The Joe Rogan Experience - #1883 - Ryan Graves

Episode Date: October 18, 2022

Former Lt. U.S. Navy and F/A-18F pilot Ryan Graves was the first active duty pilot to publicly disclose regular sightings of Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP). Today, Graves serves as first Chair of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics UAP Community of Interest, and is the Director of Business Development at Quantum Generative Materials. www.uncertainvector.com

Joe Rogan Podcast, check it out! The Joe Rogan Experience. Train by day, Joe Rogan Podcast by night, all day! Nice to meet you, Ryan. Nice to meet you, Joe. Pleasure to be here. You're one of four or five people that I've talked to that have seen something that might be from somewhere else. It's always weird when you talk to someone that may have seen something that might be from somewhere else. It's always weird when you talk to someone that may have seen something that... Let's just first, before we even get started,

please tell people your credentials, what your background is. Sure. So, you know, my name is Ryan Graves. I have an engineering degree, mechanical and aerospace engineering. I promptly left doing that to go fly F-18s for the Navy as soon as I graduated college. Did that for about a decade, both operationally in combat as well as in an instructor role, teaching the new students. And, you know, we did witness something while we were flying in our jets, but, you know, we were doing it under under we witnessed it in the context of our just everyday flying in our missions and what year was it that you witnessed this so we started seeing these in 2014 was the earliest that I know 2013 late 2013 early 2014 and could you describe what it was the very first experience yeah so

for me personally the experience was simply just flying out to the area like I would any other day. And instead of seeing an empty airspace with just my wing person or another squadron doing something a different block, there were all of a sudden a lot of different radar contacts, which is immediately a problem because, you know, we could be hitting one of those or someone working in our area. And this was happening because we upgraded our radar, the best we could tell. We were in an earlier radar called the APG-73, and we had come back from deployment. We entered a maintenance phase, it's called.

We kind of do a little bit less flying, upgrade the jets if we need to, do any long-lasting maintenance. And we upgraded to the APG-79, which was a much better radar. And what is the difference in the capabilities of the upgraded radar system versus the original system? So, you know, kind of practically speaking, it's like going from an analog TV, essentially, to like an OLED. It's, you know, a digital modern tool compared to more of like an analog classical radar

that has more limited range and has less ability to track multiple targets and things of that nature. So just generally speaking, we would expect to see more objects if there were any out there or smaller objects, but there shouldn't have been any objects out there. And so how far offshore are you when this is all going down? Our working areas start about 10 miles off the coast, and then it goes out, you know, 100 or 250 miles or so, though we don't usually use those far eastern areas. But we would only see them over the water. So they would really only be in our working areas, maybe slightly, you know, in between the working area

of the land, but never over the land, sometimes over the bays that are in the area that are quite large, but never just kind of zooming west over land or anything like that. And is this restricted airspace? It's not. So that's a tricky question. For us operating in a military operating area, it is not restricted in the sense that you have to be, there's only one person allowed in there. You could have these little Cessnas kind of bumbling in there, but they would get called out pretty quick, both from the kind of air traffic control agency that's working out there, as well as F-18s and the other aircraft that may be working out there.

But in a broader sense, when we look at it in relation to our air defense identification zone, which is essentially a band of airspace that surrounds our entire country, if your flight path originates out over the water outside of that ADIZ and you proceed into that ADIZ, into our controlled airspace, then you do have to essentially have permission to enter that airspace. It's not a restricted airspace like a traditional bombing range, but it is protected airspace. It's our coastal air. So you have this upgraded radar system, and what are you detecting? So on the radar, really what we can learn from that is essentially the kinematics of the object. So where is it essentially, and what direction is it going, how fast is it going,ematics of the object. So where is it essentially? And, you know, what

direction is it going? How fast is it going? Things of that nature. We can't necessarily make up the shape or things of that nature. So it's a representation. It's like a block on our screen to show that information. And so when we see that on our radar, we can tell, you know, where it's located, you know, perhaps what's located around around it if there's other objects we're detecting, how fast it's going, what direction it's pointed in, what direction it's traveling in. So we call that velocity vector. So if we see this essentially little circle, it'll have a tail coming off of it. And that tail kind of represents the nose of the vehicle, at least as its flight path is going. kind of represents the nose of the vehicle, at least as its flight path is going.

And so with that, you know, we would typically see an aircraft just kind of trudgling along with a straight line, taking occasional turns. But these objects had a little bit more of a, I don't want to say random, but more less controlled flight path. That velocity vector would kind of jump around a bit more. flight path, that velocity vector would kind of jump around a bit more. They would not proceed in like a perfectly straight line, as you would imagine, like a flight navigation computer would take you, right? It takes you from A to B in the straightest line possible. These objects seem to kind of be moving in a direction that was not a straight line, but generally proceeding in that direction. And so they would kind of be meandering slightly, but moving in that general direction, both three-dimensionally and horizontally. So winding around, going up,

going down. So they're not on a flat plane and they're not going in a straight line. So I don't want to draw too many firm statements like that because we would see them being flat too. We'd see them perfectly stationary up there, regardless of the wind. Really? Mm-hmm. Yep. Wow. So what kind of wind are you talking about? Oh, gosh. I mean, at altitude, you can have anywhere up to 100, 120 knots of airspeed. Which is, what is that in miles per hour? It's about 130, 140 miles. So they're completely stationary with 140 mile an hour wind. Correct. How would something do that?

stationary with 140 mile an hour wind. Correct. How would something do that? That's confusing to me as well. Even if we had something that could just burn that much energy, right? Like if you had a sphere surrounded by a little rocket, right? Just imagining something right now. Okay. And if you wanted to keep that perfectly stationary, right? Against gravity, you could just fire all the rockets at the bottom really fast and hopefully keep it flat, right? Right. It's going to have tiny little variations. And then if you have wind hitting it and all this, you could potentially have those rockets try to counter it, but it would never be perfectly still in winds like that. Because the wind's not perfectly still either, right? Exactly. It changes and varies. It does. So it's almost like it's the wind. It's not even really fighting the

wind, it seems. It just seems like it's just there in a way. Wow. So the first time you see these things, what are your thoughts? Yeah, the first time really was, well, what is this, right? It's not a UFO or something mysterious at this point. At what we're thinking at this point, we see on the radar, it's just, well, our radar is broken, right? These perhaps don't represent physical objects yet because we hadn't, you know, visually seen these or seen them on our camera yet. And so, you know, we kind of like, hey, what's going on here? You know, is anyone else seeing this kind of thing? But not really like investigating it,

right? It's just kind of like, all right, there's stuff out there, but maybe next time we'll take a look. But the way our systems work when we we have all these contacts on our radar, and if we kind of just select one out with our little cursor there, all our sensors go to it. Our FLIR goes to it, which is our camera system. All our weapons, they have like their own little eyes in some sense, and they all look in that direction. And so eventually, you know, someone had one of these selected and flew close enough so that as they look at their FLIR system, their camera, they could see something that was at the spot represented on the radar, right? So there was something there. So they were seeing it visually with their own eyes? Not this point, just on the FLIR system. The FLIR system.

And so that's a, it's a regular camera and also an infrared camera. And so typically we'll roll around in infrared just because it returns a better image typically. So yeah, it didn't look like an object they were seeing on the FLIR. It just looked like a source of IR energy in a sense, almost as if someone was shining a flashlight. But something had to be there to be reflecting that energy or creating it. So at this point, to answer your question, now we're like, OK, this isn't just an error in our radar. This is perhaps, you know, we're thinking this is real. We have to really respect this as like a safety hazard now. Even if it's just a small, you know, however small ribbon of tinfoil, right?

Like that sucked down the engine can still take out an aircraft, right? So we have to be very respectful of that. Like a mylar balloon type thing? Potentially, right? Yeah. But how fast are these things going? So sometimes stationary, right? Sometimes they would be going around 0.6 to 0.8 Mach, which is at altitude about, you know, 240 to maybe 330 knots, you know, around there. So somewhere in the range of an airplane. Yeah. And fighter aircraft would be kind of flying around at those airspeeds, except sometimes they would be perfectly stationary as well.

Right. So it's not exhibiting any sort of patterns that you've recognized in the past. No, they have actually. But with the stationary, no, right? Correct. With the stationary, no. With the meandering kind of flight path, no. But I would also see them essentially fly what we call a racetrack pattern. And essentially what that means is they fly in a straight path and then they do like a 108 degree turn in a certain direction. Then they fly a straight path, then turn again. So that's what we call a racetrack pattern as opposed to a circular holding pattern. We did witness racetrack patterns.

In fact, I think there's been some cases off the West Coast just the past couple weeks where people have also been observing objects flying in racetrack patterns high at altitude with lights. So I do recognize that behavior, but I don't necessarily think that means we have to attribute it to normal behavior necessarily. That type of flight path is important because it's a very efficient way to fly, right? If you have to maintain the position in a certain area, you want to minimize how much you're turning. Because anytime you're turning in an aircraft, you're using more energy than if you were just flying straight and level.

And so by having that racetrack pattern, it's an efficient way of holding in a position by maximizing straight and level time and minimizing your turn time. And how long would these things stay up there for? So from my experience, from our experience, and again, we weren't studying these, but they were always out there. You know, they were out there when we took off. we'd see them. And then we'd go to land, they would still be out there. Like every day? Every day. Every day. So you guys go from not having any idea that these things are out there to upgraded radar system to seeing them every day. Yeah. What is the thought? Like, how are you feeling when these like, is there an evolution of the thought pattern of how you're addressing these things and thinking about them? Initially, you're thinking they're errors. When do you start getting one, the object was directly at what we call the entry point of the area.

So, you know, that box that I told you about in the sky that starts 10 miles off the coast, this particular GPS location and altitude where incoming traffic will fly in and outbound traffic will fly in the exact same spot, but will fly out a thousand feet lower. There were two aircraft from my squadron, VFA-11, and we flew, or excuse me, they flew, took off as a flight of two. That means they're essentially flying in a formation like this. And as they hit the area, one of these objects went right between the aircraft. area, one of these objects went right between the aircraft. The lead air crew saw the object. The Dash 2 aircraft crew did not, which is not surprising because they're usually, you know, you're very focused on flying formation. You're just staring right at that aircraft. The lead really has actual leeway to look around. So he saw it and, you know, he immediately came back. I have to assume he didn't have it on his radar because he wouldn't have flown through this object at the entrance point.

He turned around, flew back, landed. And I was in the ready room when he come back. And, you know, he had all his gear on, which typically is not a good thing because you want to get that stuff off as fast as possible. So it usually means, you know, there's a problem of some nature. And, you know, he was just sitting there saying, hey, you know, there's a problem of some nature. And, you know, he was just sitting there saying, hey, you know, I was hit with those damn things. And we all knew what he's referring to, even though we didn't necessarily have a name for just because we were seeing these so much. And he described it, you know, he described it just as a black or dark gray cube.

And that cube was inside of a clear translucent sphere. And essentially the apex or the corners of that cube, best he could tell, were touching inside of that sphere. And that description mirrors many of the descriptions that people have had of these, whatever you want to call them. They're calling them UAPs now for some strange reason. UFOs, I don't know, does it have a dirty connotation to it? Is it tainted because of so many crazy people talk about UFOs? Is that what it is?

It does come with a lot of assumptions baked in. It baked in. Yeah. So that's something. But whatever it is, that is a design that people have reported seeing before, that this translucent sphere and this cube, can you see through the cube? Not to my understanding, no. So it's some sort of solid black cube that's inside this translucent sphere,

and it's just floating around and flying around the sky. So, you know, that's a good point. Is it floating around? Is it flying around? It's doing both, which is strange, right? Because you could think of that description, okay, that's kind of some kind of weird balloon maybe with stuff in it. And that's certainly, you know, one way, if you just know, that nullifies that particular idea. And you'll see, you'll see that a lot where it's not just like that one picture, that one behavior. It's really, you kind of have to zoom out a bit and look at everything in relation to each other and say, okay, why is this weird? You know, okay, it was hanging out in a racetrack pattern. That's not exotic. But when you learn it was doing it for, you know, perhaps 13 hours. 13 hours? Perhaps. They were out there all the time. So I land and I go back. And we weren't on an intel mission to analyze these. We're going to do our training. It's very expensive, $30K an hour to fly these things. So really the only time we

can put energy into looking at these things is when we're kind of transiting back and forth or waiting for a fight to start. And so it's never like a dedicated analysis. One of the problems I've had is that, you know, people haven't wanted to look into and to study this topic. And people ask me all the time, okay, you know, what were you seeing on the jet? What were you seeing in the radar? I want to be able to tell them that there was a great thing that we saw, but an F-18 is not a scientific tool, right? We only get presented a certain amount of information when all the sensors essentially filter all the data out so that we can prosecute the targets and do our job. It's not some type of like analog, you know, information we receive. So, you know, just because, say, something is showing jamming on my radar from one of these objects doesn't mean the object is executing, you know, electronic

warfare to jam my jet. It just means that, you know, it's doing something to our radar signal, and when it comes back, you know, our jet is processing it like it's EW. So we need to get proper scientific tools to do an analysis on these objects instead of basing, you know, a lot of our analysis right now just on tools of war that aren't built for that. Right. How long can you guys stay up in an F-18? If we're dogfighting, about an hour. If we're holding at 0.6 to 0.8 mach, you know, like I described them as doing, somewhere maybe around like two, two and a half hours maximum. And you think that these things are up there for far longer than that.

So how big was this thing when this guy saw it? So it's very difficult to tell in the air, but because they were flying in formation, we can make some estimated guesses essentially. And that's what we did when we talked about it afterwards, right? So the aircraft were about a hundred feet apart. This thing, you know, they estimate it essentially split the section, which means it went more or less right down the middle, but slightly closer to the lead, which would put it somewhere less than 50 feet, you know,

on average if they're about 100 feet. You know, and then so he essentially used that size reference to say, hey, you know, this might have been somewhere in like the 5 to 15, you know, this might have been somewhere in like the 5 to 15, you know, foot diameter. It's, you know, not a tight guess, but that's the best we could come up with. And what is it like, like what, what's the atmosphere like when you go back to the base? Are you allowed to discuss this? Is this something that's openly talked about? Is this something that you get ridiculed for? It's just, you know, like you would expect any group of, you know, dude and dudettes, you know, hearing about this, they just kind of, you know, do the normal reaction like anyone else and to kind of, you know, make the jokes and then kind of get back to work essentially because,

you know, we're just so busy at this time right we're getting ready for war like for a lot of us this is the the apex of our career sense to get ready for deployment you know and it's kind of like the long blade gets cut in a sense in a fighter community like that it's very much a trust-based organization so you know no one's out there looking to like make a big deal out of something that's completely irrelevant you know in our eyes to our day-to-day operations other than a safety risk. That's really, like, as much as we could process it. So, yeah, there was ridicule, but I don't think it was, I wouldn't say it was, like, over the top or emotionally damaging. But, you know, it made it clear it wasn't something that, like, you know, we were going to, like, put serious thought and energy into.

You know, it was, hey, yeah, stay away and, you know, let me know how you did in that next fight, essentially. And when you discuss this, how many other people came forward with similar stories? It was less about people coming forward because everyone was just like, well, yeah, of course we see them out there. Like at this point when we, it was almost a safety issue at this point. Well, let me back up. At first, you know, as soon as people, you know, the joke subsided when people eventually flew in a jet with upgraded radar and saw it themselves. Right. So, you know, it dwindled down where everyone was aware of this and it was just a safety hazard. Because, you know, the high probability answer was that this was some type of classified program of our own making that had perhaps just started operating in an area they weren't supposed to for whatever reason. That was, you know, that was kind of our assumption. And so we submitted a safety report because of that near midair, a HAZRAP or hazard report, which is essentially a notice that goes out to the whole fleet that says, you know, this is a potential hazard that could cause a loss of an aircraft. And, you know, it was due to us almost hitting an unknown object of unknown origin.

And that's how it continued for a while. And there was a number of HazRaps about that, about near misses. misses. Eventually, they put out what's called a NOTAM or Notice to Airmen, which is a published, it's published on a federal website, which essentially lists things like, hey, the runway lights are down, or, you know, they're working on this runway, or this area is closed for something. And we had one in our area, local area that said, you know, caution for the unknown objects working in our operating areas. We just don't know what they are, essentially. So that's just kind of where it stagnated at that point, as far as, you know, resolution. That's got to be a very bizarre feeling. You're flying around

in these jets preparing for deployment, and you see things that are, if not unexplainable, haven't been explained yet. It just didn't fit into our framework, right? Even if we look at it, so, you know, when we really kind of were trying to hash it out in the squadron, it's, you know, okay, what could these be? And even the classified, you know, drone thing, and I'm not even going to consider all the things that have happened since then, but even at this time, the drone thing didn't make sense to us for a number of reasons. One of those is why, right? Why do we have potentially hundreds or more small drones that can perform better than anything we've seen just hanging out for years off the coast? And is there a visible method of propulsion that's coming from these objects?

No. What about a heat signature? No. So, yeah. So there's no plume of heat coming out the back. There's no propellers. There's no wing surfaces that we've seen. And when you're looking at it, are you looking at it through some sort of an infrared that

will detect heat? Mm-hmm. You don't see anything? Usually through infrared, yeah. And so, you know, it'll come back as either a white hut or a dark hut, which means, you know, black color represents heat. Hut? What is hut? Just the, it's essentially if we're looking at like an object against a blue sky,

you know, if that thing's producing heat, then it's going to come out white in white hut. All right, so if I see a white object, it's going to be a hot object and the sky is going to look blue. What's that word hot you're using? H-O-T. H-O-T. Oh, hot. Like the temperature.

Like hot. Okay. Yeah. Okay. A little New England accent coming out. No, it's okay. I'm from New England too. I just thought it was something else.

I thought it was like a technical term. So yeah, you know, and I say that just to say that, you know, it would just be like either all like completely one temperature essentially, right? It wasn't like the skin of an aircraft you could see. It was just kind of like an emission of IR energy, like a flashlight, right? Sometimes, most of the time it would be cold. It was like a cold object. So it didn't appear to actually be emitting heat. There were times when they did appear to be emitting as hot objects as well.

So we did see both. So I don't know what to make of that. Was there a difference in the way they were moving when it was exhibiting heat? Not that I know. I don't want to say no, but we just didn't look at it deep enough to say that at the time. But whatever it was doing, it wasn't exhibiting any of the characteristics that you would normally expect from a jet or a drone or something that had some sort of a visible method of propulsion. Yeah. Wow. So when these things

are happening every day and all these different pilots are experiencing them every day. This is essentially just from the moment of 2014-ish when this new radar system gets implemented. So you had one sense of what was out there, and then all of a sudden you have these new systems, and now you're like, whoa, this is littered with these things. What is that like? For you personally, what does that feel like? What is that like for you personally? What does that feel like?

You know, it's just comforting. We spend a lot of time and energy on the most basic aspects of flight in a sense, right? Because if you can't just operate safely, right? You can't come back and land and manage your fuel and not bust through altitudes and all that. You can't do all the other stuff, right? And so we're very particular on those type of details.

So to have someone operating in that area would be a massive oversight. So it was, you know, in a sense, we kind of, at least I did, felt a bit let down, right? It was like, you know, someone should be willing to look at this and deal with this problem, you know? If it was going to constantly, it was not that it was constantly getting laughed at. It's just it was, we always had more bigger fish to fry, essentially. Which I respect and I understand. But it doesn't mean we completely ignore that. Right.

And we have to do more than just, you know, we have responsibility, I think, as aviators when we're up there to report really what we're seeing because we're on the front line of what we can see up there. And if, you know, we don't have the command or operational support to, you know, tell the truth about what we're seeing up there, then, you know, things have to change. And the ramifications of what these things possibly could be, how much does that weigh on you? Because if these things are from another world or from the ocean or from another dimension or fill in the blank, whatever you think it could be, that alone has got to be very weird to experience because this is not something that's being openly discussed. So you're just flying around out there. You get this new equipment. And then all of a sudden you're like, hey, there's some stuff out here that we have no knowledge of, and it's moving in a way that we really can't explain. What is that like?

We never really appreciated it at the time. Really? Because you're so mission focused. You're so mission focused. And the point when we kind of left our squadron, we left for deployment in 2015. And so this was still happening. It was prior to the point that they started putting that notice out to airmen, that NOTAM out. So they still not even got to the point to have that general notice out. It was just people sending out the occasional hazard reports and left from an individual squadron. And then we left for deployment. Well, excuse me, we left for workups first, I should say. So let me backtrack a little bit. As we get ready for deployment, we have our date where we leave. But then about six months prior to that, we're gone to the aircraft carrier and the different training areas to essentially get ready for that deployment and practice like we play. So we start going with the boat. We live on the boat.

We start doing tactics off the boat. And we left to go down to the coast of Jacksonville, Florida, on an event where we essentially do exactly that. We fly out on the aircraft carrier, and we do a number of tactical missions to simulate that we are in an operational theater. And honestly, it's more dangerous and likely difficult in a lot of cases than the actual combat deployment. We're preparing for every eventuality, air-to-air combat, rescue missions, everything. But of course, not everything gets exercised when you get out there. So it's much more dangerous and pretty

intense. And so that's what we were getting ready to go do. And then we left and we did that. And when we got down in that area from Virginia Beach, we noticed that these objects were down there as well. We didn't know whether they came with us or whether they were already down there. But once we started flying off the boat, about, I don't know, 1,500 miles or so south of Virginia Beach, you know, there they were again. And it was in my squadron again when the video that's known as the gimbal video now, when that was recorded, we were on that workup cycle out in Jacksonville. We should play the gimbal video. Jamie, will you please pull that up? Because I want you to kind of give us an understanding from your own expertise, like your technical understanding

of what we're looking at. Yeah. So here it is. So this is FLIR footage? Yep. So this is when I say FLIR, this is what I'm referring to. And right in the middle, the top of the screen, you see IR, infrared. So that's that infrared mode where we're seeing heat right now. We are in black hot. So that means objects that are darker are hotter. So this object right in the middle is putting heat out. And right now it appears to be rotating. Is that what it was doing there?

Yeah, exactly. So we do see this object rotating. I mean, it looks like a gimbal. That's why it's called that thing. I didn't name it. But we do. We see the object essentially rotate from what looks like a horizontal position here.

Those lines above it represent the horizon, so it's essentially parallel. There it goes. And it's hard to make out the shape of this thing but it seems almost like a disc with like a crown on the top and the bottom yeah kind of like it looks like almost like a little a little bit of energy coming out from the the poles there if you will that's kind of how i describe it i see like a little bit of the dark you know heat emanating from there or the energy as I call it. And is there any way from this video, from this equipment to detect how large this thing is?

There is. So the velocity vector in the middle there can be set to a particular size. And that size correlates to a particular length. can be set to a particular size. And that size correlates to a particular length. So that in a dogfight, if you have, you know, you're behind a guy and you essentially, his wingspan is equal to the length of those two lines on that circle with the lines coming out. See that? That's the velocity vector.

Then you know how far away he is, right? So it's kind of like an analog thing that's not super relevant, like in modern age, but yes, there is. I don't know, however, what that is set to in this one. So I can't make that calculation for you right now. Now, I know some people who have attempted to debunk this and debunk even the rotation of this object. What how do you know that that object is rotating? Definitively. Well, so we don't. Right. is rotating definitively? Well, so we don't, right?

We don't necessarily definitively know it's rotating at the end of the day, right? We have evidence that it is, but I don't have definitive evidence that you're a conscious human being on the other side of the table with me either. But you know what I mean? Like we just don't have that information.

So you only have video footage and in the video footage, it appears right now in relation to where it sits on the clouds that it has rotated. Yes. So, you know, we can also see if you, and I know it's been done. People have created models out there that, you know, essentially look at the clouds and they draw out a flight path that this could be at. And the only variable is essentially how far away the object is. And that flight path obeys an equation that can be observed pretty readily

when you build the little model. And essentially, if you're at six miles or so, the object is proceeding in a direction, and then when it starts to rotate, as the air crew have described, it climbs and reverses directions. So you can't quite make that out, but when you actually model it out, you can see that at these ranges, it does what was claimed. And we're kind of skipping a little bit on storage, so maybe I should back up. So, you know, when we observed, when this object was observed, the air crew essentially saw it on what they call a situational awareness page.

And so that is a God's eye view of all the sensor data and everything else that our jets and other jets put out. And so we can put caches on and move around, select stuff. And what the air crew described during this video verbally is a formation of objects and then the gimbal object. So what happened was, you know, we had all gone out on an air-to-air training mission during this workup cycle off of the aircraft carrier, the Theodore Roosevelt. And again, we're off the coast of Jacksonville, Florida. And, you know, there's like four or five or six, you know, red fighters, which are our own guys or gals acting as the enemy. And then we go up and act as the blue

fighters and go do our tactics. I was part of the flight. We all flew up there. When we kind of run out of gas during the fight, you kind of just return by yourself. And if you still have gas, you continue the fight type of thing. So we don't always fly home together. And in this case, the air crew from the gimbal video, you know, they knocked it off and started flying back to the boat. We don't go like directly back to the boat when we run out of gas. It seems counterintuitive, but we have to wait for our landing time. We can't just come back and land earlier. So it doesn't really matter where we are as long as we're nearby. And we just slow down to what we call our max endurance speed.

Right. So we just kind of cruise around, put along out there and just hang out until it's time to land. And so, you know, while they were doing this, they noticed that there was a group of contacts on their situation awareness page, again, from their radar. And they're like, hey, you know, maybe this is like a penetration test because they'll launch aircraft from the coast, you know, like old fighters or, you know, just things that can move relatively quick, but, you know, not necessarily there to engage us in a dogfight to see if we can detect them and intercept them in time and things of that nature, part of the overall training. And so when they saw these objects, that's what they thought this was.

And so they started flying over to it. And they got about six to seven, eight miles away. Six to eight is what the air crew told me. They didn't want to get any closer because it was nighttime at this point. They couldn't see the object, which is why they were only in the IR mode. And they essentially, you know, they checked out for a bit and then circled a bit and then flew back essentially as it was time for their recovery. But what they saw was, you know, you saw the gimbal object that we saw in the film, but there's also, there was also a formation of like four to

five, I might say six, I don't remember the exact number, but somewhere in the four to six range, to five, I might say six, I don't remember the exact number, but somewhere in the four to six range, objects that were flying in a wedge formation. So essentially like a triangle without a base. And those objects were kind of proceeding along the same line as the gimbal. From my recollection, the gimbal was, you know, slightly behind that formation and offset below it. And so that formation essentially kind of just turned in a, I'll call it left-hand turn, in a normal radius of turn to slightly less. But they got all jumbled up. So they just started turning instead of like a clean turn

where they all kind of stay in the same spot, kind of a big sweeping thing. Instead of that, it was a lot tighter, and they kind of broke down. They didn't look like they were in formation anymore in a sense. They were kind of scattered about. And I can't tell which one's which really out there on the radar looking at it, so I don't know if they came back in the same formation, exact same position, but when they rolled out 180 degrees out, basically reversed their direction, you know, they kind of got back into similar, if not the same formation,

proceeding in the opposite direction. And during this time, the gimbal object, you know, again, proceeding, call it left to right, trailing this formation while it kind of executed its radius of turn, the gimbal just essentially was continuing in a straight line. And then as if it like pinged off a wall, just reverse direction to follow that formation, you know, once they had started flowing in the opposite direction. So no turn. Just stopped in midair and went backwards.

I wouldn't even say stopped. It just seemed like it just never stopped. It just went ping. Wow. And that's how we saw it from the situational awareness page, from looking down. And so when you lift that up and look at it from the side, what that ping motion looks like is a U-turn, a vertical U-turn to go in the opposite direction. All right.

So it climbs to reverse its turn to flow in the opposite direction within about 500 feet, which is a very tight turn. I think an F-18 needs like 6,000 feet or 4,000 feet to do a turn like that. Wow. Yeah. So there's nothing that we have as a drone that's capable of moving like that? So, yeah, again, if you just look at one particular case, it's like, all right, so something climbed vertically and proceeded in the opposite direction. Like,

that's not the sexiest thing in the world. But then let's look back in context and say, okay, we're, you know, 350 miles off the coast in protected airspace around an aircraft carrier, you know, with only fighter jets in the air. And then all of a sudden there's a formation of small objects just kind of cruising around, you know, for a period of time that's unknown, performing the least fuel efficient turns possible, right? Like there's no concern for how fuel efficient that turn is. That's not, that's like the least efficient way to do a turn. And so how is an object hundreds of miles off the coast, you know, with apparently no concern for fuel hanging out next to our carrier? And without the FLIR footage, you would have never been able

to see these things. Correct. Yeah. When you report this, what's the reaction? How does that go? No. Because we were practicing like we play at this point, getting ready for war, we were doing a formal intel debrief after our flights, right? It's kind of like, hey, we intercept these guys and did that, another thing. And so the air crew who recorded it were going down to that room to debrief it um and someone told me like hey you know your friend there got something interesting on the on the fleer this time you know maybe you should go take a look or something so because i had already landed my gears off you know and so uh waiting to debrief essentially and so i'm like yeah i'll go check it out so i

walk down there you know it's like the other side of the ship uh go into classified space all the intel folk are in there and they're queuing up the video the tapes to watch uh the FLIR footage and here's an interesting thing too right so the situational awareness page that screen i told you about with radar data that's kind of in a screen that's, you know, chest level. And then there's a screen here, screen here, eye level on either side. And if you record, we put the FLIR here as standard procedure in the situational awareness page down here. And then we'll have a radar up here or any of our other systems. If you record this screen with the FLIR, you record the SA page automatically.

Like it's part of the same tape. So what's interesting is that is that's what we watched when we were in that Intel space. You know, I was able to see the FLIR footage and that's what, you know, we just watched. And then the situational awareness page with the radar data showed that as well, which, you know, showed the fleet and showed that movement I described. Those are, you know, if that FLIR footage exists, then the radar data for that event exists as well, right? Because it's filmed the same time. So someone would have had to specifically split it off to get the gimbal video out without the radar data, right? So the gimbal video was leaked.

Is that what happened? I don't know the exact mechanics. My understanding, that's the way it could be described, but it was done within channels that doesn't make it an illegal activity. But I honestly don't know the mechanics of how it was released. So somehow or another, it gets out there and it gets online, but the situational awareness page and the radar data does not. You only get the FLIR footage. Correct. Why do you think that is? I think there's good reasons for that. I don't think it's overly mysterious. Our radar sensor systems are our primary sensor out there. They're how we

employ our weapons. And that's all fine. I think that's completely reasonable to not have that released. Because it's top secret? Because it would be some sort of a breach of security? Yeah, it would give away how well our radar works, essentially. But, with that being said, there's still ways you can take that information and declassify it

and just put the raw data out there in a sense like the kinematics. Like, okay, we're detecting objects that move like this. There's no location. There's no specific... there's specifics have been kind of fleshed out. There's like mathematical tools that can do that with like, you know, precision and certainty. So there are ways to declassify that data. One of the efforts that I'm doing at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics with the UAP community of interest that I've helped put together is essentially preparing teams to do that, you know, analysis. We have a team of engineers, aerospace and others that have, you know, over 300 years

of NASA experience, you know, at least that are working to put together, you know, engineering and scientific UAP sensing manuals that can be updated yearly so that the information that we learn going forward in a productive manner isn't something that we need to necessarily get disclosed from the government in order to move forward on. So when you're watching the FLIR footage and you're looking at the situational awareness page and you're seeing these objects, the FLIR footage and you're looking at the situational awareness page and you're seeing these objects, you've already had experiences with these things by then? So the gimbal was new. With something.

Yeah. We hadn't seen the gimbal yet, though. So this is different than the other objects that you've seen. Yeah. So the gimbal object at this time- What is a gimbal, by the way? A spinning top. That's what I think of, right?

Oh, okay. Yeah. And essentially, you know, and that induces a force that wants to keep it upright, essentially, right? So, as it's spinning, you poke it, and it kind of goes back to the center. You know, again, I don't know where the names came from, but. Okay. But this particular shape of UAP, you had not witnessed before. Had you heard of something like this before?

No. No. witness before had you heard of something like this before no no and let me let me say it's not necessarily the shape um that one gives it the name and even um is what we were analyzing right because what we see in a video is ir energy and that could be anything is you know is there a plasma field there but the surface is smaller or is there some type of energy out there that or heat that is masking the shape of the object? We don't really know the size or the physical shape of the object from that image. Right, you're just getting the signature. So when everyone is observing this, how many people are in the room with you when this is going down?

Yeah, maybe like 15 or so. A lot of intel people, a handful of aviators, and then, of course, the air crew. What's the reaction? Everyone just kind of looking around at each other, just kind of like, holy shit. There was no like, oh, that's prosaic or that's – there was no conclusions drawn, but everyone just kind of like had no idea what it was. And the people that were in there, had they also used this upgraded equipment so they were all aware that there was something going on out there? Like this is a narrative that's being discussed? All the aviators, yeah.

So everyone kind of knows that you're not alone out there. It's a good question. I don't even know how many of the intel folks knew at this point. But, I mean, at least our squadron intel, you know, guided and I know a handful of others. But I honestly don't know how many of the intel folks were aware at this point is there a discussion about you know how much of this can you talk about openly how like is everyone going huh like what what is it like yeah pretty much that huh right and kind of just waiting for someone to provide some you know

leadership on this so like what'm like, what the fuck? What leadership is available if an alien spacecraft shows up? Well, apparently they called the Admiral, right? So they're like, let's see what the Admiral thinks. And so I kind of like, kind of slowly walked into the shadows so no one kicked me out, you know?

Right, because you want to know. Yeah, I want to see what his reaction at least was, you know? And he came down in a couple minutes, and he watched it for like five, six seconds, and he just turned around and was like, hmm, and just walked out. Whoa. Yeah.

So I was like, I think he's clearly seen this before. Yeah. Yeah. That's my thought. That would immediately be my thought. If he's just going on, like, unless he's so fucking jaded, the guy's seen so much shit. you need to retire buddy you've seen too much shit but i would imagine if that's his reaction that this is something that he's observed before so fast forward a couple years and we'll

come back but you know i at this point talked talked to various people on the Hill and had been involved with some people that had looked into this. And one of them mentioned to me, you know, hey, your inclination was correct. You know, after he saw a video, he essentially came back and called us to report that these fucking objects were still, you know, in his airspace. And we're looking for some type of answer of what to do about them. Wow. And was there any sort of conclusion? Like, is there any sort of protocol

that gets established afterwards to what to do when you encounter these things? So to answer that in the worst way possible, you know, we walk back to our ready room, and, of course, then we're all talking about it. And like, what's this? Because we've seen the other objects. From the best we could tell, the formation represented the objects we were used to seeing off the East Coast.

But the gimbal was new. And now we're building theories because it's like, well, this is different. We're starting to get a little more interested. And essentially, someone just came in and just said that was enough, essentially, you know. Stop talking about it. Yeah. And it wasn't like it was, you know, here's an NDA or anything like that. And it wasn't really even anyone in position to order that if they wanted to, but it was still, it was just like, all right, you know, just another weird thing here at this point. And again, we're in a super stressful time, right? Right. 18 hour days, you know, it's a stressful time, but yeah. And, you know, I look back and I and I feel like I have to defend that decision because it's like, why weren't you more curious?

Why weren't you more into it? You know, or why didn't you think to explore this part of it? But yeah, we were just busy. We were just so focused on what we were doing and trying to do it the best we could. doing and trying to do it the best we could. When you guys are alone, like if you're having dinner or you're just alone having a beer, do these things come up in conversation? Yeah, absolutely. Especially over a beer. Yeah. Are there more different shapes and more different types of these objects? The observations off the East Coast, we talked to other people

in other squadrons with similar capabilities, and they were describing it the same way, the Cubanosphere. Same color, same, you know, everything. And does that seem indicative of things that you only see

on the East Coast? So far as I know, you know, again, there's no, I wish there was a better place to answer these questions, but part of the reason I don't have answers is because we've just refused to look at this for so long, right? There's just never been data collections so far as, you know, I know. And so, you know, that would be, these would be questions we could answer that if we had started looking at this 20

years ago, perhaps, that we could be answering now. But, you know, we have to collect a lot of data. And, you know, it's interesting because we have really two ways of doing that, right? There's leveraging the world's best sensors and things of that nature through the U.S. government. And, of course, all that is always going to be classified, and it's always going to be difficult. And then, on the other hand, there's really discovery, right? I mean, we don't have to just wait for the government to tell us, you know, what's right and what's wrong, what's real on this topic, right? We are at an age now where technology and democratization of tools, essentially, and access to space, you know, is moving it. So, you know, we can verify and move the topic forward without being hand-fed, perhaps, from the people with the world's greatest sensors.

That makes sense. Yeah, it does make sense. How many different types of these objects have you heard other people discuss? There's the circle that has the cube inside of it. There's this gimbal thing, which you don't really necessarily know what the shape is, but have people witnessed eyewitness accounts other than Commander David fravor described something that he said looked like a tic-tac and i believe he said it was somewhere in the neighborhood of like 25 feet wide is that what something sounds right um so there's three right you don't know what the gimbal the physical shape of it is then you have Then you have the circle with the cube inside of it, and then you have the Tic Tac. Are there more?

Probably. Have you talked to someone who's seen others? On the East Coast, we were typically seeing whatever I described to you, all up and down. So even up in the Patuxent River area outside of D.C., people were seeing them up there at the test pilot area. On the West Coast, like you said, I've heard the Tic Tac description multiple times. Once kind of the word got out, I think, about the cube a bit and people were looking and paying attention, I started to hear about those being observed in other areas,

such as the West Coast and further inland, actually, around other bases. But we still don't know necessarily if we're observing things there because they're there or because we just happen to have the sensors there, right? It could be in more places. We're just not necessarily looking there. So there's a huge aspect right now to observation bias. In 2017, it was kind of a milestone moment for UFO, just a discussion, because the New York Times printed a story. And once it was on the front page of the New York Times, it was like, okay, this is a serious newspaper.

And you have a serious discussion now about this thing that had been for a long time been ridiculed and then the pentagon discusses it you start hearing people why do you think that's happening like what it what is it about this subject like it must have been for you in 2014 very bizarre when you have this new radar system that starts detecting these things now you get this understanding of the fact that these things are there all the time. You just haven't been able to put eyes on them and you haven't had equipment that measured them accurately. Now you do. And now there's this discussion of it in The New York Times. What do you think is going on?

At the end of the day, I wish I had an answer for you. I don't. At the end of the day, I wish I had an answer for you. I don't. But from where I'm sitting, I see a lot of people that seem to be paying attention more so now, especially after that article came out, myself included. I mean I was part of it. I was a witness to it. But just like everyone else, I kind of just let it be part of my history until I saw that article pop on The New York Times. until I saw that article pop on the New York Times. And, you know, I don't know why we are moving the conversation forward. I've listened to Chris Mellon talk about it.

I've listened to Lou talk about it. And, you know, it's very simple when I talk about it because it's very simple. It's just there are objects out there that our aviators are almost hitting. And for me, whenever I, you know, I engage this topic, it's always from that perspective of aviation safety. So it's never really like engaging on this like crazy ontological like wave, right? It's just, it's me just working on a problem that I was trained for by the Navy. I was trained to be an aviation safety officer, right? So I see the signs of the safety problem brewing. You know, people don't want to talk about it.

It's taboo, right? That's not how aviation safety works. It doesn't live in silence in a cone like that. You need to share lessons learned. And the government gets it now. The DOD gets it. That's why the air crew have a reporting mechanism now. They can come back after their flight, after they've seen one of these objects, and they can report it. And, you know, I understand that reporting mechanism

has an area where they can describe the shape of it. So my hope is, you know, we can answer that question of yours once that data gets released. I hope it will at some point. It's classified at the moment. Do you have any understanding of how often these things get reported? I don't know how often they're getting reported. My fear is that if aviators don't get feedback from the work you're doing, they're going to stop reporting, right? If you just keep reporting a safety hazard every day and it's just data collection and nothing solves it, then eventually you're just going to say, what's the point? I'm going to just do my thing. And I've seen some declassified pilot reports. Some of these were from the UAP Task Force report that came out last year.

And they're fascinating. The pilots are curious. They're seeing things they don't understand. They're seeing these interesting objects, massive winds. They're seeing formations of objects flying around, behaving in ways they don't understand. And they're looking for more. They're saying, hey, if you have any more questions, you know, please reach back to me on classified if you need to. And my fear is that if they don't get that information back, that engagement with people collecting that data, it's going to taper off.

So, you know, I just wanted to make the plea that we consider that it's a two-way conversation with those air crew. conversation with those air crew. Christopher Mellon, when I talked to him, he was saying that there's a lot more data, a lot more evidence out there that hasn't been released. And his understanding of it is that what you're seeing is just the tip of the iceberg and that there's high resolution photos and videos and that some of it is, you know, for lack of a better word, disturbing, because you're looking at something that doesn't make any sense in terms of what we understand, what's physically possible with the technology that we have access to today. Yeah. You know, I have some volunteers within the AIAA work that I do that, you know, have been in a position to do that, right?

Now that, again, there's been a new reporting mechanism, we're kind of moving into a new age with this. I can't speak to all the data that may be out there for the past X years, right? Again, it comes with a lot of assumptions and a lot of unanswered questions. But from the new reports that they've started fresh with the Navy, and I applaud them for, you know, standing up and taking the lead on that. The reports that we see is that, you know, this has continued to be a problem that is occurring. The number of objects, you know, they seem to be increasing. It seems to be happening everywhere we're looking, you know, so Navy bases on the West Coast, in other places in the U.S.,

and on the East Coast, they're seeing them. Yeah, I'll just stop there for a minute. I do that occasionally. It's such a squirrely subject, man. And I'm really fascinated by the fact that these sightings seem to occur on a regular basis over the ocean. And Jeremy Corbell, who has had video leaked to him, I use the air quotes leaked because I don't know exactly how this is happening or why it's happening. I assume they're focusing on him because he's capable of releasing it in a very high-profile way. If he releases it, people are going to pay attention.

But one of the videos is of a transmedium device, something that is apparently some of the military filmed this, that it was flying above the ocean and then went into the ocean. When you're seeing all these things, they appear around the ocean. Why do you think that is? Do you have any speculation? Well, you know, it's, it's, we're pretty blind down there at the end of the day, right? You know, we don't, we don't have as good a SAL, say, or as much presence in the ocean as we do in the air, I would say. Yeah, we do have, you know, a lot of sensors and we can likely see certain things, but radiation, electromagnetic radiation doesn't propagate very well through water like that. So in a way, it's kind of a good place to hide, I would suggest.

Yeah. So in a way, it's kind of a good place to hide, I would suggest. You know, there's talks of hydrogen being a useful fuel source, you know, and of course, plenty of hydrogen in the water. But this is all just pure speculation. I really don't know at the end of the day. But when we, you know, the video that you mentioned with that kind of transmedium behavior went, you know, directly into the object like that. medium behavior went, you know, directly into the object like that. I'll just say that, you know, that is, that is very unique to see objects like that, you know, people argue about the shape or anything like that. But even if, you know, these objects are coming from, call it, call it a near peer threat, right? And they're still able to do these types of behaviors. At the end of the day, it really comes down to technological surprise, right? Whether that's an adversary on earth or whether

that's, you know, something else. It's the same process of understanding what the capabilities are so that, you know, come 2024, 2025, you know, we don't have, you know, a surprise that we can't counter, whether that's, you know, hypersonic object flying around that happened to be UAP or whether they happen to be missiles, right? It's essentially the same problem. The problem is, yeah, we don't know if that's coming from an adversary or whether it's coming from an alien. And so we don't know how to react, whether this thing is observing us or whether this thing is an actual physical threat? I've used the word threat before. And for me as a pilot, when an aircraft is flying around out there and they're not talking to me, right?

Like say they came into my area and I'm the only one out there and there's an interloper. That aircraft's a threat to me. It doesn't mean he has hostile intent necessarily, but my aircraft could be lost if I have a midair. If I start doing some tactics and I forget he's there and now I'm, you know, zorting through his altitude. So he's a threat, very simply. It doesn't mean it's a bad guy or he's got, you know, explosives on his plane. But it's the same way when I talk about these being

a threat for aviators out there. It is a safety hazard. Someone could die. We could lose aircraft. for aviators out there. It is a safety hazard. Someone could die. We could lose aircraft. I don't think that these objects are displaying hostile intent out there. But even just observation and collection of our electronic warfare, our communications, our radar frequency, all that information, if it was an earthly threat, that would be very useful information that they could look to back engineer has there ever been any sort of design or discussion of a some sort of a craft that can operate in a transmedium way that can fly through the air and then go into the ocean nothing that i've you know seen that's been created really. How would a propulsion system work that would go from the air into the ocean with, based on what we understand about like the abilities that we have today? You know, on the surface, like to go from air to water isn't necessarily a complete

challenge, right? Like you can imagine something that can get dropped in the ocean and perhaps move around or some type of mini submarine that comes up and then launches a UAV, right? And flies away. But just to be clear to people listening, that's not necessarily what we're talking about. We're talking about an object that is moving at a relatively, you know, quick pace and enters the water as if it wasn't there. And that's my, is that what you understand? Yeah. Yeah. So the way I understand it is it just, just went and enters the water as if it wasn't there. That's my, is that what you understand? Yeah. Yeah. So the way I understand it is it just, just went right into the water.

And so, you know, that's, that's incredibly interesting for a number of reasons, you know, propulsion in the air versus propulsion in the water is, you know, typically pretty different. And once you start talking about high speeds underwater, that kind of goes out the door, you know, high speeds underwater, 200 miles an hour or higher, is not like 200 miles in the air. And so when I think of something that can operate in both, the first thing I think of is that neither are concerned because of its operating system, whether that's air friction or whether that's the water drag that it would be exposed to. That's the first kind like out there thought as far as how this could operate. It would somehow be affecting, you know, the air or the water, right, the liquid around it to move it around the aircraft

or to, you know, negate the effect of all that force, right? Because moving underwater is just so much pressure, so much friction that it's just so hard to go fast. so much friction that it's just so hard to go fast. Did you watch that Jeremy Corbell documentary, Bob Lazar, Area 51, and Flying Saucers? I did. I did. What did you think of that?

It was interesting. You know, I got a cool story for you here. When I was a kid, I was an avid explorer of the Internet, and I had stumbled upon what I thought at the time was the coolest possible website ever. This guy selling all sorts of like radioactive rocks and like cool scientific equipment. And I was like, this is the coolest website. Like this is why the internet was built. Uh, and you know, fast forward, you know, many years later I learned that, you know, that was Bob's website. Oh, United Nuclear. Yeah. Oh wow. I heard it. It might've

been in that movie actually. And then, or the documentary. Yeah. Oh, wow. I heard it. It might have been in that movie, actually, or the documentary. And yeah, I was like, holy smokes. That's that guy. But, you know, the story's fascinating. Here's my only, you know, I don't want to say I believe or disbelieve because this is such a controversial area

when people start, like, drawing these, you know, conclusions. So I want to be able to establish the ability to do real science on this topic. I want to be able to get a material or to get a bit of information and have a real peer review process that is going to look at that information objectively without the stigma that UAP have had. Even Bob's story, right, comes with, you know, people either, you know, hate it or love it. It's very controversial. But at the end of the day, you know, data is data. And if we can, you know, perhaps get element 115 or some other thing that could be used to do an analyst and we can write papers, we'll have a

process to take that forward and be able to say, hey, you know, here's now a flag in the sand that we can kind of move science forward on, on this, you know, unique topic. And if no one, if the people that haven't seen the documentary, what Ryan's referring to with element 115 is something that Bob talked about in the late 80s. And what he describes is a reactor that uses this element called 115 that was theoretical in the late 80s, but then proven in somewhere in the 2000s. Was it like 2009 or something like that? But it was proven through a particle collider where they were able to detect it, you know, when they have these particles and they can detect them for a very short period of time, but they know now that it's not just theoretical, this element 115 is an actual element.

In the first discussions that Bob Lazar had about this, he claimed that there was a stable supply, a stable version of element 115, and that this element 115 method of flight that is very similar to the gimbal. The way he described it, and this is again in the late 80s, that this thing would be traveling and then it would turn and rotate vertically and that it would then travel in, that would be somehow or another, this element 115 with this reactor would create this, some sort of a field that allows it to bend gravity and bend space and time around it. And the way he described it as if, the way it uses a propulsion system, he would say, if you had an incredibly heavy bowling ball and you put it in the middle of a mattress and it sort of pushes the mattress down, like that's what this thing is doing to space. And that, yeah, instead of like firing flames out the back, it's doing something with this element that's allowing it to travel in an incredibly fast way. And when you listen to Commander David Fravor's depiction of that Tic Tac object, one of the things that's incredible is that they detected this object at more than 50,000 feet above sea level. And then it went from above 50,000 feet to 50 feet in less than a second, which is just

bonkers. Like, who the fuck knows what could do that with no visual propulsion system, no visible, no understanding of how this thing is moving around. But the fact that Bob Lazar was describing that actual method of propulsion back in the late 80s, it's trippy. I just, I wish, I wish if he's a liar, he's one of the best liars of all time. And what a great con he's been running because he's been telling the exact same story the exact same way for more than 30 years. It's really crazy. And you don't know what to think. I mean, I talked to the guy, I had dinner

with him. And then I talked to him on the podcast. And, you know't know what to think. I mean, I talked to the guy. I had dinner with him. And then I talked to him on the podcast. And, you know, I like to think I have a fairly decent bullshit detector. But I don't know. I don't know. I mean, he's obviously a brilliant guy, a legitimate scientist, incredibly intelligent. He would have been called out. And he kind of has about his education record but he explained that to me and i'll explain it to you afterwards like what he told me that he doesn't want discussed publicly

but it's it's so strange that the way this guy was talking about these objects back in the late 80s is exactly how we're observing them behave today. And that he was saying that the United States government had these things in their possession, and they were attempting to back-engineer them. And they hired him, a propulsions expert, to try to figure them out. So that's element 115. So when you are watching this documentary and him explaining this and talking about Area S4, which is where he was supposedly working on these things, what's your sense of that? I try to stay agnostic in a sense because I think probably like most people like I want to believe it yeah

that's the problem it's super interesting oh yeah a very deep part of me just was like man I want all that to be true it's super cool yes um and so in a sense that's what kind of pushes me away from it you know um because I don't have any tools to prevent that from taking over, right? Like I don't have any data or anything other than just that. But that's okay. That's what we've dealt with, I think, in the past. But, you know, I think and I believe and I hope that as we move forward, we're going to be dealing with this in a new way, right? It's going to be about planting flags

and moving the conversation forward with data and science. And there's some, you know, another reason, again, this could be happening now is that there's just better tools, right? Our technology is getting better. We, in a sense, have, you know, another non-human intelligence on Earth with us right now, right? With our, you know, our advancement in machine learning and artificial intelligence. our advancement in machine learning and artificial intelligence, those tools might give us information, insight into these behaviors

in a way that we wouldn't obviously put together, right? That's what ML does best. And so I see great promise for us having a better understanding of some of these mysteries kind of when we bring in that tool to show us things that we just, our brains aren't well suited to find those patterns. So part of the problem with all this stuff is the fact

that it's not openly discussed. Yeah. And I know that you were brought in for a hearing. No, this is in front of Congress. Is that what it was? So, you know, way back when, when this kind of got kicked off, I had a private meeting with members of the Senate Armed Service Committee and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. And what was that like? Pretty nerve wracking. I mean, I was, you know. Yeah. So, you know, it was funny. I, you know, I volunteered to do this in a sense.

And I was like, listen, I realize that, you know, I'm active duty right now. This is definitely not like, you know, I can't represent the Navy here or the military, right? I have to just try to speak as a citizen the best I can. So I was like, I'm not gonna wear my uniform. I'm just going to go as, you know, as Ryan, not Lieutenant Graves, hopefully. Um, and I ended up getting a call at like nine 30, 10 at night, the night before I was about to leave, uh, essentially saying,

get your, get your uniform ready. Cause you're now on orders to go up there to have that conversation and you'll be in uniform. And this was like months before I'm getting out of the Navy. So, uh, like my,

my shit's all packed up, you know, like I'm like calling friends that like, and some of the stuff I shipped back home already, you know back up to new england i'm in mississippi at this time so i'm calling my squadron mates at like you know 10 11 at night trying to like get uniform pieces to pass together like oh shit here's the worst part right so i'm in there's you know some very serious people in there one of them is a former admiral and now he's a staffer essentially. And like all the questions and, you know, we're having the whole conversation

near the end. He's like, he's like, so I noticed that you're missing a ribbon or a uniform. Cause I, you know, I had to have that rack right here. And there's one you get like every time you kind of leave a squadron, um, they're no, you know, no big deal, but I didn't have it. It's just like the stores were closed. I couldn't get it in time. He's no, you know, no big deal, but I didn't have it. It's just like the stores were closed. I couldn't get it in time. He's like, did you leave your squadron? Did you leave your squadron on a bad note? You know, cause I didn't have that metal. Oh shit. No, but he was pretty cool about it. But yeah, that was probably the most stressful part. You have to explain the whole thing that you didn't know you were coming in uniform. Yeah, pretty much. I just told the

story. I just told you that they loved it. Well, I'm sure they were probably like, thought it was funny that you were so nervous about it, too. Yeah. I mean, I'm at a table, not unlike this one, but much bigger. And I'm at the head of the table here. And on your side is all the DOD folk and executive branch representation. And on the other side is all the SAS and Senate intelligence folks. and Senate intelligence folks. And I got essentially walked over by a handful of admirals

that were in various roles from that point. This was an unexpected part of my trip. I was supposed to just go talk to them. But part of me coming in uniform was that I needed to have a conversation at the Pentagon right prior to that. To what to discuss and what not to? No.

At the time, it was just kind of like to get, you know, a pre-brief, essentially, is how they described it. And that's all it was. It was nothing nefarious. They really just wanted to hear it from the horse's mouth, you know, before they escorted me across the hill. And what were the questions? Like, what was the nature of the discussion?

Which one? When you sat down in front of everyone at the big table. I mean, essentially, you know, what's the story? You know, what are you seeing? And not unlike, you know, a lot of the things I told you about here, you know, did people ridicule you? Did they, you know, people tell you not to talk about it? There was a concern it seemed like from those, from the non-DoD folks that they were wondering if there was any influence on me to, you know, either downplay or not talk about it. So they, and there was none, you know, to be clear, but that was, you know, they questioned me on that. But at the end of the day, it was essentially,

you know, they seem earnestly, you know, interested in getting the bottom of what we were seeing out there. There seemed like a lot of, they seemed to ask a lot of good questions that couldn't be answered at that space, in that classification level. So they were having a follow-up conversation after I left. But that was really the kickoff of me speaking about this in an official fashion, right? To actual decision makers, things of that nature versus media, essentially. Is there discussion about media? Was there a discussion about how you were allowed to talk about this or how much of this is classified? So, you know, the whole boat situation, right? With Gimbel, it's people are like, all right, we're done talking about this. But, you know, there's, that's not how classification works,

right? There's NDAs and paperwork. Like, so, you know, the short answer is no, like this was never information that was classified. Like I never, you know, I wouldn't have spoke about it if it was unclassified. And yet I thought it was inappropriately unclassified and could cause, you know, natural damage or anything like that. Right. I understood it was like a new thing, but, um, I was, I was in, at least in my mind doing what I thought was best, but it was not classified information. It was not information at the time, right? It just wasn't a thing. Now there's a program. Now there's a reporting program, the UAP Task Force, you know, collects reports. Now it's a classified reporting program. So I don't expect people that, you know, to be quote-unquote leaking

or talking about it publicly anymore due to it being a real operation now, which is a good thing. Have you had any conversations with anyone at a high level that gives you an understanding of what they think these things are? Yes. not to the specificity I think that you would like or anyone would like, but, you know, there are efforts standing up within DOD, with the error office, with, you know, some of the Intelligence Authorization Act language from last year and also this year. The language and the efforts that are being established to look into this

are doing so under the context that there is a large category of other, right, that we just simply don't understand. It's, you know, we're not, the systems are being designed and built and organizations aren't there to better understand, you know, the Chinese threat that might be off our shores, right? Like if that's identified, then it gets routed to the proper place and then they'll go back to doing their job on the mysterious stuff that's still out there, right? So, you know, that's how the efforts are being organized right now. And now what the output of that investigation is going to be, whether it's, you know, aliens or any of the other million hypothesis is unknown at this point. But it is mysterious. It's not the prosaic that they're establishing these channels for. So it really is an unknown in even at the highest levels

other than what commander fravor described and what the equipment detected in terms of speed the movement of that thing and then another disturbing thing was that the object when it took off at extraordinary rates of speed after they had detected it and went to their cat point which is very interesting because they had a predetermined place where they were supposed to meet up and this thing went there like it could read their plans their intent maybe i you know i i don't have an answer for that it's mysterious right it's those points aren't like like super classified but like like, there's, there's no logical reason for that, you know, an object like that to know where they're going in the future. Was, is there any other instances of something exhibiting that kind of speed that

you're aware of? I hear lots of stories about that from other aviators. haven't personally like witnessed the gunshot acceleration that you hear about what have you heard from other aviators you know one of them was up by the Pax River the test pilot area I mentioned a friend of mine that was on the east coast with me who deployed and was used to seeing these objects was then in test pilot school and then stayed there as a test pilot without doing a mission, you know, off the eastern seaboard. And he had an object come up

about 20 feet from his cockpit, looked similar to what's been described off the east coast, was there for four to five, six seconds. He's cruising at, you know, 350 knots, you know, somewhere in the teens, the thousands, you know, 15, 16, 17,000 feet. The object just stays there for, you know, 350 knots, you know, somewhere in the teens, the thousands, you know, 15, 16,

17,000 feet. An object just stays there for, you know, a handful of seconds and then just like darts off, like into the great beyond, you know, very quickly. And he's being monitored by a whole testing apparatus, right? Like a mini NASA with all the screens and the test engineers, because he's doing a real flight test. And they knocked it off. You know, the ATC, the air traffic control, didn't have any knowledge of that air traffic. And, you know, the test people didn't see it either. But he ended up reporting that through the UAP Task Force report. He did end up getting debriefed and was likely one of the 144 reports.

So I tell that to show that, you know, at least at the time it was working, right? Like there was a real process. We know that now because we've seen the evidence of it in the reports. So I tell that to show that, you know, at least at the time it was working, right? Like there was a real process. We know that now because we've seen the evidence of it in the reports, but there's, you know, there's other cases of pilots where they just, you know, they see something in the distance and it's there, it's moving around in ways it can't explain. And as they get closer, just, you know, shooting off like a cannon. And when I was telling you earlier about the UAP off the Eastern coast, that's kind of like the new generation. But all the, you know, the aged aviators and the Navy, you know, they all had their own stories, you know, whether it was. All of them.

I mean, not 100 percent, but, you know, at least the ones that, you know, there are plenty that we're willing to talk about. I'll say about that, you know, I can't say how many weren't, but. So this is not a rare occurrence. It would happen for a long time. Yeah. So this is not a rare occurrence. It would happen for a long time, yeah. And this one that you were just describing, where it was very close to the cockpit and then took off,

was it the same thing, the translucent circle with the square inside of it? Yeah. What's the earliest known sightings of that particular type of object? So far as I know, it's that late 2013, early 2014, back when we saw the radar upgrade. Have you seen anything visually? I haven't been able to see it. So we would fly up to it. People in our squadron would, like, once, of course, we knew there was something there, we'd try to fly up to it, right, and see it. And, you know, our safety limit is 500 feet, which is very close for us. And we train all the time to come to what is called a merge, where we fly right by another aircraft really close.

500 feet is our safety bubble, and then we execute a fight, you know. And we're trained to look at their wings, right, and see if they're, you know, if they have condensation clouding in the air above their wings to tell if they're pulling a lot of G, right, or if their flaps are auto-scheduling down, right? To say they're low energy. And so even though we're going by at 1200, essentially miles per hour relative velocity, and it's really only a frame or two of information, we can make a pretty decent assessment of that, you know, other fighter and what they're going to do and their weapon load outs and everything, right? So we have these tools that tell us where to look. So we're not just out there kind of gazing around. All our sensors are

pumped into our visor. And so as we look around, it shows us the object we have selected in a box, where to look, right on our visor, no matter where we look. So as we come to this merge, we have every expectation of having a successful merge and seeing this object, right? And then, you know, it wasn't there. We'd still see it on the FLIR, right? We still see the energy emitting from that area, but nothing visually. So it, wow. So do you think that it's, some of these things are not visually available? I wish, we just don't have enough data, right? Like, are they moving a little bit out of the way? It's tough because again, we can only go so slow, even if we're like all the way back at like maybe

130 knots, right? Still 150 miles an hour. If that thing like was right in front of us and dropped down, I mean, I'd like to think that we'd still see it, but it's, it's just, you know, it's just not the right tool to be doing that type of analysis. You know what I mean? We just couldn't see it. So does it mean that somehow they were deceiving us, or does it mean that not all of them were physical objects? We just don't have enough data to say that. Well, I mean, obviously this is speculation, but if you guys are using this equipment out there overseas, are you flying or are there many people that are flying these types of aircrafts using this type of equipment over the continental United States? In the jets, you mean? Yes.

Yeah. Yes. Do they detect them there? Initially, we weren't reporting them over the continental United States. However, I have heard that essentially anywhere in F-18 that has these radar, you know, that has these radar capabilities, you know, seems to be testing. So we have them further inland in places like that. And so far as I know, they've been experiencing them as well inland. Jesus.

So is it possible that these things have some sort of a cloaking mechanism or they're not visually available to like we can't see them because of the way their propulsion system works or whatever? Yeah, I think there's a lot of different ways, you know, that you could be visually deceitful, right? Like, you can, it doesn't have to be, like, a visibility cloak per se, right? But, like, I can think of, like, a lot of, like, tricky mechanisms that may make it very difficult to see something coming to emerge, right? Even if it's just, like, you know, something that can change polarity with electrical charge and like, you know, it makes it lighter or darker object or something, right? Like those windows. You know,

it's a physical object until you change polarity. Now you can see through the, you know, the object in a sense. Right. So there's trickery there, you know, that could be done. And all the way from kind of basic trickery to advanced, you know, invisibility science and physics with negative diffraction and things of that nature. But we just don't know. We just don't know. How much has this changed the way you view our place on Earth in the universe? earth in in the universe you know it certainly opened me up to all the assumptions that i think i had baked in from from birth in a sense and as i as i grew up that were kind of either baked into me or put into me or you know i put into myself that you know basically said anything outside of this this median channel here is is rubbish right, in some sense. I was middle of the road, I guess you could say, right?

But this really kind of made me realize that our place in the universe and in the cosmos and even here on Earth just might not be as apparent as we think it is, right? And that doesn't sound very exciting, but we come in a place it is, right? Like we, and that doesn't sound very exciting, but like we come in a place of confidence, right? We have this perception that, uh, you know, we're the masters of the universe, right? We don't, haven't seen anything else out there. We imagine that there's other stuff, but we have no evidence of it. And in a sense, you know, we are the best

thing that has ever been in the universe. So to think that there's a lot of other stuff out there, that there's a lot of other stuff out there. For me personally, it's really, I'd say, allowed me to to better explore that kind of non-traditional mainstream thoughts in a sense, right? UAP wasn't something I grew up thinking about, but after I kind of got over the skepticism and looked at it and, you know, just realized how much information was there, it made me wonder what else, you know, I haven't been paying attention to, or what other small assumptions, even if it's not something as exotic as UAP, but what other scientific assumptions have we made or, you know, economic or sociological scientific assumptions that we've made that have just kind of pushed us in the wrong direction,

but it's right enough that it hasn't caused too much of a problem yet. Have you entertained the possibility that there are things that are native to Earth that are highly intelligent that we're not aware of? Yeah, I've gone down that rabbit hole a little bit, and I'm not shy of going down these rabbit holes and exploring them, you know? So, like, I have the ultra-terrestrial type theory, and you probably know more than I do, but I've heard those theories. Can I ask you, what time frame do you think that that ultra-terrestrial theory would come from?

Do you think that's, like, something that arose on earth a long time ago or something that's more recent it's a great question because why would it avoid detection like what's the reason for it like why would it always have avoided detection there's not like a historical record of these things like coming out of the ocean and flying around from a thousand years ago that we're aware of i don't know how would it evolve how would it work you know what is it doing you know how come we're not detecting them with submarines how come we're not detecting them when we fly over the ocean on a regular basis like why if this thing is avoiding detection why why is it doing that? Is it observing us? Is this, you know, you want to go really far out? Is this what made us? You know, like, what are we? We are so different from every other life

form on earth in the fact that we wear clothes and the fact that we can communicate and the fact that we are obsessed with technological innovation. It seems to be the number one thing that human beings physically make. If you looked at us collectively, you have all these people that are working constantly. And what's the treat? What's the carrot at the end of the stick? Newer, better stuff, whether it's a newer, better car, a newer, better TV or a newer, better phone. a new or better car, a new or better TV, or a new or better phone. One of the main reasons why people work as hard as they do, they're incentivized by technological innovation. They're incentivized by, like, if we just looked at us, if you just abandoned the idea of culture and context, and

what are these weird talking monkeys doing? Well, they're making better stuff constantly. Well, why are they doing that? Like, it seems like that is what they're making better stuff constantly. Well, why are they doing that? It seems like that is what they're obsessed with, just like a bee is making a beehive. Do they know why they're doing it? Do they know why collectively they group up in these cities with millions and millions of people? And if you watch the cars come in and out at night, it's much like blood in an artery. You're watching things moving back and forth and back and forth and they're creating objects, better and better objects. And they don't seem to be collectively aware of what they're doing. And they distract themselves

with these cultural issues and all these... you know, you have two completely different polarizing political parties that are constantly at odds and fighting against each other. And all the while, they're creating artificial intelligence. And all the while, they're creating some sort of a symbiotic relationship with intelligent computing and with artificial intelligence and with technology that seems to be going in a way where they're going to integrate with it they're going to physically integrate with these electronic devices and and with technology and with the internet like why why is it doing that why is it not aware of that that should that should be like the number one thing, other than climate change and super volcanoes and giant threats to civilization.

They should be really concerned with the direction the shit is going. But they seem to be blissfully unaware, foot on the gas, all gas, no brakes, moving in that general direction. Like, what if that's what we do? What if that's what this species does what if this species creates technology and is essentially on its way to giving birth to a new life form and that new life form is a life form that's created completely out of technology that's uninhibited unhindered, disconnected from emotion, from instincts, from all of these instincts that we have just developed over thousands of years of survival. All these human and animal instincts, instincts, ego, emotion, fear, lust, sexual desires, desire to accumulate wealth and power,

all these things that have to do with primate biology and animal biology and mating. What if that's the future? What if the future is that is going to be the past and the new life forms are going to be completely unhindered by all of these problems that we've created for ourselves, why we've pushed all gas, no brakes, towards this industrial revolution and this technological revolution and all the haphazard things that we've done. What if all that shit is just a byproduct of this inevitable merging of the biological life into the whatever technological life that we're creating and what if those things are monitoring it or encouraging it

or created it in the first place i mean we have no idea what happened to the human species like we have no idea how the human brain doubled over a period of 2 million years. It's the biggest mystery in the history of the fossil record. They don't know. They don't know what the fuck happened. We're so different than every other animal that's on this planet. Well, what if that's by design? What if there's some sort of an accelerated evolution where something has come in and just manipulated the lower primates

and created us. So to your point earlier, you know, even just to kind of reinforce what you said, you know, our technology has moved ahead so fast and we disregard in a sense everything, right? Our climate. But, you know, we've seen it, right? Our culture can't even keep up with the technological progression, right? So our culture, you know, breaks down and fractures and is damaged as a result of the new introduced technology. And then ideally, you know, our society will adapt to it and move forward and grow with it. You know, I think in an ideal world, that would probably be switched around, right? You know, our culture would, you know, define what we need and what we define as important.

And then we would build tools that would help enable those things that we think are important. Yeah. I would even say that perhaps it's even a bit further down. I mean, when you think about an artificial intelligence, which really at the end of the day

is electromagnetic energy in a sense. So if we were to truly merge with an AI outside of being, you know, rid of all our things that ail us in our physical bodies, you know, really it might be a move away from just generally space time itself, which, you know, we're learning is less fundamental than we already thought. And we already thought if there is a coherent, you know, artificial intelligence contained with a pocket of electromagnetic energy or some type of organization of electromagnetic energy, much like our brain outside of a skin suit, then we're going to lose the limitations that, you know, space time and, you know, us operating within space time bring to us. And if that evolves even further, if that sort of ability continues to accelerate and goes in, you know, a thousand-year period or a hundred-thousand-year period, we conceivably would have the power of gods. We conceivably would have the power to control all the processes that we observe in

the known universe, black holes, like the birth and death of stars, like all that stuff. If you think of what we can do now based on what amoebas can do, and you take that a million years in the future, and as long as we don't blow ourselves up, as long as we don't get hit by an asteroid, you keep going. And you have more and more control over the physical nature of the universe and of technology and power, and we can harness dark energy, and who the fuck knows what the future is. And maybe what we're seeing is creatures or some things that have already made these leaps or some version of these leaps. Maybe they're the British explorers that land on the coast and check out the natives. Maybe that's what they are. And maybe they're primitive in terms of what their capabilities are in comparison to what's possible with a million more years of evolution.

I mean, it's not going to stop. That's what's fascinating to me, is that our technological innovation and our lust for constant improvement of our ability to change the world, it's not going to stop. It's going to keep moving. So where does it go? I think it's Professor Hansen, who's an economist. He looked at that, and what he calls that is a greedy society where, you know, we just want to keep taking and keep building and keep growing. And one of the great mysteries, of course, is why don't

we see, you know, alien life out there? Because, you know, we're greedy, we expand, and we assume that anything else out there would also, you know, want to expand to gain more resources or to explore, right? Like, we like to go to different places to explore, which, you know, is that a pure economic driven thing? Or is it something about our, you know, our human nature that we like to discover new things? And, you know, his big thought is, we don't see anything out there. And because we don't, and if we assume that we don't see anything out there, and we assume that essentially UAP do represent, you know, other life forms, then the assumption is that they found a way to make themselves not greedy, right? So they stopped themselves from expanding, in a sense. To control

that weird rogue unit from kind of just expanding in a million years, or however long it takes for that, you know, that seed of an or, you know, of a civilization that might go out in a spaceship to come back and be the greedy thing that takes up the whole universe. Well, the way to do that is to eliminate sexual reproduction. I mean, that would be one of the big ways because one of the reasons why people are greedy, Human, especially males, are greedy because they want to be the alpha. They want to acquire the most resources so they have the pick of the litter, so they can decide what gets done. They have the most power over the other entities, the other humans. If that gets eliminated, if we merge with artificial intelligence or we become

Some sort of new version of artificial intelligence the way I've described it in the past is like that We are the electronic caterpillar that becomes the butterfly and we don't even know what we're doing We're just in the middle of like making this cocoon like we just got to make the cocoon We're busy making the cocoon need an iPhone 14 making the cocoon new Tesla making the cocoon. We're busy making the cocoon. Need an iPhone 14, making the cocoon. I need a new Tesla, making the cocoon. And all that innovation, it all leads to exponentially more powerful innovation, exponentially more powerful technology. That's ultimately, the end game is artificial life and the ability to transcend space and time and just unimaginable technological power. And I don't think that's possible unless we get rid of emotions, sexual desire, lust, greed, all those things, which are human things. Those are the things that allowed us to survive when we're running away from big cats that we're

trying to stay alive from predators and that very desire to stay alive and to breed and to to fight off conquering tribes that's allowed us to innovate and create technology because that's the thing that separate us from the other animals is our ability to develop tools and our ability to innovate and to think and plan out how to protect ourselves, how to accumulate resources so that we can be safe, and how to develop walls and cities and urbanization. And all these different things have essentially set the stage for this about humans that a lot of is tied to sexual reproduction a lot of is tied to our biological needs if we can get past that that's that's what those fucking alien things are you look at them like if you look at the archetypal alien they have no muscle they're they're these thin things with these giant heads. They have no genitals.

Like what if what we're seeing maybe is, maybe it's not even like physically a representation of an actual thing that we're seeing. Maybe what we're seeing is we're recognizing the pattern, that this is where it goes, that this is where the upright human animal, the hominid, this is what it becomes. You just keep going and it merges with technology and then it becomes that thing. I take a little bit different view on that, you know, the anatomy side of it, but I think of it more of like, maybe that's the best tool they have to interact with us at a peer level, right? Is to build something that somewhat looks like us but is different enough so that it doesn't get mistaken as, you know, it's not sneaky in a sense, right?

They don't want to be sneaky. They want to be apparent. Maybe that's the tool they use in a sense. Like it's not a being made of light that we don't even recognize as a life form. Yeah. If I was like waving to an ant, you know, like he's not going to know what's going on. Right, right. Well, if I was like waving to an ant, you know, like he's not going to know what's going on. Right, right. Well, that could be possible too.

It could be that those things are drones, that those things are artificial intelligent creatures and that the actual intelligence that created them is disembodied

in the future. We just talked about, yeah, you know, space-time being one of the things that drops out if we do merge with AI potentially. Right. And so that would make sense that if they were outside of space-time being one of the things that drops out if we do merge with AI potentially.

Right. And so that would make sense that if they were outside of space-time, they would need to construct something of space-time in order to interact here. Right. Well, if this Bob Lazar story about Element 115 is real and they can apply this at scale, like if you have enough element 115 and a reactor that's sophisticated enough, you can travel to anywhere in the universe instantaneously. And there's no boundaries, no physical boundaries in terms of what's possible. I also want to believe that. I want to believe all of it. That's the problem. I want to believe all of it, but I also know that there's certain elements of what we're discussing that are 100% in process of happening. Like Elon Musk's Neuralink. When I talked to Elon about it,

he was saying, you're going to be able to talk without words. Like, what the fuck is that? Like, where's that coming? You know, he's not talking about next week, but he's talking about ultimately and eventually. And I feel like that's where all this stuff is going to go. It's not going to get less sophisticated. It's, you know, I was having this conversation with my kids last night. I was saying we're having this talk about new phones because I have an iPhone 14. They're like, is it better? And I'm like, no.

I mean, yes, but not in any noticeable way that I recognize every day. Like the camera, the 13 was great too. It's silly. And I'm like what's funny about people is that we never are happy. If we just decided – this was the conversation we were having. I said if we just decided right now to stop making new things, we would have a pretty great life. If we decided, okay, planes are fast enough. Let's keep fixing them.

Phones are great. You can talk. You can iMessage, and you can use FaceTime. You can see each other. We don't need to fix that. Just maintain it. Let's just the Tesla. Jeez, it's so fast.

We don't need a new car. Just fix that, and just everybody just keep what we have, and let's maintain life. We're never going to do that. It's possible. We're never going to do it. We would possible. We're never going to do it. We would self-destruct. There's just no way we could do it.

Why? Why, though? I don't know. That's a great question. Humans, beings need to reproduce. That's a lot of it. A lot of it is the desire to accumulate resources and power. and power and a lot of that is tied to these biological urges that are baked into us from the time that we really did have to survive from animals trying to eat us i i saw a video today

uh of this poor fucking guy who was rock climbing and a bear tried to attack him i was like that used to be us all the time that was us on on a daily basis. Have you seen that, Jamie? Fucking crazy. Did he climb? The guy's got like a GoPro on, and he's climbing up this rock, and a bear comes down at him and tries to get him. Yes. That's even worse.

And so he swats it to the side. Watch this. So this guy's climbing up, and look at this. This bear comes right out, and he pushes it, and it runs back up at him and he kicks at him so one interesting thing about bears is grizzly bears generally when they attack people they're attacking people because you surprise them and it's a female with cubs but black bears are often attacking people for food. They're predatory in the sense that they recognize that people are weak and they're like, oh, I'll just eat that thing. Because they cannibalize each other on a regular basis.

So anything that they can eat, like black bears, one of my friends was up in Alberta, and he observed a male black bear attack a female and their cubs, kill one of the cubs. The female scared the male off, and then the female ate her own cub. Oh, damn. I didn't see that coming. Hard world. The dead one or the live one? Yeah, the dead one. Okay.

The dead one that the male had killed. Once it was dead, she's like, well, might as well eat it. Might as well eat my baby. She just ate it right there in front of him. And he's like,

Jesus Christ. Like, that's what a bear is. It's not a stuffed animal that, you know, sits next to your kid at night when it goes to bed. It's not Yogi.

That's what a bear is. It's not Winnie the Pooh. That thing trying to eat that climber. That's a bear. Well, you know, I mean, here we are, you know, strip mining our planet and, you know, killing stuff. And it's not too different, I suppose. We're not innocent. We're certainly not innocent. But my point is that I think that we have all these instincts because we are a part of the natural world. And the only way we

can transcend that is to eliminate all of those biological urges. If we have true mastery over the material world and to the point where we no longer need to be hindered by those biological urges, that seems to me like the best way to transcend space and time, like the best way to eliminate all the things that kind of hold us back when it comes to logical, rational thinking. A lot of it is emotional, you know, and I think that that may be the future

of the intelligent species in the universe. They probably don't act like, you know, like barbarians. They probably have transcended that. And they've recognized that all the problems that we have... What's the number one problem we have in the world? It's probably war. Other than the environment and what we're doing to the environment, it's probably war. It's the most horrific, terrifying thing that human beings will attack other groups of human beings they don't even know and try to steal their resources, which is generally what they're trying to do when they're, they don't go to war for no reason, right? They're generally going to war for, there's a benefit there. Well, if we could get

past that, boy, if there was no war, imagine the cooperation that we could have. Imagine how much we could get done. If we all spoke the same language, we all treated each other as if we were the same thing living other lives, and we all just shared resources and worked together to make life better for the species. Well, how would you do that? Well, you'd have to eliminate the lust and greed. What's the best way to eliminate the lust and greed? Well, to become something different and more advanced. And the best way to do that is to no longer have all these urges that human beings have, the urge to be powerful and to dominate and all of our dominator culture stuff that's just a natural part of being a primate. So what do we lose with that?

So what do we lose with that? Everything. We lose music and comedy and fun and romance. We lose the best first date of your life where you lose everything. You lose drinking wine and laughing with friends. You're going to lose everything. You're going to lose all the things that we love about being the imperfect creatures that we are today. But what you gain is you become these super powerful, ultra enlightened beings that have different motivation. And I think that that's probably going to occur. It's going to probably occur in stages. And one of the stages is probably going to be either virtual reality or augmented reality that can provide you with

experiences that are far superior to the physical ones that you have to get on your own. I mean, I think we romanticize so many things about our life, like that guy climbing, right? That guy's climbing because he's trying to get this thrill of like trying to like physically take yourself through a dangerous course up a mountain. And you get this thrill that you're doing this. If you fall, you're dead. And along the way, he almost gets fucking eaten. Right. Which is bears.

Yeah. Pretty wild. But we romanticize it. And it's baked into us in a way that it's, it's like inherent to our physical being. Like, uh, when I, whenever I go on trips into the woods, one of the things that shocks me is how good I feel almost like it, it hits a frequency that I've been needing, but I, that's not accessible to me living in a city. And when I'm in the woods and when I'm climbing a mountain and I'm out there with nature, when I'm out there, I feel so good.

I feel so centered and grounded. Like I feel better than I feel at any other time. And it resets me in a way that's not available in a city. But what if that's available through augmented reality or a virtual reality? What if that's available through a chip that gets installed in your brain and it's far superior to that feeling that you get? And you recognize the futility of that experience. What you're trying to do is you're trying to recreate what it was like when people lived 1,000 years ago or 10,000 years ago. And you had to survive by throwing a spear at a rabbit or whatever.

That was the only way you could feed your family. And you would look at that time and how difficult it was. And imagine just being able to go to a grocery store and going, oh, my God, that's so much better. Grocery store is so much better. Nobody wants to go back to hunting for food every day. It's too fucking hard. But we don't think of it that way because we have the grocery store because it exists. Well, what if there's something that's exponentially more significant than a grocery store? Like that life experiences itself, all the things that you love about life, all the things you love about romance and creation and culture and all the wonderful things that we think of when we associate the best aspects of human life and human interaction and human community.

What if that pales in comparison to what can be created technologically? We're going to embrace it, just like we embrace phones. I mean, we all have phones. I remember the old days where, I don't even have an email. There was a few holdouts. Those fucking people are all on board now. It just took a decade. It took a little while.

What if that's the future of this symbiotic interaction that we have with technology? I think it is. I think that's where we're going. And my fascination with these UAPs and with this idea that we're being visited by these things, I almost feel like they're cultivating us. I almost feel like they're watching us, like whatever they are, that they're just making sure we don't blow ourselves up along the process. Because one of the things that has been discussed by many people that have experienced these things on military bases is their ability to shut down bases. There's their ability to shut down like these nuclear facilities. And that you got to

think that if they were going to wonder about any one particular thing that we have access to, it's being in this transitionary period between having these primate instincts and applying them to spectacular technology in a brutish, horrific way. way, like we're worried about right now with Russia. We're worried that Putin, because all the horrific things that are happening already in Ukraine, the bombings and the drone strikes and possibly the use of hypersonic missiles, what if that's applied to nuclear weapons? And what if we're dealing with a nuclear holocaust? I mean, that's really what we're worried about. And I wonder if that's what they're monitoring. You know, you asked earlier about the why now part, right? But, you know, there's a lot of stuff happening, right? There's climate, there's war, there's everything else. It feels like we're accelerating towards something, right? And technology, not least of all, moving us towards, you know, what some people call the singularity. And yeah, you know, maybe they're all here to watch the birth in a sense. I think the hope would be that we would be part of that

birth, as you described, to integrate with the artificial intelligence. I know that there's efforts to consider the moral and ethical application of artificial intelligence, but, you know, are we fooling ourselves? Is that, you know, are we going to have the options of maintaining an ethical AI once it's been created? You know, is it possible to create safeguards and AI that, you know, transition past, you know, or into the singularity and allow it to keep in mind human interest once it's already become sentient, if that can happen? You know, one thing that you mentioned about artificial intelligence and, sentient, if that can happen. One thing that you mentioned about artificial intelligence, and if that is the output of our craving for advancement,

what does that change for the world, right? There would only be one general artificial intelligence, I would assume, because anything that would be created afterwards, if it was not a secret, would be assumed by the primary AI. Right. You know, so this kind of ties into a thought I've had before about, you know, maybe the way we're interacted with UAP or, you know, we're going to make the assumption that they're coming from another planet right now. And so with that assumption, you know, perhaps as societies mature, much like you described, they do start to, you know, advance their sociological side. They start to work better as a group. They, you know, remove some of those more animalistic urges that they evolved with, right?

And that remained when they got the power of the gods, if you will, right? Once they had technology, but were still, you know, commanded by their primal urges. You know, you may very well be right. There's that transitional period that we live in at this moment. Maybe that adds to a lot of the hecticness of our current days. But what if those other planets, since they have realized that, you know, they interact with us as a planet, as an entity, you know, if that's the way their society has evolved, in a sense, to be more collaborative and less argumentative, then they may approach us as,

you know, as a planet to planet versus a country to country, right, or individual to individual. They might assume that since the best things can only happen when the most people work together, right, in a sense, if we can assume that, you know, if you and I work together, Joe, we can do more than just if either of us worked alone, right? Yeah. Like, if we make that assumption and we apply that to a planet, it would make sense that, um, you know, if there are a bunch of species out there that if they survive, they would have worked together, learned how to work together, right? Yeah. Uh, and they might assume that of us. Like, oh, wow, look, they have all these cool tools. They must have moved to that point where they know how to work together, right? Yeah. And they might assume that of us. They're like, oh, wow, look, they have all these cool tools. They must have moved to that point where they know how to work together.

Do you think that? I don't think they would think that. I think they'd watch us and they'd go, oh, look at these crazy fucks. Well, that's why we're anomaly, right? That's why we're anomaly, because we do have these tools and yet we're not ready. Maybe that's just how it normally is when a civilization or when civilization in general advances past a point where we're at now, that there is this chaotic moment where there are sort of a combination of lower primate and higher being. And the power of nuclear weapons, the power to send video

through the sky, and it appears on a device that you keep in your pocket that you literally talk to, and it gives you answers to things. I was having a conversation with my kids last night, and they were talking about how they went to see Lil Nas X and how great it was. And I'm like, how old is that guy? How old is Lil Nas X? Bang, 23. It just shows you on the phone. I'm like, how wild is that? That you could talk to a device. I mean, that's fucking Jetson shit. I mean, when I was a kid, that wasn't even in Star Trek. Even in Star Trek, they had walkie-talkies, remember?

It was like, Kurt, out. And you had to hang up a stupid phone. Like, no one imagined the internet, even in science fiction. And that's something that we have through the sky that is in incredible speeds. It just shows up on your phone. And the battery lasts all day long. You watch YouTube videos all day long. It's crazy what we're going through right now.

And we complain about it. Battery doesn't last long enough. We complain about everything. But that's always going to be the case. We're always going to be unsatisfied. And that dissatisfaction is what leads to innovation because it's part of our lust and thirst for constant growth and improvement, which is one of the things that we do. I mean think about materialism in general. Like what is materialism?

What does materialism fuel? What purpose would that serve, this stupid need for constant acquiring of objects. Well, it serves to make sure that people make better and better stuff because that's the best way to fuel materialism. If you want people to continue this sort of fruitless desire to acquire new objects, you got to have new, better stuff constantly. You've got to have new, better stuff constantly. Well, if you have new, better stuff constantly, what does that do? Well, it fuels innovation because you have to make the things better. It's like our own stupid desire for materialism, it fuels technological innovation.

It's like baked in. It's a part of us. All our solutions are usually technology-based as well yeah right for everything it's never about you know it's never about how do we you know how do we raise our children better how do we kind of work on the personal side of things it's always what tool can we make that makes that problem go away yeah even when we have problems like we have carbon emission problems well I was reading an article.

I don't remember what website it's on. One of the scientific websites about a new concrete that they have that extracts carbon. The concrete itself, the construction of concrete, apparently it leads to carbon emissions, right? Like just transportation of know, transportation of the raw materials and all the things that are involved in making concrete. Well, they've developed a concrete that actually extracts carbon from the atmosphere, which is pretty wild. So these people that have problems, they see these problems, like what's the solution? Well, here's a technological solution for a complex problem. So we don't have to alter our behavior, but we'll have complex technological solutions that mitigate these problems. Makes a lot of sense. You know, to describe how I got into flying, it was very much

to fill that urge that you described. You know, when I thought about flying a jet, it wasn't for a passion of flying, really. You know, I hadn't had access to that, so I didn't develop it. But, you know, I thought that was the place that I could really be at the tip of the spear as far as technology and how I could access it just as a regular guy, you know, with no experience or anything like that. So, I mean, frankly, I was driven by, you know, that same urge just went about a different way. Well, that's one of the more fascinating things about classified military intelligence. Because of the fact that it's military and because of the fact that there's a great benefit to the country for it being top secret and not being available to our enemies, we develop this stuff that we're not even aware of. So our tax money goes in a way that's kind of unaccountable, and it's gigantic budget, and it's huge. Like, what is it? Like, how many trillions of dollars a year?

Didn't we look at it the other day? Yeah, the Defense Department budget, and we don't even know where all that stuff goes, right? But it's trillions, trillions of dollars. I can't even imagine how much money. It's insane how much money it is. And it's going towards these technologies that we don't even know about until we see them implemented. Like the stealth bomber, for instance, is one of them. Or the Manhattan Project or many other things throughout history.

That's fascinating, too, because there's so much that's being that. So when I see something like these objects, these UAPs, part of me goes like, how much of that shit is ours? How much of that shit is ours where they don't want to talk about it? They don't want to let us know. But they're they're implementing these technologies. And does Russia have something similar? Does China have something similar? Like how much of that shit is stuff that's just top secret drone technology? Because why is it all so near military bases? Like that's one of the things that I thought almost immediately about the Tic Tac. Because that that Tic Tac thing is real close to the it was real close to the Nimitz. And it's real close to all the bases that are near San Diego. I'm like, what if that's ours? Like, what if that's like some super top secret, high level shit that we just don't, we're not privy to that information. That's always, I don't want to call it a risk, but you know, I think we're inclined to think like that too. And we want to, because again, we want to be true, right? Like we want our government to be that smart and to have that information. It makes us feel safer, I think.

Oh yeah. I want it to be like a Captain America shield that flies at like 10 times the speed of light. But you know, where does that end? Right? Like, let's just say that's true. Like how much technology that could be beneficial for society via either, you know, energy production or ways we can't even imagine because it was designed for a particular use case. But whenever something like kind of gets out and it's exposed to kind of that innovation ecosystem, right, it's just there's a flourishing. People use that technology and those ideas in ways that people never thought of before. use that technology and those ideas in ways that people never thought of before. And so it's not just like you hear of something hidden away or technology, but imagine if all that was just like out in the open to be kind of meddled upon by, you know,

the quantity of minds we have nowadays with the access to the tools we have. The problem with that is war, right? The problem is that we can't have that kind of technology available to our enemies because then they would use it on us. That's the big fear. So if we do have something that's like super powerful and just beyond imagination at this point of our understanding of what's technologically available and that shit gets in the hands of Russia or gets in the hands of China or gets in the hands of whoever Iran and then they use it on us before we could use it on that. Like we want to have the technological military superiority because we think of ourselves as best case scenario of human beings on planet Earth in 2022. Well, what if, you know, what if we've had it for a while and we've, you know, essentially blown that lead?

Yeah. I mean, why are we talking about it more than because I assume that would still hold true unless there's been work elsewhere that has pushed up, made that less relevant. What do you think? I think if we're experiencing it here, it's probably something that our adversaries are dealing with and probably are working on as well. Have they discussed it at all? Are you aware of any discussion, whether it's the Chinese government or the Russian government? Is there any discussion at all about UAPs over there? There's a lot in Russia. I mean, Russia has a history of UAP just like we do in the United States, you know, from my amateur research.

But in China, too, it has been taking notice. I hear that they have been apparently working on artificial intelligence or machine learning solutions to better understand what these objects are. They've been communicating that they've been seeing a large number of these objects and that the sightings have been increasing. Everything that leaves China essentially comes out of state media. So, you know, what are they communicating exactly? I don't know. But that has been they have been doing looking into it.

Yeah. I mean, maybe that would be the thing that unites us remember that ronald reagan speech there's a ronald reagan speech was it from the united nations i learned about it yeah yeah it's a it's a wild speech you've seen the speech right oh would russia help us or soviet union help us if we were attacked from yeah well imagine how quickly would it ban our differences if we're faced with an alien threat from another world and then hope yeah all the the UFO people went bonkers. Like, oh my God, he knows something.

Ronnie's trying to tell us. And that's, I think, I mean, if there was something that united us as a human race instead of thinking ourselves as like these individual communities that live on patches of land, you know, tribal attitudes. Like the one thing that would do that, it's something from another planet. Knock on wood, you know, we have seen mostly bipartisanship in the bills that have been passing in the Congress and Senate regarding UAP activities in the United States. So, you know, to that point, it seems to, you know, what's been happening in Congress and the Senate has been very rational, you know, strong bipartisan work by both, you know, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Rubio.

You know, they've been working together on this problem. So to your point, you know, I hope that continues. I hope that is the thing that can kind of get us over all the back and forth. What are the big – I'm sure besides the Commander David Fravor situation and some of the – what have you ever heard of that's a big instance, like something crazy along those lines that maybe people haven't heard of? Oh, I don't know what people haven't heard of, but, you know, some things, you know, there was a flyover to the United States Capitol, it seems, at some point in the 50s, where a group of UAP were just kind of cruising over the White House and the state building. You can find pictures of it out there, although it hasn't been... Pictures of it?

Well, you know, it's like a formation of lights, essentially. So, you know, what is it? Who knows? But essentially, there you go. Is that... What? Well, that's a drawing. That's a drawing. That's a drawing, but... That looks terrible. Oh, so that's the actual thing? Wow. UFO sightings,

a peaceful union, or battlefield Earth. So so is that a real photograph so it's from the 1950s from history channel so this could be like a recreation all right probably yeah so from the 1950s and that's a that it's a drawing for the newspaper yeah saucers over washington dc there harry. Barnes, senior air route traffic controller for the Civil Aeronautics Administration, was in charge of the National Airport Washington, D.C. ART Control Center the night of July 19, 1952. Briefly, he states in a newspaper article, our job is to constantly monitor the skies around the nation's capital with the electronic eye of radar.

Shortly after midnight on that date, seven PIPs. What is a PIPS? Do you know what that is? PIPS? Seven PIPS? I don't know. Seven PIPS appeared suddenly on the control center scope. Ed Nugent, Jim Copeland, and Jim Ritchie,

all experienced radar controllers, checked the observations. The airport control tower radar operator verified the same sighting. They were over the restricted areas of Washington, including the White House and the Capitol. Wow. And there was some concern then that this was that these were Russian. Right. Because this was during the Cold War, this post-World War Two. You know, we had gotten some of the Nazi scientists and that they went on to work for NASA and through Operation Paperclip. And then Russia had gotten some Nazi scientists as well.

And we were concerned, like with who is going to develop some sort of spaceship or who's going to get to the moon first and all that shit was going on around then. Right. Yep. Absolutely. And, you know, a few years supposedly after Roswell and, you know, people always ask about, you know, it's like, well, why haven't we seen him? Why haven't they landed on the White House law and all that? But it's interesting if you do look back, there are some interesting examples of, you you know large groups of objects flying over you know very important areas you know clearly making themselves known well my take on that is like if we find an ant colony do we make ourselves available to the queen for a meeting and we don't give a fuck who the who thinks they're in charge

you know like if they're that advanced they can come here from another galaxy you know they're they probably don't give a shit about biden like come on that's so silly that oh that's your king but we do we care about them so if they wanted to influence most of our people they might look to influencing the person we all look to in a sense or or defy the power of these institutions by hovering over the Pentagon and letting them know we these high-level officials that are concerned about these things. Is this all – is this moving in a general direction of transparency, do you think? Do you think they're recognizing that this is something that has to be addressed and has to be – that people have to be informed about this because it's so prevalent? I do, yeah. So, I mean, that's what I'm seeing at this point. You know, I've engaged people, the Hill, and they are taking this very seriously.

And by extension, they have pushed that seriousness back to, you know, DNI, DOD, and the offices that have stood up within there, namely AERO right now, or the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office. From my perspective, they have a charter to engage the community on this. Of course, not to put any national security at risk. But that's kind of another conversation, the classification problem. Because that's its own entity, right? People might think if someone in the proper place can just declassify whatever they want. It's kind of its own entity that everyone else kind of operates under. So it's not quite that simple.

Kind of two problems there. But I have seen it seems to be real movement in the direction of engaging the public on this topic. What do you think their motivation for doing that is? I can't say exactly, but you know, when I, when I have been pushing people to pay attention to this, I, you know, it's very simple again, for me, it's about people are still flying by these things and almost hitting them. Right. We can talk all day about the, you know, societal implications of what they are, but at the end of the day, the people, the operators that are flying around out there have to not hit these things. And so, you know, from that sense, it's hard, I think, for people to ignore that because they

understand that, you know, this is a serious safety risk. And that as we kind of transition that new knowledge of the risk to the commercial markets and the general aviation communities, it's going to probably stir a few feathers, you know. The commercial markets, I think, don't necessarily want to acknowledge this because they have zero safety plan. They've been ignoring this for a while. And, you know, they might have to answer some hard questions about, you know, why they are ignoring the potential for midair with hundreds of people on their aircraft. Has there ever been an instance where there has been a midair collision or crash that happened because of, you know, trying to avoid one of these things?

So that's actually a better question than what I thought you were going to ask, because I thought, you know, that's a great thing. If a pilot sees one of these objects, right, and they have zero training on it and have no idea what it is or what to do, they might maneuver that aircraft in a way that could cause the aircraft to depart or to hurt somebody, right? Right. of it where, you know, because we're actively not teaching pilots to deal with this, they could do something dangerous when they do it. I thought you were going to ask, have we ever seen like an airplane crash because of midair with a UFO? And again, we don't know, right? Of course, there's been plane crashes, but nothing's been proven or else we wouldn't be having this conversation. But avoiding something would cause a real issue. If you're flying 500 miles an hour and you see something in front of you, you have to make an abrupt maneuver that's unplanned.

Yeah. Absolutely. Or the pilot says, oh, that's just something on my windscreen because clearly UFOs don't exist. And then they barrel into something and it turns out to be a balloon and they lose an engine, right? There's all sorts of ways you can go wrong. And not talking about it is never the solution when it comes to aviation safety. How many pilots, like, when it comes to commercial air pilots, how many pilots report these sort of sightings? And do these reports get to the Pentagon? Do they get to the White House?

Like, how does that happen? From where? If someone's, like, flying for American Airlines, and they see a circle with a cube inside of it that's like going, you know, the speed of sound, like what happens? You know, most likely the pilot will call up the air traffic controller they're currently talking with and ask them if they see the object or if, you know, there's other air traffic there. And the most likely answer, you know, from what I've heard is no, they don't see the object. And so that just kind of leaves the pilot there at that point. There is something that essentially says within the FAA manuals, if you will, though I don't know the exact one where it says, hey, if you think you've seen a UFO,

it actually uses that terminology, then you have the option to report it to the fa and doesn't even like tell you an office it's just kind of like if you feel the need to report it then that's something you're going to do so what that tells me is that this isn't the first time that there's been people poking around trying to report on it but that was really the best they could do is just say you know hey if you really feel like this is important then sure you can fire a message off right and that's kind of it so there's no organization there's no acknowledgement what's this jamie uh commercial pilot that filmed something he saw what is that thing you're saying it gets closer so he's zooming in and there's this like black dot it's like a circle it kind of looks

It's like black dot. It's like a circle. It kind of looks... What does it look like? What the fuck is that? Is that a TIE fighter? That's a cube. So this was over a meeting in Columbia. Whoa.

And it got... The article I found said that this was like labeled as a UFO is all it was labeled as. I'm trying to find the link I had. Look at that. It's like a cube. Go back to that again. I mean, that looks like a

square. The air crew on this particular incident, if I remember correctly, had seen the object for some time before it came into the camera's field of view. What's likely happening here is that the air crew are flying past that object. It's not that the air crew are flying past that object.

Right? So, like, it's not the object not flying down their nose. It's the aircraft flying. So they're flying close to it. So it might be a balloon or something that's just floating around? Not to say that, but generally speaking, I think their kind of story, if I remember correctly, is that they were seeing it for a while, and it was like doing something that was strange to them. I don't know what, if it was moving or changing shape like you saw or what,

but it was something that completely drew their attention and pulling their phones out. Airline pilots are not supposed to use their phone inside the cockpit like that. So he's breaking the rules in order to take a video of that, which I applaud him for. But this is exactly the type of thing that we talk about when we talk about needing procedures and things of that nature, right? He's breaking the rules in order to get data on this, right? And that's obviously not conducive to, you know, a proper

investigation of this topic. Right. There was another one that was recent that was being discussed online that was taken from a fighter jet I don't remember what model jet where it was the same sort of a situation where someone was taking a photo of some sort of a triangle shaped object that was in the sky do you remember that do you remember that Jamie I had two so there's one that shows that photo re like it's a an artist's rendition of it so it shows a real fake triangle I saw another one where it was filmed from a cockpit and there's a very split second,

you can see something fly by and they've like still framed that. I'll try to pull that up again. I'm trying to figure out which link I had it on. It's gotta be so strange for you to go from not really having any understanding of these things to upgraded radar and then holy shit, you see them every day. Yeah.

I mean, I wish it was – people always ask me, like, what was it like? It was never this just, like, come to Jesus moment where it was like, you know, oh, my God, there's UAP here. We were very pragmatic about it until we really had that time. Yeah, this was in the hearing, I think. It flashed by super quick there. Right, and then someone took a still of it as it flashes by, right? Yeah. So whatever that thing is just whips by.

Yeah, so this is what they were shown in a hearing in Congress. Those pilots didn't wander up to that object, right? Like they had radar on it. They had the FLIR on it if they were carrying a FLIR. The only reason they showed that was because they didn't have to declassify it. It was an air cruise phone, right? So there's this beast of an animal that surrounds us, which is the U.S. classification system. And, you know, the default is that stuff is classified more or less, right? And so, you know, that is something that needs to

be contended with by, you know, Aero, by the groups actively working in this, because they have to essentially work against that system, right? It's not intended to release information to the public. It's not why it's designed. It's designed to do the opposite of that. In terms of these images that have been released, what to you is the most compelling? Have you seen any of them that have been really fascinating to you? I have heard that there's some incontrovertibly interesting stuff floating around now. So, yes, like we said, in the past there's been stuff. But now that there's been an actual reporting mechanism since the UAP task force started that proactive system, and since then there has been recordings of things that are now floating around the general classified network,

that's not like some buried secret that people with the proper access can go and verify themselves, frankly. And, you know, I've met some of these people that have done their own homework, and they're incredibly passionate about volunteering their time to help. Some of them are helping me within the AIAA because they understand that, you know, we're entering a new realm of understanding our world, I think. So you've heard that there's some evidence that we're not privy to or that? Yeah, as a general public. I mean, I have no doubt that there's a plethora of images, classified images that, you know, will give us a lot more to talk about than that frame or two that we just saw. Do you have any hope that that stuff will ultimately be released?

I think that there is a pathway there. I do think there is a pathway for the declassification of data so that the scientific community can better understand it. I have been working with the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics with some of the emerging players within this landscape, I'll say. And we've been working very hard to see how we can, you know, the organization that we put together, how we can help those other institutions. In the near future, you know, we'll be able to announce some of those collaborations so that the general public can better understand the type of work that we're going to be doing.

What do you think the benefit for the government to release that information? Like, why would they be transparent about it? Why wouldn't they just continue to sort of dismiss it and look, we had our little hearings and let's just go about our business and whatever we get, we'll keep to ourselves? I don't know. You know, I don't know. Part of me wants to say, hey, maybe it's kind of a changing of the guard of a bit. Right. I mean, it's been a while if all the stories are to be believed. And it's kind of a new generation of people that kind of grew up in a more open society in a bit. I feel maybe less inclined to just bury everything away for the for the greater good.

And that's pure speculation. Right. That's how I feel. And perhaps, you know, as a bit of a new guard into this topic, you know. But at the end of the day, I don't think, you know, I don't know. And I don't, I hope we find out, right? I hope we kind of get the debrief at the end of the day one day, but I don't know if we'll get that. Because you've been open about this, and I know you did Lex Friedman's podcast, you've discussed this, and I saw some other things about you discussing this online. What has been, what's been the reaction from other people? Have you received more information

of people reached out to you to talk to you about things that they've seen? Have you received criticism from discussing this openly? I have not received criticism for talking about it openly. I think there was a period of time where, as to be expected, my former colleagues were treating this like a joke, like it was in the ready room. But Echo shut down pretty quickly, from what I've heard. And generally speaking, I've had people reach out, you know, with support, people incredibly passionate about this topic. You know,

I've, I like the word latent demand now, because in a sense, all the stories and topics and obscuration on this topic has just hasn't made people's interest go away. It just kind of bottled it up in a sense, at least what I hear. Because I have, you know, every day people mailing me saying, you know, thank you. I can feel like I can talk about this now in like a respectful manner. I can, you know, I'm a professor at a college and we're going to start looking into this with the students because the students are super passionate about this. And so, you know, I think the younger generation is very easy to accept and integrate, you know, the possibility I'll say, whereas the older guard is coming around in a sense.

So I do think that it is possible, I would say, for, you know, like we talked about, as this, you know, this technology change happens with people moving into that technology faster and faster, and it kind of leaves our society behind in a bit. I think the same thing is going to happen with this topic, right? Like there are people that are going to be able to integrate this into their reality faster or sooner than other people. And, you know, much like technology, there's going to be advantages to people that do integrate that information. But the hope is that I think we'll get everyone there one day. Yeah. And the hope for me is that people release more of this stuff, like the leaks that have, uh, that Jeremy Corbell has gotten about like the transmedium device and some of the other things. There was another one where there was those pyramid shaped objects that were flying over, uh, and it was an aircraft carrier. Some, some ship. I don't think it was a carrier.

Yeah. I think it was like a destroyer or something like that. What did you think of those videos? There's a lot of like... See if you can find that, Jamie. It's really weird. They're like pyramids. Mm-hmm. And they're flying around like these things.

Yeah. Flashing triangular-shaped object. Shown through a night vision camera over the USS Russell and footage leaked to Jeremy Corbell. What did you, did you watch that footage at all? Yeah.

I don't know, you know, people, I know we're nugget down and kind of arguing about the shape of the object, right? Triangle or not. I told people, I don't give a shit what it's shaped like.

Like, these things should not be flying over a U.S. destroyer, like, regardless. Like, let's focus on the right things here. There's a sense that if something can be prosaically explained, then it must be, right? If there's a, you know, an unknown object that has a light on it, it's impossible for it to be a UAP because UAV have lights and they need lights. So that's the simplest explanation. And therefore, everything else is negated. Right. And you need to have that exceptional evidence for it to even be considered.

I don't care. Right. It's near a naval asset. And we don't, you know, that's our airspace. And whether the shape is interesting or not is irrelevant. Like it's a massive security flaw to have objects like that flying near a ship. It's, you know, it's a travesty if that's what our Navy is allowing foreign adversaries to do. So that needs to get fixed. And if it's not foreign adversaries, then we need to better understand that as well. If you had a pile of chips and you were going to push it into like

red or black, red is some sort of human based technology. Black is aliens. Can we say other instead of aliens? just something crazy other some non-human intelligence non-human intelligence something from somewhere else whether it's another dimension another planet what do you think i think there's another actor involved i think there is another i think that there is something that is not human that is interacting in some fashion i don't know whether it comes from somewhere else or was here before or comes from something we don't understand, but there is a segment of the data that is just not explainable at this point. And from my experience, you know, again, not 100%,

not binary, right? But on the scale, you know, that's the direction that I've continued to move in based off what I've seen. And I haven't had any reason to go the other way. Do you bounce around possibilities in your head of whether or not this thing is interdimensional from another planet? Yeah. Yeah. You know, the dimensional thing is interesting in a lot of different ways. We obviously, you know, obviously, but, you know, we don't necessarily evolve to see reality, right? We evolve to survive in our environment, as we talked about before. space-time, or 40, I should say, may not be the complete picture. You know, we call things other dimensions or X, Y, or Z, but, you know, what does that really mean? Does that mean a consciousness that's bound in an electromagnetic, you know, pattern, right? Is that a higher dimension, or is that, you know, a life form occurring in three-dimensional space? I don't know the answer to that, right? It's kind of a nuanced discussion. And I think that at the end of the day,

we don't really fully understand our universe well enough to fit it into one of the buckets that we've already defined. I think there's undefined buckets that could be a participant in this conversation. Not that I say to know where they are, right? But I'm just assuming that there's unknowns in the makeup of our universe, whether it's the 3D, 4D space time,

or whether it's something beyond space time. And I don't know what those unknowns are or where they could live. There's your classic vision of time travelers or people kind of stepping outside of our space-time into another land. There's also another quote-unquote dimension if we think about, you know, quantum, the quantum regime and, you know, wave functions and, you know, one interpretation has those wave functions not collapsing, right? And so then there's multiple realities of all possibilities happening at once. So there's lots of different definitions of multidimensional. And I think we're just still scraping the surface as it is. And we're going to learn more about where things could come from in the future. Well, I certainly hope so. One of the things that gives me hope is the fact that this

is discussed openly now, as opposed to when I was younger, when I was a kid, if you talked about UFOs, you were kind of a fool. You were a silly person that was, you know, you were, you're, you know, it's like talking about elves or, you know, leprechauns or something. It was dumb. Like why, why, why are you concerning yourself with UFOs? Those are all silly stories. The only one that was really compelling was the Roswell story, because the Roswell story was actually reported in the newspaper that they recovered a crashed UFO, and then they actually flew it to, I think it was Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in two separate jets.

They flew the wreckage in case one of them goes down. They still have some of the wreckage in one of the jets, which was amazing at the time. But then the next day they said it was a balloon, it was a mistake, and who knows what that was. I mean, I don't know how much of you looked into that story. I've read Corso's book. Yeah. You know, so I've got that perspective, of course, kind of read the mainstream interpretation of it. But what was Corso's perspective on it? What did he think? Well, he kind of broke down this whole, this whole, you know, he told the UFO story as much as you could tell it. I'm not necessarily vouching for any of it, but it really goes into, you know, details like you just described

around moving things around and technologies that could have been, you know, observed, things of that nature. Again, you know, stuff almost like Bob Lazar, where, you know, he's highlighting technologies and describing one way that we now recognize, you know, things like fiber optics and things of that nature.

So, you know, I don't know where the truth lays but um again it's all being clouded by this classification system right like the full story is still classified and what happens when you have information gap like that people just fill it in um you know recently there was you know communication about how um the one of the i think it was the aviation intelligence service Service of, gosh, was it Navy? I forget. But they released a patch with a UFO on it, like a straight-up UFO. Yeah, I saw that. And they took it down.

Then they took it down like a week later. Did they? Yeah. They took it down? They took it down. They said it was an accident. What? Yeah.

How can it be an accident? Yeah. That's crazy. It was a design. Yeah. How is a design an accident? Yeah. That's crazy. It was a design. Yeah. How is a design an accident? It's like a federal website. Like, you don't just accidentally post like the wrong GIF on a website like that.

I thought it was pretty cool. Jeremy actually made t-shirts out of it. Yeah. But then, you know, kind of some of the talk was, oh, everyone got too excited about that. And you made the assumption that there's UFOs and they're doing it there. And it's like, well, one, of course, that's the assumption that was made. But two, that's what happens when you just hide information. Right.

Like don't chastise us for not like for filling in the gaps. Right. Like that's not our fault. Yeah. I think there's a real fear of admitting that there's something that we can't control that's technologically superior to us that can visit. superior to us that can visit. And if I was running the country, I would like to have the ability to say that we're in control of everything, that there's not some super intelligent beings that we don't understand at all that are using technology that's indescribable. And they're visiting us all the time. And some of them we can't even see. We don't even detect them until we lock on to them with superior radar.

I mean, that alone, I mean, that puts you in a position of like, well, you're not the boss. They're the boss. You're just the fucking general manager. You know, and I mean, I think that's what I would be worried about if I was going to release that information, if I was in a position of power, if I was an admiral or general or president, I would be like, don't tell them. They're just going to freak out. I feel like our society is more adaptable and flexible now, just with the tools we have and the way we communicate you know and the way we can you know break down problems and share them digitally i think now it'd be easier to integrate problems like that because it's easier for people to do their own homework and integrate it whereas you

know 50s and 60s everyone's just circled up on the tv and just getting pumped with whatever information goes out right yeah that's true that That's true. There's a general accepting of access to information that just wasn't the case before the internet. Yeah. And so, yeah, I think we are a more adaptable society now for better or worse. We have the ability to find our own tribes, right? And to find comfort with others that have the same ideas of us, whereas in the past, you were on your own island in a sense. And so it was hard to cultivate those ideas. Well, Ryan, thanks for doing this, man.

Thanks for talking about this openly, and thanks for coming here and discussing it. It was really fascinating. And I hope we get to do this again someday. Maybe there'll be some new information that comes out and some new revelations. I think we will have some new information to talk about next time. Do you know something?

Tell me now. Tell me right now. Would you? Maybe tell me off the air. I won't tell anybody, I promise. I will tell people. I can't keep a secret about that. I can't stop myself.

It's too important. But it's really fascinating stuff, man. And, I mean, I don't know what to think of it sometimes. Sometimes I think about it too much. You know, one of the things that I got out of talking to Commander David Fravor imagination, that's got to stay with you every day. No matter what you do, whatever you – what's on Netflix? I don't know, but there's fucking aliens out there. You know?

Whatever you think is important, that has got to be in your consciousness, like right there next to you all the time because he's experienced something personally that very, very few human beings will ever be able to comprehend what it feels like to watch and to know that that's out there and to know that all of the boundaries that we think of in terms of just propulsion systems technology and whether or not we are actually in contact on a regular basis with something from somewhere else imagine having that confidence that knowledge you know wow dave's story is incredible, you know, to see the tic-tac like that and hear him tell it. Yeah. And the thing that was under the water that the tic-tac was interacting with, that's, that's fascinating as well, that there might have been some sort of a mothership or something below the surface of the water because of the way the water was reacting. That, I mean, the, the transmedium aspect of this is really fascinating to me

because it makes so much sense that if they could fly through space and they could just, if they have this ability beyond our imagination or, you know, maybe in tune with our imagination about propulsion systems and the ability to just move around instantaneously, why wouldn't they just go in the water? If they could do that, why would the water be so complicated for them if space isn't complicated? The difference between space and our atmosphere, it's quite the thickness difference, right? And so that's why things heat up when they come back from space.

And really it's the same problem, right? If you can just do that without that happening, transition seamlessly from space to air, then it should be the same principles essentially go from air to water. Especially if they're doing it with some method that's similar to what Bob Lazar described of just completely manipulating space and time around them. You'd think if you saw that there'd be some interesting detection methods you could do or, you know, like maybe like a red shift, you know, if you were to beam light at it and then record some of it coming back, you could see perhaps how that light shifted

due to the gravitational effects, or if you had a sensor on each side and just like we, you know, bend light around a star or a planet to see things behind it, perhaps we could, you know, observe a bending if we had sensors on both sides, which sounds difficult, but when you have, say, maybe a bunch of fighter jets flying around, they're all in a data link pumping information together, over a period of time, they're going to be in that position just due to random chance, in a sense. So it's about collecting data over time versus getting it perfectly. Has there ever been any discussion of devising some sort of a plane or some sort of a jet or something that just goes out to try to collect data on these things? Yeah, you know, I mean, the area is not totally closed off. Like,

you could take an aircraft over there or a ship over there. But that's also why we don't test equipment out there, because it's just international water, right? And so that's why it's like, hey, why would we be testing our own equipment here? Because anyone can take a boat over here and look up and start sniffing around. So, yeah, I don't know how to answer that question further. To come to a conclusion. Oh, well, that's this. And that's that. Now we know. The end. There's no the end here. You're right. We haven't finished the story yet. But, you know, just to kind of give you some of my perspective, you know, this conversation is still ongoing. I think that more resources and more energy and more people are getting involved. I see us moving this conversation forward both technologically. I think that we're going to be able to better understand not only where the objects are and how they kind of relate to each other and the locations and some things about that. But I think we'll better understand repulsion.

that has been collected in the recent past so that we can move the conversation forward technologically as a society, as a people, and study this from all the different societal angles that it's going to need for us to fully integrate it. I think that in the next few years, we're going to have the proper institutions, both in the government and in the commercial and academic world, in order to fully integrate this without needing to build new stuff, not exposing the populace to this information and saying, okay, wait for your institutions to catch up. I see that landscape being built. And I think it's going to be interesting when we have the tools within our society to really flesh out what this information means. Well, I, for one, can't wait to meet our alien overlords. And see, I just want to see.

I mean, I think this is all emerging and it's really fascinating. I think about it too much. Obviously, look at this place. I got a UFO on the desk. There's one behind me. It's a problem. I'm working, you know, I've left my employer to start to engage in this full time. So I'm right with you, Joe. Wow. So how are you engaging in this full time?

More to be revealed next time. But like I said, there's a landscape spinning up. And, you know, I think this fall and this next winter, I think we'll have some more open conversation about what that short-term future is going to look like. Well, come on back and let us know, please. It'd be my pleasure, Joe. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. It was great. Great conversation. All right. Bye, everybody.