Somewhere in the Skies - The Chicago O'Hare UFO Incident: A New Perspective w/ Christopher Plain

Episode Date: May 8, 2023

On episode 316 of SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES, Ryan is joined by Chief Science Writer at The Debrief, Christopher Plain. They break down the latest UFO news and then discuss a new theory on the 2006 Chicago UAP incident over O'Hare Airport, demonstrated by the Applied Physics Group. Follow Christopher Plain on Twitter: https://twitter.com/plain_fiction Buy Ryan’s new book: https://a.co/d/4KNQnM4 Website: www.somewhereintheskies.com YouTube Channel: CLICK HERE Book your Cameo video with Ryan at: https://bit.ly/3kwz3DO Official Store: CLICK HERE Buy Somewhere in the Skies coffee! Use promo code: SOMEWHERESKIES10 to get 10% off your order: https://bit.ly/3rmXuap Order Ryan’s book in paperback, ebook, or audiobook: https://amzn.to/3PmydYC Email Ryan directly at: [e-mail] Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@ryansprague51 Twitter: @SomewhereSkies Instagram: @SomewhereSkiesPod Read Ryan’s Articles by CLICKING HERE Opening Theme Song, "Ephemeral Reign" by Per Kiilstofte Copyright © 2023 Ryan Sprague. All rights reserved. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/somewhere-in-the-skies. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

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

And with seven rewards, I'm just $4. Quiet. No. Krispy, saucy, and $4? Very. Only at 711. Valley 36-2326, participating stores only while supplies lastly out for full terms. Looking for a protein shake that tastes as good as it performs?

Meet Rockin' Protein' Max. Packed with 50 grams of fuel, it'll help you keep up when your day won't slow down. And because it's always creamy and never chalky, every sip tastes great. Even better, it's lactose-free and has zero added sugar. It's not every day you find a protein shake you actually want to finish. Catch Rock and Protein in the Dairy Cooler at a store near you. Rock and Protein and Shamrock Farms are registered trademarks of Shamrock Foods Company. Since 2017, the Somewhere in the Sky's podcast has been a place.

for people in all walks of life to tell their personal UFO stories. How have these sightings and encounters change those who experience them? From Beyond the Freight publishing comes Ryan Sprake's brand new book, Stories from Somewhere in the Skies. This compendium brings to life some of the most powerful UFO stories ever submitted to Somewhere in the Sky's podcast. It takes us on a fascinating journey through life-altering experiences from those who stared into the skies and had something extraordinary stare back. Stories from somewhere in the skies. Now available in paperback and ebook on Amazon.

Order today from the link in the show notes or visit Amazon and search for stories from somewhere in the skies. This is Somewhere in the Skies with Ryan Sprague. Welcome. We have got a special episode tonight. This is actually going to be somewhere in the skies because this will be our podcast episode for this week as well. We have one of my favorite people to grace somewhere in the skies with us tonight.

He is the head science writer at the debrief. That's right. We've got Christopher playing with us. But before we bring him in, I saw him doing the dance to the intro music there. I'm loving it. I'm loving everyone's dancing and grooving to the music. So we're keeping it. That's the somewhere in the live stream music.

But our somewhere in the Sky's podcast music will not change because I know you guys love that to death. We've had it from the very beginning. But let me go ahead and say hello to everyone in the chat before we get into all the new stories we've got for you tonight. No podcast highlights, only news stories because there is some awesome, awesome stuff to cover tonight and some controversial stuff. But we'll get to that with Chris. I want to say hello to NeroStream, Ginger Turtle, Lance is here, Robert is here, Ryan Baker, as always, escape VFX. We've got Andrew is here. Reptile Z. Ooh, Graham. Graham Rendell is joining us from over here in the UK.

Hello, folks here for a little while to listen. Thank you, Graham. Thanks for being here, buddy. Appreciate it. As always, hello to Joe from Carmel by the Sea, California. Podman is here. Just watching the Coronation concert. Ooh, Podman, stay tuned.

I've got a special little clip from the coronation that occurred here in the UK. recently and I want to get Christopher Plain's thoughts on it as well. Hello to Richard. Who else? Wayne is here. Suzanne is here. Paranormal Pixie. Morcovy Studio.

The list goes on and on and on. Hello, Yosef and Robert. All right. Let's do it, guys. Let's bring him in for what will be yet another unforgettable episode of somewhere in the live stream. Again, head science writer at the debrief. Mr. Christopher Plain, welcome back, my man.

Sprague, what's going on? My good man, good to see you. You too, you too. Well, I am off the heels of the coronation here in the UK of our new king. I can't believe I'm saying that. We're still doing monarchy shit over here. Yeah, right. But hey, who am I to judge?

I'm just an ex-pat. But did you get to watch any of it? Are you into that stuff? You know, my wife watches that kind of. of stuff. I'm still convinced that at least in America, fascination with UK royalty really just comes down to like

a princess fantasy, like marrying a prince or vice versa, you know, like some sort of like where you know, to me I'm a staunch democracy fan. So even if it's symbolic, the fact that there's hundreds of millions or billions of dollars

of wealth passed down through some royal family somewhere is, you know, kind of rubs me the wrong way. But I know that I've taken some heat from some of my UK fans for that. So, you know, I'm just an American. So I do mind. I am too. I am too. So I shouldn't be saying too much. You're not in the country, Ryan.

I am. I am. I'm like that movie The Terminal with Tom Hanks. Yeah, you are. Just watch that. Yep. Yep. Exactly. But hey, here in Scotland, they're not, they're pretty anti-monarchy. So they're doing it right in my opinion. But the thing about Scotland is they're not really impressed by. anything. That's my thing about when I I was on with Andy McGrellon the other

day and we were going around a little bit before we went on camera and I said you know, the thing about the Scottish people I've met my life and a few Scottish comedians over the year, they're just not impressed. They're like yeah, whatever with your opinion. It's so true, man. If there's anything I've learned since being here,

yeah, yeah, not much impresses them and I really do respect that. I do. Yeah, absolutely. But before we get to UFO stuff, I'm drinking a coronation ale tonight. And the reason is because I'm going to play this clip for you, Chris, and that I promise we'll get the UFOs. I'm drinking Crystal Light.

Ooh, ooh, on the wild side. Hey, it's still early over there where you are. That's right. It's not boozing up in the afternoon time quite yet. Not quite yet. But so at the coronation yesterday, this is pretty interesting. They caught this on camera.

And it's kind of been going viral on, on Twitter. And this was a sighting, possibly, of the Grim Reaper at the Coronation. So I'm going to go ahead and play it. And I want to get your thoughts, all right? Let me just go ahead and play this really quick. Oh my God. That's great. What do you think? I mean, I've been, everyone's been saying it was, you know, this thing is so ceremonial that there were the ceremonial, like, druids there. So apparently that's what this was. It was someone dressed in a cloak who was doing something ceremonial to do with the coronation. But yeah, it kind of went viral. And it was like, oh, my God, the grim reaper made an appearance of the coronation.

How morbid? How morbid is that? It was a horror movie when I was growing up in like the 80s where like the director's son had hit out on the set. And he's behind some curtains in one scene where they like go by God, I forget what movie it is, but I'm sure there's someone in the chat will know what they pan by. And if you pause it, you see the kids standing behind there.

And it's like the creepiest moment ever in the movie. So, yeah, no, I think it was a Grim Reaper. So screw everybody. That's what I think. We're going with it. We're going with it, man. Yeah, yeah, it was creepy. It reminded me of Exorcist 3, that, like, famous scene where the nurse is walking by. And then, like,

someone just walks by with a huge thing of, like, I think it's like cleavers or something. Oh, God, it's terrifying. But yes, the Grim Reaper made an appearance at the coronation. So what a ominous way, a harbager, if you will, of this new monarchy. We shall see. Can I just say that the term the queen consort sounds kind of crappy?

Like if I were the queen consort, my wife was like, it sounds like royal sidepiece. And I was like, yeah, that's a good. observation. It is. That poor woman has gotten so much flack throughout the years. And now that's what she needs to be. That's what she's going to be known as. Absolutely.

I do feel bad for her. But anyways, actually, I don't feel bad. Frickin millionaire. She's doing all right. She's doing okay. We are too. Thank you, Jordan Mack, for the 499 super chat, my man. The two best looking guys on UFO Twitter.

Wow. Look at that. Wow. Yes. I would have to agree with it. This isn't Colthart and Zabel, honey. This is Sprag and playing. I know.

I know. We're bringing the big guns today. We are. Who's the guy? Was it Ryan Baker that said in Russia? Oh, yeah. Where was it? Cloud Punch you or somebody?

Yes. Whole Punch Cloud Punch you. Yeah. That's great. He's always coming in with these Russian things. And I love it. That's great. I absolutely love it.

Right at the start of my stand-up career, which really only lasted from 90 to like 2002, and it just traveling and all that was too exhausting. It could make it okay living out. It was a lot of work. There was this Russian comic named Yakov Smyranov that was really big in the 80s.

And you would see him out when I was at the clubs and stuff in the early 90s. And all of his jokes were like, in Russia, and then he would yeah, give the counter to the American example. It was a very funny guy. I love that. I love that. Family guy makes a lot of jokes like that, too. So

keeping the Russian jokes alive, even in an age where they're more terrifying than ever. But moving on. Let's talk UFOs, Christopher Plain. Absolutely. And we're going to start with a... There she is. Dailen, the angry Sourcrowt is here. I was waiting for her to show up.

Hello. Welcome to the show. Now we're just missing Doug Sprague. So hopefully he'll be in soon. I saw paranormal pixie earlier. I saw a couple of... Paranormal pixie is here. Lord Boss.

I saw Graham Randle in there. Graham. Good to see you, buddy. We got the best over here, dude. Our support system is incredible. So I think they're going to like this episode tonight. Like I mentioned, this will be the podcast episode too. So if you're listening to this guys in the future, we're going to have visual aids tonight

with Christopher Plain. So head on over to YouTube and watch the YouTube version if you want to follow along with that. But we'll describe all the visual aids for the Spotify and Apple. listeners. We will. And here's the first visual aid we have.

For our first story, how science and politics are bringing an end to euphology. So you guys know the man on the right that is resident skeptic on UFO Twitter, Mr. Mick West. And he recently wrote an article, a very controversial article, I might say, over at the New York Post, basically claiming that uphology is dead. So I'm going to read a little bit, Chris here. Sure.

Before I get your thoughts on it. So Mick West wrote over at New York Post, as the military continues to devote money and brainpower to finding UFOs, all they can come up with is further proof that they don't exist. The myth of the trained observer is also evaporating. In late February, a pair of F-16 pilots from the Minutes, Arizona Air National shot down a small octagonal object flying over Lake Huron. Audio from the shootdown demonstrated just how much trouble military pilots have

with describing even the basics of a small, slow target, leaving lots of room for misinterpretation. He goes on to say commercial pilots are likewise not perfect observing machines, as evidenced by the 2022 Starlink flap, the racetrack flap, as it were, Chris, that you guys covered extensively. He says the good evidence claim euthologists is secret, of course. The government supposedly knows about UFOs in their alien pilots, but isn't telling the public because of national security concerns. The problem with that narrative is that the closer we get to that secret evidence,

the more it seems to evaporate. So basically what McQuest is doing is going through point by point, everything from basically the New York Times article of 2017, up to the UAP Task Force, the establishment of Arrow, and everything in between, Chris. But I will end with kind of these two points that he brings up. The veneer of legitimacy that uphology has acquired through the establishment of the UAP task force was eroded when it was revealed that its chief scientist was someone well known to the UFO community, Dr. Travis Taylor.

His role at the UAPTF chief scientist seemed incongruous, if not laughable, to many. The seriousness of the UAP Task Force suffered another blow thanks to leadership liabilities in the form of John J. Stratton, who had previously been featured in the book Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. So the field of uphology could very likely wither away as people, the media, the military, and politicians become disillusioned and begin to lose interest, because unless the evidence emerges soon, euphology is dead. At first, I didn't think it was real. I woke up to this blinding light,

and I was transported to another place. Pluto TV! Then I heard a voice. Come with me if you want to live. There were thousands of movies and shows, and they were all free. The truth is our city. It's just so beautiful.

On Pluto TV, free streaming of Terminator 2, Fringe Arrow, the 100 N.EX files may cause excitement, loss of sleep, and belief in extraterrestrials. No credit cards or alien encounters necessary. Pluto TV. Stream now, pay never. What do you have to say to this, man? This is an article that most wouldn't even read. I got, I started kind of clinching my teeth, almost two paragraphs in, but I want to get your thoughts, your initial thoughts. I know you hadn't read it either before we decided. Yeah, before you made me. Before I forced you at gunpoint. So what did you think of this article?

So the reason I had avoided reading, it was because opinion, people. and opinion piece about a subject from somebody who's just, you know, a layman like anybody else, is just not, as he would say, it's a low information zone piece. There's not, there wasn't a lot for me to take away from it. I would say agree with a lot of what he said. I think internally at the debrief, this is one of the things we talk about is this idea that Travis Taylor or Gary Nolan or sometimes these scientists that are, associated with this stuff. When you dig deeper, they have these supernatural stories or these

alien abduction stories or these, you know, creatures follow me home from Skinwalker or whatever. So I think he voices things that a lot of people think and a lot of people ask about, but I don't know that he broke any new ground as far as, you know, ufology is dead. there's one of my favorite articles. There was an article written in 1976 at the end of the first season of Saturday Night Live. And basically it sounds like any article you've read a million times about Saturday Night Live, which it says, you know, the first season was really funny.

But the characters are old. The jokes are stale. We're kind of repeating the same stuff. And it was basically the same critique I've heard of Saturday Night Live my whole life, which is it used to be funny, but it's not anymore. So I think this idea that uphology used to be one thing, and now it's becoming something else. It used to be vibrant and now it's dead.

I just think is a take that somebody who got into it relatively recently, like it seems like Mick has, would have that opinion, where I know, I think one of the reasons I'm attracted to somewhere in the skies, and I think there's a community of people that treated like a support group, which is you've seen something you can't explain. Here's a place to come talk about. So I think if you're a skeptic

and you've never seen something, I could see looking at the circumstances and the task force and all these other things have gone, man, seems like there's a lot of noise, but I'm not seeing good credible videos or photos or pieces of spaceships or whatever.

So I argue this, like I said, at the debrief, it's something we talk about. in the background all the time is the state of uphology and evidence and all that. And I think honestly, what I really took from the article is mixing what I hear mostly skeptical people say, which is, well, there's no good evidence. There's no good evidence. It's still kind of like what I boil out of the article. And I think that's a valid point.

I think testimonial evidence always in this field outweighs the, the physical evidence to this point. And then this idea that there is good physical evidence, there is good photos, there is good videos, there are maybe even parts of craft, but that's all been held from us and that that will have to come to fruition or some element of people following that will fall away.

I think that's legit. I think a lot of people have felt like, hey, if we're going to hear about whistleblowers that worked on physical craft, we're either going to hear it or we're not. and if we don't hear it, and if there's no substance to that, or it doesn't turn out to be substance to that, I could see a lot of people falling away from interest for it.

I think guys like you and me are just always in the boat of, I saw something I couldn't explain, I could tell it was real and physical, I could tell it wasn't something I'm used to seeing before, it's not consistent with other things I would see in the sky. I'd like to know what it was that I saw. So I think those of us that live in that category will continue to stay interested. I think people that are looking for that great piece of evidence, that great photo, that great video, I'm like everyone.

I'm hopeful that comes out. But I don't know that there's anything that will convince people definitively. I mean, for me, I think a lot of us, testimony is enough to say there is something there. I referenced the Nimitz case all the time. And I say, you know, you either believe that the three of the four air crew that have gone on the record as describing this 40-foot long, rounded ended tick-tac thing, moving the way it did, traveling at the speed it did, having no control services, all of that. I think that either has value for you or it doesn't. And so I think that's what a Mick West and people in this category are saying is, look, I've heard the story. They sound interesting, they sound compelling, but without physical substantive photographs or videos or physical material, it's not enough for me to invest in that story.

So I think that's fair. I don't have any problem with somebody having that opinion. I just happen to have a different opinion. And if you've taken the time to research going back to the 1940s and the first military looking into it, even before Project Sign was the, the infamous Twining memo where Nathan Twining had a whole team that people look at it. And when you move through investigations, Commetta report in France and things like that, that is still what you see is an analysis of testimony, analysis of people saying, this is what I saw.

So if you are somebody who says, until I see good photo or good video or physical material, the testimony has no value to me. until it's corroborated. I think you will always be that way. I just think that's where you're going to exist in your opinion. And I think for those of us, I hear Fravor and Dietrich, and there was one other crew member.

I can't remember his name that spoke early on. When I hear them describe their incident, I just think it's real. I think what they saw was a real physical thing. I think they encountered it. I think it moved in the way they described. I don't know that there's any great video or photo or any supporting evidence. It's a low information case.

So I think if you're somebody who needs physical evidence, you can probably easily dismiss that. For me, I grew up in San Diego. I grew up around military. I grew up around military, aviators, some extended family, people that I know. And I just tend to believe that those three people

who independently described what they saw, saw what they saw. And that's a real thing. And I just want to know what it is. Yeah. Absolutely, man. And, you know, again, I think, A lot of what Mick West said in this article is it's very understandable.

You know, he's even kind of saying as the government investigates these things and explains them as conventional aircraft or spy balloons or weather anomalies, that the uphology that a lot of people want, you know, ET, interdimensional, time travelers, what have you, is going to strip away, evaporate, disappear. appear because we'll be able to explain a lot, if not most of it. And that's what happens when politics and science collide. Um, so I, I think, you know, there was some good stuff in there. He's so snarky. And, you know, I can see why this is published in the New York Post of all places because of McWest's snark. Um, but, you know, he had some interesting points. Um, but I have to

disagree with him that uphology is dead. In fact, I wrote an article, um, A couple years ago, it was an essay I wrote for a book, maybe four or five years ago, actually, called the UFOs reframing the debate. And my essay was called Frankenstein and Flying Saucers. And basically, my argument was, uphology dies constantly. But it always comes back. It's reanimated, just like a Frankenstein. And I made, I showed examples of, I think it was five different articles. in five different decades where the headline always said,

uphology is dead. UFOs are dead. Clearly they're not because this keeps happening. It's a cyclical thing. The phenomenon is always a step ahead of us. The government's never going to fully understand it or explain it away. Therefore, euphology isn't going to die. It's just not. So I disagree with him on that, but I understand why he would think that.

So, yeah, I think what those headlines you're talking about throughout the past and this current headline, what they're saying really is they're saying it's dead to me. Uphology is dead to me. Right. This thing that fascinated me, these witness accounts and these stories and blurry videos or photos or whatever that fascinated me, I got deep enough into it. I explored it enough. I read enough about it. I heard enough testimony. I saw the people that are involved.

and I found the whole thing not to be credible. So to me, uphology is dead. I think that's a fair point. I think I know there are a lot of scientists who feel that way about string theory, for instance, or feel that way about dark matter and things that we have evidence for, but we don't have any proof of. So I know that people can get so deep into something and then go, you know what, I'm not seeing, I see a bunch of smoke, but I'm never finding any fire,

so I'm out of here. I think that's a valid thing. I just think that's what that headline is saying is not that the rank and file either people that have seen something or people that know people that they have seen things that they trust. I think those people will always be there. I think those of us that have seen something and want an explanation for it will never can, I will never be able to gaslight myself.

I will never be able to tell myself I didn't see what I saw as much as they wanted, want me to. And again, I come back to you could go back to cases in Michigan in the 60s. You can go back to all kinds of cases with military aviators seeing really clearly like a saucer

in daylight that's silvery that's moving in a certain way. It's why I always bring up the tick deck. There's something that are, either the story is real and what this person is describing or people are describing is something they really saw or they're all making it up.

And everybody's making it up. And Fraver and Dietrich and the other air crew got together and said, let's phony up this story that went nowhere, that went into a folder in 2004 and disappeared. And it wasn't until Elizondo dug it up and made it part of his case to the secretary of the Navy, I believe, that never got there that was, hey, look at this. Look at what pilots and aircrew are seeing. So, yeah, I think the UFO and dead theme,

is, I think we would be fine. If people that are skeptical of it have looked at it, have seen it up and have said, I don't see anything there, I think it's not worth time anymore. I would agree with that. It's not worth their time. They should move on. Move on. Exactly.

The rest of us are still going to be here. Yeah, people that are interested are interested. Yep. For sure. Absolutely, man. All right. Well, that's enough air time I want to give to Mr. Mick West over there.

If you're watching, Mick, we love you, we hate you. That's euphology. That's euphology. Let's move on, Chris. The reason you're here is because you are the head science writer over at the debrief, and we've got some really cool science slash space news

and articles that have come out recently, both at the debrief and elsewhere. So I want to cover those with you before we get to the second half of this conversation, which involves a disc during daylight. A little tease for you guys.

It involves witness testimony and involves actual scientists who don't have preconceived notions about UFOs or stories from Skinwalker, ranch, or anything else. An entire team of them taking a look at it. So, yes. Yep.

I can't wait. I can't wait. But before we get there, let's talk about this first story. Let's see if I can get this in here. All right. the search for extraterrestrial intelligence to get a boost from the Colosso Radio Array in New Mexico. This was an article over at the debrief by the one and only Micah Hank. So I'm going to read this briefly.

And then I really want to get your thoughts on this, Chris. The search for ET Intelligence SET will soon be getting help from one of the world's largest and most powerful radio telescope arrays. As scientists continue to scour the universe for evidence of ET, and their technologies. The Carl G. Jensky, very large array. I love that. I love just very large. Yeah, the VLA.

A National Science Foundation facility is now collecting data that SETI researchers say they will analyze in the search for emissions from distant artificial sources that a technological alien civilization might produce. VLA is expected to be as much as a thousand times more comprehensive. in its search for signs of alien techno signatures than past efforts, allowing a wider variety of transmissions to be detected than previous SETI searches have allowed. So this is so cool, man. SETI has been around forever.

It could be argued not much has ever really come of it. You know, there have been a few examples of stuff that possibly they came across. But this is huge. Now that other institutions, other radio telescopes are getting involved, the most powerful ones out there, this is only going to increase the chances of SETI finally possibly finding something. So what did you make of this story over at the debrief? So you know on like a crime TV shows where they're trying to track somebody down and they'll go, well, we can log into the camera that's set up for traffic. And then we can log in all these cameras that are set up in front of banks or other businesses. And they can use this network of cameras that have been set up for entirely different purposes to track a perp.

Oh, we saw his car going here. And then we saw him turn down this corner and then he walks into this building. And you can follow that. Well, that's pretty much the approach that he's doing here. It's really a genius one. Is there these radio telescopes that are set up to do completely other things. things, that they're doing completely other types of research on the cosmos. But really, a big part of what they're doing is pointing telescopes and capturing data.

And so SETI came to them and said, hey, if you're going to be capturing all this data anyways, can you give us a copy? So that way, while you're looking for, you know, whatever it is your astronomical and cosmological phenomena, you're looking for in the telescopes, we got copies of that data we can look for what we're looking for, which is sign of EM emissions from technologically advanced civilization somewhere. So it's really, again, it's the way of saying, well, rather than using the handful of cop cams we have to track a perk, which use every camera in the neighborhood and track them. So that's what they're doing with these telescopes.

And I wrote about something about this about a year ago as well, was SETI had partnered up with another group of radio telescopes, more or less doing the same thing. And so it's essentially piggybacking on something that's set up for a whole other purpose. And it's like, hey, you're grabbing that data. Throw us a copy over here and we'll take a look at it. And I think the search for techno signatures, I think for a lot of people, is a million times more interesting than the search for biosignatures. You know, the search for biosignatures is looking for life,

but it could be microscopic life or plant life or insects or whatever. The search for techno signatures is exactly the search for. that looking for living beings that are using technology that's at least as advanced as ours because it has ZM emissions like your Bluetooth or your Wi-Fi or your radio or UHF, TV, VHF, any of these things, radar communications, all of these eight ways we put electromagnetic emissions out into the ether on the planet Earth. Looking for those, the original concept of setting, is a really strong. smart, fun, neat way to look for techno signatures,

and it's something that can be done right from home. And in this case, expanding their ability to scan, I don't know what, 10,000 star systems or something, they scanned, I think he's, Seth Shawstack from Settysed up to like a million, just with this run off of these telescopes. So it's a killer, smart idea to take advantage of what's already out there

and get a huge pool of data and use that pool of data to look for what you're looking for, which is signs of a technology being used in other star systems. Yeah. Well, and you know what's cool, too, is, you know, some people in the chat are saying, like, Scape VFX says, SETI is so 70s.

And someone else said, why did SETI not do this before? A lot of people do look at SETI as kind of, like, archaic at this point in terms of, of like, you know, how to search for alien messages or signals. So it's cool to see them kind of stepping up with the times and being like, oh, there's other ways we could be doing this in integrating certain things. And I kind of look at it as I saw this presentation in actually at the University of Southern California

with an archaeologist. Her name is escaping me right now. But she gave this amazing talk where she created a company where, where citizen archaeologists and amateur archaeologists could use, you know, satellite mapping to help find areas to, quote unquote, digitally dig in certain areas. So, you know, this opens up an entire new world of archaeology. And we're seeing this when it comes to stuff like this as well, mapping certain areas of outer space and areas. and areas of star systems and letting the public get involved too. So I hope and I wonder if not only, you know, the very large array and setty,

but other groups like this like Avi Loeb's group and stuff like that, we'll start using the public to also become involved with this stuff and kind of group think the whole thing. I think it'll only quadruple the efforts of any of these things. What do you think about the public getting involved with these sorts of? I think it's a great idea. I'm a big believer in using what's already available. You know, I talked about them piggybacking onto these telescopes that are being used for something else. I wrote one time about a ESA European Space Agency scientist, Philip Alieris,

and he basically made a proposal that said, look, we have these satellites that go around Mars. One of them is called the Mars reconnaissance orbiter. And what it does is it takes all these amazing photographs that are in really high-depth quality of Mars. And there are these huge databases of inch-by-inch photos of the entire planet that we really haven't had the time to comb through every single photo and look at every single thing. So his idea was to write software that could look at those HD photos and look for things that seemed artificial in nature. It's a way to search for techno signatures. So again, taking a database of information that was collected for something completely different and using it to search for extraterrestrial intelligence.

I will say to the people that are saying, SETI is very 1970s. For my money, as someone who grew up in the 70s, that's very cool. But I will say this. I do think that if we're to find techno signatures, now I know there's some hope that, like Galileo we'll find a photo of a spaceship in our atmosphere or just outside our atmosphere. There may be some things like that that happened. But I still think that if we're going to find signs of technology from another civilization, SETI, at least a civilization on another planet,

because I'm more of an E.T. hypothesis guy as opposed to dimensions and all that. I can explain that. But basically, I do think that SETI is still a strong bet. for finding that sort of technological signature. One other, just since we're on it, I'll mention this. One other thing I wrote about at the debrief, not that long ago, is there's a huge telescope run by Caltech, and it's the laser interferometer gravitational wave observatory, or LIGO.

And what LIGO did back like 2015 or so, it proved Einstein's theory of gravitation, waves or essentially ripples in space time. So like when you're zooming through space, just the way you would leave ripples on the top of a pond, a spacecraft, especially if it's very massive or warping space. So using like a warp drive or a faster than light drive

would leave these gravitational waves behind it. So the assistant dean of a... Assistant Dean of Physics, I believe, at Carnegie Mellon partnered up with this group called applied physics, and we'll talk some about them later. They're a group of physicists, and they got together and they wrote this paper, and they basically said, if we used LIGO and programmed it the right way, and again, use data they've already captured, we could survey star systems

and look for ripples in space time that would indicate people or somebody or somewhere, some technological civilization is using work drive. And it's a really straightforward. And the same way that SETI is just looking for EM emissions, this would just look for ripples in space time created by extreme gravity. They're a massive object like a, you know, a huge, like, planetoid-sized spacecraft or a small spacecraft that's using a work drive and is a rippling space time behind it. So it's not just SETI anymore.

There's a lot of new approaches to how would we find technology in space around other planets or coming from other civilizations. So whether it's looking through photos at Mars or whether it's looking for waves in space time and other places, looking for pollution in the atmosphere of exoplanets that would indicate an industrialized society, I think SETI is just one version of that. And a very, still a promising one, in my opinion. But it's just opened up this array, as you've said, of all these different ways people are doing it. And there's more to come. As science gets more advanced.

We will find new smarter and better ways to look for life in the cosmos. Absolutely. Well, that's the perfect transition, Chris, actually, for our next story. You couldn't have hit it any better, brother. I'm going to get to this one right now. Now, alien civilizations may be able to send us messages by the end of the decade. Here we go. Let me read a little bit about this one.

According to a new study, some of the strongest radio signals have reached far off stars. And apparently, if those stars happen to be home to ET Life, that could respond to our ping. We could be hearing back as early as 2029. The team behind this recent study wanted to see if signals from NASA's Deep Space Network, or DSN, the superpowered and super focused radio array used to communicate with deep space missions like Voyager and New Horizons, could have run into any exoplanets by now that might host life. The team tracked the signals set out by the DSN and found a few stars that may have been hit by the radio waves. The nearest is a white dwarf star, a tiny, very large.

dense star that can form when a larger star dies, located 27 light years away that may have been hit by a communication sent to a mission called Pioneer 10. If there is a planet around that star and that planet responded as soon as they got our message, we could hear back as soon as 2029. Last paragraph here. The goal of this study was to provide potential targets for further analysis. In the search for ET life, any kind of narrowing of the field is, helpful as searching the whole sky for transmissions is understandably difficult. The curiosity and hope attached to the potential of finding alien life is pushing the field of astronomy forward now more than ever.

I mean, this article came out, I believe it was popular mechanics just recently, Chris, and you just touched on all of this, you know, the fact that we're narrowing in instead of just sending out sweeping, you know, casting a wide, net were now narrowing in on places where these transmissions could possibly have gone. And what happens when a transmission goes out? You hope for a transmission back. So, yeah, what did you make of this as early as 2029? Yeah, so the math there was pretty straightforward, right? They looked at these, you know, because most of the signals we send out in this space, you know, like a TV, uh, UHF broadcast or a

VHF broadcast, something like that, is going to scatter and get so diffuse as it goes, that it probably won't be picked up by a civilization that's 10, 15, 20 light years away. Contrary to the movie Contact, where they pick up the first TV broadcast of the Burnland Olympics in 1928 and, you know, send it back to us unless they were just maybe a light year or two away and had picked it up at the time, but otherwise it's going to be too diffuse. So what these guys did, I thought it was really interesting and a really cool approach is they said, okay, what radio or electromagnetic signals have we sent in the space that would be strong enough and coherent enough that it could be picked up? So the same way we're talking about SETI looking for those signals coming to us, these guys were saying, if aliens were out there on different planets and they were listening and we're saying, and we're sending out these signals, not to them, but for our own communications purposes.

And it went out there. Who might hear it? And how quickly could they react in kind by sending us a radio signal back? So they basically, yeah, said, where did these signals go? They looked at where they went into space and kind of drew a line for each one and said, okay, these are these handful of really powerful signals that went. out into space that could, that stay coherent enough would be picked up by

another civilization. And then they said along those beams into space, could it have run into some planets? So they didn't find any, and this was key, they didn't find any of those handful of strong signals they followed, had actually run into

any known exoplanets, any of the 5,000, couple hundred planets that we've already confirmed outside of our own solar system. But it did come close enough, And I think they pointed out one star system that they said, okay, if this star system has planets and it has technologically advanced civilization, a couple of leaps, but nonetheless,

if this one, because of the distance it is, the 27 years it would have taken the signal to get there in real time. And then if they replied immediately, there would take 27 years to get back. Well, 18 of those 27 years coming back. have already passed. So they're saying it's possible, or I guess 21 of them. So it's possible that six years from now, when all 27 years have elapsed,

that if they got that signal on this theoretical planet, and they replied to it and said, hey, we just picked up a signal from your satellite, hello people of Earth, and then the time we would pick that up is in 2029. So that's of the blasts we've sent in the space of electromagnetic radiation, the handful that are strong enough to be picked up somewhere. Yeah, that's what they did. And it's a cool way to go, yeah, like where might have these signals have gone? Who might have heard them?

And if they replied, how soon might we hear back, assuming that like us, they're limited to the speed of light and their communication to send radio waves back to us at the speed of light, how quickly could we have heard back? So, yeah, 2029 is only six years away. So if there's a planet along the line of that one deep space network satellite they talked about, and it picked up our thing and they replied right away, yeah, we can hear back in theory. Yeah.

What do you hope the reply will be, Chris? Oh, you know, I wrote an article about this like two years ago, where this is before two and a half years ago, before I was at the debrief, I wrote a fun piece about like the five, questions I would ask E.T. And one of my jokes was, do you guys have copies of all the old black and white movies that have been lost, right? Because if those were broadcast on TV in the early days, and they grabbed those signals out of space, but as I said, I ultimately learned it would be too diffuse. So what would you like to hear that reply and say, Ryan? Oh, man. I mean,

obviously, it all depends on what, you know, they got from us, you know, what message got out to them what transmission what if all their message back said was stay right there yeah right don't move or um please send moods i don't know i don't know it really really depends i always go back to like you know contact when what they got was

the olympics where hitler was there and i'm just like no please no please don't be anything like that but you never know. You never truly knew. So everyone in here. That broadcast from the first like television broadcast it was broadcast close circuit in Germany.

I think it was the 1928 or 1932 Olympics. And Hitler kind of put out the first television broadcast to a handful of sets around the country just to prove his technological ability. That signal shouldn't have been strong enough to make it to another star system coherently. So if we do hear back from them, yeah, it would probably be whatever the data was that this deep, you know, coherent signal. What did they say that, I forget the name of the satellite network that they tracked in the story you just read, but there's a deep space satellite network.

So, yeah, like they would pick up some weird technological data that our satellites were communicating with each other. and maybe send us back something in binary, and we'd be like, I don't know what that is. This episode is brought to you by Redfin. You're listening to a podcast, which means you're probably multitasking, maybe even scrolling home listings on Redfin, saving homes without expecting to get them. But Redfin isn't just built for endless browsing.

It's built to help you find and own a home. With agents who close twice as many deals, when you find the one, you've got a real shot. at getting it. Get started at redfin.com. Own the dream. Yes, please repeat. What do you guys think? We want to know what do you hope the reply will be or what message do we get back? Put it in the comments below. I've got a couple in the live chat. I'm going to read Chris before we move on to our last story before we get to your amazing story at the debrief. If aliens are picking up our TV broadcasts, I really hope they love Seinfeld. Someone said,

telitubbies. Oh my God. They're watching those terrible Kardashians. Someone else said, I hope it's Pokemon, which I think that would be awesome. Hey, Jazz Shaw is here. Welcome, Jess. Welcome, as always, my friend. I was too late.

No, you're not. It's never too late to join somewhere in the live. We were just about to start gossiping about you now, jazz. Yep, yep. Now we can start talking about jazz. Everyone's saying, hello, Jazz. He's such a celebrity here at the show. And so is Douglas Sprague. Douglas Sprague did pop in.

I heard he was doing some yard work there in central New York. So hello to the Sprague family if you're still watching. My father, Chris, is becoming more popular than I am on my own show. I told him that the other day. And he loved hearing that. It was probably bound to happen. It was bound to happen. Doug Sprague, he is the coolest guy ever, man.

Like, if I told you stories that he's told me, he's basically Kelsey. from that 70s show. Oh my God. Hey, can I ask, technically, was he the person that you were with when you had your UFO siding as a kid? Yes. Yeah. Yeah.

Doug Sprague. That was my dad. I seem to remember hearing that when I first met you a couple years ago. I briefly had him talk about it on a live stream a really long time ago, but I got to get him on to actually talk about. How old of a guy was he when that happened? Do you remember? So, oh, gosh, he's going to kill me for aging him right now.

God, I don't know how old he was when I... How old was he when you were born, right? When I was born? Oh, my gosh. I don't know. I'm going to say... I know. It's clearly not working.

Thanks, Chris. I'm going to say he's in his late 50s, early 60s right now. So he's not far from my age then. Yeah, I don't want to give it away. Just in case he doesn't want me to. Um, he's still got those dashing young looks like, uh, like I do. The boyish sprague looks. Yeah, which are evaporating rapidly as the days go on.

But, um, anyways, hello to Doug Sprigg. Hello to jazz. Um, awesome, man. Well, let's move on to our last story, um, before we get to the crux of the conversation. And that is this one. A massive blue hole just showed up near Mexico. new life forms may be inside. This came from pop mechanics as well.

I'll read a little bit. Scientists from Caligio de la Frontera soar have discovered a massive blue hole off the southeastern coast of the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico. It spans 147,000 square feet across and dips 900 feet down. While the new blue hole was discovered in 2021, the researchers, only recently detailed their findings in a study published in frontiers in marine science. With a circular opening near the surface

just 15 feet below sea level, the steep 80 degree plus slopes form a large conic structure that scientists say is covered by biofilms, sediments, limestone, and gypsum ledges. Last paragraph here. Studying the microbial diversity

of these blue holes can offer a glimpse into the type of life surviving in the unique environment. These gas-rich environments that fill with hydrogen sulfide don't destroy all life, but instead give a home to more extreme biology that finds comfort in oxygen-depleted areas. This unique mixture of water properties and biological life invites scientists to explore the depths of blue holes

to learn more about their makeup and the life that can exist within. So this is so cool, Chris. Extremophiles, as it were, these deep blue holes in our oceans that they're finding. I mean, this kind of reminds me of, you know, a lot of the theories that maybe something like the Tic Tac was something from under the water that had been there for a really long time. But not even like intelligent life. Just life we've never thought possible in these deep blue. holes in our ocean. So what did you think of this story with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration? I think the coolest thing that I take away from something like this is, you know,

150 years ago, evolution or survival of the fittest or the origin of species was all theory. And now it's just something we see take place practically all the time. So if you take, if you go in your backyard and you take 100 birds that are living in the tree and you put 50, 50 of them in one city and 50 of them in another city, and you come back after a period of time, you know, a couple of years or a couple of decades, they will have speciated, which means they will have reacted to their environment by survival mechanisms.

And some things that, you know, if you put a group in a really cold environment, the ones that weren't adapted to the cold environment would die. But if enough of them survived and reproduced, you would get a more hearty, cold environment bird. And then if you went and looked at this other one in another hot environment, same exact thing. So when you have these extreme areas like this,

you know, they found life under icebergs in Antarctica. They found life deep in caves in Chile, like down in these mines. I mean, when we find these extreme life forms, what it really says to me, and this is something, one of the reasons I argue for the E.T. hypothesis all the time is that, as Jeff Goldblum said, in Jurassic Park, life finds away. And it really does. I mean, that's the most amazing thing. You go to Chernobyl and you go right outside the nuclear power plant where it's still super irradiated. And they have dogs and pigs and birds and all kinds of things that have reacted to that radiation and have essentially speceated. They've especially turned into a new version of that old life form that can survive in that extreme environment.

One thing you mentioned about this hole that I thought was really key is this idea of sulfur and a low oxygen environment. And, you know, there was some news about a year and a half ago that there were some life signs or potential signs of life found in the clouds of Venus, which is just a planet right next door. And the reason that was interesting was they found this type of phosphorus called phosphine gas that exists, you know, was giving a chemical signature in this one area of the atmosphere where we had thought previously, hey, if there was life on Venus, it's too darn hot down on the surface and it's too cold in space. but there is this area right within the Venusian atmosphere where the air pressure is right and the radiation is right, that if there was going to be life, it would be in these layers in the atmosphere. And because of the gaseous compositions and the chemical compositions,

the type of life that would be there would be this kind of phosphorus breathing, phosphorus expelling, low oxygen extremophile or extreme light. And that's exactly what they found was the chemical signatures of this phosphine there seemingly in higher amounts that would have occurred naturally. And yes, there are natural explanation, so it could very well be a natural phenomenon. But it was enough of an outlier for us to say, hey, there might be life right next door in the clouds of Venus. scientists 50, 70, 100 years ago would argue that they will never be life found on any other planets anywhere, because we don't even know that there are other planets.

Universally now, when you talk to scientists about life in the cosmos, there is almost unanimous agreement that there's probably microscopic life everywhere. Even Neil deGrasse Tyson, who's not a big UFO guy or a big intelligent life, coming to Earth Guy or visiting us will tell you, yeah, there's probably life everywhere. And that's why it's because you go to one of these holes or you go to one of these C-note holes or you go to one of these under Antarctica or these places, you find life. And you find life that is speciated specifically to survive in that unique environment. So this is just more proof that life is everywhere, life finds away, and it's only more evidence that we should find life not just on Earth, but we should find life everywhere.

Because it's just, you know, I tell people all the time, these planets around other stars that we found, a lot of these places that we will, they're made of the same stuff our planets are. It's not like there's some super alloy that they're made. It's all the same stuff. There's carbon and water and phosphorus and sulfur and all these same compounds. It's all made of the same stuff. And so if we find life everywhere on Earth, we find it underground, under ice, in ice, in extreme radiation environments, in non-radiate, in no oxygen environments, and we find it stinking everywhere, Ryan, we find life. We look for life on Earth.

We find life. And this is just another perfect example of that. Absolutely, man. I remember writing an article at the debrief about the blood falls when up in the Arctic, they found this really strange blood-like liquid coming out of the glaciers. And they were able to figure out that there were these organisms living under the ice that when it hit oxygen would turn a certain color. It was really cool But the reason I bring that up is the point you made of when we find these extremophiles on Earth and we look at the conditions in which they were found

And then we cross-reference that with other planets and the conditions that we find on those planets That's when you can be like, huh Like there's a possibility that that extremophile could survive on Mars So in that story that I wrote I actually talked to one of the, you know, I believe it was a genie, not a genealogist, excuse me, a geologist who said, literally, finding these extremophiles under the ice gives us so much hope that in these possible lake beds under the surface of Mars that we're going to find the same life or some sort of life like that. Or at least a record of it, at least a record from a couple billion years ago.

Yeah, when there was water on Mars. Yeah, I would say it's probably on Mars, that's the most likely is that we're going to find fossilized microscopic life forms from 2 billion years ago that haven't survived the current day. But, you know, they're constantly finding evidence for water underground on Mars

and there is geothermal activity, so there is energy. It doesn't necessarily need sunlight. And again, that's, as you said, a type of extremophile we found on Earth could probably be injected there and lived there. It was the point I made about Venus is even if what they found in those clouds aren't life forms, we know of life forms on Earth that we could inject in those clouds and they

would probably survive there. And that's what's interesting. Absolutely, man. I have so much hope. That's why I love having you on. All the science stories give me hope where uphology just drags us down. But science continues to move towards their being life, not away from it. people all the time. The reason scientists had such a hard time believing it at the dawn of the UFO wave, so we didn't even know if you could survive in

space. We didn't even know that they were, I tell people all the time, I started UCLA in 1987. And when I took an astronomy course, and I had an astronomy professor who said he was willing to bet his retirement, that we would never find planets

around other stars. He thought that was unique to our solar system. It just wasn't something you were going to find and he would bet his retirement on it. And it was eight years later in 95 that we kind of measured, you know, via the radial velocity method, found our first exoplanets. And now we have thousands of them and we have thousands of more candidates. And what we're finding is just like life, everywhere we look, we find planets. Well, then the argument was, well, we're not going to find rocky, earthlike planets. We're spot these huge gaseous ones that are like Jupiter

or Uranus, but we're not going to find rocky planets, earthlike planets. We're Well, what do you know? We found a ton of those. And we're not going to find them with water or with liquid water, water, vapor in their atmosphere. We found those. We're not going to find them in the habitable zone of their stars, which means their orbit at the right distance from their star, to have enough heat energy to have liquid water on the surface, which we think is critical for pretty much all life or the vast majority. And what do you know?

We found those two. So if you're saying, are there places in the cosmos that have life? we still don't know. But what we do know is there's a ton of places in the cosmos that are probably capable and have the right situations and circumstances chemically and energy-wise to support life. Because, again, it's made of all the same stuff.

It's made of the radiation energy is similar. Yes, it might be a different type of star. It might be a different orbital velocity or distance. There might be some variations between Earth than what we see in the cosmos. And yet, we haven't spotted an Earth-sized planet exactly with water and continents around the type of star we're around because our instruments just can't pick up planets,

rocky planets, around our type of star. So most of the Earth-like ones we found are around like M-dwarfs, you know, like a smaller red dwarf planets, because they're not as bright so we can spot the planet either when it crosses in front or it's a gravitational, effect, either the transit or the radio velocity methods. So, yeah, UFOology may be this. So we're never going to get any answers.

But what science is, is this constant march forward towards life. So if, if like me, you believe there's at least a possibility that the UFOs, at least some of the UFOs people see are either probes or spacecraft from another planet, the evidence for that argument continues to go. go up. There continues to be more star systems they could be from. And there used to be this old argument that well, space is too vast

and you can't travel the distances. Well, we couldn't fly an airplane 120 years ago. We can now design a probe using directed energy propulsion. Something we haven't done yet, where you push it with a laser, but we could get something up to about 20%

the speed of light within about an hour. So you can hit a probe with a laser, get it to 20% the speed of light. If there's a star that's 10 light years away and we can go 20% of the speed of light, I mean, you can do the math, but that's 50 years. We could get a probe there with our technology. And we couldn't even fly an airplane 120 years ago.

So the idea that the society is even slightly more evolved than us, much less dramatically more, can't get a probe here because it's too far away. It's just very old school thinking. And I just do think, first of all, I would like to let people know the scientists I talk to, and I talk a lot of smart ones about a lot of different subjects at the debrief, not always about UFOs. But when they find out I'm from the debrief, they'll often say, hey, you know, tell me the latest dope on UFOs. The vast majority of scientists I talk to do not hold humanity as this magical 18th century, 17th century. We're the center of universe. and there won't be intelligent beings anywhere else.

If anything, we're just probably common, boring, old intelligent beings that probably exist on all the type. They may not look exactly like this or behave exactly like us. But the idea that humanity is so rare is, to me, akin to this old school thinking of the sun revolves around the earth and there's nothing else in the cosmos but stars and this one planet and everything revolves around it. And it's just such old school thinking. So I think a lot of these Neil deGrasse Tyson's, a lot of the poo-pooing scientists you heard,

are more just examples of the era they were raised in and the era of science that they were raised in. When I talk to scientists that are in their 20s, 30s, and 40s, people that are younger than me that are interested in this subject, the idea that life is common in the cosmos is a popular idea. The idea that there will be intelligent life in the cosmos is just what we talked about with, speciation, which is their survival of the fittest. If there are mechanical forces on a planet and you have microscopic life, you've given enough time you're probably going to have complex life because that life is going to continue to adapt to its environment.

It's going to get more and more complex. It's going to get to the ideally at some point to the point of using tools, using electricity and flying spaceships and making TV shows and doing all the cool stuff that we do. So if you're somebody that's waiting for the UFO answer to be, they're travelers from the future or they come from another universe or things like that. You may be in for a long wait because there's not a ton of evidence. And it may be the case.

It's just not a ton of scientific evidence of traveling backwards in time. And although the idea of the multiverse is very popular in science fiction, it's a really cool idea. And it kind of springs out of M theory and string theory and stuff. A lot of the science behind M theory and string theory doesn't hold up lots of times. So it's something that comes out of a cool scientific theory. The guys like Eric Davis just love because they call it super symmetry for a reason. It explains everything.

It solves, you know, the old problem of the Newtonian and Einstein conflict, this idea that there's the quantum world and there's the macro world and those two things don't unify. We need a unify out theory that can explain them all. So string theory can do that. The problem is it works mathematically. It doesn't always work in the real world. at least the experiments they use to find magnetic monopoles and things like that that would support strength theory.

So the bottom line is if you're hoping for a magical explanation, you probably already have one. You know, if you think it might be ghosts or you think UFOs might be something paranormal, that would, in a magical world, maybe we're in a magical reality. I don't know. I don't know where everything comes from. I don't know. But in just the base materialistic scientists, I don't believe in God. don't believe in ghosts. I don't believe in nothing. No psychic powers. It's all material.

There's no purpose to life. Nothing means anything. In that definition, aliens should be everywhere because it's just, life would just be common. It would just be just another example of the common thing in the cosmos. So in a materialist universe, even if you're the most cynical of the most extreme answers to the UFO phenomena, you should be of the mindset that life is everywhere and intelligent life is probably common because we're only 4 billion years into a 14 billion year universe. So I know I made the same point

at Andy's show the other day, so I'm kind of beating the same drum. But for guys like me who are fans of science and write about science, I have no scientific training, but it is something I've been following my whole life and I write about. Scientists are wide open to life on other planets. if they're resistant to the idea of UFOs themselves being visitors from other planets, I think that just more comes down to the connection between magical thinking and scientific thinking.

Because if you ask scientists privately, this is something they're very interested, the idea that there are life on other planets, and it might be sending probes here, it might be spending spaceships here, and because it's just more advanced in us, and we're just catching up to the point that we can even understand. what we're looking at or understand what we're communicating with, that's something that scientists, rank and file scientists, way more than not, privately tell me that they're fully open to and that science supports it, that humanity isn't magical, and there's just one place with life in the

whole cosmos. It's very egocentric of us, but the truth is we're just probably typical and not antipical. There we go. Well, let's talk about that, Chris. Scientists looking at at the possibility that we have been visited. A lot of people in the chat are bringing up what we're going to be talking about, and that is the 2006 Chicago O'Hare UFO incident. But I'm going to take a very quick break, Chris. I'm going to go ahead and play a little ad here for the folks. So stick tight, stick around, stay whatever the saying is you say when you go to a commercial break.

Do that, everybody. and we will be right back to talk with Christopher Plain, the head science writer at the debrief, all about his new article over there about a possible new perspective on the Chicago O'Hare UFO incident. So stay tuned, guys. We'll be right back. The Summer in the Sky's podcast is free to listen to every week. But if you would like to help support the show, we have a very active Patreon page where you give what you think the show is worth. In return, you'll get early access to the main show, bonus episodes, and priority to ask our guests your listener questions. Your support truly makes the show continue and grow.

So, to learn more and to join, visit patreon.com slash somewhere skies. All right, guys, welcome back to Somewhere in the live stream. And before we do anything, James Craig, thank you so much for the $20 super chat. playing off the heels of what we were just talking about with Christopher playing life in the universe everywhere. Intelligent life in the universe, extremely rare. But how do we know that, right? Yeah.

So that's something that you used to hear a lot. You will still hear now from scientists since they've moved away from there aren't planets and there aren't planets in the habitable zone and there aren't Earth-like planets and they get proven wrong in each step and they've had to acquiesce well because of extreme of possible. There's probably life everywhere. but intelligent life is rare. Well, that last step just tells me that you don't believe in evolution.

You don't believe in survival of the fittest. You don't believe that organisms adapt to their environment and over time become more sophisticated, excuse me, the way they use energy, which we call evolution, but that's really what it is, just become a more complex organism, more sophisticated in the way it uses energy. So I don't know that there is any proof for that last leap. I also saw somebody saying that life in the universe is common, but it's the space and time and distance between us

as we probably haven't ever encountered it. Again, so 200 years ago or 300 years ago, the idea of going from London, New York, was you had to go by a boat. Now you can go by jet, and you can go so much faster. We can send probes, I will repeat this, at 20% the speed of light with the technology we have right now,

we're not doing it, but we have that technology. And it's a proven technology. So the idea that, oh, it's too far away, something that's 40 light years away or 100 light years away is too far away. To me, it's just old thinking. It's thinking of the rocket equation era that, hey, well, take this much fuel to go that fast. Well, the rocket equation is not valid in deep space travel anymore. You don't need magical things like warp drives,

even though there are a lot of people working on those, things like plasma magnets will get us up to 1 or 2% to speed of light, and things like Directed Energy will get us at least to 20%, maybe even 30%. So you start cutting those distances down real quick. So to me, that's not the case. That's fair. That's fair, man. Well, you mentioned warp drives. Let's do it.

Let's go there. All right, the real reason I had you on, I couldn't wait to get to this part. Oh, gosh, we are way over the time I told you, my man. man. So that's all right. I think my wife's napping, so I think we're good. Okay, we're good for now. All right. You let me know if that changes. Here it is. This new article over at the debrief by Christopher Plain,

the Chicago and Micah Hanks, excuse me, the Chicago O'Hare UAP incident. Physics Teams analysis offers a fresh look at this famous 2006 case. I'm going to read this briefly, Chris. the Chicago O'Hare incident for those of you who aren't familiar with this, shortly after 4.15 p.m. CST time on November 7th, 2006, at United Airlines Gate C-17 at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, a UFO was spotted by many employees and passengers.

That is the most cliff notes version, Chris, that I could give of this incident. And I do have a clip I'm going to play in just a moment here. But before we move forward on this, applied physics group and this sort of theory that they came up with about this case. What do you remember about the Chicago O'Hare incident? Were you familiar with it when it actually occurred? Like, did you see this playing out on the news? Or what are your thoughts on the case before we get the thoughts of applied physics?

You know, like Mick West, UFOology was dead for me. No, you know, as somebody who's followed the subject since the late 70s, it comes and goes in my interest throughout my life. Things will pop up of Bob Lazar's book came out or the day after Roswell by Colonel Corso or these things, Whitley Stryber's books, like things would come in a pre-internet era that would maybe grab your interests for a while and then fade away. In 2006, I remember it being discussed. I remember the O'Hare incident being discussed at the time,

but it wasn't something I followed close. I was not a, I wasn't on UFO Twitter in 2006. Was there a UFO Twitter in 2006? I don't think so. Yeah, so a UFO Reddit or UFO Myspace or whatever. So I wasn't in the community at that point following the latest stories. So as I mentioned to you, and I mentioned on Andy's show the other day, the best information I ever really got on this was,

when I first met you two, two and a half years ago is when we met was a little over two and a half years ago. But I think it was about two years ago. You ran an episode of somewhere in the skies about this incident. And that was the first time I got really kind of a detailed telling of the story, a detailed recounting of the, again, the testimonial evidence. People saying they saw something and different people from different walks of life at the same location, at the same time. more or less all describing the same thing, being in the same place, looking the same shape, and performing in the same way. Yeah. And I mean, this has become one of the, you know, pinnacle cases in the past few decades because, A, it happened in daylight.

A flying disc seen over an airport in daylight. And, you know, immediately journalists wanted to go interview all the people. who claimed to have seen this over Gate C-17, and nobody would talk. It was clear there was a very quick cover-up, as it were, put in place. Nobody was allowed to talk about what they saw. But, you know, many years went on with this case, and we didn't really hear of anything.

You know, was there communication between crew members on the ground or the flight towers or anything going on in real time as this was happening? And actually, the individual who was able to finally obtain that and kind of bring it forward was Stephen Greenstreet over at the New York Post. And, you know, say what you will about him. I know he's one of the enemy number one on UFO Twitter right now. He was the one to dig this up and find actual audio tapes from that day. And I actually had him on that episode you're referring to to talk about what he had found.

So if you don't mind, I'm going to go ahead and actually play the. audio clip. What happened that day when this happened with several of the crew members at the airport? So bear with us, guys. I'm going to play this really quick, and we'll come back and keep on with this awesome story that Chris wrote. All right, let me find it here. Here it is. All right, give it a listen. Yes, the C-17, they saw some flying disc above, and we can't see you to see it, right? What kind of do you? All right. I told Dave there was a disc flying outside above Charlie 17, and he thought it was pretty much high. But I'm not high and I'm not drinking. Someone actually has a picture of it.

So if you guys see it out there. A disc, like a Frisbee? Like a UFO type thing. Yeah, okay. Okay. Yeah. I have a picture. How high above Charlie 17?

Well, it was above our tower. So if you happen to see you think. You know what? I'll keep a peeled eye for that. All right. Okay. Okay. Yeah, look out of your window.

Let's see it. Do you see anything above United's Concourse? They actually, believe it or not, they called us and said there's a, somebody observed a flying disk about a thousand feet above the state Charlie 17. You see anything over there? That I can tell. Okay. Yeah, I thought my job was stressful. Who saw it?

You guys did. Who's this? Wow, man. That gave me chills. I haven't heard it in over a year and a half, but, I mean, disc, disc, disc. Not only that, but Sue, poor Sue, you could tell she was like, you know, she wanted to seriously report this. and clearly that guy was just not having it. But she said, you can clearly hear her say,

we took pictures. We have a photo, I think she said, yeah. We have a photo. We have a picture. So, I mean, it's out there somewhere. We've seen, quote, unquote, photos. None of them have ever been proven. I believe most of them are hoaxes.

But this was a huge, huge get for Stephen Green Street. I'm not going to lie. Again, I know he's a controversial character in the world of journalism and UFOs, but wow. Like, this is what we needed for this case. And actually, Sam Morantam, who's a UFO, a Mufon field investigator, actually interviewed another witness that was outside of the airport at the time. I did feature that on the episode as well. I don't have it here with me now. But if you guys go back in the archives or somewhere in the sky,

just look for the O'Hare tapes episode with Stephen Green Street. And you do hear directly from another witness who's never really spoken before about it. And Sam Renta was kind enough to let me provide that witness testimony on the show. But yeah, man, I mean, this case is just amazing. And what everyone claims is that this disc seen over G8C17 shot up punched a hole through the clouds and disappeared. That like blew everyone's minds. They're like, wow, that's okay.

Okay, let's go. Let's go. A whole punching cloud UFO. So you took it a step further and you actually reached out to a group called applied physics. And they actually, correct me if I'm wrong. I want to know kind of the origin story of how this article came to be. Sure. But why did this group of very smart, intelligent, and talented physicists get together to look at the Chicago O'Hare UFO incident?

So I guess let's start there. What was the origin of the article? And kind of what was this theory they brought forward? Just give it to us plainly, my name. So I'm going to paint a theoretical for you right as I like to do again. But see you out in the jungle with some friends and you see a creature fly overhead. And you're pretty sure it's a creature. It kind of flaps its wings or whatever, and it moves in a certain way.

And you and your friends all look at each other and go, God, what was that thing that just flew overhead? So you start comparing where did we find it? How did it move? What did it physically look like? And then what maneuvers did it perform while it was moving? And you come back and go, well, it wasn't a bird. It's at least no bird that I know of. And it wasn't a moth.

And it wasn't really a bat. And it wasn't a, you know, there are certain frogs that fly. There's spiders that use their webs to cast and fly. So you go, nothing really accounts for all the evidence just the right way. Just like when I was talking about physics and supersymmetry or string theory. And the reason people come forward and go, well, you have all these pieces of evidence. And again, testimonial evidence in this case. So you have the description.

of where the craft was. You have the description of the time of day. You have the description of the more or less the size and the shape. You have the description that it was hovering in place. You have this description that it rapidly accelerated. And then you have the description that it rapidly accelerated vertically through the clouds and, again, punched a hole in the clouds. So that case, as you pointed out, has been out there.

has been something that was discussed about. So I didn't actually reach out to the applied physics team. They actually reached out to me. And basically, again, imagine my scenario where you've gone to the jungle and you've seen this thing flying and you can't figure out what this animal is. And you go to ornithologist and you describe it. They go, no, that's not really a bird. And then you go to private, you know, people that deal with bats. And they go, no, that's not really a bat.

And then you go into insect experts. And they go, now that's not really a moth. And nothing fits the testimonial evidence. This thing in Chicago was not a drone because of the fact that the size of it and the fact that it shot up so rapidly. We know of no drone that even now does that much less at the time. The fact that it punched a hole in the clouds, the shape of it, nothing fit. So what happened was this group applied physics. And I had known them because I wrote a story about a war,

theory they had like two years earlier. But they're just a real straight-laced Bell Lab-style physics group that does consultation for venture capitalists. So they're just 30-plus physicists who look at science as their job. They're not UFO guys. There's no, as far as I know, no one in the group who has any abduction stories or any magical stories or anything, these are literally just scientists that do science. for a living. And the head of the organization I knew from a previous story I'd written about

two years earlier. And he contacted me and he says, hey, you know this famous Chicago O'Hare case where all the, you know, there seems to be a lot of witness testimony about, like I said, all the things, size, shape, the way it moved, all of that that doesn't add up. And we just thought you might find it interesting, Chris, over at the debrief, that we can, we, we, we, we, we, Within word theory, which is something we've written about from a theoretical basis, we have a theory that would encompass all of the testimonial evidence that would account for everything that people have described. So we're not saying this is what it is. But again, in my example where you're in the jungle, and if you go through all the pieces of evidence, it doesn't fit anything.

And then a paleontologist calls you and says, you know, you might have seen a pterodactyl. Are the odds that you saw a taradadaddle in the jungle in 2020? No. But if everything he described that you describe is the way it's wings flap and the way it moved and the time of day it was and the way it flew and all of those things, that's what happened here. So I had an expert on warp theory who runs a group of straight mainstream physicists who do mainstream physics, contact me and say, there is a theory that would explain everything in that case. At least everything as, again, no photos, no videos, or at least none that we have seen, but would explain what the witnesses say they saw,

which is a disc-shaped craft hovering in place, broad daylight, massive in size, and rapidly accelerating vertically and then ripping a hole in the clouds. And the thing that would account for all of that is a warp drive spacecraft. And that's where the Genesis came. If you take the time to read my article, I kind of broke down, and Micah Hanks and I co-wrote that together, because he's kind of our UFO historian at the debrief, and he knew a lot more about the O'Hare case than I did.

And we kind of combined forces and came up with the story of, here's what witnesses say they saw. and then here's a scientific theory from scientists that takes all of that testimony into account and makes it all add up. And if that was a disk-shaped craft, which is an ideal form for a warp ship, and they lay that out in the article, and if it were able to hover and if it did punch a hole in the clouds, oh, and also the fact that it didn't show up on radar,

A warp craft will not show up on radar because it will bend Because the manipulation of gravity will bend the radar signature around it And shoot it out the other side Like you theoretically, if you make something radar invisible, that's how you do it Or even if sometimes they make things invisible to infrared or ultraviolet. We haven't made things perfectly invisible to visible light yet But that's how they do it just bend it around and dissipated the energy on the other side. So if you take that radar energy and you so, yeah,

Yeah, they came to me and said, we would like to write up for you why the Chicago O'Hare incident, why all the testimony, if you add it all up, the one thing that we know of that would account for all of the things that people are saying is a warp drive spacecraft. crazy and I know over on that UFO podcast you guys brought up the fact that I called you that dude that loves his warp drives this must have like just totally like major day man when they you saw that this group was looking at this um what what did you think when a group of physicists were getting together to theorize about a UFO case I mean this this is what we have needed in the UFO field for so long. I've talked to Micah about this, where Micah and a few other people,

they were looking at cases during antiquity and looking at different, you know, what was the weather at this time and what was going on, this, that, this, that, and being able to deduce what a possible UFO was in the time of antiquity. So retroactively attempting to, solve a UFO case. And now we have some of the most, like, the most brilliant minds of looking at

something like the Chicago O'Hare incident being like, this is a possibility. We're not saying that the Chicago O'Hare UFO was definitely E.T. using a warp drive. We're not saying that. But this is possible. And it's the one theory that would account for all of the different testimonies. Right. Right. It's the one we know of. What do you make of this that a group is now retroactively looking at different UFO cases? I mean, this is just the first one they looked at. Is there a possibility? I'm going to ask you straight out.

Is this group going to keep looking at other past UFO incidents? I hope so. So one of the things Johnny Martyr, who's the president of this group, told me was he laments the fact that every kid in school wants to be an influencer and nobody wants to be a scientist, right? Because he's a scientist and he worked with scientists. And he says, part of their goal at applied physics, the group he runs is, how do we make physics fun? How do we make science interesting? How do we make kids say, this is something I want to do with my life and something I'm curious about? And so he said, why not engage on these things that may be fantastical as far as the testimony of it,

but let's take a look at it. Why not look at the Tick-TAC case? Why not look at some of these other ones that seem to have a lot of good testimony on something that people had a hard time explaining and see if there's a scientific analysis? I know that Kevin Knooth and some of these other guys that the Scientific Coalition for UAP studies

kind of did that with the TICTAC. And they said, well, if the radar tracks were right, that the thing was going from 80,000 feet to 50 feet and less than a second, what would do that? How would that work? What would the energy requirements be? If there was something that were 40 feet long like the TikTok and it had Tick-Tac, and it had no control services,

and it was moving at the speed and had the maneuverability, from a scientific standpoint, is there something we could come up with that would account for that testimony, that would account for what people say they're seeing with their eyes. So I can tell you that after they did this analysis that you're talking about, and this article came out, I saw a C-C-of-an email from Micah Hanks telling Johnny, the head of applied physics, that the group of the scientific coalition for UAP studies, the SCU,

really found their article interesting. They had some thoughts that were, seemed to be in the study, support of their conclusion or at least their proposed conclusion and that they wanted to put those two together to yeah potentially work on some other stuff and johnny said yeah we're interested so i can't report that any specific cases they're looking at yet or any specific conclusions they're making yet but i can tell you that aside from people that maybe people are more critical like a Travis taylor some of these people that maybe bring some baggage with them that this group of physicists who doesn't, you know, have any background in UFOs,

haven't appeared on any ancient alien shows, don't seem to have any skin in the UFO game, but are just purely scientists that are interested in it. They are now, yeah, it does look like they may team up with the SU and they may look at some past cases. And I think there may even be some cases that have some radar data and things like that that they want to look at as well, that maybe a little more meat on the scientific bone as opposed to just taking testimony, which as we started this whole show with McWest and other people lamenting a low information zone story that's just testimony and no physical evidence,

nonetheless, it's a fun thought experiment if you're scientists to look at it and go, can we come up, like people are reporting something really insane, is there a way to scientifically validly explain that? The one extra thing I would add to this case is when I was first approached by Johnny back in December about this, and he told me that they might want to do this, and he laid out the theory for me about a warp spacecraft. I said, so yeah, either an alien spaceship or a secret man-made warp project. And he kind of laughed, and he goes, we don't know. have anything like that. And I said, what do you mean? We don't have any of that. Like, you know?

And he says, well, I'm not saying I know I know. I'm just saying I know. And I said, well, what do you mean? And he said, something like Warp is only dealt with scientifically in a very small community. The first real theory didn't come out to the mid-90s with a Mexican mathematician a Mexican mathematician named Miguel Alcoubier. So not even, you know, 29 years ago was the first like scientifically sound warp theory. And even that has some magic physics in it to make it all work. And his group has written a paper, Johnny's group, applied physics

about a physical work drive, a thing that wouldn't require any exotic matter, or wouldn't have any of the energy violations that some of the more complex theories have. And he told me, says, look, it's a small group of people on the whole planet that works on this sort of

stuff. It's all relatively new. If there were a secret project somewhere where, humans were building a work drive spacecraft just by default, me and the people I know and the people I work with in this community would either be involved or we would know the people involved. It's just too small of a community. So he says, I'm not saying it's alien, but I'm telling you if it was a workcraft, it's not human. And I thought that was really an interesting point to make from a scientist standpoint that, because I always argue that, you know, I always

argued that the triangle craft I saw in 1977 might have just been a secret project. No, CIA or Air Force or something project. Tick-Tac we saw the pilot saw in 2006 might just be a secret human project. And his point was if there is a warp spacecraft and it was hovering over gate C-7 or whatever the gate was at a Chicago O'Hare, and it ripped through the clouds, it's not man-made because they're just not the infrastructure in place for us to have. made the advancements to something like that. Wow.

It's quite a statement to take, to make. I love that. Square, square scientists, not guys coming. They're not really UFO people. Anyone in the group that I've talked to, I talked to Brian Melker, PhD, Brendan Melker, who's did a lot of the analysis in that article, and he's part of their team.

And he was very cautious when talking to me to make sure that we put out there. We're not saying that this is an alien work drive spacecraft. What we're saying is if all of the testimonial evidence is accurate, if this is what it looked like, if this is what it was shaped like, this is how it moved,

and it didn't show up by radar and it shot through the clouds and created a hole, we can offer one sound theory that brings all those pieces of data into account and still works, that it doesn't fail on any of that analysis. So

even though they were saying, and it could have been an alien spacecraft, they wanted to make sure that they said, hey, we're not saying it's an alien space. Of course. But we are. No, no, no. I'm just, right?

Well, this is the curse of working at the debris is things people like to tell you off, Mike, and I'm sure you experience it at this job. And mainstream scientists all the time like to tell me wacky things and tell me you can't repeat that. I go, dude, if I showed you...

Tell me shit I can repeat. Yeah. If I showed you, like, my DMs on Twitter or my email of what people say, this is off the record, or this is, you know, this can't be what you put in an actual article or on the show. Oh, God. Well, you know who does think that this was ET Warp Drive craft? Most of our audience. I did a poll, actually, Chris, over on YouTube of what was the 2006 Chicago O'Hare

UFO. And let's go through this poll here. As we speak, 5% believe it was a balloon. So Mick West would be very happy with that. He was probably actually... Yeah, right? He was

probably the 5% actually who put that. 15% believe it was a whole punch cloud. 28% believe it was an interdimensional craft and 52% believe it was a warp drive. E.T. Kraft.

Yeah, and so the Whole Punch Cloud is addressed in the article that we did. And I think it's important to note that Whole Punch clouds are a real thing. They exist in nature. You can see them up in the sky periodically. They do even occasionally occur around airports. The problem is when it comes to temperature and humidity and other aspects that have to be in alignment for them to exist, I think they're also called full streak clouds. just didn't exist that day.

It was too warm. The various atmospheric information wasn't of a nature that you would get because it has to do with the vapor freezing and coalescing. Yeah, exactly to a point. And then dropping down and you get this nice round hole. So people are right that even if it was a UFO, even if the most outlandish answer, that it was an alien warp drive spacecraft is the right answer. It would still be a hole punch cloud. So anybody who says it's a whole punch cloud is still accurate.

If they're saying it's a naturally forming whole punch or fall straight cloud, it doesn't seem that the atmospheric dynamics that day at that time were of nature that it could have happened on its own. Is it possible that an airplane shot through the clouds or a drone or something else shot through? Yeah, I think the atmospheric dynamics would have supported that. So again, did people see something else that just look like a disc and look like it was shooting straight up vertically and looked like it was a thousand feet around? And it was really just a drone or an airplane or something else. We're by an airport.

Of course, that's a legitimate explanation. We just had a lot of witnesses in this case who weren't connected to each other describing it as a disc, describing it is huge, describe it as rapidly accelerating vertically. So none of those things seem to support conventional aircraft we know of especially in 2006. Right. Exactly. This is a great question. And I was actually going to ask you about this, Chris. Chris, do you think they were doing the research on behalf of Arrow? If they're not, dude, like they should be, because these are the type of people, they need at Arrow looking at this stuff, since they are saying that they're a science. based, you know, group looking at this thing. So, yeah, what do you think of Arrow and all of this? Should they be using by physics?

I can tell you this. If I were the team running Arrow and I were looking for a group of scientists to get involved, that again, we're well-credentialed, professional on top of their game and not anybody with any previous notions as to reality or lack of reality. or anything like that. Yeah, this is the exact group. This is what they do is they look at, like I said, a lot of times they're looking at technology for investments, for VCs to validate whether the technology is viable or something like that.

So, yeah, this is, you know, when we think about UAP task force or Arrow or any of these official organizations, and we envision a group of scientists behind the scene looking at cases and trying to analyze them scientifically. I think this is what guys like me and a lot of us fantasize is that it's a team of really smart people who are professionally trained scientists who don't have any skin in the game either way.

They're just brought in as consultants to just look at it. I think actually, Kirk Patrick, or is that his name, Kill Patrick? Kirk Patrick. Yeah, I think he's kind of, for better or worse, somebody like that. Who's got no skin in the game either way. isn't, you know, and it's not the Condent Committee where you have somebody who's predisposed against, or it's not Project Sign where you have scientists that are predisposed for ET or something,

but just completely agnostic scientists that are just saying, let me see the evidence and let me analyze it, I'll give you our best bet. So are they working for Arrow now? I'm pretty confident they are not. And if they are and they haven't told me that, shame on them over in applied physics. But I do think this is the type of group that should be working. with Arrow. And I wouldn't be surprised if that's a

connection they end up making because it is such a large group of, like I said, it's over 30 physicists. They're from around the world. A bunch of them are in different countries. Johnny himself lives in New York. I think the group is headquartered out of Sweden. That's where his partner, Alexi, who co-founded it with

him, and actually co-wrote a work paper two years ago. That's how I originally met them. So, yeah, this is the type of group that should be doing that analysis. It's the type of group I would feel very good doing it because they're not coming in with any frequency thoughts at all. Absolutely. Yeah, again, I think this is so exciting and invigorating to have a group like this looking into past UFO cases and possibly current UFO cases in real time as they get, you know, reported to Arrow and stuff like that. So, yeah, I think this is an awesome lead that you got over there at the debrief and a working relationship with this group that I think is only going to enhance the legitimacy of the topic being taken seriously of UFOs in the scientific, you know, aspect.

So I think it's awesome, Chris. I think this article you put together was well worth the wait. You know, we had heard rumblings that you were working on something with Chicago O'Hare for a while. So I think you delivered, man. This was awesome. Awesome. You know, I think we've reached a point, and I think this was, again, to come back to the original opening story here. I think there's a lot of people that are like, if it's not new video or it's not new photos, I'm not interested.

I'm not interested in any more stories, and I'm not interested in analysis of stories. So if you're in that camp, I think this would just be more stories and analysis of. of stories. But if you're somebody who's looking for scientists to take this seriously, for mainstream prudentialed, well-educated scientists to take this topic seriously, and for them to offer theories on the information we do have, in this case, purely testimonial evidence, of something they see that would meet the threshold of all the things that we're witnessed in that case. Yeah, I mean, I just think this is, we need, give me more of this, not less of this. Absolutely. Give me more, buddy.

Hey, that's a perfect transition. Give me more. So what do you have, if you can tease us on what do you have coming up over at the debrief before we begin wrapping things up here? So we are working on a lot of things over there, as always. There's a lot of cooking going on in the kitchen. I've been known to get myself in trouble with the team over there from time to time by leaking things out. I think I leaked this Chicago thing out in December. and here it is coming out in May.

And people are like, man, what's with the wait? So here's something I can tell you, though. If you're on Twitter and you're following Dr. Chance Glenn, he is a scientist and a professor and an engineer at the University of Houston, Victoria. He's actually the provost of the whole university. So he's above all the other professors there and works with all of them on different projects. But he is a scientist and engineer. I met him through the fact that he was working again.

on like a warp drive type theory, and again, just hard science on how space and time can be warped. And he tweeted this out the other day. He said, recently, I had the pleasure of speaking with three gentlemen about their experiences with UFOs slash UAPs. One ex-military, one scientist, and one businessman. At least one has an experience that has been documented with RO. A-A-R-O. I will discuss this more on Ask Doctor Chance. So Ask Doctor Chance is a new show on the Debrief's YouTube channel.

Our premiere episode was April 26, 28th, somewhere right there at the end of April. And Dr. Chance spoke about space travel, and he just took readers' questions and addressed them. But in this upcoming episode, which will be at the end of May, so we're only a couple of weeks away. he's going to talk about what he mentioned right there, which is he's going to do a full show on UFOs. Again, a mainstream college professor, engineer, PhD, who's, because of his association with the debrief, is looking at some of this stuff now and has been involved in it.

And he's going to now come out and talk about, I think he mentioned three different witnesses, at least one of which had their experiments documented with Airbus. So he's going to give up the goods, whatever he's learned from them, whoever these witnesses are, whatever their experiences, including the one that was documented, he's going to discuss that on his show at the end of the month here on the YouTube, on the Debrief's YouTube channel. And if you follow me on Twitter at Plain underscore fiction, I think it's there under my photo somewhere. I will be tweeting it out. If you follow the Debrief's Twitter account, we'll be tweeting it out too. And if you want to follow Dr. Chance Glenn, he's just a smart guy and a great follow.

Let me give you it. His Twitter is at Professor underscore Glenn, G-L-E-N-N, at Professor underscore Glenn. And Chance Glenn is just a smart guy, a gentleman, and just really great science communicator, a huge Star Trek nerd, and he goes to conventions. And I mean, he's definitely a nerd. And he's just one of our type. He's my type of guy. And yeah, he's committed to doing these shows with the debrief.

And the first one was really excellent on space travel. And this one coming up, he's going to weigh in on UFOs and UAP, including testimony from three different people he spoke to privately. That's amazing. I'm so happy you guys got him to work with you over there. He is a Star Trek nerd. with his little logo pin on recently. Well, and, you know, we should mention also the other awesome podcasts over at the debrief.

You've got rebelliously curious with Chrissy Newton, our very own co-pilot here. It's somewhere in the skies and feature projects as well. Stay tuned for that. And you also have the weekly report now over at the debrief, too, with M.J. Benias. And I'm not familiar with the co-host. Oh, Stephanie Burke. So she's another big statement. Star Trek nerd and a science nerd.

And I got to tell you, that is a really fun show. It's maybe 20, 25 minutes per episode. So they're really tight. They're just Spotify, Apple, you know, iTunes, just an audio podcast. They basically go through the debrief stories of the last week. They pick out two, three, or four that they found really interesting. The two of them are really funny and really smart, and they discuss it in a fun way. And like I said, if you're just looking for a quick, like, how, what's the debrief up?

and you don't feel like sitting down and reading through all of articles, you don't have the time, and you go, what fun stuff is going on over there? They touch on that every Friday. It's like I said, about like 25 minutes. It's really fun. And you get MJ Benayas. I mean, how can one of the founders of the debrief and our own internal McWest? I mean, what's more fun than listening to a skeptic, be a wise guy,

and give ground every once in a while because Stephanie is a, she's, keeps him on his toe. She's great. Yeah, it's a fun show. I really do enjoy it. And like you said, that's what we do here at somewhere in the live stream. We bring podcasts, highlights of the week, news stories of the week, like your one-stop shop for all of this stuff.

Because, you know, everyone's so busy in their personal lives to know everything, to learn everything, read everything, hear everything. So I thought it'd be cool, like the weekly report at the debrief, to like kind of bring everything together, see what's going on in the community and outside of the UFO community. That's great idea.

I think it's cool. It's been going good. We're 14 episodes in. We've grown a really solid foundation here. We've got Dailin, Ryan Baker, Suzanne, Robert, James Craig, Jazz. They show up every week. A lot of others as well. I should mention, too, Jazz gave us a very generous super chat of $40 here before we get going. He does just like every week. I'll keep my eye on Vend. for my... Seriously, man. I feel like Jazz has got like some oil in his backyard.

He's not telling anyone about or something. But he made this comment very early on in our conversation about, you know, the alien civilization thing. The idea that a species to achieve powered flight in the last 130 years in a universe that is 14 billion

years old or much older looking at James Webb is just ridiculous. So that's Jazz's comment on what we're talking about in the past there. So thank you, Jess. Truly appreciate that.

Thank you to James Craig and thank you to Jordan Mack as well. That's all I got, Chris. I kept you for literally almost an hour longer than I told you. So I'm going to let you go for the night, man. You were just, God, I could do these science-based episodes with you at least once a month. So I can't wait to have you back in the near future.

on somewhere in the sky. But as my mom used to always say, if Chris doesn't know the answer, he'll make one up. Spoken like a true euphologist, actually. Yeah, right. Thanks for having me out, man. You know, personally, I got a ton of love for you. I just think you're a gentleman.

I think that just people that, if you are new to this community, you're just kind of stipping your toe in and going, like, is this, all I hear on Twitter is it's all trolls and it's all fighting. it's all negativity. I found anything but in the UFO community. I joined up here about two and a half years ago right before I started working at the debrief,

and I started interacting with people on here, and I found a lot of great, fun, positive, open-minded people that are just looking for answers. And Ryan Sprague is one of my favorite people I've met here, and just, I listen to your show. I'm a fan. I read your books, and I think anybody who's looking for a cool, fun read, or a cool fun show hosted by a guy who's not out looking to got you anybody or out looking to be negative and just have fun in life.

As my wife would say, Ryan Sprague passes the smile test, which means you're always smiling, brother. It's one of my favorite things about you. Oh, thank you, buddy. Well, it takes people like you to keep me smiling in this field, trust me. So I will say good night to you and to your wonderful wife. But thank you. Thank you for your time tonight. we will definitely talk very soon as everything progresses.

Sound good? Sounds good. And I'll have when there's more to come. I'll let you know. I know you will. Thank you, Chris. Thanks for joining us, buddy. All right, take care.

That's it. Guys, wow, what an episode. Again, I kept Chris way longer that I told them. I was like, yeah, it might be like an hour. And here we are, an hour and 57 minutes in. So I am going to say good night to you guys. It's getting late over here in the UK. but, but, but, this will be the podcast episode for the week,

but we have some awesome episodes coming up in the very near future as well. I'm doing a whole episode on Close Encounters of the Third Kind. No, not the movie, but actual cases. And that was co-research and co-written by the one and only Preston Dennett. So I will be bringing you, I believe it's six close encounter of the third kind UFO cases that you probably have never heard of before. Very obscure, very cool cases. So that's going to be coming to you in the following week of somewhere in the skies.

But this was incredible. I'm so happy we got to revisit the Chicago O'Hare UFO incident from a fresh perspective by this group, Applied Physics, and brought to us by Chris Plain at the debrief. So that's it, guys. That's all I got for you. Oh, yeah. That book right there just came out. So check that out too, if you don't mind.

Over on Amazon in paperback and e-book, stories from somewhere in the skies. Dailen has been in the chat all night. She's actually in the book. Her crazy dramatic UFO encounter in the outback in Australia on a military base. Stunning case. You'll read about it in stories from somewhere in the skies. So, yeah, if you have the book, please, please, please. I'm begging you, please.

Go rate and review it on Amazon. That helps tremendously. My publishers tell me, and they've been kind of telling me, you've got to tell people, go rate and review. Go rate and review. So please, rate and review the book over on Amazon. It helps us out a lot.

But that's all I got, guys. Everyone's sending their love to Chris here in the chat. Way too many to put up on the screen. So I'll put them up as we do our outro. But that's it, guys. I'm going to say good night for tonight. Stay tuned for this episode dropping on the podcast feed very, very soon. And as always, keep your feet on the ground, but never stop searching.

Somewhere in the Skies is produced by Third Kind Productions in association with the Entertainment One podcast network. Lots of places can expose you to identity theft. Oh, no. That's why LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats to your identity, which is way more than anyone can do on their own. If we find anything suspicious, like new loans or changes to your financial accounts, we alert you right away all through text, phone, email, or the LifeLock app. Get the alerts that could make all the difference.

Save up to 40% your first year at lifelock.com slash special offer. Terms apply.