Somewhere in the Skies - SOL Symposium 2025: Complete Breakdown and Review (w/ Suzanne Landers)

Episode Date: November 10, 2025

We had boots on the ground at the 2025 SOL Symposium in Italy, and now we’re bringing you the full story. Our incredible moderator, Suzanne Landers, takes you behind the scenes of this historic event, from the fascinating keynotes and speaker sessions to the thought-provoking panels and special moments that defined the weekend. Join us for an in-depth breakdown and honest review of one of the most anticipated gatherings in the world of UFOs, consciousness, and anomalous research. Follow Suzanne on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/suzannewesterman.landers Please take a moment to rate and review us on Spotify and Apple. Book Ryan on CAMEO at: https://bit.ly/3kwz3DO Patreon: http://www.patreon.com/somewhereskies ByMeACoffee: http://www.buymeacoffee.com/UFxzyzHOaQ PayPal: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@SomewhereintheSkies Discord: https://discord.gg/NTkmuwyB4F Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/ryansprague.bsky.social Twitter: https://twitter.com/SomewhereSkies Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/somewhereskiespod/ Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@ryansprague51 Order Ryan’s new book: https://a.co/d/4KNQnM4 Order Ryan’s older book: https://amzn.to/3PmydYC Store: http://tee.pub/lic/ULZAy7IY12U SpectreVision Radio: https://www.spectrevision.com/podcasts Read Ryan’s articles at: https://medium.com/@ryan-sprague51 Opening Theme Song by Septembryo Copyright © 2025 Ryan Sprague. All rights reserved. #SOLSymposium #UAP #AlienLife #Disclosure #Consciousness #Paranormal #AnomalousResearch #Extraterrestrial #ConferenceReview #SomewhereInTheSkies Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The right window treatments change everything. Your sleep, your privacy, the way every room looks and feels. At blinds.com, we've spent 30 years making it surprisingly simple to get exactly what your home needs. We've covered over 25 million windows and have 50,000 five-star reviews to prove we deliver. Whether you DIY it or want a pro to handle everything from measure to install, we have you covered. Real design professionals, free samples, zero pressure. Right now, get up to 45% off with minimum purchase, plus get a free professional measure at blinds.com. Rules and restrictions apply.

Spectrevision Radio. While our government's official position is not to speculate on this subject, we can choose to let our minds explore other possibilities. To use our imaginations, for if we consider that astroscientists agree on one point that the possibility of life elsewhere is not only quite probable, some feel that is there without a doubt. Let us suppose them that these objects are real space vehicles,

extraterrestrial origin and not an illusion of the mind. I'm Ryan Sprague, and you are now somewhere in the skies. Suzanne Landers is coming in to talk all about the Soul Symposium and everything that went down there. I cannot wait, guys, so let's waste no more time. Let's bring her in. Suzanne Landers, there she is.

Hi, everybody. How are you? Welcome. Welcome, welcome, welcome. You have had a busy week. you still recovering? Still recovering. So if I trip over my words a little bit, it just is what it is. It is what, hey, it took me like a day and a half to recover from Comic-Con. And I didn't even have to do anything there. You were like all over talking to people, meeting people, taking down, God, I don't even,

what was it, 85 pages of notes maybe? Yeah, yeah. You know, they extended the symposium this year. It was two and a half days. Yeah. And really long days, plus two documentaries shown on two separate nights. So a lot of work. Well worth it.

Well worth it. Okay. Before we get started, were you able to watch either of the documentaries show? I was. I passed on the Valenzel documentary. I had read some reviews. It's a French flick. If you enjoy French flicks, which I actually do most of the time, it's typically more.

more focused on how people are feeling about things and the bit of the moodiness around it. So I passed on that one. But the other one, gosh, I'm blanking on. Sosterberg, the UFOs of Sosterberg by Bram Raz, Rose, I'll pull his name. Well, well done. And he was there and opened the evening session for that with a few words with one of the gals from Seoul. highly recommend. I don't think it's out yet, even for purchase, for streaming or anywhere. I looked hard, hoping to be able to share a link because it's worth it. It's well done. And Ryan, I know you have

an episode. I think it's number, oh gosh, don't hold me to this. 347, maybe on Sosterberg. I promise I won't hold that against you. You don't remember my 420 episode in sequential order. I promise. Wow. Well, thank you. Yeah, thanks for shouting that out. I remember doing that episode. Yeah. And the documentary will take you from the early, it was 70s. The first set was in the 70s. These sightings over the military base in Sosterberg, which is in the Netherlands. And then there are also some 90 and 91 military guys in the documentary as well. Well done. Highly recommend. Okay, I love it. J. Ellen Heineken is correcting us. Sosterberg is pronounced Susterberg.

Susterberg. Yeah, I'll never get that right. We got it. We'll get it. We'll get it. Okay, well, before we get to the event itself, I have to show this image. I know. So where was this?

This was literally off my balcony in Straset. Italy. That's Lake Maggiore that you're looking at. Just magnificent, deep, deep, deep, glacial cut lake, probably 1,400 feet deep at its deepest. Anyway, around, and the entire lake is surrounded by these beautiful villages, little tiny villages, really nice, really nice area. So that was really fun. So that's off my balcony. Okay. Okay. Oh, I'm so jealous. My view in London for Comic-Con was not as nice. I think it was just a brick wall to another building in the middle of London. Like a big city view. Yeah. I will go to London a million times a year. And now it's cheaper to take a plane that's like an hour long to London from Scotland than it is to take a seven-hour train.

Make that make that make sense to me. I don't get it. But of course, that's also how I got stranded in Edinburgh for four extra days on a trip once. We took that flight from London to Edinburgh and got stuck in a winter storm that blew in from Russia. The beast from the east. Yeah. The beast from the east. Yeah. Thanks, Russia. From Russia with love. Yeah. But hey, Edinburgh, there are worse places to be Yeah. Agreed. Agreed. All right. Well, let's start with Seoul. I'm just going to be throwing up these two images that Soul had on the website. Sure. I might add some photos in post-production when this will inevitably come out as a podcast itself,

your review here of Soul. But tell us a little about what Soul is. We did kind of do a preview a couple weeks ago, but what Soul is? And I guess kind of, yeah, wherever you want to start, Suzanne, I'm all ears. And I'll be checking the chat if we get some questions and stuff. But yeah, the floor is yours.

Well, great. Thank you. Well, first of all, you'll remember that last year it was in San Francisco, California. And there were 400 seats available in this amphitheater. It was packed to the gills. This year, they extended it the extra half a day and added the two documentaries at night. And they opened it up to 520 live people. So it was amazing to see this crowd.

that they had called into Europe. And I think maybe having it in Europe this year might have been helpful, especially for the Europeans to make it a little easier to get in, and see in person. But they also opened up a live stream. You could pay, I think it was $149 or something. And so people all over the planet could actually watch the symposium in real time. Now, I don't think they were able to do things like watch the documentary.

But everything else they could see. And I liked that because not everybody can go. And, you know, you could enjoy it just as much from a computer screen as you could in person. Although it was really fun to be there in person. Yeah, it's pretty cool. So the live stream was free, I believe, from what I was sold. But, or no, excuse me, the live stream was not free. But they will be putting out the speaker's talks on the Soul YouTube channel, which will be free to view.

I believe about getting that right. Or it's another one. Okay, okay. Yeah. You had to pay to watch in real time, $149. But they will over the course of several months be releasing the videos that were taken of every speaker on their website or through, you can link in through Twitter or wherever you want to follow them. Cool. Hey, I'm all for it.

Yeah. Pay to play, baby. And then, yeah, eventually it'll be free. Like these things are not cheap to put on. They had to rent the venue. They had to pay the speakers. the travel, the lighting and the tech guys. It was game on in terms of production value. High, high production value. They tripled the seating space, which was really nice.

You know, we were kind of stuck in seats last year, which after two full days, two 10-hour days or whatever, you just want to get up and move, even if you go sit in the back and the floor, right? And so you could do all of that this year. So I think that they really learned a lot from last year. and implemented it. That's very important. That's why usually they do like feedback things after these events. Yeah, I've been there. And I've definitely been the one to get up and go lay in the back for a little bit.

We've all done it. That's how Andy McGreland and I finally found each other. It's like I'm the one in the back laid out flat for a minute. Well, Andy, we should mention too. He just put out his like recap review of his experience there, which is awesome. And he had some, um, interesting interviews at the end with Dr. Eia Whiteley, Whiteley, I believe. Yeah, and Jeffrey Newticelli. New Sittelli. Excuse me. So people should definitely go check that out over on that

UFO podcast for that too. But yeah, yeah, I guess let's kind of start with what. Yeah, walk me through this. How did it all begin? Well, guess who was first and who took center stage right off the bat? and that was Beatrice Villa Royal. I apologize, Beatrice. I'm trying over here. But I thought that was really interesting for them to put her right in the forefront because everyone has been so anxious to hear from her and the science on her glass plates. She is completely confident, but the thing that I like about her is she's kind of soft-spoken. And, you know, that brain is whirling.

But anyway, she wants us to put all this in perspective. And her perspective is that there are 200 to 300 billion stars in the Milky Way and that 90 million of those are probably in habitable zones. We have found microbial life on Mars, ancient life, of course. And amino acids or it's called DMS. And a lot of this is beyond me, but DMD. DS is likely to be found in the oceans in a couple of years, all of which kind of folds into Fermi's paradox, which is that it's just almost impossible for there not to be life out there. Now, we

haven't found it. We've been searching via radio signals for a long time, nothing yet. But she said, you've got to keep in mind that just because we're reaching out, calling out, doesn't mean that someone wants to talk, right? Maybe they would send drones or probes, you know, where if they're paying any attention to us, they probably know it's not a safe thing just to come zipping on in and hoping we all do the right thing in that bullets and bombs aren't flying. So ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goals because we're built for what you're building. Fit for your ambition. her citizens back.

She says, keep in mind that they may be hearing us and not interested in talking. And that when she found these transients, that that's what led her to that thought about this. This is maybe how they are checking in with us instead of landing on the White House lawn, you know, that sort of thing. So here are the interesting details about her work. all of these glass plates, first of all, just let me add this, this was not from her, but these were ordered destroyed by the American government at some point in history. And everyone, I think, thought they had been.

But somehow, Beatrice found a set of them. And I did learn that she wasn't given access to the actual glass plates. She was given access to basically the equivalent of a high-tech photo of them. And based on that is what she did her work. with. So they can find, they're looking not just for these flashes that are out there. There has to be a flash for them to be noticeable, but it's not the only thing. Other things can flash. That doesn't make it anything unusual. And they have to be in the sun's shadow. And they have to be in the sun's shadow to avoid glint. So what she says is these are highly reflective objects at super high

altitude. They present as a flash, but single flashes are valueless. They could be anything. So they're looking for multiple flashes along a line. And so the plates that she put up during the talk that you'll see like five dots or three dots coming at an angle. They're in a uniform pattern and then they vanish. And so the odd thing about her findings is the one set of these plates, you know, these are pre-1957, before we had space junk up there. One of these findings actually coincides with the DC UFO flap of July 19 and 20, 1952, and another one coincides with the other DC flap in July of the same year, but July 26, 27. So that to me is going to need some more work.

We need to know how many more of these are out there and what do they coincide with. She says 68% of the findings correlate with our nuclear testing. But right now, all of this, as I think you mentioned earlier, Ryan, it's only correlation is not yet at causation. But she said she is quite comfortable that these observations that we've just talked about save these plates from being called basically trash by virtue of defects. It's not a defect in the plate. It is a thing.

They are things and they are worth studying. She says, so they have found all these, but she says, assume that we are missing 10,000 objects. And she didn't expound on why that number was the assumed number, but that's our number. So we're only looking at a little piece of information here, but a substantive one that's going to end up matter, and probably in the long haul. And can you imagine the ones that are actually the number? Wow. Right, right, if we're missing 10,000 objects. But it makes sense to me because of all the witness accounts. There are too many.

There are just thousands and thousands and thousands, maybe more starting from BC. You know, they're captured and talked about. So I suspect she's right. They are going to, she and her partner, Dennis thinks Asperg, they're going to go into the ocean off Sweden to find a very specific, strange object with right angles. It looks artificial. and it's shaped like a D laying on its flat side, but it has bridges. Yeah, the Baltic Sea, is that the one? I don't know.

She didn't call it that. It made me think that it was something else. It's a different one? Oh, okay, okay. She didn't call it that. And so I thought, well, they have found another thing. But that's where they're headed. Future plans are, let's dig in the oceans.

Let's dig in our land and see what we find. Yeah. Cool. All right. Oh, I'm excited for whatever this new expedition is. Yeah. Yeah. We'll see.

Cool. You want to move to Carl Nell? Yeah, definitely. I love how they're just right in order here on our scene. Oh, it was a day. That first day. Oh, my gosh. It was nonstop.

Yeah. All right. For our listeners, remember that Carl Nell was with the U.S. Army. And then he worked at Bell Labs, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin. He was on the U.S. AP Task Force as the Army Director support person. And he poses the question, how do you justify your belief in non-human intelligence? And he says, first you find foundational facts and you apply rigorous but reasonable standards to them. Now, he talked about what lawyers call burdens of proof, legal standards

of burdened proof. And so for lay people, the way to think about that is if I am going to sue Ryan for running into me with his car. No. I know. I won't, I promise. I only have to convince a jury that it's more likely than not that Ryan has hit my car. That's a civil standard. And it's a really low bar, relatively speaking.

If I am in a criminal arena, then my standard is beyond a reasonable doubt or clear and convincing, depending on the crime and the application of punishment to it. So he says it's important, and this is for the naysayers, it is not a clear and convincing standard. That'd be nice, but that's not the right standard. And it's really more of a reasonable man standard, more likely than not. This makes more sense than not, you know, that sort of thing.

So first you get your foundational facts and you apply a reasonable standard to them. And then you look at the beliefs of others, some trustworthy people, is the, I think of whistleblowers. He didn't say that, but I thought of like military whistleblowers when he was talking. If they're qualified and trustworthy in other aspects of their life, then we ought to be believing them here in this arena. And then he says, here are the foundational facts that he is quite comfortable with in justifying. his belief in non-human intelligence, although I'll tell you, I suspect it goes beyond a belief. I have a feeling this man knows exactly what's going on. But here they are. Life's evolved over time here. Negative energy has been proven to exist. Micropes have been proved to live in space. We have

sensor data. We have craft being reported as early as 218 BC and continuing nonstop so that the documentary evidence is just overwhelmingly voluminous. He mentioned the Bolander memo, and it's just one of many, you know, project. It said Project Blue Books going away, and the response was, well, that's not a problem, because the most important reports didn't go to them anyway. You know, that kind of stuff. And then there was one in 1971 by the Australian Department of Defense, Grant LaVoc, if you're still in the chat. This is for you.

Shut up, Grant. 1971, the Department of Defense shows that they were trying to figure out what America was doing and that they confirmed that with intelligence behind the scene, that they were going to learn how to manipulate gravity. Okay. And this was in 1971, here we are 50 years later or more, you know, here we said.

But he says the biggest problems that he sees are we've allowed oversight to creep out of the control of elected officials. So very true. And we're failing to inform Congress. And it's legally required. And it's just not happening. We've also created a subrace to create arms. These are, you know, he's just saying these things like they're common knowledge.

we failed to inform the public of what's really happening despite our obligation to do so. We've lost all accountability and the money related to it, you know, often this race or weaponry or whatever technology. And the only benefit to the way the American government has handled this and dragged other nations with it is that it's likely we have thus far avoided ontological shock. Yeah. So anyway, he says as a final comment, now keep in mind everybody, these talks might be up to an hour. So you're just getting the bare bones. Don't let this sub in for actually listening for yourselves and watching these people talk. Really important, I think, to get your brain on their words and their body language and their facial expression.

But he says this is what he gave to Congress, a briefing book, and it had 21 documents, and he did not and would not. say what those documents were. It had three videos. It had three whistleblower transcripts. And he flat out told them you are out of conformity with the law. Whoa. Yeah. It was serious business. Yeah. Interesting. Yep. Now, I know that there was a question asked of Nell by Andy from that UFO podcast. I guess or the Q&A. And I actually touched on this in a episode I released on Halloween about Frankenstein.

So I wrote this essay back in, God, it had to be about 10 years ago now at this point, about euphology dies, many, many deaths. And that could be the same about disclosure, too, but it always finds a way to come back. And there were recent remarks made by Carl Mel that disclosure is dead. And this took the UFO community like by storm. Everyone's like, what does he mean? What did he mean by that? So I have to ask, was that expanded upon at all in the room when you were there?

Or did he talk about why he believes disclosure in its current state is dead? Or, yeah, what are your thoughts on? And these are just my thoughts because nothing got said other than that in the moment. Number one is that the UAPDA is dead in its tracks. and we're making no progress over the last 100 years, literally, trying to get disclosure in the sense that the government comes out and acknowledges that non-human intelligence is here and we have the craft and blah, blah.

But I also thought, what also ran through my mind at the same time was, and perhaps, because this was mentioned by some of the other speakers, perhaps what you may also mean is disclosure is done to the extent that the whistleblowers have come out. We know what we're watching. We know what they're watching. We know what the witness accounts say. We know where the science has led us, like with Beatrice. So somewhere between those two goalposts, Ryan, I don't know exactly. But I think there was a general theme among the speakers that everyone's just tired of trying to mess with the government and rely on the government. And I have a feeling that's what pushed those comments.

Yep. I would have to agree. Like, I think civilians need to take it back again. Like we've tried since 2017 for the government to be, you know, a part of this. And they've made it clear that they don't really want to be. I mean, Congress has tried as well. But, and, you know, that's not to say that we need to stop or should stop. I mean, there is a reason the UAP Disclosure Fund exists, the reason your organization exists within the UAP Disclosure Foundation, I believe is the new name that they're going by.

Like, that needs to always be a part of it. But I think what now was really stressing is, look, UAPDA is dead right now, so we have to do something proactive. Like, let's take this back in our hands and let's find answers for ourselves. So, yeah, I would have to agree. Yeah, and leave the government out of it. Let's just, you know, Seoul to many, to many extents is trying to do exactly that. I think of Seoul as a big think tank with the right professionals to also do science and manage the problem. So obviously that just needs to continue that way.

We're not going to get the American government right now just to say, oh yeah, we've been lying since Roswell, before Roswell, since Magenta in theory, right? The 30s. Exactly. Yeah, crazy. Crazy. The cover up existed before Roswell guys, apparently. Apparently. Allegedly.

Yeah. Awesome. Well, who do we got next? We've got Mr. Luke Dini, D-I-N-I. And he's a French aeronautical engineer. And he's known for his study of UAP with Guy Pan, which they pronounce Jaepon. We're not even close, are we?

You know, every time an American says it, they all go, ow. I always thought it was a guy pan. I always thought it's a guy pan. And he started that in 1977. And they would, because they collected a group of experts, sort of like what Sol's doing now, to study this and try to figure this out. He is especially known for his study with Sigma 2, 3AF, which is the commission of the,

of the Association of Aeronautics and Astronomy in France. And it began in 2021. There's Mr. Deanie, yes. Formerly a skeptic, he began to seriously investigate the subject after the 2017 New York Times report, you know, by Leslie Kane, came out and revealing the Pentagon's UAP program. And he works on promoting scientific investigation. and transparency regarding UAPs.

He says, I am not a believer, and he does fingers and air quotes in NHI, because this is a fact. There's a physical presence and physical evidence and data to show us that this is a fact. Let go with a concept that this is something you need to believe in

or not believe in. It is what it is. Now, his presentation was quite technical. So I'm absolutely certain I didn't get it all right. But anyway, he is taking this work as the French do quite seriously. They do such a good job, a much more open job. I don't know, a better job, but a much more open job with their public and with their

science on it. So to be commended, I thought this was interesting. He has observed the following shapes of UAP triangles, modified triangles, which look like a cone, like a rounded triangle. There was one object that I called it like the bat signal. It almost looked like from the movies when they shine the bat signal up there. It was like a bat. And then, of course, orb, saucers, ellipses. And then there was one that wasn't the bat signal, but kind of.

look like a bat with little ears on the edges and a thing that came down from the center and the bottom look like it had a ball. So this is why I say, even though this is a technical presentation, you're going to want to see the shapes because they were displaying those shapes in the videos. Sorry to interrupt Suzanne. This just like sparked my memory. Like that's what Skywatcher was doing, was creating a database of shapes. So now we can correlate his shapes with these shapes. It's if there's any patterns. Yeah. Sorry. And I hope those two teams are talking to each other. He says, the last category are shapes that change. And he says, this is an incredible thing to get to watch. One is he says is the concept of the mothership. So there's an object and the little things come out

of it. And we saw some of that with the Hellfire missile. You see the Hellfire missile in that video from what two weeks ago, hit three weeks ago, hit the object, and then two things come down and it carries on and they track behind it and that's what he's talking about. And then he said the other change of shape that he watches with some frequency is giant orbs becoming tiny and I think vice versa. So they're able to do some stuff and it makes me think of the witness accounts where they talk about what they've been in a craft and it's so much bigger on the inside than it looks on the outside. Yes. Like it could be a tiny craft. They walk in and it's the size of like a football stadium. Yeah. Right. Exactly. In furtherance of his proposition that this is a fact,

these things are here. He says, we can, we get all kinds of readings from them. They shut down electronics, our cars, our cameras. Jake Barber, when we talk about him at Skywatch, his helicopter was stopped mid-flight, not going up, not going down. So they also kill vegetation around it and, of course, emit all kinds of radiological things, you know, that are radiation that have direct impact on humans and animals and areas. And they also detect microwaves, and they're not sure what the microwave business is about. So he said it's important to remember that it is not an easy thing to study because they are clearly, some of them, plasma, what we would think of as plasma from our sci-fi movies. They're shapeshifters. They glow. They blur. There's an incident at the Canadian border where a blue light appears with noise. Might be microwaves interacting with the ear to create blue, but he didn't know.

and then recorded, they recorded all of that, and then it'll go away. And then, you know, so it's just remarkable stuff. He is working with Jacques Fillet on sample analyses on various cases. And he's also working on the human effects of microwave radio isotopes. Wow. I love that he's working with Jacques. That's perfect. It's a French match.

It's a French connection. It is a French connection for sure. And I think they've worked together decades. In the past. Okay. Love it. Love it. And you would see them together in the hallways, you know.

Oh, that's cool. Yeah. Yeah. Right. All right. Here comes Dr. Peter Scafish. You know, everyone will remember, and I promise not to wax on too long a little bit, but I did have to fan girl out, just a tiny touch. Because this is my favorite anthropologist on the planet.

And he is the one who last year went on and on about. about why catastrophic disclosure was not a good idea for humanity. Well, he had some trouble this year because someone printed out his talk just as he was walking up to the podium, they gave him the wrong talk. Oh, ouch. Yes, I hated it for him. I hated it for me too because any extra news I could get from him, I would have loved. But long story short, we got. some of what we got last year.

And then he went through some encounters that he wanted to talk about. I think we just skipped straight to the encounters. There's one in French Guyana, an excellent engineer he knew had a siding. And he told, what's Mr. Baskon's first name? I'm blanking. Bisconde. We'll talk about, oh, hold on. Okay, so Scafish and General Pierre Bascon,

we're on the stage together. Oh, yes. I got a little detail out. Pierre Bescon is an amazing person. He's an engineer by training, worked in missiles and rockets. He's chairman of Jaupon, the steering committee, which is a key leadership position in the study of UAPs. He's a member of the 3AF slash Sigma 2, just like Mr. Denis.

He's a member of the cometta committee. And we'll remind everyone of the 1999 report from the committee, which found that the extraterrestrial hypothesis was the most plausible explanation for what we were watching. Anyway, so then he and Mr. Scafish, or Dr. Scafish, wanted to talk about these incidents. The first was in French Guiana, an engineer that he knew, told Biscond about it. And he was highly impressed with what the engineer told him, but also how he told him and his science background to back up what he was, what he said he was seeing. And it really impressed Vescond. He said it never left him, made a big impression. And that he thought,

especially at that time, and it sounded to me like that might have been in the 90s that he didn't say specifically, but that it was sort of a game changer for him in terms of what role, trustworthy whistleblowers or trustworthy witnesses, eyewitnesses, might have to offer. That's how I, that was my impression of this. That wasn't said. And then he wanted to talk about an Air France incident over Eastern France in 1984. It was Air France Flight 3532. There's a lot out there on this incident.

A pilot and the flight attendant saw a large object glowing reddish-brown and the radar at the local tower picked it up as well. And then it just vanished. They captured the disappearance visually. They were looking at it when it vanished, and they also captured it on radar. But the radar would not give them altitude on the object, which is very unusual. And that incident remains unresolved. And then one of your favorite incidents is Ryan, the Tehran-1976 incident is one of the points as well. And very quickly on that, because I know everyone's.

heard Ryan talk about that incident, but it was a radar and visual sighting as well, multiple residents of a bright object in the sky. The residents called the Iranian Air Force to report it, not move on, anyway, they got blown off by the Air Force people until one of the officers on the base saw it too. Tehran immediately scrambles the first of two Air Force F-4 Phantom Jets, and it gets up there close enough to this object to try to lock on and the engine fails as they approach the object. Systems were only restored once he was able to turn away from the object, turn the craft away from the object. The same thing happened with the second jet scrambled. And then they saw that it also ejected a smaller object, round and bright, that flew directly at the jet.

second jet had tried to fire a missile and lost all communications of weapons control. And, of course, it didn't normalize either until it went the other way. But here's the crazy part. The smaller object descended and landed on the ground radiating a bright light. And the next day they went to the site where the small object landed. There was nothing there. But other residents had heard a loud noise and saw a bright flash of light. And it, too, remains unresolved today.

Yep. Love that case. Yeah, that case, you know. Yeah. Anyway, Roswell was the next one. He wanted to talk about Roswell. Everyone knows that one like the back of its hand. But then he said that his committee's

1999 take on what the U.S. knew about non-human intelligence was that the Americas were very aware of non-human intelligence and that we were actively reverse engineering. and that every time he approached a high-level U.S.A guy, it was weird. And those are his words. It was just weird. He offered cooperation between France and the U.S., but it was declined or he got silence.

And he made this offer two more times. Same response. He made it a fourth time in a secret meeting at a secret location, and he got told flat out, no, it's secret. Stop talking about it. Sounds right. Yeah. And he concludes that the government can't solve this,

and they're not going to desecrit the stuff, he said. Institutions like Seoul and Jaupon have to solve it. He'd love to build an international coalition with the U.S., but he said the U.S. is not operating conventionally right now politically, and that it may well find itself, the United States, quite isolated. But, you know, the French, they speak really plainly and openly about UAP and NHI. So let's hope that the Seoul Foundation or similar organizations can carry on. There will be a new Cometta report.

Oh, okay. Yeah. I'm down for that. Yeah. But it's been a minute. It's been a minute. It's been a minute. We need another one.

Yeah. Yeah. Oh, that's awesome. Commetta is one of the best reports that have ever come out on the UAP topic. So I trust the French will do the right thing here for sure. I hope so. I hope so. Cool.

You want to roll on to Diana Pazolka? Oh, Diana. Love it. I just talked to her this morning. Did you? Yeah. She's coming out with a new book. Cool.

And I'll be the first to announce it here. We've already nailed down an interview. So we will be one of the first interviewer when her new book comes out in 2026. So yeah, yeah. Let's get to it. Diana. She appeared remotely. She wasn't actually in Italy, but did a really great job. And she was actually live. It was not pre-recorded. She was live. And they took a few questions. She took a few questions at the end of it. To remind our viewers, she's a professor of religious studies at the

University of North Carolina at Wilmington. She focuses on the intersection of Catholic history, new religious movements, digital technology, and UFOs and UAP. She has, has a research agreement with the Vatican Apostolic Archive, particularly around the issue of Joseph of Copertino. This Unitarian has no idea who Joseph is, but I'm gonna look it up. I just hadn't had a minute yet. She also, her research and her publications

tried to bridge the academic gap, and she's kind of the only one out there in this niche right now. And she's such a good speaker, she's such a collected speaker. She's currently focused on celestial displays, both from a religious perspective and historical perspective. And, you know, religious and non-religious, I guess, is a better way to say that. Thousands in Cairo in 1968 at the Coptic church or the Virgin Mary saw a radiant figure of light flowing over the church. They took photos in black and white at the time.

The sightings continued for three years, and it's the most documented mass sighting of this kind of display in history. And the sightings continue sporadically to this day. All kinds of celestial displays like levitations and telepathic contacts, apocalyptic messages like aerial school and Westall where the children are told, you know, you're not taking care of the planet, let the nuke skull. They occur constantly, these messages. And she wonders, this is where her brain is going, which I always love to hear. Maybe we're moving toward what appears to be a post-biological universe. And maybe non-human intelligence and these UAP we see

are already there, which is how they're able to go from big to little and this to that and vanish in a blink, whatever it is. And she poses the question, does civilization outgrow its biology? So anyway, she said they appear so much more highly developed than we are. Can they meet us in the middle to communicate? And so she gave the example of ants here on the planet. So we see the ants. We interact with the ants because we want them off of our sandwich at the picnic.

You know, we're getting out of the way of the ants. but we cannot communicate with the ants because we are so evolved past them. You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save? Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your oceanfront room.

Just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. Well, she says, is there a way that they can communicate with us by using religious symbol? And it might be a Virgin Mary sighting, a celestial siting, or something that, like, if you and I, I think you were raised Catholic, you might see the Virgin Mary.

I might see a glowing orb, you know, because I was not raised Catholic. So is it tailored? Are they using symbology to interact with us in a way that they think we can relate to because they're so far ahead of us? I like thinking about that. I like thinking about that. You know, maybe this is what a first communication looks like. It's just symbols. That's interesting. Yeah.

I mean, when it comes down to communication, like what do we, what is like the thing you could really put out in front? and that's something visually, but it will be interpreted differently by each human according to their belief systems. Much like near-death experiencers. You know, depending on their background, they have different experiences that are viewed in that same capacity as their backgrounds. So if you're very religious, they tend to have a religious experience. They're met either by God or Jesus or the apostles. And if you are very secular, then your loved ones are there first. or, you know, it just seems to be tailored to suit the individual being.

But anyway, I thought she's very interesting. The only hole I would poke in her theory is some of the examples she gave already, which is like Ariel School or Westall. The messages are telepathic and they're clear and they don't require symbols or interpretation. So maybe it's a combination. I don't know. Maybe it's different beings on the other side, you know, but something to think about. Yeah, absolutely. Right. I mean, it's, that's, that's the beauty of this.

Right. Everything's up for debate and we'll all take it differently. But yeah, interesting. Interesting. Well, very quickly, let's go through Dr. Carl Sposel. I'm sure I'm not pronouncing that right. S-V-O-Z-I-L. And his talk was on the question of, if scientists say it's not possible, get me a new set of scientists. And so his subject was so deep. fascinating fellow, incredibly interesting to watch and listen to, but it was hard to interpret it for a layperson, I think. Also, my one suggestion that I would offer to Seoul for the future symposiums is these speakers, first of all, most of them are polyglots. I don't know how many languages they speak. But the problem with that moment, is it's very hard in the moment for the ear to adjust, you know, the American ear to adjust or the non-language speaker to adjust.

If they would run translation in English or Italian or whoever they needed to help during these things, I think it would be better. And so I haven't gotten my survey yet, but that's going to be one of my recommendations is help the non-Polyglot here and see and read and understand. Because it's, it's interesting here, Suzanne, in Europe. Like everyone kind of just assumes everyone is multilingual and everything. And yeah, it's difficult sometimes. I think people take it for granted over here. Yeah, exactly.

Well, he works in quantum physics and quantum theory and mathematical logic and what's called randomness. And I did a little digging around on randomness. Let me just mention it's really random. I don't know what he's thinking on. It is deep, deep stuff well beyond my ability to understand it all. But he says that we need to be focused on the fact that we haven't resolved or unified the theories of general relativity and quantum theory, which I've talked about several times on our shows. We know that particles react one way on the micro level and the quantum level, and they behave totally different on the macro. And that just has to mean we don't understand the rule.

We don't have the rule right yet. So he'll be a leap forward, a huge one. If we could just figure that out, but we've been stuck for 100 years. And the line in the sand for us right now is that we don't understand gravity, which you and I have talked about before. You know, gravity, you and I can defy it just by standing up from our chairs or jumping up, you know, jumping a rope or whatever we want. And yet it holds us all in the place.

planet. So very weak at times, very strong at times. It just makes no sense. But you can't get frustrated and you have to press on. And that's what he's doing. He did say that he interviewed a fellow named Joshua Golden, Goldson of the USAF, who told him that the development of a anti-gravity device is coming next from America. Whoa. I know. Did he give a date? No, he didn't. Of course not. Yeah, but it must have been something he felt confident about to give this guy's name and for this guy, this military person to actually be out there.

Right. Right. Interesting. All right. How about Mr. Jacques Valet? Oh, heck yeah. All right. Valet.

He was there the whole time. He was in. the audience like everyone else. Here's the only bad thing about 520 people at this conference. I couldn't get anywhere close. I get anywhere close. I got close enough at one moment to say hi. And he said hi. And then boom, it off there, you know, it was over. Hey, that's more than most people consider it. I got a hello. Yeah. You got a hello from Jock Ballet. Heck yeah. Yeah, but there are 520 people trying to get a word from him. And it was just that part. That part of this symposium got harder. It was hard last year, but that got harder this year. Yeah. So I thought this was absolutely

interesting. He had a full hour. And by the way, on a softer subject, he was treated with the deference that this man deserves. He was the senior professional in the room. Everyone went quiet when he stood. Whatever happened, the deference he got was palpable. And I appreciated that for him. You know, he's aging. We all are. But I was really happy to see the group give him the respect for the bravery and the hard work that he has dedicated his life to on this very difficult subject.

But you know how he chose to spend? his hour talking about one incident in 1966 in Arkansas, very near Hainesville, Louisiana. So Arkansas sits on top of Louisiana, for those of you who don't live here. This is the same time frame of my experience as a child. It was, I think either 66 or 67 was mine, and I was maybe an hour away from where this happened. But he said this incident was never classified. There was no abduction. There was no government. Hanky-panky, he called it. And there were only conventional physics involved, but no conclusion was ever reached. So why is he going to cover this one? He says, because now we have new tools and witnesses were so credible. It happened, of course, in 1967,

which is when he heard about it. He heard about it in real time. And he was working, this is so crazy. He was working on AI in 1967. That's, I know. I think he brought that up in my last interview with him. Yeah, it's crazy. I know. I know that brain. Oh, to have that brain. He was also working for Dr. Heineck cleaning up the blue book files. It's great to all this was going on at the same time. So it was about 10.30 at night, central time. It was terrible weather with the temperature barely above the freezing. mark, soft rain, limited visibility in a commercial forest owned by the Hauser Corp. So miles and miles and

miles of nothing but trees. A young man in the Air Force and his family were in the car traveling. This is Dr. Louis Galloway. He was 31 years old at the time. And he was a physics professor in Shreveport, Louisiana, and he worked on atomic physics. Suddenly, an intense light that went white to orange appeared about a mile from them. Galway said that the energy at work was in the range of a nuclear power station. He said, I'm not going to call this a UFO because it wasn't flying. It was on the ground, but it was an unidentified object. He stopped this car and he got out to see it better. And as soon as he realized what level of power was involved, which I guess he could see better once he was out of the car and out from behind the windshield, the wet windshield.

He got scared, got back in the car, and got his family out of there. But he reported it immediately to the Air Force. The exact location they couldn't find because, of course, it is a giant forest of nothing but commercial trees. But the case made its way to Heinek, and they got permission to investigate it. So he got Professor Condon involved. And Condon was with Trinity. was a Trinity with Oppenheimer at the time.

It's just so crazy to hear all these things, how this goes together. How they're connected, yeah. I know. And Condon actually talked to the witness, Mr. Galloway. And he sent two scientists, one in physics and one in psychology, interesting combo and I think a smart one, to interview the witnesses too.

Extensive follow-up was done. Planes flew over with infrared equipment, for night vision, whatnot. They couldn't find anything out of the oil. order. The Air Force got back involved, reanalyzed, reworked it. Condon's conclusion was that it was unidentified and basically couldn't amount to much, but he gave four pages about it in the Condon report, you know, so it had some merit, right? Yeah. You would spend four pages and then say, eh, nothing. Yeah. But anyway, Condon, after the Condon report came out, other witnesses found the

location. And Galloway was then able to place himself back at the spot where he had pulled the car over, and he was able to do the calculus required to figure out where the object was and how big it was, those sorts of things. He redid all of his own calculations. The craft was three meters in diameter. And then later, they found four families who saw the same exceptional light in the area at the same time on the same night. So now it is a UFO. The details of the location, it was in a clearing that was 10 meters wide. All the trees around the clearing were burned. And they absorbed radiation. The radiation samples were taken and they had absorbed radiation. They sent them to a lab. The lab returned the samples with no comment and no testing.

Nothing. Silence. Just like, nope, not touching it. Interesting. Well, somehow the witnesses agreed to give Jacques Valet the bark. He has the bark. But he won't let anybody have it. He is literally waiting on science to catch up to the point where they can do the testing needed

without anybody cutting into the wood. So he did some level of analysis got done, but nothing that would require damaging the bark. And the result of the testing that he did, he found that the energy level detected was equivalent to three-mile island. What? I know. And the moral of his presentation was we need to go back and investigate these cases before 1970 when stigma was bad. But don't give any of your testing to the government, Avi Loeb. Yeah, it will disappear.

Or $300 trillion, yeah. Wow. I love this idea of like retroactively investigating UFO cases. Micah Hanks and I talked about this really long time ago on the podcast of how as technology progresses, we can then go back. I mean, look at the work by Beatrice Villarillo. I mean, with the plates. Like, these things are decades and decades old.

But we're now able to use them and use whatever, machine learning and everything to figure these things out. They're connections to nuclear detonations, connections to UFO flaps. Like, it's, I agree with Jacques. The more technology progresses, the better. It's not even the stigma at the time of a UFO. It's the non-stigma now and the availability of technology in the scientific world where we can now look at a case from the 1970s with three-mile island levels of radiation in bark. That's crazy. Well, you know, I am going to the UFO Center, the Historical Center in Albuquerque in December.

I've finally met an appointment with Mr. Marler. And so I was hoping to look for this case to see if he's got anything on this case, plus my own case, from the same area in 66 or 67. So cross your fingers. Fingers crossed. Yeah. Eyes crossed, toes crossed. Everything's crossed. I love it.

Okay. It's time for the UFO throwdown. Jag Barber and Gary Nolan. No. Uh-oh. Sasty Gary. What did he have to say? All right.

He was, I think he was really enjoying himself this time. Okay. He seemed so much more relaxed and happy and interactive. And I liked that for him. I like that for, and for everybody, too. I just think he was, maybe it was that first big symposium and the anxiety around putting on a production like that for the first time. But this time he was very relaxed and very engaged. He and Jake Barber from Skywatch, Skywatcher,

they pulled this one off together. And they were a really good team. To remind everybody, Jake Barber worked for the government for 30 years. He was also a retired government contractor in aviation recovery. And he used helicopters to do this. He's a whistleblower. And, of course, he's Skywatch dog whistle guy. They figured out a dog whistle.

We'll talk about it in a second. He did the Big Egg reveal on News Nation with Ross Coldheart. And he's a huge transparency advocate. Gary, of course, is a professor of pathology at Stanford. He has a zillion patents for a zillion devices. He is crazy what is going on in this guy's brain. He's written over 300 scientific papers, and I thought our group would love to hear that Peter Scafish took the mic

as they were going through this and called him intellectually promiscuous. Is that a compliment? He meant it as a compliment. Of course, everybody laughed because there's just nothing that Gary Nolan isn't interested in, I guess. That's true. Or whatever. So Barbara spoke first, and Barbara said he started with this line, 2017 got weird.

And there was just laugh through the three. I was like, yeah, that's when the current craziness started, 27th, New York Times report. And he wondered in his job, what was really going on with this stuff that he was retrieving? And he said he began to question who he might actually be working for. He wasn't expanding on any of this. Of course, these are the things that I would love to have the answers to.

But so you don't know who he thought he might be working for if it wasn't USAF or whatever. But he had actual concerns that he might be subjecting himself to criminal prosecution. for some of it. And he didn't expand on that. But clearly something big was going on and it turned a corner for Jake Barber. He had already laid out the plan for Skywatcher with another friend who had big funding. So even before 2017 got weird, Jake, this was rolling around in Jake's mind. He was no longer willing to wait on the government to disclose what he thought he had realized in this. process. And he felt certain, which I love this too, that he felt certain they could catch up scientifically with the government. And the skies are not classified. So you can't stop him in other words. He interacted with David Grush. Grush had put a call out, I guess, behind the scenes to other military guys for backup. He didn't want to come out alone in the whistleblowing game. So they made a careful plan after a lot of thought on how to go.

forward. And he said it was big and scary to ponder this. What don't we know? Maybe there's a good reason that the government is not telling the truth. You know, it could be something negative and scary or harmful. We don't know what we don't know, right? That old thing. So he said it also, just from a personal perspective, felt weird to be without oversight, which I can very much imagine. If you come from the military background, that probably feels a bit untethered, you know, and a little unsafe maybe even. But he literally had no idea what the phenomenon was and how much the government already knew, if anything at all. Then at August to 2024, he said he went straight for the big prize. He went to an area, and I think it was in California, but don't hold me to that, that is known

for tons and tons of UAP sightings, just almost constantly. And immediately, an egg went over them at about 1,800 miles per hour, completely silent. And this is crazy. They got a photo. They got a photo. He said, this is like capturing a bullet with a bullet. You know, your friend standing out in the dark somewhere, and he shoots a bullet, and you're in the other place, and you've got to hit his bullet with your bullet.

And then they did it, you know. So anyway, they also got a bunch of sensor data on top of their photo. And he is absolutely convinced that consciousness can interact with these things. And the goal is, of course, to collect the right data, repeat the data. And then when you're able to repeat the data, the data becomes evidence. And then you get that evidence peer reviewed. And then when the peer review is done and approved, there's your proof. And so that's their whole setup.

their whole setup. And Gary Nolan is helping on the science into this. And he told a funny story. He thought he was supposed to be working on one project. But when he got out there, there was some of this consciousness woo stuff going on. He goes, what have I gotten myself into? But I think very quickly, he got to see exactly how these things were going to get, working together. Cyanics, baby. Cionics, that's right. So they unbeknowingly and unintentionally caused a UFO flap in California. Yeah. Oops.

They've established, of course, this process to call a UFO, which is called a dog whistle. But there's also a second process, which he calls neuromeditative. And I challenge our group out there. Dr. Ia Whiteley, who we're going to talk about in a minute, is also into the consciousness and that it is a meditative process. But I have searched the planet to try to find what process they're using. Where's the YouTube on it? Where's the primer on it?

Where's the research? I can't find anything. Now, I'm not asking you to look for the dog whistle. You're not going to find the dog whistle. He very specifically said, we're not going to share it. We cannot share it. We cannot have the whole planet summoning these things. And it might stop working.

and it's going to interfere with what we're doing if you all can call too. So you're not going to find the dog whistle. But the neurom meditative process, if anyone finds it, please share it. It's got to be out there somewhere, but I have not been able to find it. He says, they created this flap, is what he was talking about. And the California desert triangles of weirdness showed up. That's how he described it. He said, some of these triangles were,

Clearly, military and private craft, others were not. So it's almost like they've tapped into this signal that can call what our government has already figured out how to make. Yeah. So, yeah. And he noted that skunk works, grooming, and the Air Force base are all right by this thing. Interesting. He says non-human intelligence is real. So many won't accept that.

that. But he said, the best way to do it, and it's part of what motivates them, is the skeptics need an experience. And how do you give that to them? Well, you give that to, you know, if everyone could have an experience, we'd be having a totally different conversation as a species on the planet. Well, if you, you know, unfortunately, you have yours at one time. I have mine at another time, you know, others here, there and yonder as well. Well, how do you give that experience to the people who have not been fortunate or unfortunate enough to have it and through science. He said in response to some questions, he had a few minutes for questions. Most people ran over.

There were no questions this year, no big questions. But he said, someone asked him, are they coming in freely? And he said, you need to basically stop right there. I'm not sure they are they. it might be a system. No clue. He said, don't assume they. Just assume we don't know. And then I thought this was really interesting. The other question came from like a park ranger kind of person. Maybe that's, maybe above a park ranger, but in that system. And he said, have you looked into the possibility of using the deforestation, satellite imaging for this stuff,

and the whole crowd went quiet, including Jake Barber. And Jake said, oh, my God, no, that's a great idea. Please come see me. So we've already got satellites up there working on deforestation and other issues. And now that I think they're going to tap into that. Revelations happening at Seoul. Right, right there. And that to me is the point of soul.

Right. Almost think tankish. Get those things in the room. And networking in a good way of like, how can we benefit one another and how can we help one another with different resources? Right. Or just stepping out of, you know, I'm sure Barbara and a lot of these guys, they've been, you know, so hyper-focused on certain approaches and things. It's like, we didn't even think about that. Like, that's the beauty of it.

I love that. Because you never know who's going to be in the audience there. Right. And you never know who you're going to motivate to think a little differently. Exactly. Right. Like Mr. Scafish did for me last year. That came out of blue, but only because I was sitting in the room.

Yeah. Put those brains in the room, let people think. Yep. Love it. Let's go on to Aia Whiteley. Sure. Her talk kind of dovetailed with Jake Barber on a bridge between consciousness and unconscious states and world.

She, this is interesting. She is a consciousness engineer. It's something like, she's got an interesting title. So I had to look at that up, a cognitive engineer. She designed systems to improve human performance and how we think, perceive, and make decisions. She is a space psychologist, which fits in beautiful. beautifully with this subject. And she has designed training for our astronauts and still very much

involved in it. She is also practicing a neuromeditative technique, which she talks about. And there are videos out there on her on YouTube. And I listen to one or two of them. I still don't really understand the process itself, but it is a meditative process and it involves a special way of breathing. And if you watch her videos, listen to her breath. She's actually doing it while she's talking. Yeah. So it's a circular breathing protocol that reduces CO2 in the brain. And it leads to a better connection to alternative states, increased neurological growth, and increased memory. And so basically, you're working towards heightened neuroplasticity. And it morphs the brain for lasting positive change, long practiced by the Tibetan monks. There's some clues for finding the process and many

other ancient people. She feels like that she has, through her science and research, confirmed the value of the practice of those ancient people. She said her practice is also being used in space training today. So I think she says it typically takes six breathwork sessions to start to raise veils and create emotional safety to deal with the phenomena. And so in my limited lay terms, how I would say this is and experiencers are going, I think it'll resonate with experiencers. My interpretation of what she's doing is she's taking those experiences, which so many of us could not put down for decades. They are transformative things, concerning things.

You spend hours and hours and hours wheeling it in your brain. And if you don't resolve it somehow, then you're handicapping yourself and you're shutting your brain down. And so whatever it is she's doing in this breathing technique is helping to lay down the fear and anxiety around these anomalous experiences and resolve it for that human and then that human can go forward. So I will tell you this as an attorney who, who practiced for decades. And part of what I did was mediation, trying to help people who were stuck in litigation get their case settled without having to go in front of a judge

for whatever reason that was going to be problematic. And I can tell you that very, very quickly, in the 35 or so years that I did mediation, I learned that if I had you cornered in a room working on a problem and you've told me no all day long, and I'm just still working the problem with you saying it different ways, having you think about it different ways, what I think a solution would be at the right time when you are ready,

you'll do that. And I know with the sureness of my being, you just accepted it. And I have no doubt that's sort of what she's working on here. If we can assimilate these experiences in a healthier way, we can take that deep breath and move. on past it and find solutions to whatever's on the table. So that's my 10 cents on Dr. Ayo Whiteley. That is fascinating. I love it. I love it.

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. 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. No one goes to Hank's for his spreadsheets. They go for a darn good pizza. Lately though, the shop's been quiet. So Hank decides to bring back the $1 slice. He asks co-pilot in Microsoft Excel to look at his sales and costs to help him see if he can afford it. Co-Pilot shows Hank where the money's going and which little extras make the dollar slice work. Now, Hang says, line out the door. Hank makes the pizza. Co-Pilot handles the spreadsheets.

Learn more at M365 copilot.com slash work. All right, Dr. Christian Peters, we made it to day two, people. We made it to day two. Day two. He was the first speaker of day two. All right. And he was talking about the hard and soft science of UAP. He is a social scientist and political theorist. He is the managing director of the Brennan International Graduate School of Social Science at the University of Bremen and also known as the Jacob University of Bremen in Germany. Large focus on populism. What is all this doing in relation to

humans? What for the, you know, sort of a Peter Scafisch perspective, how does this work for humans and what do you do with it? And he says, it's important to remember that UAP are not just a natural science issue. This is a social and human issue too. And so you can see how they've dovetailed their speakers, right? They are showing you from numerous scientific perspectives and practices that we need to do a better job of assembling this information in our brains and hearts. And then we can do a better job figuring out what it is. Otherwise, your emotions and your well-being are negatively affected. So it's so much more than what he calls a true-fals equation.

It's not a precise measurement thing. We don't know enough to do precise measurements, but we know enough to know what those experiences are for us and for those like us who've had them. And it's so much more ambiguous and complex. And he said, what this tells him is that this is much more likely a feature of the phenomenon than a bug. It's just part of it.

Experience demands meaning, meaning demands politics, and politics-shaped experience. So you're walking in this circle until it was all right. All right. He says it is, UAP is a threat to our serenity and it poses problems for many. Humans are not comfortable with a certain level of knowledge. You know,

there's some things we don't want to know, especially if it threatens our status quo. And the world may not be like we know it. The reality may be far weirder, far stranger, far scarier, far better. I don't know any of those things. And we don't do well living in the mystery. I think those of us in this chat on this live stream do because we are trained to it.

And frankly, we hadn't had a whole lot of choice about it. You know, and you have those experiences. You're in the club, whether you want to be in the club or not. Yeah. But it's also like living in limbo. And I don't live well in limbo. I like order and whatnot. So I think this really resonated with me.

He thinks we're in a phase of partial disclosure. The government has acknowledged the Nimitz videos as being true, and they've said they don't know what the objects are. The Arrow report acknowledges an unknown out there. The government has the power and the authority to disclose. So release the non-national security stuff right away. Get it out there. And unless is everything connected to national security in that. could be an unresolvable problem.

Yeah. That's the conundrum. It always is. Yep. Yeah. Interesting. Yep. I love this idea of like UFOs, like, challenging serenity.

Like, you also, they're so like chaotic, I think is the perfect word. It is. It is. And it's in turn your world upside down when you have one of those experiences. Absolutely, absolutely. Yeah, mine was not serene. I can tell you. Mine was not either. Maybe like aspects of it. Like, and maybe for like brief glimpses, it was like serene. But at the end of the day, it was, it was terrifying. Yes, me too. Mine was just. That's just human nature, you know, fear of the unknown. Right. And I think when you're younger and we were both younger, it's even more of that, right? Because you only have so much now.

to manage it anyway and then little and anyway. So, well, how about Fabio Damasi? He's part of the European Parliament. You want to talk about him next? Absolutely. Let's do it. He heard Mr. Grashe testify at the hearing before Congress in the States. And that is what prompted his interest in this, which I always think that's interesting

because most of the people we deal with daily have had a firsthand experience. So you don't often hear another professional say, well, your experience has prompted my interest, right? I think that's different. But he says, but it's really risky for politicians to get involved in this topic. And here he is in the European Parliament. Initially, he thought what was being seen was U.S. defense stuff. And maybe even disinformation stuff pointed it's people like China or Russia. Russia, you know, kind of targeted disinformation. But he has since reconsidered. And here's what he wants

the European Parliament to do. Review the data like a scientific organization. So very much like what Seoul is doing in Jaupon. Interview the witnesses and the whistleblowers, which, you know, we are, it's one thing we are doing right over here. We are getting it out there one way or the other. Yeah. And then they want the European Parliament to take its own path forward. Stop. leaning on the United States and asking the United States for whatever tidbits they'll throw out, if any. Avoid the secret state stuff. They don't go the way of the United States. Tell the truth like the French do, Jepin, and do the science directly and then share the data with all the other nations and all the humans. I love it. I love that. Yeah. Well, in like the UK itself is

slowly getting involved. There's been whispers around of like the House of Lords might be having some sort of UAP briefing or almost like a congressional thing here in the UK at some point. So yeah, stop waiting on the Five Eyes or the U.S. specifically. Like Canada did the same thing. And now they're like, you know what? Screw the U.S. We're just going to do our own thing.

And that's what birthed Sky Canada project. So, yeah, I agree with. that for sure. And you have to hope that all those groups at some point hook up with each other. Of course. And that is how we get isolated, I think, because we're stuck in a secrecy machine, and they are not, and we can find ourselves quite isolated. Yeah, agreed. Agreed. Yeah. Well, how about, of course, everybody's going to have to just get through this with me, because this with Dr. Michael Bolanders, he is an ethics and non-human intelligence guy. You know, My brain, that's where my brain goes. I love living in that myasma of the ethics, ethical questions around.

He's a lawyer by training, and he was a judge at the Hague, and he handled the Kosovo trials. So if he sounds familiar to you, that's probably where you saw him. That is heavy. And he's another one. He is not an experiencer on any level, but he chooses to believe that we're not alone. And he chooses to believe that non-human intelligence are already on the planet. and he chooses to believe the experiencers are telling the truth, including and particularly the abductees. And he notes that different forms of non-human intelligence interact differently with humans.

Think of the Grays versus the Nordics and those witness accounts we hear from how differently those humans are treated by the different groups. Whitley Streber, you know, he had a terrifying experience. And he was there this year. And he asked some good questions. We'll talk about one of his in a minute. But he was all involved. He said, no one understands the phenomena.

Well, true. I love this analogy, though. We see the puppets, but not the puppeteer. Where's the puppeteer? How do we get to see the puppeteer? But he said through practical investigation, like in a judicial proceeding. Of course, you know, this is another example of we all see the world through our lens of experience, right? So here's this lawyer and judge who wants to lay it out like a lawsuit.

We need science with an open mind, and the science needs to be rigorous. He says it's important to note that the public's view on non-human intelligence has changed dramatically over the decades. A 2024 survey was done on non-human intelligence, and it was conducted in French, German, Spanish, and English. They had 7,400 participants, but guess what? They threw 6,000 of them out as bots. And then don't you want to know? Like, it's like, but wait, wait, who would send bots to this? Now I want to know who sent the bots, you know?

Yeah. It's probably us. It's probably America. Probably. But he said at the beginning of the survey, the very first question was, have you had an personal citing or experience? And if you said, yes, you were thanked and sent on your way. because they wanted to control potential bias.

You know, if you and I were taking that survey, we would answer strongly in some direction. Of course, yeah. And maybe not in others. But someone who hasn't had the experience is what they were looking for in order to test true public view without any of this overlay of the experiences that we've had,

which I thought was brilliant, frankly. So he said, one of the questions asked was, have humans been contacted by non-human intelligence? The French were extremely skeptical, which shocked me. I thought the French would be out there going, oh, no, no question. No, they were very, very skeptical. But across all the other languages, 55% said no, which means 54%,

from 45% said yes. So you think about a 45% approval rating? Yeah. That's a powerful number. That's a powerful number. it's not insignificant. To the question, have non-human intelligences abducted humans? 40% of the people who took the survey said yes.

Have governments sacrificed human rights to get alien tech? Less than 10% said yes. Regarding human experimentation, even a smaller percentage said yes. So that issue is probably the step too far for people, right? You aren't directly involved. There's always a line. There's always a line. So I think we're watching that right there.

He said, but here's the deal. Human rights are being violated by non-human intelligence and regularly. Abductions, examinations, all lack consent. Communication, telepathy is invasive. Humans don't get a choice, right? And that was my experience as well at Santa Fe. house, they're just in your head. Other examples of control, the kinetic things they can do, they can move things around, they can move you around, they can paralyze you, they can create screen

memories after your incident with them. They can create memory blocks. This is all before you even get into the sexual interactions, right? So all bells dinged in that category. And why are these not crimes. Well, he said it all begs a bigger question. Is there a reason that non-human intelligence cannot ask for consent? Or is there a reason they don't need consent? What's the source of their right to do these things? We need a solid set of ethics and a mutual consent arrangement. And he's written a book that some might be interested in. It's called Contact with ET, Intelligence, and human law. Interesting.

Interesting. Yeah. Yep. All right. How about Ms. Mara Mendrilla? Okay. Let's see. Find her.

There she is. I'll get a close up in a sec. Okay. So Mara works at the Soul Foundation. She's a lawyer by training, but she also has a fashion design degree, and she looks like it. She is put together from top to toe, and a really pretty girl and a really good speaker.

Very, very comfortable on that stage. She started out saying the human eye is an amazing masterpiece of evolution, but not compared to other beings like, say, an eagle who has eight times sharper vision than we do, and it's in high depth and in multiple dimensions. Snakes, they don't even need light. warmth is how they know it glows to them somehow in their brains so they're using heat instead of light so she says there are huge huge deficiencies in what humans are seeing with these masterpieces of evolution called our eyes we need to change how we look and I know you and I talked about this when the weather balloons were shot down over Alaska and one of the great yeah what a time yeah yeah As soon as they changed how they were looking for those stuff, all of some, the skies were full. Right.

And that was her point here. Once we change how we look, then the taboo will help fall away. We'll start to fall away. It'll help that. And I think that that's exactly right. I think that as the images come out, whether they're from Skywatcher or whatever, taboo does start to fall away. And people who are not experienced,ers, do step forward with interest. curiosity and a need to know. So we need to look beyond with a studied curiosity. Yet Europe

remains silent despite being the birthplace of thinkers like Galileo. They're too dependent on the United States and NORAD and NATO. There is a clear and present danger in Europe's skies. And Europe needs to build a plan to go into effect ahead of disclosure, including upgrading their equipment, finding financial independence, I think primarily from the United States. We've got to figure out space governance in order to avoid monopolies, right? So right now it's pretty monopolized in theory in Skunk Works or Lockheed Martin or whatever. But to avoid that, we need to set rules we can follow as a planet. The plan has to include a management plan for ontological shock, and it has to be a data-first, data-driven approach, and it has to be shared. The solution isn't

secrecy. It only comes with publication and collaboration. All right. So this is one of those times when Whitley Strieber stood up and asked for the microphone, and he also, much like Mr. Valet was treated, I mean, the room goes silent, right? Yeah, of course. Willie Streber stands up. And they're racing a microphone to him as quickly as they can get people just passing that thing as fast as they can to get it. And he says, I too was raped. I was shown, and some of this, I mean, I knew that, but some of this I did not know.

Like he was shown his wife's miscarriage. Did you? Oh, my God. you heard that? He may have mentioned that in my last interview with him, but oh my gosh, that's I know, traumatizing. He said all the lack of consent, humans have no voice in this. He wants to know what it will take to bring institutions to focus on this problem. Stop laughing. Stop ignoring it. people have to find a way to have themselves heard. And Jeff Nucitelli, who was our final speaker at the end of the third day,

he echoes this. And I just wanted to mention it here that he, too, thinks that the people have lost their power. Time to get it back, guys. I'm getting it back. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Who's next?

Mr. Tim Gallaudet. Oh. Okay. Okay. So, you know, this is speaker after speaker, hour after hour. The days were about 10 hours long before you watch the documentary. And so, and I'm trying to take these ridiculous notes so that I can report it accurately back to everybody. And so he approached and I thought, well, I haven't heard a lot in the news about him recently.

There hasn't been more going on about him. So I don't know what we're going to hear that we hadn't already read. Holy smokes, people. He blew my socks off. Really? He has had enough of the American government. He's done. It's over. The gloves are off. He is ticked off. And no bones about sharing it. I went from, oh, my hand hurts. I'm tired taking notes to, holy smokes. What's happening here?

So you really, really want to hit a record button, which you cannot. It's not. It's not allowed. It's like Gary Nolan took this year to calm the F down. And Tim Godd picked up the sassy pissed off torch. Yeah, he has ticked off. Just to remind everyone, he is the former chief oceanographer for the Navy, and he was the director of NOAA for the first Trump administration. And I think that might have what got in his way. I don't know this, obviously,

but I know that after he did a lot of campaigning for President Trump, that President Trump then cut. the NOAA budget and all those things that he was working on. It made him mad because there was a little bit about that out at the time. That's about right. So maybe that was sort of the straw that broke the camels back for him. But his perspective, other than just being ticked off, was do we need an international approach for UAP discovery? And like, oh my gosh, we have another theme through this year's presentation. The U.S. is not coming through on this. Where's the UAPDA? It's dead on arrival, he said, he's so disappointed in that process. And he says, will the Trump administration

change anything? He says, Trump isn't going to change a thing. They're obsessed with control. These are his words, people. These are not mine. These are his. This is Mr. Gallaudet's words. They're obsessed with control and it's scary to Mr. Gallaudet. Gallaudet reached out to President Trump in a letter, got zero response. He did the same thing to NASA, same response. And he said, That's only going to get worse now that they're under intelligence. And ditto a letter that he and Chris Mellon sent to the Wall Street Journal on the garbage that was in that article that you and I tore apart. And he got no response from them either. And all of this means to him is there's going to be zero openness.

And so what I think you're watching is the rest of the world also say, we've had enough. We're going to just do this without America if this is how. America's going to play. All right. So regarding the DOD, this was a doozy. He said, Kozlowski seems much more open-minded. Admitting zero experience with the topic seems to be listening intently trying to learn, but he now answers to the National Security Council, so nothing is going to change. Gallaudet said he knows that there are recent sightings and whistleblowers, and they are not being released. He says, and this is funny, I'll give Kozlowski the benefit of it out,

basically because he's learning, but not the former guy. The who shall not be named. He who shall not be named is not getting the benefit out from Tim Galadette. Wow. Anyway, he says all his secrecy, despite the public being so much more interested in the topic, it's just a problem. He said he is looking forward to the public. public reaction to the age of disclosure flick that's coming out November 21st.

And that he thinks that might move the needle a little bit just because of there's something like 30 or 32 military and government officials who are apparently calling it what it is. I wish we could see it. I hate to have to wait to the 21st. But maybe that'll turn the tide a bit. Congress, by the way, is going to get a private screening of it. He did not know exactly when it was. He did know that it was set up.

up though. And then there is an exhibit coming. I can't wait. I can't find anything on it yet. Maybe the chat can. But it's done by the same fellow who did King Tut and the Titanic exhibits that went all over

the world. Oh, I saw the King Tutte one. Yeah, it did too, and the Titanic. And so he's doing this on disclosure. He's calling it a disclosure exhibit. It's going to like travel the world? I think it's going to travel the world, just Oh, hell yeah.

And the Titanic. Right. That would be great. He did throw this out. And I wanted to be sure you knew he had said this. Obviously, he didn't use your name, but he said the podcasters are doing an incredible job on this. That they're just not buying the story anymore, the secrecy story, and that they needed to continue doing that they were important piece of that puzzle, basically. So I thought that was nice.

Yeah. And then, of course, he talked about the device on top of the sphere. that Avi Lope had put up there and the NASCAR thing, which I think he thought was funny. But he was using those as examples of increased public interest, right, in this topic now. And I agree with him. I agree with him. I think, can you imagine 20 years ago going to somebody in Vegas and said, yeah, we want to look for non-human intelligence on the top of your building? Can we do that?

What? I don't think so. Yeah. Times have changed. Times have changed. Times have changed. He said, but other governments, the kicks just kept coming to the American government. Other governments are doing a great job, he says.

Canada with the Sky Canada report. Brazil, they have an office dedicated solely to UAP studies. Korea, they have the same that Brazil has. Asia is a mixed bag, but headed in the right direction. Japan, and I loved hearing this, Tim Gallaudet, Chris Mellon, and Peter Scafish have advised Japan privately. Yeah, yeah, I heard behind the scenes they've been working. And Japan is establishing their own UAP office, I believe, as well.

So, yeah, I never thought I'd see the day where Japan would get involved in the UFO. They have a rich history. Sure. I mean, counters and everything, but that their own government is going to get involved. That's interesting. Right. I thought so too. Yeah. India has an astrobiology foundation, which is a private entity, but is doing the work.

And then, of course, Beatrice and her partner, Dennis, in Sweden. France has Jacques and Jepin. Australia has Coldheart and Reese Dalton Morgan. And I am going to add Grant LaVoc. And then U.S., Iran, Israel, China, and Russia are all so security-focused. and this is a quote, the U.S. is now aligned with its enemies, close quote. Amen. So he agrees with Jake Barber.

Ignore the government, leave the U.N. out of it. They're largely ineffective anyway. Do the work privately and use AI to help us. And then he got some interesting questions. Will the five eyes help? You mentioned five eyes a little while ago. He said, yes, they're already working on underwater things. But the problem, it'll all be classified.

Sure, they're going to do the work, but I'm not going to tell you. Cool. Love it. He did say this. I thought this was interesting and valuable. In classified settings, how he could talk about this, but this is what he said. In classified settings, officials acknowledge that they don't know what the UAP are. And he said, go ahead.

I love that. Well, I've been saying that for years. I don't think they know what this stuff is. I don't think they know either. That's not the cover up. That's not the conspiracy of like they have it and they're hiding it. It's the they're hiding the fact that they don't know. They don't know what it is or how to deal with it or what to do about it.

And then he said, we need to seriously consider Carl Nell's religious worldview. I didn't know what that was and he didn't expound. So as soon as I got home that night, I was Googling. And because no one around me seemed to know either. Yeah, what is that? Here's what it is. Number one, there is. is an ultimate truth and a higher power. Nell has stated, quote, I subscribe to the idea that there is

an ultimate truth and that humanity being created in the image of a higher power is endowed with the quality to pursue an understanding of that. Number two, that is on the connection between religion and UFOs. He has also explored the relationship between UFOs and religious concepts, and there is a podcast that he did called the biblical truth of UFOs and angels. and he discussed the subject with Diana Posolka. So that might be something fun to ask her about too when we interview her. And then this concept of the emanation of a godhead. In a presentation chart about possible explanations for UFOs and non-human intelligence,

one of the hypotheses was listed as emanation of godhead. So I guess God's showing himself basically or herself, whatever. But he said that global human sovereignty is being threatened by non-human intelligence. And that catastrophic disclosure is a real possibility in consideration that it could actually happen that way, which he does not think it should, but it could happen. It's going to happen sooner or later. Well, at some point, with all the private research, we're going to get with the program or we're not. It's going to happen, right?

You know, either get a plan to help it not happen or it happens. Or it happens. Get on the train or get it off. Yeah, yeah. Okay, the next speaker was Dr. Jacob Hock Misra. And he was talking about scared in the shadow. And he's basically just ticked off at SETI. He doesn't think SETI is doing what it needed to do to get the work done.

Like it's scared of its shadow. He's a senior researcher at the Blue Marble Institute in Seattle. He studies bio and technological signatures, and he works with SETI, but he's mad. That mad's a strong word, but he just thinks that they need to do a better job. He has some things that he's working on, their works in progress, one's called Breakthrough Star Shot. And this is a project to send many gram-scaled probes with light sails to Alpha Centauri. These star chips, he calls them, CHIPS, not ship. would be pushed to 20% of the speed of light by powerful ground-based lasers

aiming to complete the journey in 25 years. We'll see. Okay. And then there's one called the Lone Signal Project. And they're sending messages deeper into space in what's normally done. And he's also working on an interstellar probe that would fly far away from the sun's influence, which I think we're listening to a lot of that on 3-Ey Atlas, how the sun's causing that object to do certain things and not do other things.

And so getting our scientific gear out of the realm of the sun may lead us to something we don't know yet. So basically, also on three eye atlas, he says, I think it's just a comet. We got another one on the comment side. Yeah. Yeah. Love it. All right. Anna Brady Estavaz and Jonathan Bertha.

Let me talk to you about Jonathan Bertha first. He's the guy, I think I talked about him last year. He's been an AI for years. He constructed and ran this AI bot we had as a participant in the Soul Symposium. You could ask that bot anything. And by text, it was on signal. And by text, it would answer it. What room is this being held in?

What time is this? Is the documentarian that made this flick going to be there? Whatever you wanted to ask, how many people are attending? boom, boom, boom. So it was, that was nice. You could do any, you could get any answer instantaneously. But he and Anna Brady Estevez were on stage together. And you'll remember Anna Brady Estevez, first of all, she's extremely articulate, extremely bright gal. She has a PhD in chemical and environmental engineering from Yale. She worked at the National Science Foundation, directing the small business and innovative research portfolios and investments for all kinds of space things.

They have about 200 million that get deployed annually. Introducing the new Best Skin Ever Ultra Slim Precision Concealer from Sephora Collection. It's full coverage with a matte finish and perfect for any look, whether you're building it up for a full glam moment or targeting correction for a more natural vibe. At only $12, it's great for affordable touchups on the go. Get this new must-have concealer at Sephora or at Sephora.com today. Jonathan is trying to work on bringing humans back into the AI loop to clean that mess up. But they were talking about what are the pathways forward in UAP tech?

And Anna Brady Estabas said that the America Deep Tech company is dedicating its energy and money to improving humanity's conditions. They will give startup dollars to anybody if it's a thing that makes humanity better, easier, easier life, you know, better medical care, whatever it is. And it's proven, and it's likely to succeed, right? You can't just come up with some crazy idea and they're going to give you money. But they're willing to fund crazy stuff in order to see crazy stuff, relatively speaking, non-traditional stuff

in order to see what might come from looking at a problem differently. So she ran into the UAP topic about 15 years ago. She actually saw one in 1999. But the congressional hearings in 2023 are what really

solidified it for her. And she wondered when she'd be invited into those meetings because she does a lot of advising in the background. while she tried. She tried to work her own way in to help from behind the scenes, and she immediately ran into the classification issue, shocker.

But guess what? Howe put off stepped up and got her in, and Ryan Graves helped. And so now she's on the inside for them, helping from the inside. Yeah, yeah. So while her focus is very UAP-centric, it's not just UAP, but anything that offers a high-tech solution to a human problem. That's that one. Okay, I love it.

I love this. This gives me, it's invigorated me that people are willing to help fund these kind of out-there things, you know. And they're not scared. They're thinking of it differently. They're perfectly willing to do the unusual thing and fund it. in order to try to get a different result. Right. Hey.

I love it. As long as, you know, like, the big problem is, like, people, when they're paying their taxes and stuff, they're like, I don't want my money going to that or go to that. This is private funding. So, like, that's fine. That's totally fine. Exactly. Exactly. And solved that problem.

Yep. Michael Valiant, his talk was on uniting experience and science, which I like that idea. His history is that he is in the Society of UAP Studies, and they're, quote, advancing the study of the UAP phenomenon through interdisciplinary dialogue, just like the Soul Foundation, just like Jepin. They're trying to bring together thinkers from all walks of humanity, but particularly from the two categories of the humanities and the STEM people. So you bring the more creative thinkers and the science thinkers together, and you end up. up with something that's quite different and can be quite effective. Now, Mr. Valiant was French, and this was another one of those speakers where the closed captioning on the screen would have really helped me. So I missed a lot. But his takeaways were this. It's problematic that the

UAP community across the planet is so fragmented. And we are. We are. You've got people in every little pocket and very few groups working together. we need a good protocol for dealing with this thing, which the other speakers had also said. And I think he, this is me, thinking I heard correctly and trying to understand, but I think he's working on a unique UAP database of some kind. So I have flagged him. We'll see what comes out from him, following him on social media, and I'll report back if I see anything.

Cool. All right. I'm all for more databases. maybe. Put it in there. Put it in there. Okay, this was one of the most interesting things. This is Roberto Pinotti, P-I-N-O-T-T-I. And this Italian gentleman is a specialist in the Magenta Crash in Italy in 1933. He, he, it was a little hard to, on language, to hear, you know, these people speak English beautifully. It's just the accent. It's not the accent. It's not the words is the accent so hard for a non-speaker to hear. But he is a sociologist, a journalist, and an

aerospace expert. He founded Italy's National UFO Center, a private organization based in Florence. He's also been its president for decades. And it investigates UFO sightings and paranormal phenomena, which we've talked about before too, how I think we're going to ultimately find out all this is related somehow. He has collaborated with official bodies like the Italian Air Force in Japan in France. He's written many, many books. He's a lecturer, an investigative writer on a ton of UFO crashes. But he began working on this topic as a child.

Sociologically, he focuses on the impact of UAP on society. And then he talked about the Magenta Crash. And one of his books is about the UFOs of fascism. And I think I have the actual title, which I'll give in a minute. So all of this is reflective of his incredible research that he did during the fastest years in Europe about what happened where and how they ended up finding some of these things, which the Germans, as they occupied places, would take and hide. The allegations around the magenta incident were that a saucer-shaped craft was recovered. But here's what happened. Mussolini blackboxed it in order to reverse engineer it.

And he was later able to show that that is what that was true. But that's what I said. Yeah. Ultimately, the Pope is said to have given the object to guess who, the Americans. And the trail went dark. So he's not been able to track it past the Pope when it apparently came to us over here. Grush, you will remember, confirmed these facts in the 2023 hearing, and Elizondo confirmed these facts in the 2021 hearing from his intelligence. Yeah, that's right.

You're watching a little circle come full. This all prompted pressure on the Vatican to release their data. And so I think he's still working on that. In 1997, though, the way he unfolded this particular drama around the Magenta, crash and fascism. He got a letter from an unknown cinder. And in this mailing was a complete Italian Air Force report dated 1936. The object was torpedo-like, no wings, no engine. It had been followed by two smaller objects. It had flown over Venice and then Mestra, M-E-S-T-R-A, and the Italian Royal Air Force intercepted it. He was able to verify

the authenticity of important documents and analyses related to it. But others got the document, too, from this unknown cinder. One was a Bologna newspaper. But the paper, and they got it during the years of fascism, apparently. But the paper refused to publish it for fear of the fascist regime retaliating. And they actually destroyed their copy. I know. It's so bad. but since Mussolini had blackboxed it for reverse engineering,

I'm sure they were too afraid to touch it. But anyway, this document also confirmed the existence of a committee that was called the Cabinet RS slash 33. This was a secret Italian government unit created by Mussolini in 1933 to investigate the crash. The unit was headed by, are you ready, Nobel Peace Prize, or Marconi, the telegraph, you know the Marconi code guy? This was also later confirmed by Marconi's nephew. Also on the committee were Mussolini's son-in-law name, I'm not going to get this right,

Galeazo Ciano, and Halo Balbo, who was a fascist politician and a black shirt leader. The documents were then authenticated by a forensics expert. And it turns out that the Italians have the equivalent of a Cheyenne Mountain, and it's called Mount Sorata, S-O-R-A-T-T-A. And it is an atomic shelter and bunker, and it was controlled by the Nazis. There are 14 kilometers of underground tunnels, and this is where the secret committee was headquartered. Other than that confirmation of the committee, he's not been able to find any other historical. document referencing it. So this is where apparently all the documents and the research related to the crash were taken by the Nazis and some of this only came back out once Italy was liberated.

Here is his book. It's UFO top secret Mussolini and the extraterrestrials and it was released in 2000. Okay. Yeah. He calls- Check that book out, guys. Yeah, he calls this book and the other work around all that, the fascist files. Why not? Coming to you on Fox next summer. Yeah, there you go. There you go. Mr. Pennell.

Yeah. Love it. I'll have to look into a lot of that stuff. Absolutely. Absolutely. Well, James Fowler, guess who he is, guys. He's the dog whistle tech guy. And this was really.

really interesting. Here's his history. He is in security strategy, global threat mitigation, that sort of thing. He helps with the monthly sole news roundup if you get that in your inbox. He was in Obama's Defense Cabinet and he works at Stanford with Gary Nolan. And he also works for Barber and Skywatcher. He retired from the government in 2020 and he started running war games. and there was a seven-foot UAP that deviated its path and flew right over his team. And it made him ask why, shucked everybody. He asked the government if the UAP was theirs. They said it was not.

And then he wanted to figure out a way to engage whatever this was. So he began this dog whistle research. And he realized that when using radar to see UAP, they saw nothing. And he thought maybe they just weren't, maybe it was a scientific principle that just kept them from being visible on radar, but he wasn't sure. But he decided to try other systems. And after two years of working on this, he figured out how to capture them with learning adjustments along the way. It didn't just, wasn't a reek a moment. But he, you know, he refined his process over two years.

And what he's doing, he says it produces huge, huge. quantities of data. And that's a problem. It's onerous and expensive to go through massive piles of data and that normal scientists are not data scientists. So you have to take this voluminous information and make it usable by other scientists in their areas of expertise, which is what he's doing. And I think they're probably using a little AI to help with that as well because it's so big, but it's terribly, terribly expensive and timely. In 2021, he only saw one UAP, but they wildly increased in the subsequent years in showing up, including from cell phone video, which he found odd.

You can't see it on radar, but I can capture it on a cell phone. Also in broad daylight, also all over the globe, all valid. He said he is convinced the UAP have taught them how to see capture and interact. interact with them, that it was a two-way street. He said, UAP and aviation flights are dangerous, and airliners see them all the time and in close proximity. When you see one, you can then go to data and see that many more are there, but they weren't physically visible, which is bizarre. He says that the equipment used to produce this dog whistle is a combination of three signals costing millions and millions of dollars.

And if they're not careful, they go to jail. I don't know what that means, but. Yeah. Straight to jail. Yeah, straight to jail. Do not, Pascoe. Once they've been working a while, then they started this classification process. And they've created 11, but they've only released nine of the classification.

So two more out there. I don't know why they haven't released him, and he didn't say why, but there are two more out there. They still don't know where they're coming from or what they're doing. The Tic Tacs actually hide from them. Isn't that interesting? Some come quite close. It makes him think that they are observing us, just like we're observing them. and there's a field around these objects that interferes with the equipment.

They've chased 25 UAPs and come within 200 meters at times of them. You can't see them from the air. So engaging is dangerous. Someone's got to be on the ground with equipment. They're directing a pilot in the air or the copter people in the air. You can only track with the ground equipment. he said regarding the New Jersey drone incursions, some of those could be friendly craft. Others are clearly not. And the incongruences abound, especially in illegal areas.

And areas government doesn't typically conduct stuff in, you know, because there's huge risk if something goes wrong. So overpopulated places, you know, you're too close to humans if something goes wrong. So they are releasing imagery publicly in times, at times, but he says this imagery that the government's releasing on these drones is clearly manmade. And it's the stuff they're not releasing that would actually help us answer the questions. So someone said, is it coming from Russia? And he didn't really answer that. I don't think he knows. But he's said, all jamming attempts failed over Langley when the incursions were happening. Oh, wow.

And the Pentagon said privately, it's still mystified two years later, but it's happening all over the world. It's not just here. Man. He also confirmed that they have captured mothership operations in many locations, many times over. The objects flying in the daytime are quite different from the objects flying at night, apparently.

Oh, that's interesting. I know. Long-term similarities have been noted. Many have red and green lights that pulse. These started appearing in the 40s, and it's the same today. And then he said as an aside almost on this topic of whether it could be manmade and perhaps the work of our enemies or our own secret stuff, keep in mind that whatever Lockheed Martin has, they're 30 years ahead of what we as the public know about. The old 30 years. Yep, the 30 year rule. God, if I hear that one more, no, but it's true. It's true. Yeah, it's true. So the UEPs are moving so fast that we aren't even really capturing their full movement.

And he gave the stats on this, which went directly over my head. But we do not have camera capabilities at the shutter speeds necessary to capture full motion. long dumb down. That's my interpretation of it. Yeah, that's how good. They're just faster than our frame capacity. We don't have the ability. They need higher capacity cameras

and they're thinking about perhaps crowdsourcing the science on this. Good. I think that's a good. And then he added, I thought this was interesting because I'd never heard this before. Anytime they see a jellyfish, UAP, there's a Tick-Dak.

They go together. Jellyfish and Tick-Dak are always together. Okay. I know. And he says that he's guessing at the purpose of drones at night at low levels. Unsure, though, whether it's surveillance work, because that surveillance work could be done from satellites without putting yourself in a position to be questioned by public. Or mayors of little towns or whatever. Maybe to sense the nuclear stuff up close, perhaps, that they're not doable from space.

maybe to place yourself close enough to engage in some seriously sophisticated computer hacking, maybe close enough to take lethal action if they wanted to, but he said there's literally zero evidence that that's a motivator. Right. That's it. Yeah, that's it on him. I know. I know.

I'm looking to him. All right. Jeff Nusatelli. Okay. Holy smokes. you guys, he knocked it out of the ballpark. I learned so much about him as a human and what he has been through and why he came out. And I think all of these tidbits I'm about to share with you tell you so much about who he is and how serious he is about this and why he came forward. So he was on

stage with Peter Scafish and that team worked really well together, I thought. I'm anxious for that video to come out so everyone can see them working together. But here's Jeff's history. He was born in a coal mining family in West Pennsylvania, and he joined the Air Force at 18 years old. His father and his grandfather were both coal miners. And so I had that sense. He didn't say this, but I had the sense was he needed to take a different path. He saw how hard that existence was. Anyway, he joins the Air Force at 18, and he did military security. Some of this, he told, in his whistleblowing before Congress. But during the war on terror, he did helicopter crash recovery. And then he said his interest was actually peaked when he was a child. In 1965, he and I must be somewhere kind of close to the same age.

his father saw a giant fireball come down and the buddies ran to see where they saw it land and they couldn't find it and this was in Kexburg, Pennsylvania. And the army came in and investigated and but the whole ordeal made a lasting impression on Jeff. So one night in 2003 he arrived at work for his late night shift. He worked night so he's up he's up all night and down during the day. And there was a crowd waiting for him, a bit of a curfuffle going on, because a real work UFO incident had just happened, and it was being taken very seriously. Fraver and Grush testified about this incident in their public testimony. A low altitude, 100-meter red-blowing square had appeared. It was clearly a structured craft, not plasma. And as soon as the reports were written,

He made copies of everything. He said, this is a trick I learned early on in the military. Copy it all, save it all. And he even copied reports from the observers and kept those as well. And he said, keeping this paperwork all these years turned out to be hugely helpful. Leading up to deciding to testify, he just said he was almost haunted, my word, not his, but hunted by this thought that he had almost been in this position before and he couldn't place what it was he was feeling.

And then it came to him finally after some inner reflection. In 1970, in Pennsylvania, his father was a member of the coal miners union. And they had walked off the job and they were rebelling over coal mine pay. and it was some kind of terrible offer. And one of the elements of the offer that the union was trying to cram down the miners' throats. And apparently the union, his perspective, was that the union had become corrupted

by the mining company and that they were trying to get them to take, the union was trying to get them to take this terrible, terrible deal, which included if a miner's widow, you know, you're killed in the mine, you get a widow's pension from mine. But the new deal would say,

well, if you've gotten a minor's pension and the widow earns more than $200 a month, you lose all benefits, including medical. And so what that did was that caused the miners to simply stop. It was like the line in the sand. Well, guess what happened next? Two of his father's buddies, was one buddy and buddy's wife were murdered. And clearly as a result of this conflict. And just an intimidation tactic.

But his father stood firm and so did all the minors. In fact, his father told the union representative, you're just going to have to kill me because I will never accept this. And I will never ask anyone on down the line to accept this. So how Jeff interpreted this was my father spoke truth to power in 1970. And it did get worked out appropriately. And Jeff saw how hard that was and what strength that took. And that was why in this moment on this topic, he felt like he had been there before.

Yeah, exactly. Wow. He says basically kudos to Grush, who just kicked in the door on this thing and others followed. Somebody had to go first. Grush went in. He's the, what do they call it? He's like the first player on a football team to take. They get it. That's right. They lost their clearances, their livelihoods. They lost their social networks. Many are still in this particular situation, including Dylan Borland. And this was what I thought was interesting. Dylan was listed as being a live speaker at Seoul this year with Jeff. And then when I checked in and got my materials, I went immediately to see where they were on the lineup. And then it showed that Dylan was going to appear remotely. And I thought, well, okay.

whatever. But then when the time came for the presentation, no Dillon. So I have a little anxiety for him. I don't know. I know he thinks he is not safe. Safe. Yeah. So I just throw that out there. Keep him in everybody's thoughts. But anyway, this is why Jeff agreed to come forward to speak truth to power. And he was incredibly reluctant. He saw what was happening. But he also, I think, had that sense of loyalty to his buddies that if one was going out, they were all going out. And they might get phased out, you know, in dribs and drabs and drab. It wasn't everybody at once, and Grush was going to be on the line fire first. But all those things together gave him what he needed to step up and do this. And I tried really hard to get to talk to him and thank him. And I couldn't get anywhere close. That's the only bad thing about having all the extra people.

people is just that much harder. But anyway, Congress tried to help Dylan Borland, he said, and they sent him to Arrow. Arrow thanked him, promptly classified everything they told him and threatened him with criminal prosecution, even the death penalty if he talked. So then Dylan goes to the inspector general, but things got worse, more pressure. And at this point, Ryan, I mean, I get goosebumps. The room is dead silent. You could have heard a pin drop on the carpet.

No one is making a sound. And by the way, Grush and Dylan Borland all come from the same area that Jeff is in from. That interesting. That is. Longs year or short, he says, no one deserves this kind of treatment. And all of this factored in for him in stepping forward. He says, I live through the Vandenberg incursions as well. There wasn't so much stigma.

at the time of the Kexburg incident in 65, but it started immediately after that. And the pressure to shut up and stop talking about had an extremely affected chilling effect on everyone. And so the other guys stopped reporting it, but they didn't stop telling Jeff. So two years later, now he's in the backyard. This is part of what he testified to with these buddies at home around a bonfire. and a friend noticed a light and they all immediately stopped what they were doing and looked

and the object started to dance in the sky and do strange things with light, he said. They noticed it and it noticed him. He knew his sureness that it was watching them as well. But when it performed, you throw out all the ideas of like satellite, helicopter, because it was doing things that we cannot do yet with technology.

It didn't radiate or light up anything, but it was lit. So it was somehow a structured craft that the light, you could see the light on it, but the light was not falling down on objects. They can control the light, which is wild. And this experience changed everything. And he was very grateful for the fact that it happened in this little pack of guys. He didn't have to explain anything. He didn't have to justify what he saw.

He didn't have to convince anybody. Everybody saw it. Everybody knew. And it gave a sense of peace, I think, and comfort. Yeah. So his takeaway is let the people speak the truth. And remember that these experiences with these crafts also come with trauma. It's not all peaches and music.

It's there is. trauma and these people are traumatized and the whistleblower process creates more trauma. And he says while his experience with his buddies in the backyard was positive and he thinks it was because he was with his buddies when it happened, others are truly traumatized in trying to integrate the experience, which is a really hard thing to do on your own, much less when the government attacks. And he says, so why does the government have to attack? If it's our tech, you're showing us, and then why are you showing it to us and then punishing us for saying it? So stop.

You're creating trauma on every level. And he said, it's very obvious that our government knows. We are under observation and we need to know why. Here's what the whistleblowers need. They need money. They need support funds. And you're going to start seeing, I think, some of those things pop up around. and that we will be able as just regular citizens to contribute to to help.

They are unemployable even at mundane jobs like at the local Home Depot. Something has gone on on the government end of things that is not good that keeps these people from being able to feed their families. The other thing they need is legal support and psychological support. and everyone can contribute something from their expertise. And that really resonated to me because here you are a writer and playwright, and here I am a lawyer. And yet here we are every week from completely different perspectives,

throwing in something that we think is of value on this topic. And that was his point, you know, that let everybody bring what they have to the conversation and appreciate it. Everyone should have a voice. Everyone should have a voice. And then his final thoughts were this. This is a battle of attention. Don't look away. Stay on the team.

Keep asking the hard questions. Draw attention where you can. And the room erupted. Standing ovation. Aplause. Everyone lost their minds. Wow. Sounds like Neesatelling is like the man of the hour.

He was. Of course, being a big baby, I've now got tears. you know, everybody was just clapping and I'm like, oh my God, I'm in tears, you know, because what he's been through and how he was treated and the whole thing with Dylan Borland just undoes me that they get treated this way. But we're doing our one little part. Yeah, absolutely. Wow. So that is the sole symposium for 2025 in Stress, Italy. That is incredible. I, I, I, what a marathon. I don't know how you, Andy, and all the other people did it. But do you, can I ask, do you have those notes with you?

Can you show us? I mean, yeah, look, guys, look at how thick that is. That is loosely paper that she can't write. That's insane, Suzanne. I envy your up. I envy your. attention span. Oh, gosh.

And I would have to, every once in a while, I just to get maniacally focused. And after a couple of hours, like, oh, I need to move a minute. You know, I've been like absolutely stiff and still. Look, I, when I get in playwriting mode or book writing mode, I got the music in the background. I'm writing. It five hours can pass and I will not have moved a muscle. And then I try to get up and I just, oh.

But yeah, you lose, especially when you're enthralled and captivated in learning. Like everything else just disappears. And when it comes to this topic, it's easy for the world to disappear because you're now like using your brain again for the first. Not you, but like for many people out there for the first time in a long time. We're so stuck on our phones and watching TV and doing this. And then when you can sit in an auditorium or a place and listen to someone and have these thought experiments, it reminds you why we interact as humans. It reminds you what makes us special. And that's that we can have individual thoughts.

We can express an emote and convey those to other people. And we can hopefully find answers to these things. Yeah. I have to go. I have to go to Seoul next year. You have got to go. You're going. You're going.

I have to. I don't care of guys. He couldn't do it this year because of the other one. But next year he's going. If it's on the moon, I'll go. If it's on the moon. Also, sorry. Sorry.

I'm so sorry, Susan. I do want to give a special shout out to tie over at Total Disclosure Pod. That's with us tonight. Thanks for dropping in, buddy. Guys, if you're not, if you're not subscribed to Total Disclosure Podcasts, you can find it wherever you get your podcasts and right here on YouTube. So special shout out to Ty. Thanks for being here tonight, buddy. So nice. So nice.

Well, I do feel like when I go to these things, the responsibility to get it right is really high for me. And here's why. I can remember last year coming back and listening to some of the other podcasters cover it. and thinking, were they in the same room I was in? Well, what? What? And I would pull my notes. And here's what I paid more attention to like who was coming in out of the room this time.

A lot of these people are out in the hallway on a phone or a computer or they're playing on their phone in thing. And so finding a really serious recitation of what. did go on from somebody who is paying attention is really important to me to share it as accurately as we can. I won't get everything right. God knows. It's going at fast pace and you do get tired and you are a human. But I just think it's really important to get it right, as right as we can get it. Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, it's a topic that deserves that, I think. And, you know, everyone was there for their own reasons to find their own validation. or a certain speaker.

But at the end of the day, I respect the hell out of you for going to an event like this and just absorbing everything and being able to like sit down and process it and bring that to us tonight. That's so sweet. You have given us an inside look at an event that few people have access to.

Yeah, they can do the live stream. Yes, they'll release the talks. but that doesn't include like these other moments that you have when you're at a live event. And, you know, Andy brought this up on that UFO podcast. Sometimes it's the conversations that happen after the talks or in the hallway or at the bar or, you know, that are just as rewarding. Exactly. And the people you meet too. Exactly.

Of course, wallflowers accepted. Some of us are against the back wall. That's okay. Because I know even if you're on the back wall, you're still listening. I'm still listening, taking my notes. Yeah, exactly. As the playwright, I know that feeling. I used to sit in the back of bars and just listen to people's conversations.

There you go. And it helped me. And it's probably a little creepy. But at the end of the day, like it really enhanced my thought process and how people talk and helped me out. So I love that. Well, I see a question from Michelle. She wants to know if I got to spend some time with Andy. I did, Michelle.

I got to have a nice long chat. with him in one of the breaks. He is such a hard worker. He has more irons in the fire. He's got a young family, plus this podcast. And Ryan remind me, does he have a regular job as well, a job job? Yes. He has a 95-day job.

Yeah, all this on top. It's just wild. Books, I've got his book up here, is Atlas of the Unidentified Flying Objects that just came out too. The dude is just like doing everything. You know who else I got to talk to just briefly. I know everybody's tired. But it was Beatrice.

But, you know, we did not talk about the plates. Beatrice had a ghost in her room at this hotel. Of course. It was moving things around her room like a frame or something. And so she and I just happened to be standing to each other next to each other the second or third day. And of course, I had already said hello. to her and told her that you had said hello.

And so this time, she said, I am so tired. And I said, why are you tired? There's something in my room. This happens to me. And like, oh, my gosh. So she didn't sleep a wink in her room that night. Oh, my God. She's having ghost experiences at a UFO conference.

I would have it no other way. I would have it. I love that. I love that. Awesome. Well, did they say it all? tease where the next sort of

imposing will be? No, okay. I pondered, you know, like, because lots of people said, well, I hope it's in America next year. Well, I do too. First of all, it just makes it easier. But I know that they're trying to make it easier for non-Americans to have a front-row seat sort of, so sure, not a front-row seat.

Do you know what I mean? To be in the room. They could even do something like Brazil. They could pick a third location. I think, that would be really hard to actually go to the Brazil area. Yeah. You have to do some serious security review and figure that out. But that might be one we do remotely if we are not comfortable when it happens.

But it might be okay. I don't know. Yeah. Who knows? Yeah, I love this idea. Maybe like the U.S. one year, Europe, the next. Hey, bring it to Canada. Everyone's willing to go to Canada.

Yeah. Well not. For France. As long as it's not in the middle of, I guess it would be this time next year. It's not too cold in Canada. No. No. That'd be great.

I love it. Awesome. Well, any final words on Seoul before we disembark for the night? Well, to wrap it up, my takeaway on it was that the major theme was what we've talked about, some speaker by speaker, which is soul's goal to get as many thinkers in the room as it can from all the different disciplines, including, you know, the church mice like me, to think through the problem at hand. And I think that the problem is what's the reality of reality, right? What are we dealing with here? And how does it affect reality as we think we know it? So kudos to

them for a job well done. It sounds like it was a huge success. So awesome. Congrats to Seoul. I can't wait to see what they come up with next year. And I will, look, I'm calling it now. I'm going. You're going.

I have to. You got to go. We need a front man. I don't know if you want me to be the front, man, but I'll try. I'll try. All right. so much for that extremely detailed and passionate review of Soul Symposium. Thank you. Thank you.

Somewhere in the Skies is part of the Somewhere Podcast Universe. Please take a moment to rate, review, and subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. To learn more about all of our shows, visit thespu.com. Specter Vision Radio. Now receiving frequency. Are we as individuals part of the universe? Yes, but where do we end and the universe begins? Where does the universe end?

And we begin, breaking our bodies down into particles and even smaller light waves. Is the universe conscious? Yes, we are the universe.