Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal - Luis Elizondo on Biological UFO Samples, Remote Viewing, and explaining "Somber" #UFOamnesty

Starting point is 00:00:00 Alright, hello to all listeners, Kurt here. That silence is missed sales. Now, why? It's because you haven't met Shopify, at least until now. Now that's success. As sweet as a solved equation. Join me in trading that silence for success with Shopify. It's like some unified field theory of business.

Starting point is 00:00:20 Whether you're a bedroom inventor or a global game changer, Shopify smooths your path. From a garage-based hobby to a bustling e-store, Shopify navigates all sales channels for you. With Shopify powering 10% of all US e-commerce and fueling your ventures in over 170 countries, your business has global potential. And their stellar support is as dependable as a law of physics. So don't wait. Launch your business with Shopify. Shopify has award-winning service and has the internet's best converting checkout. Sign up for a $1 per month trial period at shopify.com slash theories, all lowercase. That's shopify.com slash theories.

Starting point is 00:01:03 During this entire interview, it's best to read between the lines of what Lou is saying, as while ostensibly equivocating, he's actually saying quite a bit. Breadcrumbs are judiciously dropped. Tweet the hashtag UFOAmnesty, and I'll retweet it at ToeWithKurt. This is the second interview with Luis Alessandro and his longest interview ever. Luis Alessandro is a former U.S. Army counterintelligence special agent, mostly known as the director of the now defunct AATIP, a program initiated by the Defense Intelligence Agency in order to study unidentified aerial phenomenon, also known as UFOs. Thank you to Shortform for

Starting point is 00:01:43 sponsoring this video and click on the timestamp in the description if you'd like to skip this intro. For those new to this channel, my name is Kurt Zeimungle and I'm a filmmaker with a background in mathematical physics dedicated to the explication of what are called theories of everything from a theoretical physics perspective, but also delineating the possible connection consciousness may have to the fundamental laws, provided these laws exist at all and are knowable to us. Now this UFO phenomenon may seem tangential to the exploring of the variegated landscape of toes, that is theories of everything. However, if you watch episodes like the Kevin Knuth episode,

Starting point is 00:02:17 you'd see that there's an intimate connection between some of the deep mysteries of the universe and this phenomenon. Thus, I'm interested, and don't view this enigma with the stigma that the majority of the scientific community has. If you enjoy witnessing and engaging in real-time conversation on the topics of consciousness, psychology, physics, and so on, then do click on the link in the description for the Discord and for the subreddit. There's also a link to the Patreon, that is patreon.com slash Kurt Jaimungal, if you'd like to support this podcast as the sponsors and the patrons are the only reason I'm able to do this full time. And it would be extremely difficult to explore topics like geometric unity or loop quantum gravity or even string theory, which is coming up without the sponsors, without being able to do this full time because of patrons like yourself. Again, that link is patreon.com slash kurtjaimungle. Thank you. reduce returns and inventory write-downs while reducing inventory investment. It's a supply chain AI that drives smart ROI, headed by a bright individual named Amjad Hussain, who's been a huge supporter of the Toe podcast since nearly its inception.

Starting point is 00:03:34 In fact, Amjad has a podcast about AI and consciousness, which will be linked in the description. So if you'd like to learn more about that, then you can subscribe to his content as doing so supports this content. The second sponsor is Brilliant. Now, Brilliant illuminates the soul of math, science, and engineering through these bite-sized interactive learning experiences with courses that explore the laws that shape our world, the fundamental laws which elevate math and science from something to be feared to this delightful experience of guided discovery. You can even

Starting point is 00:04:04 learn group theory, which is one of the most daunting mathematical theories, at least for newcomers, and it's one of the main pillars behind the standard model, that is quantum field theory. So when you hear that the standard model is predicated on SU2 cross SU3 cross U1, that's the same as, well, those are technically called Lie groups. Visit brilliant.org slash toe for free and get 20% off the annual subscription. I recommend that you don't stop before four lessons and I think you'll be greatly surprised at the ease at which you can now grok subjects that you previously had a hugely difficult time understanding. The

Starting point is 00:04:36 third sponsor is joining us for the first time and that's Shortform, which is a place that you can go if you don't have the time or the inclination to read an entire book. Yet, let's say you want to know the gist of it so that you can be conversant as if you've read it. And I mean that in the best sense, more on short form later. Quick note, this podcast is also on iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, and so on. I hear many comments asking where it is. It's in the description if you'd like to follow on an alternate audio platform. Thank you and enjoy this conversation, one of the most revelatory conversations with Luis Alessandro to date. That's primarily thanks to you as this was an AMA. That is questions were gleaned from you. Thank you for watching slash

Starting point is 00:05:13 listening and thank you, Lou, for your generosity. Enjoy. Tell Jennifer, I know how much my wife contributes to my success. It's mainly my wife's success. So I imagine much of your success is your wife's success. Absolutely correct. Kurt, it is. It is absolutely, it is, you know, behind, I tell everybody behind every great man is a greater woman or a greater person, you know, obviously it might come from an older generation, but it, you know, it's usually the success of anybody is always dependent upon a close circle of trusted people behind them that are, that are, them that are really helping make things happen. So you're absolutely right.

Starting point is 00:05:51 Okay. Anything you want me to be aware of before we go live? Anything you want to say? You know the rules, man. There are no rules. You can ask me whatever you want. Okay. If you can see this, type forgot about Dre.

Starting point is 00:06:04 Forgot about Dre. So, Lou, while I'm making sure, there's about a 20-second delay before I can tell if this actually went live. How's your day going? You know, it's going considerably well versus the alternative, right? There's an old saying, any day above ground is a good day, and I definitely subscribe to that. I know that you're in such a whirlwind, primarily, what is it? Interviews or what? No, I wish. It's a combination of many things.

Starting point is 00:06:37 When I first presented those five slides, those on how we are having this conversation, legislative engagement, executive engagement, et cetera, all those take a lot of effort every day, a lot of care and feeding. They're like children, really, that are constantly wanting attention. And so you have to feed the beast accordingly. You have to make sure you give just the right amount of information to those specific silos, if you will, or pillars to keep them happy. But of course, therein lies part of the challenge because you can't give all sides the same information necessarily because obviously the information you talk to with executive leadership sometimes is classified and you can't give that necessarily to the public, but you can still have the same conversation without providing classified information.

Starting point is 00:07:34 And so that's how you have to thread that needle. And it's a constant, I guess you could call it spinning of plates and hopefully you don't drop any of them. And so it takes a lot of, a lot of time. It takes a lot of effort and a lot of, a lot of coordination for each one of those. This is what I don't think people understand when you look at the, the collective achievements or accomplishments we collectively have made all of us over the last four years, each one of those bullets is, is, is hundreds, if not sometimes a thousand hours working behind the scenes to make things happen.

Starting point is 00:08:11 It's a lot, a lot of work. And, you know, I still have a day job and I'm still, you know, trying to do my best to have this conversation. You know, every time I have one of these, and you can attest to this, Kurt, I don't get paid for this. I mean, call me a liar, but have you ever paid me to do an interview? No. No, right.

Starting point is 00:08:34 And I don't ask for one and I won't accept it to do one like this. And so it takes time away from my other stuff. It's a lot, a lot of work, but I think it's worth it in the end. I think ultimately this is a conversation that needs to be had. And I think we all have a part of it. Do these conversations make you nervous? You know, conversation doesn't make me nervous.

Starting point is 00:08:59 People make me nervous. It's probably just a product of my, my upbringing and maybe my, my, my choice of, of career profession. I think dialogue and conversation is great. You know, it's funny, you should ask me that, Kurt, because there's a, my wife and I, my wife jokes quite a bit with me and she, she sometimes don't know if I'm telling you if I'm being serious or not, uh, just cause of my sense of humor. And, um, you know, I told her, I said, after, after 40 or 50 years around the sun, the one thing I've learned it's, um, you know, I, I love humanity. It's, it's humans. I don't like, you know, and, uh, there's a difference, you know,

Starting point is 00:09:42 I love the idea of humanity, but unfortunately, uh, individually as human beings, um, you know, and there's a difference, you know, I love the idea of humanity, but unfortunately individually as human beings you know, there's a, I think there's a lot of room for improvement for, for all of us, to be honest with you. And so, so there lies the problem to have a conversation that's concerning you know, humanity, I have to engage, you know, humans. And, and that's what, that's what I find challenging sometimes because humans are, we're emotional beings. We can be, we can be fragile beings. And sometimes we can be, we can be violent beings and, and, and to each other. And that violence can manifest itself, not just physically, but sometimes just in words and hatred. And so that's what I find so challenging, you know, just simply trying to have a conversation. And there's people out there that want to stifle that conversation for whatever reason.

Starting point is 00:10:37 Okay. Well, let's minimize your trepidation by saying anytime you need to refill your coffee or go to the washroom, people who are watching, just bear with us because we're going on for quite some time. So here's a question from myself. By the way, I have to ask, what do you think of my coffee cup? Right. I know people are expecting like machine guns and tanks and whatnot. Right. But I have flowers to celebrate fall. Right. I have hearts. There you go. You beat me. Okay. Damn you, Kurt. hearts there you go you beat me okay damn you kurt conspicuous for similar reasons okay is there any evidence that these whatever we want to call them aliens creatures future humans whatever we want let's label them x is there any evidence that these x can shape shift can look like other humans or other creatures you know i i don't know um But I'll tell you, mimicry is something that

Starting point is 00:11:27 is common in nature. And it's even common in what we do. There are species to defend themselves in the animal kingdom. Let's take a coral snake versus let's say a king snake. The coral snake is very deadly. The king snake has the same colors, except for some of the color arrangements are in opposite order. And these animals mimic other animals for protection. Now, let's look at it from a humanistic perspective. We have something where we call light deception on, for example, Navy ships. In the old days, we would string lights in a way that would try at night to make a big, large destroyer appear to be a fishing boat, a trawler. And light deception is part of camouflage, part of survival.

Starting point is 00:12:15 So if there is a species that is far more advanced than human beings, it's not inconceivable. It's far more advanced than human beings. It's not inconceivable. Look, we can go to the panda exhibit in the zoo in China and see that zookeepers will often wear these kind of, I mean, it appears ridiculous to us, but not so ridiculous to the pandas. The zookeepers are required to wear a panda suit, a big furry teddy bear suit. Yeah, they do that. So when they go into the enclosure to clean up the

Starting point is 00:12:46 enclosure or whatnot, provide food, they don't disrupt the local panda population as least as possible. Of course, it's entertaining to us to see a bunch of humans walking around in furry panda suits, but at the end of the day, it's effective. So I don't think it's inconceivable. The problem is when we start going down the road of, you know, we say shape-shifting and things like that, immediately we start going into the world of woo, quote unquote, and paranormal. And again, there's nothing wrong with it. I've written articles on paranormal, right?

Starting point is 00:13:17 Everything by definition in science is paranormal until it becomes normal, frankly. But the problem is that we don't have hard evidence. We have a lot of anecdotal evidence. A lot of people report seeing things that the UAP can look like an aircraft, sometimes disguised itself like a 747, or that the occupants can make themselves look like human beings. I don't really know. During our time at AATIP, we were focused primarily on the nuts and bolts of this and what our military eyewitnesses

Starting point is 00:13:54 and collection capabilities were telling us. At the time, we didn't really have any reports of quote-unquote shape-shifting. Now, cloaking, that's a different story. We do have some information that indicates that these things do have an ability to try to evade some of our sensors. And for example, radar, you get these nonsensical, what looks like spoofing or radar jamming occurring. You have, you know, the low observability portion of the five observables is, you know, that includes things like active camouflage and cloaking and, again,

Starting point is 00:14:33 low observability. It's hard to see. And so that there is information that we have that pertains to that. Okay. Speaking about cloaking, is there any evidence that suggests UFOs are associated with orbs, at least anecdotally? Firstly, what's the reason for that? And then second, is there any evidence that you know that suggests that these orbs may be more plentiful than we think, perhaps around us, whether in homes or outside cityscapes, just cloaked? Yeah, the problem with orb, the word orb orb is you're not going to get a common definition

Starting point is 00:15:07 from most people. Everybody thinks an orb means something else. Some people think an orb is a little plasma ball. Others say it's much, much bigger and intelligently controlled. Orb is kind of a general catch-all. When you say it's an orb related to UFO, well, by definition, it is a UFO. It's unidentified and it's flying or it's in our atmosphere and it's an object, it's something. We don't know what it is. So by definition, an orb is a UAP, but the question is, is it a UAP in the sense that

Starting point is 00:15:36 we're talking about UAPs, whether lenticular type shape or maybe a cylindrical shape or a triangular vehicle? I think the jury's still out. There does seem to be some information that suggests that orbs, as you call them, are sometimes associated with other UAP sightings, that there are UAPs in the sky, and then you see these little balls of light. The problem is it's a very generalized term. We now know for a fact that things such as ball lightning are real. Is that an orb? Well, yeah, at times it looks like an orb to me. Other times when you have

Starting point is 00:16:12 large amounts of energy being released into the atmosphere and the environment, let's talk about tectonic movement, for example, where these titanic forces right underneath the surface of the earth, creating this plasma effect in the atmosphere where you get these different colors shooting into the sky and again, orbs, if you will, being reported and seen and even captured on camera. But that's an orb that I think we can all agree is probably being manufactured naturally. Now, are there orbs that are intelligently controlled? Well, we did talk about that at ATIP. One of the questions were when you look at the different shapes and sizes of vehicles, orbs tend to be almost like, I guess,, in, in, in a vernacular sense,

Starting point is 00:17:05 think of a UAV, think of a drone. The, the, the, they tend to be described as being much smaller, highly maneuverable, different colors, sometimes red, sometimes green, sometimes yellow, sometimes blue. Is it possible that those colors are, are, are indicative of mission set, right? Is it, are the blue ones doing certain things where the reds are doing something else and their purpose is something else where the yellows and whites are doing something else? It's certainly plausible.

Starting point is 00:17:35 You know, I don't dismiss that at all. The problem is we just don't have enough information because it appears that these orbs tend to be small, that it's really hard to argue the case that they are being occupied by any type of biological organism. Now, it doesn't mean that they're not, it just means that we haven't seen that yet. We don't know what these are. Are these perhaps some sort of unmanned reconnaissance capability that are kicked out? Not much different than we use drones ourselves, right? To do certain types of reconnaissance missions.

Starting point is 00:18:11 We don't know. It's certainly possible. The reasoning behind my question is that Tom DeLonge, I recall, was saying one shouldn't do CE5. I'm going to get you to explain what CE5 is. But anyway, one shouldn't do CE5. And when one does it, often orbs are associated with it. And one thinks, oh, that's great because I'm inducing some contact. And Tom said, be careful. One shouldn't do that lightly. So that to me implies

Starting point is 00:18:37 that there's something nefarious or potentially nefarious about these orbs. Well, I mean, look, I'd say the same thing. Don't mess around with electricity unless you're a licensed electrician. Be careful because you can get zapped. That's true with anything. That's not just orbs. That's electricity. That's swimming pools. That's everything. I can't speak for Tom. I don't know what Tom meant by that, but I can tell you that general word of caution, I think is, is, is appropriate for, for just about anything out there. You know, if you don't know what you're getting into, just, just be mindful. You know, there are potentially things that go bump in the

Starting point is 00:19:16 night and, and, and it's not all, you know necessarily good or bad, you know. It's not all sunflowers like your cup. Well, you know, anytime you go, go snorkeling, look, I'm an avid scuba diver. Um, the scuba diving my whole life. Um, you know, there's always a remote risk when you go scuba diving in some of these beautiful coral reefs, you know what, there's a risk you're going to come up against a shark. Now, not all sharks are going to do anything, but if you're carrying a, you know, a bag of, of, of fresh fish that you wound up spearing, uh, and, and are now bleeding out of this bag and dead, um, chances are you may attract a lot more attention than just a curious shark. You may be attracting a hungry shark and now you got to kind of pay attention. So, um, you know, I, I, I think that's wise advice

Starting point is 00:20:02 on just about everything that we do. You know, I live here in Wyoming where a lot of people like to go splunking and, you know, adventuring into caves. But again, you know, you have to have the right equipment. Be careful when you go into a cave, you know, make sure you've got light, make sure you've got, you know, gear that can get you in and out and rope and whatnot. Okay. Now let's get to some of the audience questions. This one comes from Stephanie. Stephanie Highfill, is there information being recorded or being encoded into less mainstream information media channels that can be parsed out, John Nash style, like a beautiful mind, that could help us arrive closer at the truth of this phenomenon?

Starting point is 00:20:44 like a beautiful mind that could help us arrive closer at the truth of this phenomenon. So I'm going to need your help, Kurt, kind of detangling that question because I'm not familiar with the reference, but when you're saying encoded, can you repeat that question one more time? I want to answer it. I just want to make sure I'm understanding the question. Okay. Just deciphering. Essentially, someone of sufficient intelligence can decipher that there are different drops being placed by, let's say, disclosure people, the government. Oh, I see what you're saying. Breadcrumbs. What I refer to as breadcrumbs. One can decipher it.

Starting point is 00:21:19 Well, I've always left breadcrumbs. Every interview I ever do, Uh, so for the last four years, um, you know, I think people can now go back through a lot of what I've said in the past and come back and say, Oh, so that's what he was referring to. Now we know, uh, because certain people have come out, whether it's, you know, Jim Lekatsky in his book or other folks. Um, you know, I, I, I think I can't speak on behalf of the government and other people. I suspect that what I can say is I think that we are at a point now where we don't have to leave the breadcrumbs that we have been in the past. I think the time has come for us to be even a little bit more straightforward and a little bit more clear.

Starting point is 00:22:07 The difficult part is when you're dealing with security clearances and NDAs, which everybody hates to hear. That's becoming a three-letter word that I think is probably going to be etched somewhere on my tombstone. And people are going to be throwing tomatoes at it from here to eternity because they from here to eternity because they hate it and they don't, they don't, but they hate it because they don't really understand what it means and why you have them. Um, you know, those, those NDAs definitely get in the way of having a complete transparent conversation. But I also think that, that we are having it. I think we're, we're, we've come a long, long ways. And as far as answering this specific question, as far as leaving breadcrumbs, I can't speak for anybody else. I don't know precisely what the government,

Starting point is 00:22:53 because the government isn't just as one huge if you will, monolithic enterprise, it's, it's comprised of people. And those people, each of those people have their own interests and their own desires and, and their own agendas. And so I can't speak for them. I can only speak for me. I think certainly if people were to look at all the talks I've given and really look at them and listen to them closely, they will see that a lot more has been said than might necessarily be acknowledged. Okay, this one comes from Ross Coulthart.

Starting point is 00:23:29 Since you left the DOD, have you been warned not to talk publicly about certain things, and if so, what? Yes, I have been warned. I've been warned, first of all, not to discuss classified information, which I've heeded thus far and will continue to do so. I've been threatened. There are individuals in the Pentagon that did not like what I do and how I did it. And so once Secretary Mattis's public affairs officer, Dana White, left, they started to change the narrative a little bit.

Starting point is 00:24:08 I was told that I would be labeled crazy and that they would come after my security clearance, which they did. They actually did try to do that. And they were true to their word. But fortunately I had some friends and allies that knew exactly what I was doing beforehand. And it wasn't quite so easy for them to be able to do that. But to put it simply, yeah, I've been warned. So you've been warned. Have you ever gotten in trouble? Ross has a sub question. Have you gotten into trouble for acknowledging that the US has recovered non-terrestrial materials? Well, they're watching me very closely. There's elements that are trying to get me into trouble. So that's why I walk a very fine line. I walk right up to that line, but I won't step over it

Starting point is 00:24:55 because they're waiting for me to screw up. They're waiting for me to say one word that I shouldn't say in order to use that against me and silence me. So, yeah, I mean, I have gotten in trouble. They tried to come after my clearance, like I said, you know, and unfortunately I had to seek legal counsel to protect my constitutional rights to do so. You know, it seems that they've backed off a little bit for now, but I'm not fooling myself. I know that there's still wolves circling just beyond the limit of the fire that I'm standing next to, waiting for an opportunity. So I'm very mindful of that. But I will also say that there's some really good elements.

Starting point is 00:25:36 I've had an opportunity, sometimes through the worst of adversity, you get a chance to see people at their best. And I've learned that there are people on the inside that really do want to have a conversation and that want to see things done right. And these are senior people. Some of these are very, very, very senior people. And they have, they were willing to put their professional careers on the line to defend me and protect me. And that means a lot. That that means a lot that makes, that makes me feel, makes me feel good because I've always been that way. You know, I've, I've could have called people

Starting point is 00:26:11 out by name three, four years ago, just to defend my credibility. And I never did. You know, people are now realizing that a lot of those people are now finally coming out of the shadows and, you know, my life could have been a lot easier had I, had I, had I, you know, called them out to defend me, but I didn't because I made a promise to them that I would never, I would never reveal their identities until they were ready to do so. And that's just the way I am. To me, principles, you know, mean everything either, either you're a person of principle or you're not. It doesn't matter how bad the going gets you, you, you, you know, you got to stick by your word. So it's been a mixed bag for me. You know, make sure Ross, we tell Ross here that the, the, the full story that in, you know, even though I've had people coming after me, I've also had a lot of people rally around me. And, and to me, I'd rather, I focus on those folks.

Starting point is 00:27:01 Those are the folks that I, you know, just makes you want to do this even more because they're willing to get your back. And are you allowed to say those folks' names? They haven't come out of the shadows yet. They're in the process and we'll let that play out. But I think it'll be quite obvious when they step out because people are going to go, oh, that person? Oh, my goodness. outside of national security that they don't want you to disclose what you may disclose or they're worried you may? What is their worry outside of them? There have been forbidden truths, we can call them if if you will. There have been forbidden truths in the history of not just our country, but many countries. Truths that could upset a balance,

Starting point is 00:28:13 a balance that's been around for a long time. Let me give you case in point. Let's say there were some people that were doing their job by running a UFO program in the past, but because certain things happened, presidents were no longer briefed, people in Congress were no longer briefed who should have been, and now they're running an operation that's considered rogue. But it's still an important mission. but it's still an important mission. It turns out, you know, all of a sudden now let's say hypothetically the cat's out of the bag. What's going to happen to those people when,

Starting point is 00:28:55 when the government realizes they were running operations for better or for worse without any oversight, without any legal oversight, right? Who's going to be held accountable for that? The fact that they did not brief legally, like they were supposed to. Certain members of Congress and committees and oversight committees and, and, and the chain of command that's, that's potentially criminal, criminal action. Let's say I've said this before. Let's say you have two competing companies. You have aerospace company A and aerospace company B and And aerospace company A, for whatever reason,

Starting point is 00:29:27 gets a favor and some sort of really exotic game-changing material is provided to that company to do this analysis. Meanwhile, company B, who is competing fairly, doesn't get that material. Turns out company A now starts getting a lot of contracts, defense contracts, and becomes a multi-billion dollar company, while company B, who never had the advantage of having that material, goes into bankruptcy. Hundreds of people lose their jobs and stockholders lose their investment, keeping in mind that both companies are supposed to be treated fairly and have fair competition when it comes to US government contracts. Now what? Now what happens? Where's the liability? And by the way, now these companies are doing good things for the United States, but they got there because they had an unfair advantage, competitive advantage, potentially. Again, this is hypothetical, right? Where's the

Starting point is 00:30:25 liability there? You're talking to trillions and trillions of dollars worth of liability. You know, and who made those decisions to do that? You know, who's going to be held culpable for that? You know, the Security Exchange Commission would not be very happy to know that two publicly company, two publicly traded companies that were competing for a contract, one had an unfair advantage. The other went bankrupt. That's a problem. That's a real problem.

Starting point is 00:30:50 And so you're talking about big, big money interests. You're talking about things that are going into that gray world that go beyond just government interests. You're talking about banking. You're talking about some of the biggest names on the planet that have a lot to lose or a lot to gain in hindsight. So I think we always have to be careful that governments have always had interesting ties to certain interests. And that's true of all governments. It's not just the US, that's everybody. And we need to be mindful of that,

Starting point is 00:31:25 because you could be putting some people in a very uncomfortable position. And I'm aware of that. And that's why I've been very delicate how I approach this topic. I'm not trying to beat anybody up. I'm not trying to expose anybody and say, ah, ha, ha, gotcha, see there. I'm trying to have the conversation in a collaborative, meaningful way where everybody wins. Nobody has to get burned, right? It's not a zero-sum game. I'm not- Hypothetically, do they view it like that?

Starting point is 00:31:53 Like there's a potential where everyone can win or do they view it somewhat zero-sum? Well, I can't speak for them. I can't tell you what they think. All I can tell you is what I think and my approach. And my approach is to say, look, guys, you know, we're not trying to expose anybody. This is not, I'm not trying, it's not a witch hunt. You know, despite what you may see on social media where everybody wants their pound of flesh, that's not going to get us anywhere. be adults about this. And we need to have a conversation that if you, if you really want the truth to come out, you better be able, you better be willing to compromise. You know, this is, we're not gonna, we're not gonna sit there and put people to be eaten by the lions just to,

Starting point is 00:32:34 just to satisfy someone's, you know, ego or, or, or, or beef that they might have with somebody else. You know, the truth is more important than that. This is not about, see, I told you so, or being vindicated. This is about having a conversation that can affect all of humanity. And we have to be willing to set aside some of that, if you will. and understandably so, you know, you've got lots and lots of decades worth of, of people covering this up. I know there's a lot of animosity and resentment as a result of that, by people saying, you know, you've been lying to us for the longest time, but, but we got to be willing to put that aside if we really want to move forward. In my opinion, you're referring to animosity from the general public or animosity from some of these wolves, the general public who, general public who want their pound of flesh because people have been covering this topic up for too long, knowing that it's real

Starting point is 00:33:28 midline to the American people. Potentially, how long is too long? Potentially, is it centuries? Is it decades? Well, there's information that goes, I live here in Wyoming, and I live next to members of the Crow Nation. And if you've ever had a chance to talk and really engage with Indigenous people, first of all, they're very, very private. Two, they have an incredibly rich history. Their oral traditions and oral history doesn't go back a few hundred years. It goes back millennia. In fact, when Europe was facing its dark ages and mankind almost went extinct in the European continent, and we were burning books, indigenous people over here were experiencing a golden era.

Starting point is 00:34:20 That wasn't the case over here. And the way they look at nature, the way they look at this topic, UAP, is not like we look at it through Western eyes. In fact, they don't view it as a threat at all. In fact, they don't view it even as paranormal. They view it as normal, as part of nature, their natural environment, as real as the lakes and the sky and the trees on the mountains are. And it's just accepted as part of the greater universe. And, you know, I think there's some beauty there. You know, they're not held hostage by their fears. In fact, they embrace it. And that goes to show that, you know, you don't have to view this topic as an either or. It doesn't have to be viewed as a threat or as some sort of saving opportunity for our species. It could just be a natural part of our existence. Again, do I subscribe to that? I don't know. But I certainly think it's another way, another perspective that we should consider.

Starting point is 00:35:29 If that is the case and they're right, then we've been dealing with this for millennia. I can tell you that having a chance to talk to some people in the Vatican, they describe these flaming Roman shields in the sky that would follow them from, from battlefield to battlefield, what they call the eclipse, which is the shape of the Roman shield. You know, that's documented. That's there. In fact, I think if I'm not mistaken, I haven't read it from Jacques Vallée, but from my understanding, Jacques Vallée even wrote a little bit about that. But I've, I've seen that evidence myself. There, there is, there is documentation of these strange things in the sky going back a long, long time.

Starting point is 00:36:09 So I don't think it's necessarily modern. Maybe our understanding is a little bit more advanced and maybe consider that modern. But I don't think we're dealing with a new phenomenon. I think we may be dealing with a new recognition and perhaps hopefully at some point, a new understanding, but I don't think this is a new phenomenon to mankind. I think we've been faced with this phenomenon for quite some time. You mentioned millennia, which is thousands of years. I'm wondering, potentially tens of thousands, potentially millions, or do you think it's cut off around 9,000 or so?

Starting point is 00:36:45 Well, that's hard to tell because we only as a species, Homo sapiens sapien, have been around roughly for 100,000 years. And we've only really gotten into written language in the last 5,000, 6,000 years, really, and been gone from hunter-gatherers to more of an agrarian-type society, organized society, which is if you take 100,000 years and you compare the last 5,000 years, really only the 5% of our entire time rummaging around on this planet has been in somewhat of a civilized fashion.

Starting point is 00:37:18 And then if you look at that to the context of it's been only in the last thousand years, 2,000 years, we understood the Archimedes steam engine, right? And really didn't even fully appreciate it until the industrial revolution just a couple hundred years ago. So now you're talking at 0.2% of mankind's time on earth. We've been industrialized, we've been civilized. So how much of our own history do we really know? Well, you know, we can go back 5,000 years pretty easily. 8,000 years, things start to get a little murky, right? And anything much beyond that, we really have no clue about. And the question is, have we as a species been aware of this phenomenon much longer? Well, let's look at what we do know. The general consensus is that the American population, when I say American, I don't mean

Starting point is 00:38:12 United States, I mean North America, South America, Central American population, really began about 20,000 years ago during the land bridge when you had a migration coming over the land bridge and settling this part of the planet. But in reality, it turns out now that a lot of scientists believe that there were many migrations and many migrations before that primary migration 20,000 years ago. In fact, there may have been multiple migrations going back, perhaps even 100,000 years ago. So is it possible that our society was aware of these things, maybe even interacted with these things in a certain fashion.

Starting point is 00:38:46 I'm sure it's possible. Absolutely, it's possible. I mean, most of our history, we have no idea about. You know, it's like spending an entire day and having amnesia, except for the last five minutes before you go to bed. You know, what the hell was I? What was I doing? What did I eat?

Starting point is 00:39:01 Who did I speak to? What did I say? What I'm wondering is what you're referencing is written history. And I'm curious about archaeological evidence that you're aware of or that potentially exists. Interesting. Yeah. So let me give you a real world example and I'm not going to either refute or defend it. But again, I live here in Wyoming and there is a legend here called the little people, the Piori mountains. And for generations, the indigenous people have reported what appeared to be this fearsome pygmy warrior tribe of humanoid type creatures that lived in the mountains.

Starting point is 00:39:39 And for many, many, many years, it was completely considered a myth. Folklore, right. Folklore. And it turns out that scientists began uncovering artifacts up in the mountains that to some degree reinforced the notion that there was some sort of small hominoid type creature living in the mountains. They found small tools. creature living in the mountains. They found small tools, they found small bones that appeared to be coming from some human-like creature. Now, I don't know the details

Starting point is 00:40:17 thoroughly. I haven't had a chance to really, really explore it or study it. But that part is true, that people are now beginning to look back and say, well, wait a minute. Is that possible? Because we're starting to find archeological evidence. So, you know, it's, it's interesting here. I can walk up into the Bighorn mountains and they're pulling out spearheads, spearheads that are 11,000 years old. Now think about that for a minute, 11,000 years old. If that spearhead could talk, what people did it come from? What were they hunting?

Starting point is 00:40:54 What did this place look like? You know, environments change in a blink of an eye. Look at the Sahara desert in 5,000 years. You know, there was a lot of wildlife living in the Sahara region before it became a desert. And that was in recent human history, by the way. We were inhabiting the planet when that happened. There are drawings on the side of rock walls that illustrate alligators, crocodiles, if you will, and animals that live not just on the savannah, but in the wetlands, all cohabitating there.

Starting point is 00:41:23 So this earth is very dynamic. Every time we have a, you know, for us, it seems like a long time, but every time we have an ice age, every roughly 10, 15,000 years, the entire topography of earth changes, the climate changes, animals change, people change, right? You know, I think it's very possible that that there is potentially some sort of archaeological evidence the question is would we recognize it if we saw it and that's another big big question we have to ask ourselves you know um let me ask you this as a scientist kurt if i said to you um kurt you have a task um you can make it out of whatever you want, any material you want. Your goal is to, in a million years, you have to create something now that will last a million

Starting point is 00:42:11 years to prove you were here. What would you do? How would you do it? Razor blades are like diving boards. The longer the board, the more the wobble, the more the wobble, the more nicks, cuts, scrapes. A bad shave isn't a blade problem, it's an extension problem. Henson is a family-owned aerospace parts manufacturer that's made parts for the International Space Station and the Mars rover. Now they're bringing that precision engineering to your shaving experience. By using aerospace-grade CNC machines, Henson makes razors that extend less than the thickness of a human hair. The razor also has built-in channels that evacuates hair and cream, which make clogging

Starting point is 00:42:50 virtually impossible. Henson Shaving wants to produce the best razors, not the best razor business. So that means no plastics, no subscriptions, no proprietary blades, and no planned obsolescence. It's also extremely affordable. The Henson razor works with the standard dual edge blades that give you that old school shave with the benefits of this new school tech. It's time to say no to subscriptions and yes to a razor that'll last you a lifetime.

Starting point is 00:43:16 Visit hensonshaving.com slash everything. If you use that code, you'll get two years worth of blades for free. Just make sure to add them to the cart. Plus 100 free blades when you head to h e n s o n s h a v i n g.com slash everything and use the code everything. Think about it. Go ahead. No, no, no, no, no let's let's let's i i love you man but we're gonna we're gonna have this mental exercise right now i think it's important and by the way it's not a trick question and i'm not playing gotcha just but would you give me just some examples that you might throw out there to say okay i would make something out of this or out of that

Starting point is 00:44:01 there are some meta materials that seem to be harder than diamond. So whatever's our hardest material, it would be made out of that. Also, just so you know, I don't classify myself as a scientist. I'm more of a hobbyist, let's say. So that's what I would do. So you'd find some sort of hard material that would outlast just about anything else on earth, right? Where would you put that? Where would you put it? Orbit is one place. Okay. And hopefully a non-retrograde orbit, right? Where would you put it? Orbit is one place. Okay. And hopefully a non-retrograde orbit, right? So geosynchronous and hopefully nothing would perturb it in a million years, chances are something would, but okay. Hypothetically in orbit, good. Here on earth, it's really hard to make anything that lasts more than a few thousand

Starting point is 00:44:41 years. You can even make the pyramids and look at them now and say, wow, those things are 5,000 years old and they don't look so great. And probably in another 5,000 years, they're not going to look good at all. And they might last eventually till a hill of, you might have a hill of sand in a hundred thousand years, but that's going to be about it. And that's made out of rock, right? Mount Mushmore, same thing. It's going to be gone in 10,000 years. You won't probably even recognize it. It'll be too worn. Even mountains in millions of years become deserts, right? Time moves on. Then you have the subduction zones of earth that eventually if you wait long enough on the surface of the planet, it all gets recycled anyways. It's all going to get sucked down into the mantle and get spit out the other end and as new land. So,

Starting point is 00:45:31 so nothing is indelible on this planet. It's, it's constantly changing and, and to create something that can last the sands of time, so to speak, is a lot harder than one might think. You know, the few examples we have here on earth that are man-made, you can look at the pyramids, man-made. You can look to the pyramids. You can look at things like Stonehenge, but that's a blink of an eye. Those were just made a few thousand years ago, and they're not going to be around for a whole lot of time. That's just not the way earth is. So if we're trying to find some sort of marker, chances are you're not going to find it buried in the earth unless it only happened maybe the last 5,000 years ago or so. Even some of the most dramatic examples of terraforming, let's look at, for example, the meteor impact crater in Arizona happened 60,000 years ago. That's already filling

Starting point is 00:46:27 in. In another 100,000 years from now, you may not even know anything ever happened because of the processes of earth and what this planet does. It's constantly erasing what's on the surface, and it's constantly burying what lies beneath deeper and deeper and deeper until eventually, you know, it gets recycled. So, you know, that's, that's, that's a hard question. You know, what would last long enough for us to go back and say, wow, this is an indicator of alien life on this planet 100,000 years ago. What would you have to do to achieve that, to accomplish that? It's a lot harder than one might think. And then again, would you recognize it? One might say, well, DNA. DNA is a perfect example. If you wanted to do something that was enduring for humanity, that we could look back 100,000 years ago and say, yes,

Starting point is 00:47:20 that was absolutely manipulated by an intelligent life form. Well, deoxyribonucleic acid may be one way to do it. You can put coding and sequencing in there that will perpetuate over time and time. And yes, you'll have some degradation over generations, but in essence, you could do something that way. And it basically, it's a biological marker, right? So we have to be careful when we say we look for evidence, because evidence isn't just necessarily a spearhead found in the Bighorn Mountains from 11,000 years ago. It's not necessarily a pyramid sitting in the middle of a desert. It could be far more sophisticated than that. You said put it in orbit, right? Well, what if we put that rather than orbit, we put it into the human body?

Starting point is 00:48:02 So anyways, I know it's a very long-winded way to answer that question. Yeah. Let me ask a quick follow-up and then we'll get to super chat questions, audience questions, and so on. Are there places that we should be looking for evidence that you feel like we're not? So for example, I mentioned archaeological investigation sites. The reason I brought that up is some people say craft were found. Okay. But you're also saying there may be other markers, maybe possibly biologically, for example. You know, near earth celestial bodies like the moon where you don't have atmospheric friction, you don't have the tectonic processes that we have here on earth that are constantly recycling, you know, someone might want to put something on the moon.

Starting point is 00:48:52 If you want to, you know, reminiscent of what was it? 2001 space, 2000 space, 2001 space odyssey, right. Where you have these, these monolithic markers. That's certainly one way to do it. You know, you could put something where you don't have those same processes occurring where maybe you might be able to extend your time twice as long for leaving some sort of archaeological evidence. The evidence could be right here, could be right in front of us, could be within genetic sequencing. It could even be more obvious than that. It could be the very fact that we're alive and we're on this planet is an example of some intelligent life somewhere making a decision that life needs to exist on this planet. We need to be open to all of that. We really do. I think we need to cast a very wide net. And this is why I always say all options have

Starting point is 00:49:37 to be on the table until they're not on the table, because you may be surprised. Something that's super, super intelligent probably isn't going to build a pyramid that's only going to last 20,000 years. They're going to do something that's far more enduring, something that will really be no kidding, maybe in 10 years. All right. This question comes from Terry Rueckert. So I got to ask real quick, Kurt. I don't mean to, what, what, forgive me. And I know I'm going to get a lot of hate for this. What is a super chat? I hear it a lot. What's a super chat? Well, a super chat is when someone pays $5, $50, $100 sometimes, most of these are five to $10. You'll get your check. Don't even say that because people are going to believe it.

Starting point is 00:50:24 Clear the record man yeah yep yep i'm not getting paid a penny for this i know i'm i'm kidding i'm kidding everyone okay and thank you so much for supporting thank you so much for supporting this podcast i tremendous i appreciate it a tremendous amount it's not easy to do this full time and this is like this is a place where i have almost no knowledge in lieu, as you could probably tell by the sophomoric nature of my questions. Kurt, I don't think anybody does. You're not alone, brother. You think I do? You think if I have all the answers, don't you think we'd be where we are today? No, I've got more questions than answers, but that's okay.

Starting point is 00:51:01 My fear is when people say they do have all the answers. Those are the people that I don't trust because I know they don't. I've been in this for a long time for the US government, and I damn sure don't have all the answers. So don't worry about it. Okay. Let's get to the super chat by Terry. Terry, Mr. Elizondo has called the UAP craft multiple times, made comments about not knowing who is piloting them. This seems like an assumption, at least without proof. Does this mean there is proof, let's call that evidence because proof in science doesn't exist, that these are craft with pilots? Well, let's break it down craft. Craft is a noun. It's a physical object that allows the transportation of something from point A to point B. Whether it's a hovercraft, right, or a spacecraft or an aircraft, you know, it's a vehicle.

Starting point is 00:51:56 You know, and so what defines a vehicle? Well, physical material. There's something to it, nuts and bolts. there's, there's something to it, nuts and bolts. Um, I've made a very clear, ready, my opinion about, um, my, my, my assertion that there is material that is related to this topic that has been recovered, um, in the past. That's, that's all I can say about that, but that's why, that's why I use the term craft. Um, it's, it's, uh, maybe not the best term, but to me, it's fairly accurate, at least until I can find another term that's more accurate. As far as piloted or manned, I'm not sure manned is the right way to say it because that means there's a human behind it. We're not sure that's the case,

Starting point is 00:52:41 but being piloted or intelligently controlled. Well, the way they maneuver and the way they respond to us, think of in the scientific world, stimulus versus reaction. We can provoke and elicit responses from these things. So, you know, Dave Fravor said when I came in to close the gap on this thing, this thing reacted to me. First of all, it pointed at me and then it maintained a safe distance and mirrored my maneuvers. So there is some sort of intelligence behind it. That's not random.

Starting point is 00:53:12 That's not Brownian movement, right? That is a deliberate action. There's justification in calling it craft other than that there may be pirates. Classification and calling it craft other than that there may be pirates. Correct. And something or someone is making a decision how these things perform and react. So I think it's fair to say that they are intelligently controlled craft of some sort. Now, much beyond that, I think that's up for debate. Are there potential photos that exist that show occupants in some of these quote-unquote craft? Well, there's a lot of photos that show a lot of things. The question is, are they real?

Starting point is 00:53:55 Are they legitimate? Are there potential photos that have potentially deemed as legitimate that have that quality? potential photos that have potentially deemed as legitimate that have that quality? There are very compelling photos out there that seem to show something inside, some sort of occupancy. And I'll leave it at that because it gets really murky much beyond that. And there's a lot that can be speculated. And so I try to avoid speculation as much as possible. But yes, I've spoken to enough people, firsthand knowledge, that not only report the crafts that we know exist, but potentially some sort of intelligence inside these vehicles. You mentioned it gets murky. Murky as in low resolution or murky? What do you mean by murky? I mean, in every aspect,

Starting point is 00:54:52 the source of the information, how the information was obtained, under what circumstances, resolution of photographic evidence, all of it. And so that's why we have to be very careful. of photographic evidence, all of it. And so that's why we have to be very careful. Okay. This question comes from James Shamsey. Ross Coldheart said it would be good to offer a deal to those who kept the program secret. They get some immunity in exchange for getting us the truth.

Starting point is 00:55:17 I think he referenced truth and reconciliation. Would you guys go back? Would you guys back a change.org style petition for this? Do you think that the others would like it? Absolutely. I think Ross is 100% correct. I think we need to offer amnesty from criminal civil prosecution if we want them to come out of the shadows. There's a lot of pressure right now, and I'm sure whoever's part of that cabal doesn't appreciate that type of pressure. And so if we could offer some sort of truth and reconciliation, I think something to that effect would be very helpful in this cause and say, look, we're not going to label you. In fact, we'll give you anonymity and confidentiality. anonymity and confidentiality. What we'll do is we'll, if you provide us this information, we'll make sure that kind of like a witness protection program, except for, you know, no one will ever know you were part of this, except for very few people. I think that's a great idea. I think that's what we should be doing. You know, Ross suggested in the previous

Starting point is 00:56:22 interview, a hashtag called NASA tell the truth. And so we ran with that. And part of that was tongue in cheek. But then it had me wondering, well, what would be an effective way of getting this information disclosed quicker and more truthfully? Well, NASA, look, you guys, it's working. NASA is now starting to have conversations. And the director of NASA himself

Starting point is 00:56:46 is beginning to entertain questions about this topic. So, you know, I think that's great. I don't think that's tongue in cheek at all. It's working. You know, I'd give yourself a big pat on the back because I just saw a headline two days ago where he's talking to, talking with Abbey Loeb and they're going to be having this conversation. So, hey look don't look now but you just achieved part of what you're trying to achieve thank you lou what what would you recommend what's another avenue so storm area 51 is a horrible idea you're going to get a bunch of young kids in trouble and potentially really hurt. This person, James, recommended a change.org petition. Truth and Reconciliation is also recommended by Ross.

Starting point is 00:57:31 What do you see as an efficient? I think we also have to continue to take an active role in our politics and voting people in who want transparency. We have been victimized too long by our ignorance. We have allowed people to get into the government that don't have our best interests at heart, that are motivated by politics and not diplomacy, and where information is traded like a commodity. And so secrecy is something that is abused for the wrong reasons. And I think that's problematic. There are some points of light right now in Congress we see between Senator Harry Reid,

Starting point is 00:58:12 which is absolute American hero. You have on the other side of the aisle, Marco Rubio, you have Congressman Gallego and Tim Burchette and Walker and some other folks now finally coming out and saying, hey, enough's enough. That's fantastic. That's how you make a difference. And making sure that the general public goes to them and encourages them and tells them, you know, thank you for doing this. That goes a long way.

Starting point is 00:58:39 You know, these people are taking a huge risk to have this conversation. And the more they hear from the public that it's okay to pursue this, the more willing they're going to be to do it and to have the conversation. And it's working. I just came back from DC myself. I'm not going to say who I spoke with, but that goes a long way. That means a lot to them. And it gives them the motivation and the top cover to start asking the hard questions and start poking the executive branch in the chest and saying, all right, what do you know about this? And oh, by the way, Secretary of the Air Force Kendall, with all due respect, they'll come back and say, it's not a priority just because we can't prove it's a threat or not. That's like saying a submarine pops out of the

Starting point is 00:59:18 Potomac River next to Washington DC. And because it's not wearing an American flag and you don't know if it's a threat, it's not a priority. That's the wrong answer. Again, with all due respect to Secretary Kendall, lest we forget who you work for, it's not up to you to decide what is a national priority. Let me remind you, it's not your Air Force, it's our Air Force and you're doing a job we told you to do. And if you don't want to do it or you are unable to do it, then we'll find somebody else who can, and you can go back to doing what you were doing before. That's my word of advice. I paid my dues in the trenches, and I know what I swore to do and uphold. Sometimes people in positions of power need to be reminded of that by the people, by the way. So that's what you guys can do.

Starting point is 01:00:12 Okay. So right now we've covered some topics like consciousness, UFOs, remote viewing, skinwalker, all topics that would make the traditional skeptic scoff. However, it may be that there's a paradigm shift coming. Short Form has compendious book summaries on the topics of UFOs, consciousness, science, philosophy, spirituality, and the meta issue of anomalous data leading to radical reorientations of current scientific understanding, such as Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, which is, by the way, the short form book I've read most recently. How many of your books on Kindle are left Essentially unread how many bookmarks or tabs do you have that you have to bookmark later and those remain unread?

Starting point is 01:00:57 Short-form makes learning what you've already wanted to learn an eminently trivial task that can be done fairly quickly Also refreshing books that you've read in the past is efficiently done via their summaries They even have exercises which prompt you for retention because there's very little use in accumulating knowledge if it's going to be forgotten later. To get a free five-day trial, visit shortform.com slash T-O-E, that is TOE, and you'll also get 20% off the annual subscription, at least for the next 500 people,

Starting point is 01:01:19 so perhaps you wanna pause this video and visit them. Their extremely clean UI makes it wonderfully delightful to read, and I have a taxophobia, perhaps you want to pause this video and visit them. Their extremely clean UI makes it wonderfully delightful to read. And I have a taxophobia, which means that I find this to be an underrated facet that I haven't seen in virtually any other place. Dan Zetterstrom of the UFO podcast, and the link to his podcast will be in the description, his and Andy's, asks... Great guy, by the way. He's doing a lot of great work. Great lead-in, by the way, because when you're asking what can you do, that's a guy who's and like what you're doing is exactly

Starting point is 01:01:48 what you guys should be doing great great a tip focused on military encounters did you ever come across cases where people had experienced high strangeness similar to that found on skinwalker ranch for example have any pilots reported things like the hitchhiker effect? You know, what a great question. And I know, oh my goodness, I'm going to have to buy, buy Dan a beer for that one. Great for, by the way, he's putting me on the spot and, and you know, that's, that's, that's, that's a great question. I want to answer this as accurately as I can without giving anybody the wrong impression. There's a reason why the six observables is biological effects. Okay.

Starting point is 01:02:37 That by definition is high strangeness. People after an encounter experiencing certain physiological and psychological things. to put it succinctly, yes, but not, not the same as, as the Skinwalker Ranch. Differences being? Well, you know, Skinwalker was looking at a lot of the, the, the, the paranormal aspects, as you say, in the vernacular, you know, as you say in the vernacular you know shapeshifters and uh i guess i see what's put once as ghosts and and and you know poltergeist that type of activity whereas atip was looking at nuts and bolts ufos um but there there were some some some parallels. Some people, and the question, the problem is we don't know,

Starting point is 01:03:46 we really don't know enough about that, about the UAP issue to really, to really speak cogently on that. People have had biological effects and that's just, that's as far as we were prepared to go at the time, because that could be quantified and qualified. You can look at physiology and morphology, and you can look at things like that. And you can look at tissues and things like that. You can quantify and qualify. The other stuff is a lot harder, especially anything dealing with a psychological episode. When I say psychological, I mean in a bad way, not like it's made up.

Starting point is 01:04:19 I mean, everything we do is interpreted psychologically, right? There's a mental process that goes along with it, with a physical experience. PTSD is a perfect example. PTSD is very, very real, but it's a psychological response to a, to a physiological and emotional type situation and very much the same way. You know, people, people will, will process data differently, just like PTSD, and no different in this topic. You have people in some cases I've talked to who, like Dave Fravor, just wants to get behind the wheel of one of these things and learn how to fly

Starting point is 01:04:57 it. Then you have other people who've been deeply and emotionally impacted by this and still carry that with them. For whatever reason, they've come up close and personal and, um, you know, it's, it's caused, uh, it caused some sort of conflict internally. Um, I'll tell you a great guy, a super, super guy. Um, he was on one of the episodes of, um, of unidentified and he, he, he carried the secret around. He, he told us chain of command. He was up in Canada doing a, a, a maneuver with the United States and him and his buddy were, were situated fairly close to each other, guarding some, you know, an ammo field,

Starting point is 01:05:36 like a depot out in the middle of nowhere and encountered a UFO. Well, they go to report it. But his buddy recants the story and says, no, it's all made up because of the backlash that they received. And he always maintained the story. And he was left out in the cold. People thought he was crazy. And he carried that around for a long, long time until one day his buddy come out and vindicated him. He says, you know what? Because I talked to the guy. He said, it was real, every bit of it. I was there, but I didn't want to catch crap any longer.

Starting point is 01:06:20 So I recanted the story and I left my friend out there to flap in the wind, so to speak. And that caused a lot of, I'm sure, a lot of issues. Imagine being part of something extraordinary and then the person that saw it with you telling the world, nah, we're just kidding. We didn't really see it. And you know you did and have to carry that for 20, 30 years only to come back later. His name's Dave Marceau.

Starting point is 01:06:44 He's a great guy. If you ever get a chance to meet him, I highly recommend years only to come back later. His name's Dave Marceau. He's a great guy. If you ever get a chance to meet him, I highly recommend you have him on your show. He carried that around in his soul for decades. And you should ask him the type of emotional cost it took on him. You know, people call you crazy. People call you a liar. People call all sorts of things only at the end to find out that, you know, what you were right. And it did happen. And the witnesses are coming on us saying, yeah, it did happen. You know, that, yeah, there's, there's, you know, you say hitchhiker effect. I, I,

Starting point is 01:07:24 you know, some folks swear that once you have one of these encounters, there's this hitchhiker effect. And now all of a sudden, all sorts of weird things start happening to you and your family. There's an individual that I am very, very, very close to who is very senior in this effort, who at some point when it comes out of the shadows, you should probably have this conversation with that person. Because I'll tell you absolutely yes. But, you know, again, I don't have any data that can be quantified or qualified. So I, I, I cannot speak definitively on it.

Starting point is 01:08:03 I think we have to remain open that, you know that there's a whole lot of things that are possible. And I know you said you don't have data that's quantifiable, but I'm curious about this hitchhiker effect or the sixth observable. Is that associated with proximity to the craft or length of time looking at the craft, like another variable? What is associated with it? Great question, man. of time looking at the craft like another variable what is associated with you great question man um let me take a pass on that for now i'll i'll let me um that will be addressed um sure we'll get to great question thank you we'll get to scott larkin who says there's some latin and then says lou I believe your service to God and country will be

Starting point is 01:08:45 understood more clearly in the history books. Are you aware of the CIA's paper known as Adam and Eve event, the Adam and Eve event? How much of what is going on is currently related to this pending event? I've heard of it, but I don't know anything about it. I've always made it very clear up until recently, I really haven't done much reading on this because I never wanted to have any type of bias, even subconsciously. People get mad at me. Well, didn't you read this report? Didn't you read that report? Okay. I read government reports, man. That's what I did. That was my job. And I didn't want to muddy the waters by all these other things out there. There's a lot of stuff that's interesting. Then there's a lot of stuff that's crap. You know, there's a

Starting point is 01:09:27 lot of conspiracy BS out there. That's just nonsense and garbage. And then there's some stuff that's, you know, pretty, pretty accurate. Um, so I, I I've heard of the Adam and Eve, um, if you will, uh, but I'm not, um, I'm not, I'm not overly familiar with it. So it wouldn't be really good for me to comment because I don't know the details of it. Now, if you can paraphrase for me, I can give you my opinion on it. Are you aware of Kurt of that? No, I was going to get you to explain to the audience as well as myself. Yeah, I'm not, I wouldn't be the guy to do that. Okay. So Scott, if you want, please paraphrase it and then let's get back to it. Someone wants to

Starting point is 01:10:10 know for those who maybe don't know, what's the main difference between OSAP and ATIP? What involvement, if any, did you have with OSAP? Well, now I can talk about it because the guy came out. So Jim LeCasse, he's a great guy. Super smart. I've always said he's probably the greatest rocket scientist our government had at the time. Incredibly brilliant gentleman. And also was one hell of a risk taker. So OSAP, think of Ford Motor Company as OSAP.

Starting point is 01:10:42 And they make a lot of models. They make the Bronco. they make the Crown Victoria, they make the Mustang. Think of ATIP as the Ford Mustang. It is a sub-model built under within the Ford plant. And it's a sports car. It's one of the many different lines. There's that word sports car again. Sports car, right. Bob Lazar reference. So what happens with OSAP when I think of a Ford motor company eventually going out of business for whatever reason, but the Ford Mustang is so popular that the Ford Mustang continues to be built under its own moniker and continues to be built as the Ford Mustang, but there's no other cars now being built by the brand. It's just-

Starting point is 01:11:23 Okay. So it's a of, and the parents died. Uh, it's yeah. So it started off, look, there would be no a tip without OSAP and without Jim Lekaski. That's a fact. Um, but when that program went away, a tip continued, and that's why you have all the videos out there from the Roosevelt and all these other incidents that will be coming to light and continue to come to light because a lot was done under ATIN, but it was military focused only. We did not do civilian information at all. It was military focused. And we did have funding. I'll leave it at that. I'm not going to say anything to disparage my good friend, Jim. Jim is a good man

Starting point is 01:12:03 and he's done a lot for this country. Um, but you know, I, I, I can't speak for OSAP. I can only, and I've said that from day one, as you notice, I've always said, you know, I can't speak for OSAP. One day that guy will come forward and hopefully we can stand shoulder to shoulder and he'll finally get the credit that he deserves. Um, but, uh, you know, OSAP wasn't AATIP and AATIP wasn't OSAP. You know, I was, it was AATIP. He was OSAP. And, uh, if you want to know more about, you know, the OSAP stuff, AATIP, and AATIP wasn't OSAP. It was AATIP, he was OSAP. And if you want to know more about the OSAP stuff, you probably have to ask him. Okay. Now, you mentioned the word woo quite a while ago. And just so you know, firstly, I don't use that word because that word is used

Starting point is 01:12:37 disparagingly. And also because much of what's considered pseudoscience becomes science. And also what you categorize as being paranormal depends on your assumptions of what normal is. And we don't have a theory of everything. So it's difficult to say, given that, what's your opinion on remote viewing? And I believe you dabbled in that. So I would like to know, well, I just like to know more about that. Okay, So remote viewing is defined as a human cognitive capability to observe things separated by space and time, in essence. I'm not going to discuss what I've done in my career. I've done a lot of things in my career for my country. Most of it, as you probably agree, has never seemed to lie today. And it's not really germane or relevant to this discussion of UAP. The UAP topic is only one aspect of my career

Starting point is 01:13:32 and my service to my country. But the rest is private, unless, you know, doesn't need to be. I don't think a discussion on remote viewing has anything to do with UAPs or my time in the ATIP program. I think it's just a distraction. And I'll leave it at that. Okay. So this question comes from Awaf Sol with the phenomenon being so evasive. What level of confidence do we have that global disclosure will be a net positive for engagement with it? As an analogy, we know hornets exist, but poking the hornet's nest is ill-advised. Can you repeat that, Kurt, one more time? I think that's a really, if I'm getting it right, that's actually a really, really interesting question.

Starting point is 01:14:25 really interesting question. So AWIF Sol asks, with the phenomenon being so evasive, what level of confidence do we have that global disclosure will be a net positive for engagement with it? As an analogy, we know hornets exist, but poking the hornet's nest is ill-advised. Well, let's define engagement. Is engagement the same as poking? I don't think so. International engagement is getting everybody on the same sheet of music about the topic. It's not necessarily being provocative. It's not necessarily poking, quote unquote, the hornet's nest. What it is, it's an acknowledgement that the hornet's nest exists and that hornets exist, so we should probably understand them. I'm not at all advocating that we go and poke the hornet's nest. What I'm advocating is that we need to study the hornet and we need to study where the

Starting point is 01:15:07 hornet lives and how it lives and its relationship to its environment and ultimately its relationship to us, if any. I think the last time we spoke about transmedium, that it would go from water to air, back and forth. Is there any evidence of transmedium with respect to rock? Can it move through solid material? I've heard people speculate that. We haven't seen that, but there were some scientific models, specifically a couple calculations that I was privy to in mathematics specifically,

Starting point is 01:15:39 that indicate if you can get a certain number below a zero, then, quote unquote, it can cut through rock like butter. But I'm not a math expert, and I'm certainly not going to validate or verify that because I don't know. All I saw were a bunch of numbers and letters of the alphabet put in front of me in a very long strain of what, you know, I presume to be valid equations. But I, I don't know, you know, math for me was a minor, I think I got up to calc three. And, you know, true story. I'll share this with you. Sure. You know, I, I appreciate math and love certain aspects of math, but I'm not necessarily great at math. And finally, I was going up to Calc three and my professor failed me the first time around.

Starting point is 01:16:37 So I had a chance to make it up and I go back to the same professor. And by the way, my professor really didn't like me very much. And really I didn't take it as seriously as I should. I didn't take it as seriously as I should. Okay. And so time and time again, I'd come in and I wouldn't do good on the tests. And finally, I told him, I said, look, I'm having trouble here with this class. He says, yeah, you are. And he said, look, you're not really a really good, I don't think this is for you, that you're not a great student in Calc 3. And I said, no, I agree with you, but you got to pass me because I'm, you know, I'm, I'm making some

Starting point is 01:17:09 decisions in my life. And this is really the last class I need to graduate. And he said, well, you know, you're just, you're just not making the standard. And I said, well, And then you intimidated him with their muscles. No, on the contrary. What I told him is that I said, listen, I don't like being any here any more than you want me being here. And I'll make you a promise. If you fail me again, I promise you, I will continue to be here and take your class every single day, every single day until you retire. Oh, wow. And he looked at me and he said, so I guess we have a mutual understanding that you're

Starting point is 01:17:44 just going to barely pass. And I said, sir, that's all I need. I'm not looking for an A. I just need to pass this class and I'll be out of your hair forever. And he said, okay, we have an agreement then. And that is, I just barely passed that class. And yeah, it's either Calc 2 or Calc 3. And we made an agreement. I wouldn't take calculus anymore for the rest of my life. And there you have it. That number that was less than zero or could be less than zero,

Starting point is 01:18:18 do you happen to remember if it was mass? I have no idea, brother. I know who gave it to me. I don't want to reveal that person right now let's forget about that you know honestly by the time they got through the whole whole my eyes had rolled in the back of my head about three times um and um they were obviously very excited about as i were writing these formulas down and so bam there's the answer i'm like uh where see for me math is what turns me on.

Starting point is 01:18:46 I love it. No, don't get me wrong. I wish, I wish I, I, I absolutely love math. It's, it's just doing it. That for me is kind of, kind of challenging. Okay. So alien alcoholic asks, potentially have there been biological samples recovered from craft? Let's rephrase that question. Have there potentially been biological samples recovered? Yes. I'm not going to expand anymore. Right, right, right. So let's forget about the craft. And be careful when I say that. I'm being purposely very open and vague at the same time. What does that mean? Well, it means what it means.

Starting point is 01:19:30 Senzu Bean. Has he ever considered that when the UAP changes direction or speed, it may actually be warping space-time, like certain warp drives I'm sure you've heard of. That way, the space-time around the UAP is warped, and so it's not technically moving, and thus the biological entities, if there are one or any, wouldn't feel G-forces. Have you considered that, essentially, is what Sen Zubin is asking? Yeah, it's right on the money, except for it is moving, but the principles of what that question is are right on the money. Yes. And then I just want to say, I always love when people say this at the end.

Starting point is 01:20:11 Hopefully my question makes sense as I'm not a native English speaker. Kind regards. Hey, man, your question makes complete sense. You know what? He speaks better English or she speaks better English than most English speakers. So congratulations. I understood the question perfectly. And it's a great question. And yeah. Okay. So this question comes from Steve Cambion of Truth Seekers,

Starting point is 01:20:31 and I'll put a link to his podcast in the description. Given the debate about your involvement with AATIP and your actual role, would you be able to prove your leadership role by releasing tax forms? In short, could you simply release your tax forms to prove your employment, leadership role, and your salary for those years? Of course I could, but tax forms just tell you you're working at a particular office. That's all it does. And of course, you start, people start looking at your start you know making all sorts of inferences the bottom line is that the government has already validated and verified that i work uh within the usdi um senator reed has already validated work on on atip um you had the spokesperson for the

Starting point is 01:21:16 pentagon dana white under um under secretary mattis already verify that i was working atip you have jim likatsky verifying I worked and ran ATIP. I mean, the list goes on and on and on and on. No, I'm not going to get into a tit for tat. If you don't want to, I mean, that on the world's greatest clairvoyant, because everything I've talked about has come to fruition to include the release of the videos that are on the 1910 with my signature. Both are remarkable. I mean, at this point, if people still question that, then, you know, I don't know what to tell you. You know, go get a hobby.

Starting point is 01:21:52 You know, no, I'm not going to sit here at this point in time. You know, there's an IG evaluation and investigation specifically because of how they mishandled this. And then they come out and they say, oh, by the way, we deleted all Lou's emails. I mean, if you're that much of a sucker

Starting point is 01:22:07 and you actually, you know, still at this point are at all questioning what my role is, then, you know, I'll tell you. Sorry. Okay, this question comes from Ina Etter. Question for Lou. What can we do personally to prepare ourselves and perhaps even others

Starting point is 01:22:27 for a post-disclosure world? Are we taking a break? You need to... No, no. Actually, I was trying to find an email that... Never mind. I had an email that I've never shown,

Starting point is 01:22:41 but I was about to say here. Boom. How's that for proof? But no, don't worry about it. I don't even want to get into that. We'll talk about that potentially. I'm not going to satisfy anybody's at this point questioning. All that is, and by the way, as time goes on, even more evidence is coming. You find it to be a distraction and a waste of time. We have much greater issues. Well, and at this point, it's just insulting. just insulting it's like dude i can't think for you at this point i mean if at this point you're still on the fence on that then you know find something else to do because it's yeah it's

Starting point is 01:23:15 it would be like seeing obama's birth certificate and then saying that he's still from kenya you'd be like what more do you want from me yeah it's like dude what more do you want you have the guy who ran the program the senator senator himself, saying I ran it. I mean, you have the Pentagon saying. Now you have 60 Minutes who, by the way, backed it up with General Mattis himself. I'm like, what more do you want? I mean, you want a video of me going in and out of the office when I was there? Well, you're not going to get that.

Starting point is 01:23:40 Sorry. Unfortunately, there's a lot of people out there that are still i i consider agent provocateurs they're just trying to to to confuse the situation and for whatever reason you know i mean rather than looking at the last four years and say well look how far we've come you know they rather go back and and you know it's have you heard of Anjali? I have. Okay. See, people keep telling me to look her up.

Starting point is 01:24:10 And then many other people keep saying, don't bother. She's way out there. Which also makes me want to look her up even further. And I think I've been on some polls and you've been on some polls. Who should she take with her as a representative or as one of several representatives for the planet earth? Well, I never said I'd go with her first of all. So I don't know why someone's using my name, you know,

Starting point is 01:24:33 in a poll without my permission saying that, you know, they'll take me anywhere. You know, no one's taking me anywhere unless I want to go somewhere. Two, you know, the old saying extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You know, nothing would make me happier if she can, you know, take somebody to a magic cave underground and have communication with another life form. But if that's the case, then what are you waiting for? Why not go now? Just bring a camera crew. Go now. You don't need to make a

Starting point is 01:25:05 big deal of this. Just go and do it and prove it. You know, at this, we've seen this in the community so many times before with people making these bold claims and, you know, man, I really hope I'm wrong. I'd love to eat my hat. You know, I'll be the first one. There's an old saying we have, you know, if, if I'm wrong, I will kiss her butt in front of Macy's window. Nothing would make me happier than that, than to be true. But everything about how this is unfolding doesn't seem legit to me. It seems showboat, you know, when you have someone sitting on a chair with, well, anyways, I don't want, look, I don't want to be judgmental. Enough people are judgmental about me. I know how it feels. I want to give Anjali a fair

Starting point is 01:25:51 shake, but you better produce because if you don't, you got a lot of people riding on this and all you're going to do is hurt the cause with some outlandish claim like this. If you can't prove this outlandish claim, all you are going to be responsible for is being another one of those people that are tinfoil hat and the reason why this topic was never taken seriously. So add yourself to the list if you can't deliver. When I looked at her and I didn't look at her much, I just saw a couple of videos. I didn't sense any dishonesty, but I didn't have anything like a close gander, let's say. So you sense some grandstanding or showboating? No, no, look, I'm not going to judge anybody. I'm not. I'm not. I'm just simply saying that if you've got extraordinary claims like that, you've got to deliver. You've

Starting point is 01:26:38 got a responsibility now, and you better not have an excuse not to deliver that. All right. So this question comes from Ina Eder. I believe that's how you pronounce this person's name. What can we do personally and even societally to prepare ourselves and others for a post disclosure world? I'm not sure we need to prepare at all. I think we're perfectly prepared.

Starting point is 01:26:59 I have faith in human beings that we will look at this from a rational perspective. You know, our paradigm is challenged every day. We just had in the media, you know, China launched a hypersonic cruise missile around the world. You know, that's a change in the way we see ourselves, especially with potential foreign adversaries. We have our paradigms change every day. People are told that they have cancer every day. People are told that spouses are cheating on them every day. People are told that they're pregnant and are going to have kids every day.

Starting point is 01:27:38 People are told about the death of a loved one every day. We're human beings. That's part of life. of a loved one every day. We're human beings. That's part of life. I think, I'm not sure there is anything we can do to prepare. I think just be ourselves and be willing to ask the hard questions and have the patience to find the answers. Let's not be so quick to jump into some sort of preconceived narrative just because it makes us feel good, right? Because we all want to understand things that we don't. We all have this natural fear of things we can't understand. We must be tempted not to

Starting point is 01:28:16 create an artificial narrative just so we feel better. We need to really explore this for what it is and have the courage to do so. That would be my advice. Okay. I need to urinate. Do you need to use the washroom? I will if you have time. I mean, I don't know how you're-

Starting point is 01:28:36 Let's just get going. I'll- You sure? Yeah, I'll turn this off and turn off the audio. Well, I'll keep mine on. Not that I plan on necessarily going here but i actually have a bathroom i'll use people may like that be right back folks thanks all right okay for those who are in the chat don't worry if you've super chatted and i didn't get to your question because

Starting point is 01:28:57 i'll read them all at the end and i will also prioritize them for the next time when i speak with lou provided he's generous enough to speak with me again. Two hours later. All right, Kurt, I'm going to give you some hell here. I know you didn't have time to go to the bathroom and wash your hands in that. Okay. I'm extremely quick. You put me on the spot, man.

Starting point is 01:29:26 At least I should be able to put you on the spot a little bit too. All right. Okay. Let's see. By the way, these are some really good questions. I really appreciate it. Yeah. Well, this is questions that people haven't asked me before. Yeah, man. Really good. By the way, let me also caveat here. You're going to get, I do have some people that really don't like me, and I'm sure they're going to take out that hatred on you.

Starting point is 01:29:49 So I apologize ahead of time. If anybody is screaming at you, I got some haters in my camp that tend to be rather vocal. So I hope they're not driving you too crazy. No, I've got a nice little vocal. I call them my chorus because I know every time I come out and say anything, like on this show, that chorus is going to come out any minute now. And I can already hear them warming up their voices. The last time we spoke, there were two comments that you said that stood out to me. One was the somber, the somber heard around the world, in a sense.

Starting point is 01:30:28 And then you clarified that, or you added to that by saying sobering. I was wondering, we can get to that. And then also you mentioned that the charlatans of the world will be shown to be charlatans. And I, again, don't know much about this UFO community, but people in the comments were saying, did he mean Stephen Greer? So why don't you comment on that? You can be as diplomatic as you like. I know that you're a relatively diplomatic person.

Starting point is 01:30:56 Yeah. Let me start by somber or sobering. start with by, by somber or sobering. Imagine, imagine everything you've been taught, whether it's through Sunday school or through regular formal education in school or what our political leaders have told us. And yes, even maybe our mothers and fathers around the dinner table have told us, or maybe at bedtime, um, about, about who we are, right. And our background and our past. Um, what if all of that turned out to be not entirely accurate? In fact, the very history of our species, the meaning, what it means to be a human being

Starting point is 01:31:52 and our place in this universe. What if all that is now in question? What if it turns out that a lot of the things that we thought were one way aren't. Are we prepared to have that honest question with ourselves? Are we prepared to recognize that we're not at the top of the food chain potentially? That we're not the alpha predator, that we are maybe somewhere in the middle. You know, it's interesting because I was having a discussion with a friend not too long ago, really, really, we call them gray beards in the government, really, really smart guy. I'm not

Starting point is 01:32:41 going to mention his name, but I was talking to him probably a couple of months ago. And this is a guy who was always paid to solve the hard problems for the US government, Cold War. How do we solve that? How do we do these big things? How do we go in and beat the Russians at their own game? So this guy I respect tremendously. And we had a conversation. He said, you know, Lou, mankind's been around for a little while. And for most of that time, mankind's been around. We've been smack in the middle of the food chain. We ate a lot of things. A lot of things ate us.

Starting point is 01:33:19 And that's just the bottom line. And about 70,000 years ago, something fundamentally changed. Something changed. And, and our species was instantly catapulted to the very top of our planet as far as predatory animals. And, and now all of a sudden we became the most feared. We, the most lethal and the most successful. And in fact, most of the large species that existed on this planet went extinct because of us, believe it or not, because we were eating all of it. There were a couple of species that did very, very well with our ascension, our immediate ascension. And we brought a couple of species with us. The dog is an example where the dog species benefited greatly with

Starting point is 01:34:07 mankind's Ascension as the alpha predator and wound up succeeding as well, very, very well off of that. That changed the entire global landscape of our planet. Almost overnight, large animals went extinct because of us. Almost overnight, large animals went extinct because of us. What if it turns out that there's another species that is even higher on that ladder than we are? Do we need the social institutions that we have today? Will we need governmental and religious organizations that we have today?

Starting point is 01:34:52 If it turns out that there is something else or someone else that is technologically more advanced and perhaps from an evolutionary perspective, more advanced. Have we been wasting our time all this time? Or are we doing exactly what we're supposed to be doing? Are we, does it turn out that mankind is in fact just another animal in the zoo? that mankind is, is in fact just another animal in the zoo or cause we thought ourselves as a zookeeper before, but maybe we're just another exhibit inside the zoo. What would that mean to us? So, so when I say sombering and sobering, uh, I mean, that is it, you know, there's going to become a point in this conversation. We're going to have to do a lot of reconciling with ourselves, whatever that means from whatever philosophical background you,

Starting point is 01:35:49 you have. This is going to impact every single one of us the same and yet equally and yet differently. And I think that's important. You know, do we find ourselves in a situation where history may have to be rewritten? So that's what I meant. Now, as far as the charlatans, I'm not going to give any attention to individual charlatans because they already have enough attention. They know exactly who I'm referring to. These are individuals who have made a cottage industry, a career of taking people's hard-earned money and deceiving them. And not only deceiving them, but having them sign nondisclosure agreements to make sure they don't tell the world that they've been deceived. And preying upon people who, for whatever reason, believe in them. People who say my narrative is the only narrative and

Starting point is 01:36:49 anybody else who tells you otherwise, you know, is trying to hurt you. I have all the answers. I have the solution. Anybody who says that, I think, I think it's a charlatan. And, and I think it's a charlatan. And I think we need to be very, very mindful of that. They're very dangerous. And they're dangerous for several reasons, because if they're lying to you about that, they're probably lying to you about other things in their life, their past life and their current life, which may or may not come to light at some point.

Starting point is 01:37:19 These are people who have taken advantage of people for a very long time. And, you know, you have to be careful, you know. What else are the motivations of some of these charlatans, or potentially could be their motivation, other than financial? Well, look at any religious charlatan. It's the same thing. It's a cult personality. It's somebody who, for whatever reason, thinks it's all about them. And they manage the narrative. It goes to the basic core of pride and ego in human beings, and narcissistic behavior, true deep psychological issues, some sociopathic, to be honest with you.

Starting point is 01:38:01 Is there any gold in that rubble? I'm sorry? um is there any gold in that rubble i'm sorry is there any gold in that rubble as in it's all of what they're saying some of these charlatans we don't have to name names i know i think i think i think there's always there's always fibers of truth in in in a blanket of lies um because that's that's what holds it together there There are some aspects of truth. The problem is when you take that truth and you distort it. There's people in history that were very good at convincing large amounts of people that they have the answer.

Starting point is 01:38:40 I don't need to go back into history to say which ones those are, but you have characters like Jim Jones, Heaven's Gate is an example, you know, even Hitler to some degree, where they were very charismatic people who got people in this web and they didn't realize it until it was too late. web and they didn't realize it until it was too late. And, you know, I just think when you're creating all these shell organizations and pass-throughs and paying people off to do things for you to deceive other people, I think is problematic. Again, I'm not going to say, I'm not going to mention names. I think most people are smart enough to see through it. My concern are those people who who are already already sucked into it it becomes a cult and becomes brainwashing and manipulation and that's my concern because it gives a terrible name to the to the to the effort

Starting point is 01:39:36 and and making false accusations um you know i think is is there's an old saying i don't know if I can remember it, that ye be careful of the knife ye uses to stab at the back of others, for surely that knife will be used against you in the future or at some point. So, you know, anyway, being just, you know, right. Karma, karma is a bitch. Be careful. You know, mother nature has a vote. She's got a way of voice squaring things up at the end. And, you know, that's, that's what I've seen anyways. Remember earlier, I was asking you, what can we do as a culture i think based on some of your

Starting point is 01:40:28 statements what we can do is something like we've already been doing which is keep talking about it so that we can de-stigmatize it i know that i don't particularly like the word de-stigmatization i think it's been taken by certain people, but essentially to destigmatize. However, there does seem to be the tendency from those who are believers in or who are part of the UFO community who deride people like, see, Neil deGrasse Tyson and other skeptics deride the UFO community. And I don't think they should do that. But then I also don't think that they should be met with condescension as well, because I think that that comes back at you. I think that love and extending an arm and an olive branch is what will... Kurt, you're right. You're absolutely right.

Starting point is 01:41:17 Let me, if I may, that's a good point. Let me talk a little bit about Mr. Neil deGrasse Tyson. First of all, he's one of the few shows that I used to watch a lot. I loved his perspective. And let's talk about his background. This is a person who was a bit of a maverick. He cut his teeth and really made his bones by supporting and defending a theory that really was a hypothesis at the time, an outlandish hypothesis. And that was, there were these supermassive objects in our universe that were so dense that they created a gravity well, they created a black hole in space time where light itself couldn't even escape. And although we can't see it directly, we can't prove its existence. We think they're there right now.

Starting point is 01:41:59 A lot of the scientific community said that's hogwash. You know, it's just, it's a theoretical anomaly that isn't real. And yet Neil deGrasse Tyson did exactly that. He supported the hypothesis and theory that there are these things you'll never be able to see with the naked eye, but they fundamentally, they're there. And they're hundreds of millions of light years away. Mentally, they're there and they're hundreds of millions of light years away. Well, it's funny because that same spirit used to prove something you can never see that is there, for some reason, he seems to have forgotten that in this topic. Because we're talking about the same thing.

Starting point is 01:42:47 We're talking about something that is hard to see directly sometimes, but we can see its impact on the environment around it. And to some degree, maybe, you know, warping space time, but it's not hundreds of millions of miles away. It's right here. And I don't understand how you can support in one hand the scientific study and research into something called a black hole and not be open-minded to something like UAP. To me, it's the same thought process. Now, going back to what you say as far as ridiculing them, no, we shouldn't ridicule them. What we need to do is help them see the contradiction in their argument and not in a mean spiteful way either. I think we need to have a conversation because we need people like Neil deGrasse Tyson. We need people who are very smart to look at this problem and not just reject it because of

Starting point is 01:43:47 stigma and taboo. But the problem with the scientific community today is that they've rejected science instead favor of scientism. And scientism is no different than any other religion. It's where you are so married to the scientific methodologies that you no longer can accept new hypothesis and theories. And you reject them flatly. And I think that's problematic because as I've said before, every single principle of science today, whether it's a theory or a law of science that we accept as just normal part of everyday life in science started off as someone's wacky zany idea way back when everything and so i don't understand how we continue to find

Starting point is 01:44:35 ourselves in the same hole every time we keep saying well now there's been that's impossible but damn it every time you say that, we get proven wrong. Haven't you learned your lesson? Haven't you taken your notes from the US Patent Office when they said that bold claim that now everything in the world has been invented in a few years and we don't need a US Patent Office anymore? I mean, how short-sighted can you possibly be? That's the antithesis of scientific pursuit and endeavor. And I think if you were to ask me my true feelings on this, which again,

Starting point is 01:45:12 I don't offer very often, science and religion, when you are standing at their base, they could not be any farther apart. Think of a pyramid. Go into the Great Pyramid of Giza and standing on one side of the pyramid and say, this is science. And then walking around all the way to the other side of the pyramid and say, this is faith. This is religion. And the two could not be further apart from each other. And yet, when you start to climb that pyramid, on which other side you go on, they start to get closer and closer together. In fact, at some point at the very top, the difference between science and religion are indistinguishable. They are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are together. They're one. They're one and the same. And in fact, I think part of the problem is that in science and in faith, we're asking

Starting point is 01:46:10 two fundamental different questions. This is why the two don't get along down at the base of the pyramid. This is why they seem so opposite because one is asking how and the other is asking why. And they're two different questions. how and the other is asking why and they're two different questions and that's why the two don't seem to be don't seem to comport with one another but ironically enough the further you go up the ladder the more you realize they actually require each other actually lean on each other actually support each other and and at the very top there's there's no difference between science

Starting point is 01:46:41 and and and religion they they they become one and they support each other. I think anyways, that's my perspective from what I've seen in life. You mentioned a phrase. It's a phrase I don't particularly like. I say a lot of things that people don't like, so I apologize, Kurt, ahead of time. No, no. I apologize if I'm about to offend you. It's extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The reason I don't like that is because people like Neil deGrasse Tyson, any skeptic will say that to any claim that they've already deemed as being untrue. And even Dr. Brian Keating, who is a friend, and he almost won the Nobel Prize.

Starting point is 01:47:26 He's an experimentalist physicist. He said, I don't ask my graduate students, go find the extraordinary evidence. It's not a different class of evidence. It's called extraordinary. Also, what's the extraordinary evidence that any of us are conscious? There's actually zero evidence that you can point to scientifically outside of what people say. And then, well, what are you going to take what people say?

Starting point is 01:47:44 Well, you could just ask a computer, are you conscious? and so on and so on. So that's why I don't particularly like that phrase. Yeah, I think you're, well, I don't disagree with you. I think that's a really good point. I think I was taking it more in the vernacular, right? So if you're going to say something has been substantiated by observation over and over again, multiple times to substantiate X equals three, right? And now you're going to come out and say, no, actually X equals four. Then you are going to need evidence that is beyond what it currently is available to prove that because all the evidence right now is suggesting X equals three. And yet now you are claiming X equals four. Well, that is a, it is by definition,

Starting point is 01:48:26 claiming X equals four. Well, that is a, it is by definition, extra ordinary, the ordinary claim being X equals three, right? In simple algebra. But now you're making an extra or beyond ordinary claim that X does not equal three, it equals four. So therefore you're going to need beyond ordinary evidence beyond what showing X equals three to prove now your theory that X equals four. So from my perspective, when I say extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence, I don't necessarily mean perhaps the way a lot of people mean. I just mean it's beyond, it's like the word normal versus paranormal. It is by definition, extraordinary. But I see your point and I think you're right. I think, I think part of the problem

Starting point is 01:49:05 is that we get too comfortable in, in, in the current understanding of, of, of our current paradigm. And we're not willing to challenge with sometimes very simple things, you know, case in point is I just had this conversation not too long ago publicly about fractals. You know, they've been in front of us all along, ever since we were living in caves. And yet it's only recently we realized that that may be part of the secret to the universe, right? That fractals exist everywhere. They exist physically, they exist from even a psychological perspective, the way we relate to one another. And it's been in front of us all, it's obvious, it's not really extraordinary at all. It's actually blatantly obvious and we just never saw it. So yeah, that's a good point. I think you're right. And maybe I need

Starting point is 01:49:55 to rephrase that in the future. I'll consider that because I think you may be right. Maybe that's not an entirely good way to go about it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Maybe we're beyond that in the conversation. So great. Thanks for sharing that with me. And no, by the way, you did not insult me at all. In fact, I appreciate that a lot. Thanks, man.

Starting point is 01:50:19 Ruder Router, or however you pronounce this, I'll leave the name in the description. It says says great show can you ask lou the following based upon what you've learned lou would you consider yourself to be an idealist or a materialist and if you are unsure what those words mean no let me know what they are um is there an option c which would be what mix can it be both or neither? That's something I've been wondering. Is there a duality between those two? There's plenty of dualities in math and physics where you think it's the option between two, but it turns out that they're equivalent ways of describing a system.

Starting point is 01:50:57 Yeah, exactly. I'm not sure it's either or. I'm not sure they're mutually exclusive. I think, you know, I, my background was science was science, um, you know, in, in, in, in science, I found my solace, which I enjoyed. Um, you know, I, I grew up kind of a, kind of a angry young kid, had some, some tough times as a kid. Um, but, but science to me was, um, it was unwavering. Uh, she was always there for me. She never lied to me. And so, uh, I, I get lost in science and, um, you know, I, I, I, I do believe in the scientific method.

Starting point is 01:51:35 Um, it works. It's, it's, I mean, it's a perfect, no, but it's, it's the best thing that we got right now that we know, uh, to test and apply theories. But at the same time, there's something more you said about human consciousness. You can't prove it. There's no mathematical formula, no physical evidence to prove consciousness. And yet here we are having a conversation. So I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I don't consider myself a materialist or an idealist. Like I said, I make fun of the fact that I said, I love humanity. It's humans I don't think the two are mutually, I don't consider myself a materialist or an idealist. Like I said, it's, you know, I make fun of the fact that I, you know, I said, I love humanity. It's humans I don't like, right? How is that possible, right? Because humanity is a collective of all the humans and yet, but probably a little bit of both. Probably a little bit. I think there's an

Starting point is 01:52:21 indelible aspect to the human being that transcends physicality. We have a body, obviously, and we have a brain. And our brain is inextricably tied for metabolic processes to survive to the body. The heart has to pump blood to get blood to the brain. Otherwise, the brain dies. And in the same respect, the brain is regulating all the autonomic processes for the body. So breathing, which is automatic, thank God for most of us anyways, and heartbeat and temperature and whatnot. So the brain is a biological organ that is inextricably tied to the overall vehicle, which is the body.

Starting point is 01:53:02 And that's organic as well. But there's probably something more to the human being. There's probably something more that is not necessarily physical. Because a computer has a processor, a computer has a body, right? The laptop I'm talking to you on right now, and it's got a processor that's thinking, if you will, for the computer, but it's not a conscious living being. It's not a sentient being. So the question is, what is that extra component, that extra ingredient that makes us human, that makes us living, breathing, not only animal, but truly human, what separates us from everything else on this planet. And there's that third ingredient can be described potentially

Starting point is 01:53:45 in cultures as the soul or the id or the chi or what, you know, put your nom de jour you want on there. But I think a lot of people agree that there's something different. Case in point, the notion of love. You can't really describe it. It's hard to describe. You can't see it. You can't touch it and taste it, but it's there. And it motivates a lot of people's actions. In fact, love to some degree actually works against individual survival. And yet a mother's instinct to throw herself in front of a train to save her child is almost reflexive. You know, there's something there that recognizes the value of human life, human

Starting point is 01:54:25 dignity. Um, I could be in a car accident and lose use of my arms and my legs, but I'm still Lou Elizondo. Um, I could suffer a traumatic brain injury and, and, um, have a severe TBI and be mentally impaired, but I'm still Lou Elizondo. What makes Lou Elizondo Lou is something a little bit different, something that you can't really put your finger on. And so back to this duality, you know, materialist versus, you know, idealist. I'm probably a little bit of both

Starting point is 01:54:56 because I believe in science, but I also know that there's limitations to science and there's limitations to human beings and there's limitations to you and me and everybody else. And that's okay. And that there's aspects to being human that are probably potentially more human than human to use an old cliche. So great question. If I can ask you, Kurt, a question I never asked you, just take a break here for a minute and ask you, what got you into this? Why, why,

Starting point is 01:55:33 why did you want to get into this topic and have this conversation with your background? I mean, I, I suspect you have your, your reasons, but I'd love to know why. Originally, I was what people would categorize as an adamant atheist. And that was recently, too, just a few years ago. And I'm not saying I'm a theist now, but I'm not an atheist. And just so you know, some atheists will say they don't believe in God because, well, the concept of God is volutinous and amorphous. How do you pin it down? Well, then technically you can't say you're an atheist because you can't be anti what's cloud-like without yourself being cloud-like.

Starting point is 01:56:12 You can't be against nothing. So either way, I was speaking with someone who told me, you know, aliens exist. And I gave him my standard spiel, which is, well, why do they look like us? It's too human. It came out. The reports of aliens spike every time there's a movie so it seems culturally related the standard skeptic response yeah anthropomorphism etc yeah right and also look given our exponential curve for technological progress why do these craft seem all alike now of course they're varied they're varied in terms of shape and size, but still they're recognizable as

Starting point is 01:56:45 craft. And if you're, let's say you're coming from a planet far away, then even if you were to travel there, time has, you can travel there almost instantaneously, but thousands of years may have passed. And so then your technology would have increased. So I had the standard skeptical response. And then he said, Kurt, just watch this. He sent me a few videos, and I watched them. And then I was... I think I've said this before. If I have any skill, it's not math or physics. It's body language. I watch people's body language like a hawk. And I can tell when they're insecure about a certain aspect of what they're saying, when they don't feel intelligent enough, when they feel intimidated, when they feel like they have to, well, you can continue on the list. And I didn't see deception

Starting point is 01:57:31 in what I saw. And so that got me interested. And I decided to speak to Jeremy Corbell, because I was a filmmaker, I still categorize myself as that. And he was one and still is. So I was like, okay, let me speak to Jeremy. He has a movie on Bob Lazar. And since then, well, I've been interested in it because of the physics, but I'm also interested in the deep mysteries of the world. And it seems like UFOs tie in to them. And even if they don't, it's still incredibly informing. So that's my interest in it. And luckily, or unluckily, I don't have a scornful, despising mind like most of the scientific community. I don't look upon this subject with ridicule. In fact, I don't particularly like when people ridicule other people.

Starting point is 01:58:23 I think that's an indication they should examine themselves for what they're holding to be a self-evident truth and question their own motivations for believing in it. Because if there's an emotion attached to it, then there's some unconscious motivation for holding that belief that isn't purely a dispassionate assessment of the evidence. So that's my reason. Very well said. let me ask you a further question if i may that not that i'm interviewing you but sure this this is it's actually a question for your audience too but but i can't talk to your whole audience other than addressing you so i'll address you um you know we look in terms of everything from a humanistic perspective

Starting point is 01:59:02 and we want to make sense from nonsense. It's just kind of in our DNA, right? When we are talking about the topic of UAP, I think everybody deep down inside has this innate desire for it to quote, make sense, put it in a neat little box, and it makes sense to us. The problem is the more we talk about UAPs, the more we exchange ideas, and then the more we begin to formulate our own opinions about UAPs. And so what happens when the topic of UAP, the truth doesn't comport, because we're all doing this right now, subconsciously, subconsciously, every person does it. We are creating these little boxes that we want to check off regarding this topic of it's from outer space.

Starting point is 01:59:53 It's from interdimension. It's this. And they want this. And they can do that. And they can do it today. That's interesting. And we are building those boxes without even realizing it. and we are building those boxes without even realizing it.

Starting point is 02:00:06 So when we ask the questions, we're actually asking the questions in a way to fill those, to check those boxes that we've already made up psychologically in our brain and our subconscious, right? But we have to avoid doing that. And it's so natural that we don't even realize we're doing it. How do we avoid the temptation to ask really the big question without being tempted to fill in the little boxes? A lot of the questions your wonderful audience has asked may not even realize, but they're trying to check those boxes that they've made for themselves in their brain. They've preconceived these little

Starting point is 02:00:44 boxes that I must have an answer to this box because this box then relates to this and this and this, and this gives me a bigger overall picture and answer that I'm looking for. But what if this is even far more bizarre than that? How do we ask a question to something we don't even know what questions to ask? Meaning maybe it's not even in the realm of our ability to really get to the root of this because we're looking at everything from a human perspective, human motivation, human interest, human desire, fears. What if it's something completely different? And so in essence, we need to avoid creating these little boxes prematurely in our mind, which is hard because that's what we do as a species and everything that we do, right? You know, take dating, for example, when you go on a date with somebody, what's the first thing you do? So, well, do I like them? Are

Starting point is 02:01:43 we compatible? Do we like the same things? Do we like to eat the same, the same diet to Terry, you know, am I a vegan? They're a meat eater, you know, these little boxes that we put in our brain, you know, already, but before you even ask the question, we have these, these little voids up you want to fill. And the question is how do we, how do we avoid that temptation? How do we pull ourselves out of a human paradigm to ask the questions that maybe aren't human questions at all?

Starting point is 02:02:15 I don't know. So I just offer that up to you because- That's a great point. There's a term for that. It's called anthem memes. Have you heard of that? No, no. Please explain.

Starting point is 02:02:24 People in the audience, it's just an unstated assumption. You don't realize you're making it when you're asking a question or putting forward a statement. So for example, let's imagine worms. They see humans and they just conceive of humans as godlike. Then they would ask, well, they must eat the best dirt. What dirt do they eat? They don't realize they're asking the wrong question. Exactly. Precisely what my point is. So what do you call it? Enfamine? Enfamine. So E-N-T-H-Y-M-E-M-E. If you want a fun physics one, which I could say in like 20 seconds. Ed Witten, so one of the world's greatest physicists, said there's no such, you can't, no-go theorem.

Starting point is 02:03:01 So you can't have a particle that has, that is massless and has greater than half spin and also carry a charge, that's Lorentz covariant, which means follow Einstein's equations. Okay, which seems like it means there's no such particle as a graviton, because graviton has mass, sorry, has spin 2 and is massless. Okay, however, this unstated assumption that you don't realize, and even Ed Witten didn't realize he was making it, was that the graviton is in the same space-time. And so this is one of the reasons that there's this ADS-CFT correspondence where you have holography. You've heard of the holographic principle? Yeah, absolutely. Sure, sure.

Starting point is 02:03:39 Because it seems like, well, there's a correspondence between CFT, so conformal field theory, and then having gravity on the boundary of that or vice versa. So gravity could be somewhere else and there's a correspondence between those two. Correct, correct, correct. But it's actually extremely tricky to extract that from the statement that you can't have a particle that is of greater than spin half and massless and so on and so on. It's difficult to see the assumption in that statement. So that's what an enthym that in that statement so that's what an anthem meme is yeah yeah that's fantastic yeah that's uh i appreciate that thank you kurt for sharing that that's that uh that if anything that was worth totally me i'm just i feel so relaxed with you and i'm so i'm so honored that you're spending some time with me

Starting point is 02:04:24 man well it's it's collective right i mean I'm so honored that you're spending some time with me, man. Well, it's, it's collective, right? I mean, you've got a great audience. You're asking great questions. And I feel that, you know, I almost feel like this is like a fireside chat. If we could all just be sitting together out here in Wyoming, you know, in the evening around a fire, this is exactly what I'd be spending my time doing. You know, this is, this is, I wish I could do this more often. Um, I really do, unfortunately, you know, much of my, my time is, uh, is committed to, to other endeavors within this effort. But,

Starting point is 02:04:52 um, I think this is important because ultimately look, we're going to solve this mystery together, all of us, and this isn't going to be up to Lou. It's not going to be up to Kurt. It's not going to be up to, you know, Greer or anybody else. It's, it's, it's up to, to all of us. And you know, that old, that old, that old saying, what was it? I saw it recently, somebody, a couple of things. I saw one really neat on the internet, you know, with, with somebody who was being angry and someone said, with somebody who was being angry and someone said, come, let us share smoke at the fire, by the fire. I've sold kind of an indigenous proverb saying, hey, let's share smoke at the fire. Let's stop grinding the axes. Let's put our differences aside and let's come together. I like that. Another thing too, by the way, I don't know who does it.

Starting point is 02:05:45 It's completely off topic and random, but I'm going to, since I got a little bit of time here, I'm going to say it anyways. There is an artist that has been drawing me and I got to tell you, I don't know if he likes me or hates me, but man, it is amazing artwork, man. This, this, this person has somehow managed to capture. it's kind of like a comic book style and usually draws me with little beady eyes. I don't know. I don't know. You know, I've seen it a few times.

Starting point is 02:06:14 You know, it's, I don't know if it's like a Japanese anime style. It's really unique though. Yeah. And again, I don't know if they hate me or they love me or indifferent. I'm pretty sure it's a unique though yeah and uh again i don't know they if they're if they hate me or or they love me or indifferent i'm pretty sure it's it's a positive feeling they wouldn't but man i gotta tell you really really talented artists man i actually screen grabbed a couple of those and just saved them and showed my wife i said man look at this this is really clever you

Starting point is 02:06:41 know um one of them is uh it's i guess joking jokingly, all the work I've done in the government, and then all of a sudden, now I'm being assigned a UFO program. And there's this kind of reaction, which actually wasn't too far from the truth. But just really, really talented. So big shout out to whoever you are out there. Again, whether you're a fan or a hater know that uh know that i'm your fan either way so so you're very very talented at art if you find the person's name or person if you are watching this just leave some comments and i'll put your

Starting point is 02:07:16 link in the description as well okay i gotta get to some more super chat and audience questions they're eager do-it-yourself craft q asks what's his take on alien abduction experience they're interesting they're fascinating but um they're just that they're an experience um and with every person who who talks about uh you know how how these things may be here for peaceful purposes and you know you know, just because they've never attacked us means that they're, they're benevolent. There's just as many people who are terrified and report the opposite experience. You know, I've said this before, for record, look, if you take a member of my family against their will somewhere that's kidnapping and God forbid, if you touch them now,

Starting point is 02:08:01 that's assault, you know, both are criminal offenses. And from my perspective, I don't care what your intent is bottom line. So I, if abductions are happening well, the award of abduction itself is a criminal act, right? It's kidnapping. It's not taking you on a date. It's abduction. If that indeed is happening. The problem is it's very hard to quantify and qualify that aspect of the conversation, because at the end of the day, you're just relying on eyewitness testimony. There's no gun camera footage. There's no radar

Starting point is 02:08:38 data to suggest that it's just someone's personal experience. And when you do that, you have to consider all sorts of stuff. You know, you have to, you're now talking about aspects that involve psychology, aspects that involve sociology and aspects that involve philosophy. You know, we all interpret data differently as human beings. Processes occur differently in our brains and biochemically even. So it's very hard to do anything with that data from a military perspective, from a DOD perspective, because eyewitness testimony is one thing and even that's tricky sometimes. but when you start talking about experiences, physical experiences from people and, and they vary so much in some cases, in some cases are similar. Um, there's not a whole lot I

Starting point is 02:09:36 can do with that data. So, although it's extremely interesting, fascinating, in fact, it was never really a core part of our research in a tip again, because scientifically it's very hard to quantify and qualify. And there's, there's nobody else that can, that can say, yes, I saw this person. There's a few small anecdotal examples here and there where people say, yeah, I saw the person disappear or something like that, but that doesn't help us. We need, we need more information or more data. I will tell you. No, actually, no, I'll wait. Sorry. Next time. Yeah, next time. Yeah. It's interesting.

Starting point is 02:10:18 Someone asked about why is it that we have cattle mutilations predominantly? We don't hear much about sheep and chicken and so on. Is there, oh yeah. Okay. So this is a Hickle. That's right. Hickle asks, why is it not on other livestock? Well, I'm sure there's a minor amount, but why is it predominantly on cattle? Or at least predominantly we hear about it on cattle. Yeah. We don't know why. It could be something as simple as just the bovine genetic sequencing. It could be the fact that, uh, you can put a genetic tracer in an animal and, and, and follow the natural mutations of the genetic sequencing, uh, the genotype and phenotype, uh, manifestations, um, over time. Um, you know, if I were to, let's say in the 1950s, put a marker, a specific marker in a specific herd of cow or head of cattle, and then watch as that genetic marker changes over time.

Starting point is 02:11:15 There's all sorts of things you can find. It could also be that certain animals are like canaries in a mine. They seem to be more sensitive to whatever reason, to environmental changes or something to that effect. And so that is the animal of choice. We don't really know. And there's still a lot of debate on what that is, of what catamulations are. Some will speculate that it's UAP related. Some will speculate that no, it's some sort of secret

Starting point is 02:11:46 government program for tracking biological weapons, testing others, opining that it's something completely unrelated. It's natural. It's caused by coyotes and natural attrition of the herd. We don't really know, but assuming, let's just assume for a moment, or I hate to say that word, let's presume, because you know what assuming does, right? So we'll presume here instead of assume. Let's just presume that it does have some sort of relationship to UAP, for example. Why would we, why would we, why would anybody, why would anything be interested in one particular species? There's all sorts of reasons why. It could be that there is a special susceptibility to certain things. Again, that going back to the canary analogy, right? That for whatever reason, it's also could be

Starting point is 02:12:36 that they're widely available. I'm living here in Wyoming. There's more head of cattle here in Wyoming than are people. That's a true statement. We have more cows than we have people. That's one hypothesis I was thinking about. Have you heard of MacReady explosion? It's that if you look at the amount of any animal by mass, which one is the most plentiful on the planet? It's not humans. It's actually cattle or cattle second to humans. So I'm wondering how much of it is just because there's so many of them.

Starting point is 02:13:04 Well, there's a lot of numbers. And it's huge numbers and they're all over the world. And there are also a lot of them are really remote. So if you wanted to get in and get out and do something, cattle is a pretty easy target. Cheetahs run really fast, right? And alligators bite. Those are great points. Yeah. Okay. So before I rudely interrupted you, you're saying there was the reason of being plentiful, of being perhaps susceptible, like a canary in the coal mine,

Starting point is 02:13:32 and then you're going on. What was the next? Yeah. It could also be that, you know, they have been, so cows are one of the few species that have been specifically manipulated by human beings. You know, there was a time where our species hunted something called an aurochs, and the aurochs was predominant all over the planet. been specifically manipulated by human beings. There was a time where our species hunted

Starting point is 02:13:45 something called an aurochs, and the aurochs was predominant all over the planet. And we hunted them, frankly, to extinction. What you see now in the domesticated cattle is really a crossbreed. It was invented by humans. It's kind of the animal that never was to some degree. We've crossbred a lot of stuff. So we now have this domesticated livestock that we used as a food source. Maybe there's something in that. Maybe there's, there's, there's something significant or specific as it relates to that. You know, we, we could go on and on.

Starting point is 02:14:20 Frankly, we could spend another two and a half hours, just, just speculating on why cows. There's a lot of different reasons why potentially. The fact that it is a primary food source for a lot of people on this planet, does that have something to do with it? Is there something relevant to that that is of key interest? I had the privilege of speaking to a veterinarian up here in Montana, of all places. And he was a former official and is a veterinarian. And it's called a lot of times to these cattle mutilations. And he is absolutely 100% convinced that this is, it is something that

Starting point is 02:15:06 is not natural and that is being done. Farmers will report lights in the sky. Later on, they discover these animals with what appears to be cauterization of the wounds, a lot of sexual organs particularly removed. And then some really other unique pieces to the puzzle where, you know, maybe one tiny bone is missing in the entire animal and that's it. Like it was just removed for the sake of removing it and studying it. And so, yeah, I mean, it's, it's something that's interesting. It's been around for a while. You know, a lot, a lot of people have, you're not the first something that's interesting that's been around for a while. A lot of people, you're not the first to ask me that, that's for sure.

Starting point is 02:15:55 SR asks, not sure if this has been asked, has Lou ever heard of Zimmernacht Whistleblower? The Zimmernacht Whistleblower, called exactly that or under any other name appearing on Reddit? And if yes, is there any truth to it at all? Well, I don't read Reddit very often. Again, if I want to abuse myself, I'll just get on Twitter. They do a great job doing it. I don't need any more. And then second of all, no, Zimmernacht, I am not aware of. I'm not familiar with that unless there's some sort of vernacular that is also referencing that. I have no idea about that. Stojin Karlusik asks, what does Lou think of the set of documents named Allies of Humanity? I've read a lot of documents. I don't necessarily know about Allies of Humanity,

Starting point is 02:16:47 of documents. I don't necessarily know about allies of humanity, what that is, unless it is something involves different species that have been alleged to exist. I don't know. I don't know what that is. Matt wants to know, this goes back to the worms asking which dirt do humans eat? Yeah. Great analogy, by the way. So what questions- I eat only the very best dirt. What questions should we as the audience, as myself, perhaps even as you, which questions should we be asking that we aren't? Man, well, you're doing it. This is it. This is exactly why we're having this conversation, right? To figure that out. You're doing it.

Starting point is 02:17:21 This is it. This is exactly why we're having this conversation, right? To figure that out. So earlier when you were saying that we have some unstated assumptions and we have boxes. Yeah. You're not saying that you're immune from that. You're saying. No, no. I need your help too to break out of that.

Starting point is 02:17:37 No, absolutely. I'm not immune to it. No, absolutely not. I have the same bias as everybody else. Right. No, this is something we need to figure out collectively. No, this is not a trick question. I'm asking you to say, ha-ha, I have the answer. No, no, no. I got the same challenge you do. We're in the same boat. We need to figure this out. And

Starting point is 02:17:56 this is why I say we need academics and scientists and everybody else on board and philosophers and everybody, because they're the ones that are going to help us figure how to do that. I'm just a dude. I'm just one guy. I might not be super dumb, but I'm not necessarily the smartest guy either. I don't have much to do with these things. You're extremely bright, man. It's humbling. I appreciate it, but no, I can assure you. Speaking about humbling, when you mentioned the word sober and somber, that to me, the reason why is because, not because we're more special than we think we are, but we're much less.

Starting point is 02:18:32 So then I was wondering, is perhaps another motivation for people that wolfpack around you, not just a financial motivation, not just national security, but also perhaps self-preservation? Absolutely self-preservation. Yes, that's a huge part of it. In fact, it also goes to pride and ego and self-preservation. I mean, these are innate components of the human psyche and we need to be aware of it. And a lot of people don't even realize they're that way. It comes from a place of self-preservation ultimately survival you know um

Starting point is 02:19:08 control um and to some degree even resources um it's it's almost part of our character um we you look at any any type of society whether you have a society where you have a monarchy, a king or a queen making authoritative decisions, or even to some degree presidents or, you know, popes. Again, I'm not against any of this. I'm just simply saying that we as a species, we always want answers. We always want someone to have the final say in narrative because we like our life to be defined. When you look at the way an average city organizer, the reason why we make our streets and grids North and South, East and West, because subconsciously it helps us know where we are at any given time, why we have a compass, right? What time would look even a watch tells us where we are in time, right? We are a species that doesn't light, we fear the

Starting point is 02:20:06 unknown. And when you look at Carl Sagan's pale blue dot for the very first time, and you realize that everything in existence that we know of has occurred on that tiny little pale blue dot, which is, you know, three pixels large in the vastness of vacuum of space, in just one ray of light from the sun, that makes people pretty uncomfortable. The fact that other than towards the center of the earth, there's no such thing as up or down. There's really no such thing as left. If you go far enough, you come back right again. Up is relative. Up just means I'm moving away from the center of the earth. That's all. There is no real up or down. We don't know if we're flying sideways somewhere in the Milky Way in the universe, or if we're upside down. There is no upside down. My point is that

Starting point is 02:20:58 when you really look at the universe for what it is, we have no idea where we are. None. We are spinning in an obscure spiral arm of some obscure galaxy. We happen to call the Milky Way. That's on a collision course with another galaxy called Andromeda in the next 250 million years or so. But in reality, we have no idea where the hell we are or where we're going

Starting point is 02:21:25 or where we've been. And so we build these anecdotes and histories and whatnot, because it helps us make sense from nonsense. And that's what we like as human beings. That's why when you put people in a solid white room or even the furniture's white, most people will report not only being disoriented, but being uncomfortable because there's no point of, of, of, of, there's no relativity within the relativeness within the, within not relative, but relativeness within the, within the room. In fact, it, it, it, that's why death is so scary for so many people because it's the great unknown. why death is so scary for so many people because it's the great unknown. And it's something that as a species, we fear a lot. And it's part of, nobody wants to know that they're lost. Nobody wants to know. That's why safety and security is so important in a lot of relationships, right? People will say, I just want safety and security. That's all. I just want to know that that person's going to

Starting point is 02:22:28 be there for me and I can rely upon them, right? They want stability. They want an anchor. And that's not a bad thing. That's who we are. But we also have to realize there's a lot of things in this universe that are going to force you to reevaluate. And that's really, really uncomfortable. Once you really realize that you are truly, we are alone out here in the universe from a, from a human perspective, right? I'm not saying from a living thing or, you know, actually I'm saying from a human perspective, you know, that's scary for a lot of people. You know, best. Best to our knowledge, we are the only humans in the universe. And of course, we have a bunch of animals we can play with on our little

Starting point is 02:23:12 planet that we call Earth and it kind of makes us feel good. But it's looking more and more like every single day that there's more out there. It's just not human. And then the question is, okay, well, what are their intentions? What are the motivations? Do they want to work with us or do they want to subjugate us? Or are we going to be tomorrow's dinner menu? All these things go through the minds of people. And they're good questions. And questions, frankly, we don't have an answer for yet. And that makes people really, really uncomfortable and unsettled. And I think we need to be aware of it. So back to your question, what, you know, am I, am I subject to the same box bias that you are and everybody else?

Starting point is 02:23:54 You're damn right. I am. Yeah. And we need to figure out how, how to look at this topic, look at a potentially a non-human topic through non-human eyes is what I'm trying to say. We may have to take our glasses, our human glasses off that kind of filter. How do we do that? Well, that's my question, right?

Starting point is 02:24:12 How do we do that? This is exactly why we're having this conversation. What can people be doing? Having that conversation. Exactly. That's exactly what we could be doing. Can I add to what you said? If you don't mind, like a 30 second.

Starting point is 02:24:26 It's on point. Hopefully this pale blue dot, which I imagine is something I don't know about it. I imagine it's zooming out and seeing how insignificant we are relative. So let me tell you the pale blue dot. There's a couple pictures

Starting point is 02:24:36 that have really, really, if you really want to look at something, that's pretty amazing. The first image is called the pale blue dot. Carl Sagan, as the, I think it was a Voyager, might have been the Pioneer, I think it was a Voyager spacecraft, was leaving Earth's orbit by somewhere around the moon. It turned around and took a picture of the Earth. And then as it was billions and billions of miles away, as it was about to leave

Starting point is 02:25:03 the solar system, so to speak, It's actually the inner solar system, but to the best of our knowledge at the time, it wasn't the solar system. This is before the heliosphere and whatnot. He had a great idea. He said, why don't we turn that spacecraft around and take one more picture of Earth, see what it looks like.

Starting point is 02:25:18 And so he did. And he turned it around and then he didn't. The NASA turned it around, took a picture of Earth. And at first they couldn't find it until one science pointed out, what's that? And, and you should look it up on Google. It's, it's, it's pretty amazing. Look at it with, with the original photo, not zoomed in. And, and you all of a sudden get this sense of vastness and,

Starting point is 02:25:45 and most will agree, maybe a little, even a little insecurity. Cause you're like, Ooh, that's a, that's a fragile little tiny ball in the middle of nowhere. And then another picture is taken by it was the lunar orbiter. It might've been the Apollo 11 mission where they're rendezvousing with the lunar lander. And in there, there's a picture of the lunar lander with a picture of earth behind it. And in that picture, you realize for the first time that all of humanity, everything that has ever existed, everything that anybody had ever

Starting point is 02:26:25 hoped, dreamed, or wished for, every war, every famine, every crisis, every human being that ever lived, an animal and living thing that we knew of was all contained in that one picture, except for one person. And that was the one human being taking that picture from the lunar orbiter. And that's very humbling because then you realize, wow, we really are all in this together. And better for us, we're a family, we're a community. And those are the two pictures. I would recommend people take a look at those. For me, that was very impactful. You know, they say a picture is worth a thousand words.

Starting point is 02:27:11 Well, in this case, a picture is worth 5 billion people. Pretty interesting. Let me play with that, if I can do so for a little bit. And let me see if I can say this. I haven't articulated this out loud but when people show there's some youtube videos that show the vastness of space how immense it is just keep zooming out zooming in and out in and out i mean out and out and out and outward and then some people feel dread and meaninglessness but to me that that seems like it seems like a relic of territorial domination when we used to tell a country's power or stature from how much it owned.

Starting point is 02:27:51 Because what difference does it make if we're 1% of 1% of 1% spatially or temporally of the galaxy? All of what matters. Maybe that's not what matters at all. Maybe space and time being located in it isn't what matters. If it was, then we could go to the Holocaust and say, well, it doesn't matter because look at how small of a region it is and how temporally bounded it was and say, so it doesn't matter. But it matters. The birth of your daughter matters. The death of your son matters. Every single thing that matters is bounded temporally and spatially. So perhaps what matters most

Starting point is 02:28:25 isn't how much space do we take up, but maybe it's our heart. Maybe it's our capacity for pain. Maybe it's the ability to show love despite being hurt and to trust again. Maybe that all from another realm is something that's huge. Maybe it's vastly huge

Starting point is 02:28:41 in the way that we look at ourselves as small. Maybe it's huge, to make an analogy, in the realm of consciousness, if it's a space like space and time. But we don't know. And in fact, all that we do know is what matters isn't like your favorite piece of music. It's not, it's only three or four or five, 10 minutes long. It's not an infinite amount of time. So I don't- Well, Kurt, the value of a human being, again, may not be what's up in here and the body. It may be that piece that we talked about before, right? That indelible part of the human that is hard to define, whether you call it a spirit or whatever you want to call it, a soul.

Starting point is 02:29:18 You're right. And I think that's the value of a human being. It's not the $2.03 worth of carbon that my body's worth. Right, right, right. The nine pounds or so of my brain, or maybe in my case, much less weight. But there's something else that creates the value for a human being. But I've said this before, and let me reiterate this first, anybody who hasn't heard this yet.

Starting point is 02:29:42 We talk about the human being being this small moment of occupying the small moment of space in this infinitely vast, you know, 92 billion light year galaxy universe across from side to side. And yet, and yet within every single human being, Kurt is almost in the equal amount of space. What do I mean? Well, let's look at an atom, one times 10 to the negative 26. When you compare that to the human body, we are that universe. We are that vastness.

Starting point is 02:30:13 We are to the atom, we are the universe. And we are just as big. Interesting, interesting, right? And so we really sit right in the middle of the scale of the universe. And that's important because as big as the universe outside is, it's just as big inside. And we're just now beginning to explore the realities of that

Starting point is 02:30:36 and what that means. And so there's beauty in that. But of course, for a lot of people, there's a lot of discomfort and uncertainty and insecurity. You know, there's beauty in that. But of course, for a lot of people, there's a lot of discomfort, right? And uncertainty, right? And insecurity. So yeah, I get it, man. I understand it's one of those things that, you know, ultimately we're wrestling ourselves. Why are we so insecure?

Starting point is 02:31:00 And why does this topic make us so insecure? Well, because we're forced to look in the mirror and question ourselves and reconcile the fact that we really don't know where we are and we really don't know where we're going. Despite the best and the brightest in our governments that we appoint and say, yes, we are giving you the authority to tell us things, right? But in reality, it's kind of an illusion. It's just like money. The only reason why money means anything is because we've all made a moral contract to agree that, yes, it's valued, but it doesn't really have value. It's a piece of paper. There's no real intrinsic value behind it other than we've all agreed to the illusion that, yeah, it means something. Well, it's the same thing with, with governments and authority and some religions, you know, that we, we, we have invested this, this authority to, to tell us as a species, give us answers, give us meaning. Right. So you think those at the top feel insecure that they

Starting point is 02:31:58 may not have the answers? Oh, well, they don't, a lot of them don't have the answers. It's not, they don't feel, we know they don't. And I think if they were to be true to themselves, they know they don't. You know, I mean, look at politicians. Do you think they do? Do you think that they think that they have the answers? Or do you feel like they know they don't? I don't think they think deep enough to even recognize it.

Starting point is 02:32:17 I think they think they have answers for the paradigm for which they are living in. They don't understand that there's a much bigger reality there. For their little reality that's been conceived and painted for them, yes, they're coloring within the boundaries of the lines. It's like me when I take notes in this book, I'm confining my notes only to the limit boundaries of the paper. That's all I can have to write with. Some people- Are those notes classified? You just revealed some classified information. No, no no no no

Starting point is 02:32:46 never classified screenshot that zoom in yeah i think um you know that's uh for me um you know i look at it that way some people just have a bigger notepad to write notes um you know but maybe we get to a point where we realize that even that we need a notepad is, I'm getting very esoteric, maybe the fact that we're even using a notepad is limiting us. The limitations of language? The key here is that maybe we need to get rid of notepads altogether, doesn't matter how big of a notepad you have, because you're never going to be able to contain all the information in a notepad. in a notepad. That's one of the claims of Anjali, is that we need to get past the limitations of language for whatever reason the aliens have told her this,

Starting point is 02:33:29 and that we need to start communicating telepathically or realize the limitations of language. Just as an aside. Well, I'm not sure you need aliens to tell you that. I think that's something age-old man has known for a long time. That old cliche, right? Well, I love you beyond words. Well, what does that mean?

Starting point is 02:33:48 We were limited by language, you know, language is as close as we can get right now to reading each other's minds. But at the end of the day, we're still limited, you know, but I don't, I definitely don't need aliens necessarily to tell me that that's, that's just kind of, that's kind of a reality for us, I think. Okay. Getting back to some of these these i know that you're all eager kevin lansdowne asked given the clues lou de long and others have been laying down it seems like we're dealing with crypto terrestrials not necessarily aliens is this what admiral bird found during operation high jump it's absolutely possible that this is something that's been on this planet for a very

Starting point is 02:34:26 long time. And it's just as natural to earth as we are. It could very well be its own, this is crazy as it may sound, could be its own animal kingdom. Just like the hidden world of protozoa and whatnot of the microorganisms in that animal kingdom that was invisible to us until just a couple hundred years ago could be you know um the likelihood of it i don't really know but it's definitely i mean it is a possibility you can't you can't say no umix asks can you ask him about project crystal knight aka project serpo which was featured at the end of Steven Spielberg's Close Encounter? I am not familiar enough with it to speak in any type of authoritative way.

Starting point is 02:35:15 It'd be pure speculation. So just I'll leave it, unfortunately. I wish I could answer it for you. Matt Wood asks, Have you had, you, Lou, have you had any holy shit moments where you learned a truth about something so over the top that it wasn't even on your question list, speaking of question lists? Oh, yeah.

Starting point is 02:35:37 Okay, let me continue then. So you have more to riff off of. How many times have extraordinary relevations occurred to you as you were learning about this phenomenon? So as it relates to UAP, there were a few. I'm beginning to put my thoughts down on paper. There were quite a few. And each time it challenged my perspective on things. It challenged my understanding of the universe and our place in it.

Starting point is 02:36:11 But not quite yet prepared to have that conversation, but I will have it at some point. Did you ever lose sleep over it? All the time. sleep over it? All the time. Gus Baja asks, if Lou is under NDA, how can he write a book with new and definitive information regarding the UAP phenomenon? I don't think this question is meant to be snarky at all. I think it's genuine. Yeah. It's got to go through a security review process. And my intent is to put everything I can down there. And then whatever the government decides, no different than Lukatsky, whatever the government decides to redact, and you're going to know what's redacted. You're going to know what parts are redacted and what parts are

Starting point is 02:36:54 not. And you got to try, but it's not my call. I've got to get reviewed. So how can I? Well, I can by going through the right processes and, and that's how you do it. There's a right way and a wrong way to do it. So my intent to do it the right, the right way. How long does that process take when you get a little book? It's not up to me. It can be, it can be, it can be a while, you know, but that's, that's what I'm going to do.

Starting point is 02:37:21 And I've got a great partnership with, with, with Harper Collins, who, who is, is, is, you know, willing to take this journey. So, and by the way, there'll be a very specific reason, very obvious. When, when that book comes out, a lot of people are, are making presumptions and assumptions of, of, of my motivation. They haven't a clue. They have no clue what I'm doing. It'll be very, what will be obvious be crystal clear of why I'm writing this book. I see. When it comes out.

Starting point is 02:37:48 People are going to go, oh, wow. Jesus is the light asks, one question for Lou. I've never heard this one asked. If UAPs are trying to prevent us from nuclear war that supposedly may happen in the future. Now, this is predicated on a future human hypothesis. When was this supposed to take place? Is it less than 10 years from now? Obviously, we're in wild speculative territory. I mean, we don't know they're trying to prevent a nuclear war. That's, again, a presumption by some people. Let's not forget that in Russia,

Starting point is 02:38:22 they actually turned them on. So I don't know if that's preventing any war. And by the way, if that's the case, they didn't prevent us dropping a bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So there's already flawed logic there that they're trying to prevent anything. We don't know that. We are presuming. So we need to be very careful with that. As far as any type of future war, your guess is as good as mine. that. As far as any type of future war, your guess is as good as mine. That's a whole different territory that I'm definitely not qualified to answer. Okay. This is a question that I've

Starting point is 02:38:54 thought about. Wally Lafferty asks, who are the government people that come to confiscate cameras and data threatening witnesses to remain silent about their experience. This has happened to military and civilian witnesses. He says, A-tip? No, it wasn't A-tip. I mean, no, it wasn't A-tip. But yeah, there were people who definitely tried to intimidate people. And all I got to say is, that wouldn't be wise to do it with me and my colleagues. You know, I don't get intimidated very easily. You know, we're kind of the people who, if you poke us, we're going to poke you right back. You know, I don't know why people got intimidated in the past. You know, the only way I would ever shut up from this is if someone really came in and said,

Starting point is 02:39:46 Lou, we need you to be quiet. This is hurting national security. But that hasn't happened. I'm the kind of guy, if you try to intimidate me, you're making a big, big mistake. And I'll leave it at that because my background is specific enough where you better come at me with everything you got. Is there any truth to men in black? Well, I mean, sure. The question is, who are they? You know, there's been elements in the past where, you know, U.S. investigators.

Starting point is 02:40:19 I mean, the truth is we wear black suits sometimes. I mean, I have three of them, you know. The problem is that Hollywood is kind of portrayed it a certain way. For us, black suits were fairly functional. You could look, I mean, this is going to sound silly, but you wear them because they're like wearing jeans, but formal attire because you can spill food on black suits and all that kind of stuff and kind of wipe it away.

Starting point is 02:40:43 And it's a little bit more forgiving than, than a, than another type of suit. So, and historically tend to be more of the cheaper suits just because they're black and not, you know, really fancy material or stuff like that. So historically black suits have always been synonymous with government and, and, you know, what people would refer to us as government stiffs. There's always been men in black. You know, I was one of them. I was counterintelligent special agent, but I never intimidated people like that. And so the question

Starting point is 02:41:11 is who's doing that and why are they doing that? And under whose authority are they doing that? That's my problem. You know, if they're operating without any authority, then, you know, without any authority, then, you know, you got problems, you know, because, you know, we had to all operate under, under rules and authorities. And if you're not, and you're running rogue and you're going around intimidating people, you know, I, I can't stand bullies, man. I, I, I'm, I don't like bullies. I'm not that guy. Anybody who knows about the way I was raised and what I had to go through, you know, I tend to be a bit of an anti-bully. I tend to try to begin with the same. Yeah. You know, that's, that's, that's kind of, or put the bullies in their place. Yeah. You know, they weren't going to be bullies much longer. I

Starting point is 02:41:58 can assure you. So anyways, with that said, Kurt, unfortunately, I'm getting blown up here to, I guess I'm late by six minutes for another interview. I hate to be, I'd love to keep talking about this. I had a fantastic time with your folks. Hopefully I didn't waste anybody's time. I know you're going to get people saying, oh, Lou didn't answer my question and Lou avoided this and that. I'm sorry in advance. They're going to do it. They've got some haters. They're just going to, they're going to nail you on it. But, you know, I'd love to do this again with you. And if there's anything I haven't addressed, you know, let's, let's, let's do it next time. Thank you, man. I appreciate your generosity again, immense generosity and as well as for what you're doing. Well, and I appreciate what you're doing and I appreciate what your audience is doing because you guys are making the difference. You know, you keep asking me, what can you do? You're doing it. This is exactly what you can do. So you're doing it better than anybody else. So, so thank you. Take care, man. You got to take care of folks. And I'm sorry I had to leave like this,

Starting point is 02:42:57 but I, yeah, I do have another. No problem. No problem. Okay. Take care, everybody. Until next time. Yes, sir. Take care. Okay. Now let me take a look at the comments. Thank you all. You all are saying thank you so frequently. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you, Easter. Thank you, Matt. Thank you, Taylor. Thank you, Tanya.

Starting point is 02:43:20 Thank you, Eric. Thank you, Pix. Thank you, Fetus or Festus. Krusty, thank you. Let me think if there are announcements. There's an audio version of the podcast. So there's iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Pandora, and so on. If you check the links in the description of any of the videos. If you're interested in supporting this podcast, just so you know, the patrons and the sponsors are the only ones that are what allow me to do this full time.

Starting point is 02:43:50 So if you would like to, then you're more than welcome to go to patreon.com slash Kurt Jaimungal. The link to all of that is, it's in virtually every video. So you can click the description there and support even a dollar. There are custom pledges. People want to know. Some people want to donate more. Some people want to donate less, and there is a way to custom pledge if you want to. There is no incentive for the patrons, and I'd like to keep it that way. What I mean by that is that you don't get a cup. You don't get... Oh, by the way, speaking of merch, there's Toe Merch. I'm going to talk about that. You don't get a cup, you don't get access to episodes sooner or ad-free. You are simply doing so to support the channel and show your love.

Starting point is 02:44:34 So if you would like to do that, again, that's patreon.com slash Kurt, Jai Mungal, C-U-R-T-J-A-I M-U-N-G-A-L. And there's no thank you regardless. Okay, as for the merch, there's Toe Merch for the first time. Theories of Everything merch, and that's until the end of October. I'll include the link right here if you're interested. Until the end of October 2021, there's the first ever Theories of Everything merch at the link in the description, or you can visit tinyurl.com slash toe merch, T-O-E-M-E-R-C-H. Dylan, you asked if I could ask your super chat next time. I will remember your name, Dylan808. You need toe socks merch.

Starting point is 02:45:21 There are, Kirk, Kirkhouse, there is toe socks merch. So there's two types of toe socks, one that says toe and then one that says toe clippings. In case you don't want to watch two hours, three hour, four hour, five hour long conversations, some of our podcasts, the longest seven hours. If you don't want to watch that, which many people don't have the time.

Starting point is 02:45:39 In fact, they feel a sense of consternation looking at the length of the podcast. There's a channel called Toe Clippings, which has anywhere from one to ten minutes clips. When will Lou be back on? That's when Lou decides to be back on. I'll have him on virtually anytime he'd like to come on. Okay, so I should get going. I'm fairly tired, and those who are sticking around are sticking around maybe because they are interested in the behind the scenes of the channel. So if you are, here's a little behind the scenes. I plan on still going at it full force, and I don't mind if I burn myself out, which it's seeming more and more likely as each day that

Starting point is 02:46:25 goes by, because on November 2nd or so, I'm pretty much taking a month or two months off, perhaps starting November 3rd. So I'm going to go at it full force. The next round of podcasts, I have the list here. They are Luis Alessandro. I will likely be doing an AMA on Sunday, so you can watch that live. Michael Levin is also coming out. Carlo Rovelli, which is a theoretical physicist. Stefan Alexander, another theoretical physicist. And then I'm being interviewed on several platforms like UFO Singularity podcast. Greg Henriquez has a podcast called Universal Theory of Knowledge, I believe. So I'll be on that. Garrett Vandenberg has a podcast. So I'll be out on that. So quite a bit happening. And then someone fairly large, which I'm not allowed to

Starting point is 02:47:18 announce, I'll be on his or her podcast. And so preparing for that is quite daunting. Someone, Matt, do you want to know if any of the questions were screened by Lou? None. I don't think a single one. I think there was one question I was going to send him and ask him, is it okay if I ask you this?

Starting point is 02:47:38 But that was my question and I didn't end up doing so. Lastly, I said that I would read aloud all the super chats. However, there are far too many to read, and so what I'll do instead is place a link in the description to a Reddit thread where I've copied and pasted each of the superchats. Next time that I speak with Lou, these will get priority. The podcast is now finished. If you'd like to support conversations like this, then do consider going to patreon.com slash c-u-r-tj-a-i-m-u-n-g-a-l. That is Kurt Jaimungal.

Starting point is 02:48:09 It's support from the patrons and from the sponsors that allow me to do this full-time. Every dollar helps tremendously. Thank you.

Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal - Luis Elizondo on Biological UFO Samples, Remote Viewing, and explaining "Somber" #UFOamnesty

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.