. Yeah, take some notes, fill us in, chat if you can. Yep. He was really surprised at the absence of people in the room in the audience. Yeah. It was wildly empty. And, well, so different from the house hearing where people are up at three in the morning in the cold and blankets trying to get a seat. So I'm not sure what that's about.

I think it was manufactured that way. Oh. I mean, no news articles came out about this thing until this morning. Of course, News Nation is always the first to kind of pick up on this stuff. And then right before we went live here, I went to, I typed in Senate UAP hearing and NBC News, ABC News, like they all did it five minutes before this thing was supposed to start. We didn't even you and I last night when we were looking for the link. It was still showing no open meeting at all on the government website. And the one they were showing was at a different time than marked closed.

And then they were literally changing it in real time. Yeah. And we do have to also thank D.D. Johnson on Twitter. He was the first to find out that this thing was even happening. That's great. So we should all be very appreciative of that. I don't think because I saw photos from the last Senate UAP hearing. And I'm just going to say it.

Like there were some weirdos in the audience that were giving like Jillab. brand these like 500 page things about the you know the 50 different alien races and how they control the government and the reptilians and all and I'm just like I know not helpful it's not helpful even if they're right it's not helpful even if they're right even if they're right even if they're right but even if they're right right right like that's not the time or the place I'm sorry it's Not just not. Read the room.

Read the room. Yeah. We're not here yet. We're not there yet, guys. We hopefully will someday get there. But for now, we're still dealing with drones and lights in the sky and black triangles and all that. But yeah, I do think this was less publicized because I don't think they wanted a lot of,

they didn't want this to be a media circus, which both house hearings have to. turned out to be, whether it's from the witnesses themselves or the Congress members and what they ask. I mean, God, just the more I think, the more I'm reflecting on the last one a couple days ago, the more I'm just left a really, really heartburn. At six, it says in the chat, heartburn. And I think that's why we were so surprised today, right? Because it was like, boom, boom, boom, straight questions, straight answers done. Yeah. Like, whoa, okay. It was night and day. And they, look, they were covering different things, too. Like, the congressional UFO hearing earlier this week was not about this. It was not about Arrow. Arrow was mentioned a few times. But it was about what those witnesses had to say. Right. So yeah, is what it is. Well, I'm hoping over the weekend, I'm going to head to San Francisco day after tomorrow for the Soul Foundation program. And I'm hoping there that I'll hear about what they anticipates coming next.

And because if anybody's going to know, it's going to be that crowd. Yep, absolutely. Now, where is that taking place? It's in San Francisco. In San Francisco. Okay. It was also scheduled for a, what are they calling, an atmospheric, Riverbomb or something for the whole what is that what does that mean it's like crazy rain like

you know five to eight inches of rain and short period of time so we'll see i may be reporting back from a boat we don't know yeah right you're going to be reported from a little tugboat i'm gonna love it live from the tugboat guys i just went over to my twitter and john greenwald junior tweeted that has to be the most abrupt, awkward, and usually a UAP hearing yet. It wasn't just us. Why you hate you, John? The only thing that would have made it better is if that gavel squeaked. Squeak, that'd be great.

Squeak, squeak, that would have been great. We should mention, too, you will be seeing James Fox at the Soul event. He did announce about two hours ago. It comes with great pleasure to finally announce the release date of the program, December 16th. It'll be on Apple TV, Amazon Prime, you name it, it'll be there. So, finally, December 16th, we have the release date of James Fox's. Next film, which you might recognize some faces in there.

I bet. Not going to say anything else, but actually, you might recognize some very blurry faraway faces if the edit I saw is the same. But I did have the pleasure Like you can get, right? Yeah, exactly. I had the pleasure of joining James on an excursion up to Calvite in Scotland where the famous photograph was taken. And yeah, we got some incredible footage while we were there. Wonderful.

That was crazy. That was the day, season. We were in this pub in Pitlickry, Scotland. And we were in like this huge mansion, castle, whatever, hotel. And we're, I'm sitting there with James Fox and David Lindsay, Craig Lindsay, who was the RAF press officer who was in possession of the Calvin photo. It was me, him, the camera crew, a couple other people. And we're sitting there drinking coffee. It's 10 a.m.

We're in a bar. And then, boom, the David Grush article drops on the debrief. And it was hilarious. James and I are just sitting there. Craig Lindsay is regaling us with stories of his career. And we're just on our phones. And we're like, uh-huh. Craig, go on.

Yeah. But wait, you're going to read this. James is just like, I'm sorry, Craig. You got to hold on a minute, man. Like this huge story just dropped me and Ryan got to look into this for a minute. And the other coincidence about that day was my husband and I were in Pitlockery at the time. Do you remember that? That was when you came to visit.

That's right. That's right. Only I didn't know you were there and you didn't know I was in Fitlock. Yes. Yes. What a week that was. That was, I got to meet you and your wonderful husband. You made me home-baked cookies, which were so good. We got to have a drink at your hotel. And then I think directly after that, I met up with Ross Colthart, who happened to be. I think he picked you up in front of the hotel and you all went on, I guess, to Calvert towards Calvin. Yeah. Ross Colthart was in the area. and I met up with him.

We chatted for a little bit. And then I immediately went in the next day up to Calvin with James Fox. So that was a whirlwind of a week for me. That was a wild week. Memories. Pit Lockery is gorgeous. Garrett says it really, really is. I got to get back up there.

We're hoping to make a staycation soon go up to the highlands. Yeah. Yeah, maybe back to Loch Ness. We'll see. Yeah. We'll see. Let me see. I'm just going to go up into the chat one more time.

See if I missed anything here. And we'll start to wrap things up, Suzanne. It was a brief hearing. It'll be a brief post discussion. All right. Robert Chafee, Congress, Senate, and Arrow are a waste of my time when there are far more highly credible persons to listen to. Interesting. Robert, I'd be curious who those highly credible people are.

If you could be more specific, I'd like, I, like, I'm genuinely curious who those people might be. I have my own issues and problems with Congress, with the Senate, with Arrow, all of that. But I am curious who you think is more credible. Let me know. I wonder if he's talking about experiencers who tell their story. That's fair. If that's your answer, I totally get that. I totally, totally.

Oh, he said he's got to run. Sorry. All right, Robert, great to have you, buddy. Thank you, thank you. Would be, Metal Hendricks says, would be nice if the new Spielberg movie is about retrials, interesting.

I do wonder what's going on with that movie. The new Spielberg movie. It's supposedly going to be about everything going on right now. Right. He repeatedly denies that he's an experiencer and yet he keeps coming back in such a substantive way to this topic. And it's gone on, what, three decades now, you know? At the least. At the least. So interesting. Yeah, for sure. Awesome, guys. Well, if you have any last questions or comments, put them in the chat. Otherwise,

we're probably going to start to close things up here. Suzanne, is there anything else of note that we missed? I think that was it. You know, they're looking for patterns and frameworks, which make such sense with Dr. Kozlowski. I think that we're headed in the right direction. It certainly can't hurt. Certainly not a move backwards. So all in all, pretty good hearing. Someone did say he looks like he could throw back some beers.

So we just got to get the guy drunk. And that's when you get the real stories. The truth comes out. Oh, heck yet. Trust me. I've been there at these UFO conferences. You get a couple whiskey sours into Nick Pope. And that guy is close.

climbing up on the ceiling and swinging from chandeliers. Yeah, it is what it is. Exactly. Yeah, like we mentioned earlier, guys, if you have any listener questions for Robert Powell, be sure to email those to me by 12 p.m. Eastern Standard Time tomorrow, Wednesday, November 20th. And I will be sure to ask them on your behalf.

Other than that, I'm trying to think of anything else we got going on. sure we'll be doing a live stream on Sunday. Yeah. As per usual. Let me see. Ryan Sprague, that as I said, get him a drink and he'll spill the beans. It was Garrett. He said that. He's right. That's the plan.

That is definitely the plan. Suzanne, if people want to reach out to you, is there anywhere that they can contact you? What's the best way? Sure. I'm, who am I on Twitter? I think I'm. Who am I? Who am I? See Suzanne Landers at Twitter and on Blue Sky. I'm see Suzanne Landers.

B-S-K-Y dot social. On Facebook, Suzanne Westerman Landers. And if you sent me a friend request and you hadn't heard back from me, it means I accidentally deleted that thing because I thought I didn't know somebody. So send me a message and I'll send you a friend request back. Sorry to those who didn't get through on the first try, but I didn't realize what was happening. That happens to me all the time.

Yeah, all the time. Ooh, I just bit my tongue. All right, it's time to go. Time to go. I'm going to go heal that wound out. I'm on blue sky too. So if you guys are on blue sky, just, I don't know, search Ryan Sprague.

I don't know how things work over there. I'm new to all that, all that riffraff over there. It is nice. It's interesting. It's a lot calmer over there. The skies are blue. That's for sure. They are.

Awesome. All right, guys. We'll be sure to like, subscribe right here. Thank you for joining us tonight. If you didn't watch the live stream from this past Sunday, I would highly recommend going back and watching it. We covered the entire congressional UFO hearing. We covered some controversy with immaculate constellation and our brutally honest thoughts on the possibilities

of it, maybe not being what we want. it to be. Right. But that is yet to be decided. And then we ended with going through the entire Arrow UAP report. So go back and you can watch that with our special guest, Micah Hanks. And yeah, like, subscribe, download the podcast, do all those things. I'll probably put this up on the podcast as well. So you'll be able to listen to this tonight if you don't want to watch it on YouTube. But if you do want to watch it on YouTube, those of you listening in the future, you head over to YouTube. You can watch the entire visual of it as well.

That's going to do it. Am I forgetting anything? I don't think so. I think you've got it. A huge thank you to everybody who tuned in today, almost 700 of you. We appreciate you. I know.

We appreciate you watching and being in the chat. Yes, thank you. And Suzanne, thank you as always to you for all your wonderful moderation. And I do want to keep shouting it out. you put together the most clear, concise spreadsheet of Immaculate Constellation. I linked it in the show notes of last week's live stream. So you guys can go ahead and read that. If you don't want to read the 12-page report that was submitted to Congress,

you can read our clear and concise version by Suzanne over there. So I'm glad to share it. Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to do that. And thank you to all of you guys for watching, listening, all that good stuff, all our regulars, all our new people, all of our Patreon subscribers, all of our Apple premium subscribers. And I think that's it. I think that's it.

So I will leave you guys, as always, with our mantra here. And that is. Oh, the poll. Oh, my gosh. The poll. Thank you to Ruth. Where is it? I got it.

Hold on. I totally forgot about the poll. Yeah. Oh, here it is. Will we learn anything new that was not in the Arrow report? Out of 116 votes, 9% said yes, 53% said no. 28% said maybe, and 9% said, show me them aliens. So there it is.

There we have it. That is it, guys. All right. That's going to do it. So let's do the mantra and we'll get out of here for tonight. Have a great night, everyone. Enjoy your afternoon over there in the States. And we will see everyone here on Sunday for another live stream.

I'm sure we'll have something to talk about. That's for sure. So keep your feet on the ground, but never stop searching. Stop in the Skies. Take it. The Somewhere in the Skies podcast is part of the Lionsgate Sound Network. Please take a moment to rate and review the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever possible. Thank you for listening.