Suppressed Technology Hard Truths w/ Tim Ventura

Hello everybody. Welcome to another hard truths podcast. Today my guest is Tim Ventura. Tim Ventura has been researching alternate propulsion UFO technologies and the entire field related to uh breakthrough physics. He has talked to some of the most prominent black project engineers that we have been researching as part of this community and I'm super excited to talk to him. Tim, thank you so much for being on my show, sir. >> Absolutely. Thank you.

Ha. Thank you for having me, man. Thank you. Yeah. So, people uh really want to like know a lot more about you and what you've been doing because just at a high level, I think you have done the most research on what I would call just zero point energy technologies. Maybe some people call it UFO technologies than basically anybody.

The only person who's even probably close is Tom Voluone, if I have to put numbers out there. So, how did you get involved in this? Like what was your impetuous? What was what was the thing that drove you to start looking into this? And what drives you to this day? Well, so I've always had kind of two careers, right?

I mean, kind of like yourself, I've had the traditional day job career, done, you know, started software companies, done executive management, all of that kind of stuff. I am moving into venture capital. So, that has kind of always been there and that has helped me kind of keep one foot in normal, I guess, so to speak. And that's been really beneficial because this is kind of an area where you can take two steps out and you take another step and another step and you just get lost, right? And I know people who have gotten completely lost, never found their way back.

So the other side of this is, as you mentioned, the alt propulsion conference, altpropulsion.com that I manage. Um, I moderate that conference. I started that with Mark Soal and then a couple of other folks back during the pandemic. So the the actual story rewinds to, you know, I just like every kid back in the 90s. I was into sci-fi, read tons of science fiction books, all that kind of stuff. Watched Stargate, watched Star Trek, all the all the normal stuff.

And when I got into corporate America, I worked at AT&T Wireless. That was, you know, it and there was a massive layoff after the.com boom. And so while I was out of work, I was like, I got to stay busy. Got to do something. I got involved with this lifter project online, which are these little Beefield Brown ion wind devices. and I was the only person who had any marketing experience. So I started building these things and putting them up and showcasing these ideas for people and it took off.

I ended up doing media all over the world. I used to have like TV crews like TV Japan, right? And they would fly in and they'd be like in my garage which was like full of crap, you know, and they'd be like, you know, pushing stuff to the side, let us film this, you know, and and uh >> yeah, you know, and and then so lots I mean so many weird anecdotes there, right? Like you've got the super high power TV producer guy who's like, "That's amazing. It flies. Let me touch it."

I'm like, "Don't touch that." "No, I got to." I'm like, "Dude, that's 50,000 volts." Like, you know? So, so I mean, I I did that for a while and like in in like a free zone, all of these things are kind of like fads, right? The lifter thing came and went and I could kind of tell when it was leaving.

And for a while there I was doing like I did millions of views on the website because all the radio and TV and that kind of declined and I was like okay well I've still got all these people visiting online. What do I do with this? So I really started to buckle down and interview other scientists and there there were a couple of reasons for that. One of them was my own research also.

I got really into this and I was studying all of these other propulsion systems, but then like the lifters themselves, I was like I I tried hundreds of variations on these things and I was like there's no way to get the efficiency past a certain point. There's got to be something better out there.

So that kind of led me in this kind of transition from hey I'm doing it's it's like a DIY hardware builders. we're going to put it up online to hey I'm doing interviews and podcasts and you mentioned Tom Voluone I was showcasing people like Tom Voluone as well as a lot of these other folks and then over time I diversified from there right cuz when you're in kind of a niche like you if nothing else you get bored intellectually you know so I mean since then I mean this was like almost 30 years ago now you know but like I'm into all sorts of stuff

like >> you know and some Some of that is hardware based, some of that's technology based. Um, but I'm also into like AI and the singularity, Curtzswhile stuff. And like just the other day I was reading about declining birth rates, you know, and I'm like, okay, how is this going to affect the world, you know? So there's there's so much change happening right now. And I I just I love it.

I'm always engaged. >> Huh. So the you got started on it sounds like the APEC thing from the lifter. So I had was under the impression that you had been researching for longer. It sounds like you were, but that you got in interested in APEC and more public recent stuff back when COVID happened and that you just kind of needed this extra thing to look into like many people were looking for, you know, something to do and you're just sitting at home doing nothing, right?

So that's how this new kind of venture started. >> Well, so the question I've asked myself and I think everybody in our area maybe if you think hard enough about it, you may have this inkling, is this an avoidance behavior? Am I avoiding other things in life by being into this stuff? And I've wondered that myself. The first time I got into this American anti-gravity was back in 2002, early 2002, and it was the dot layoffs. And like it do I mean I cannot explain how horrifying. I lived in Redmond, right?

So me and Microsoft and AT&T and most of the city was out of work and and it was just like so depressing that I was like, "Okay, I need to do something else, >> you know, and and so I was doing I went to these job like I went to a job fair at a bank and it had people all the way around the bank. It had a line. There were like hundreds of people, you know, in suits carrying briefcases that weren't even any jobs.

It was like you go in and register with these recruiters and they're like, you know, after four hours of standing in line, they're like, "Yeah, if anything comes up, we'll let you know." And I'm like, "So, that was kind of where it started. But like you mentioned the pandemic." So, I again I I went out on my career, you know, I moved forward in life. So, we get to 2020. It is the pandemic. >> At that point, I I actually took the year off.

I was like, I'm going to write my way through the pandemic. I'm just gonna chill because I was in like a high pressure job and I was just like, I need the time. [snorts] So, I took some time off and I just I did defense interviews, you know, I worked with a lot of intelligence folks. I was doing really traditional stuff, right? Like folks who complain about Russia and China and all that.

And I get this call towards the end of the pandemic and it's this guy on the phone, Mark Soal, and he's like, "Hey, yeah, we want to do the mother of all anti-gravity conferences and we want you to moderate it." And you know, and I remember I, you know, and they sounded frantic, right? They sound really excited. They're like, "Yeah, come on, Tim. Tim Tim does all this stuff. He did American anti-gravity."

And I'm like, I remember I I'm on the phone and I'm thinking about it and I was just like, "Oh, f no." Hung up on him. Then they called back and I'm like, "What? What? What do you want?" And and they're like, "Come on. Nobody else can do this.

Nobody else." I'm like, "Fine. Okay." So So then I got into it. So I ended up building all the infrastructure for it and and uh and so most of that network most of the people who presented are folks that I've interviewed or knew from the past. And then what Mark and and some of the other folks brought was they brought like this current they're doing experimental work, right? And Mark still is.

It's years later. He's still doing experiments and a lot of the other guys are too. So it was kind of a mishmash. It's like, hey, let's put some builders together with a lot of kind of the established folks who were doing theory and stuff like that. And that's what turned into all propulsion. Yeah.

And it seems like a good idea. I mean, from my perspective, it's funny. We have kind of similar paths or let's say analogist paths. Like I graduated college at the dot boom once it hit and all my friends were in finance except for me who was in healthcare, IT, and they all lost their jobs. Every single one. I was just lucky that I was in a field that was like a new field that didn't have that problem at the time.

Um, and the MH370 community is also another interesting parallel which is that had something similar happen where obviously like they had these videos come out got really really big from talking about them going to a bunch of podcasts but then you realize okay well this is lingering what you know the investigation kind of wraps up. I mean there's only so much to investigate about a mystery what do you do and I actually came to a similar conclusion. And I said, "Well, what I need to talk to the people that are building this stuff or I need to research it. I need to understand the physics."

It's actually how I found you. You were like the first person I find is like I'm digging around on the internet and I'm finding your content. I'm like this is I don't know how else to describe it, but like UFO adjacent technology. I would I would call it Gary Stevenson say that. >> Um, so I guess uh that's what I' I've been following a lot of your guys presentations, the conferences. I enjoy them. And my first question is like how do you connect?

How do you find all these people? Because the more I've investigated, I think you've spoken to more black project engineers. I mean, I don't there's no way I could quantify exactly. I don't know who's a black project engineer, who's not, but I have a good guess. And I would say you've spoken to the most out of anybody in the public. Like maybe even more than Joe Rogan has.

I mean, you find the guys like the Paul Sizzes and the Friedwart Winterbergs of the world, you know? How do you find how are you getting connected to these people? >> Well, it's it's an engineering culture and so it comes out of different places, right? But like I used to go to the ISNPS staff conference and that was where I met Paul Sizz and and several other folks. Um you know I've done Poglonoff interviews with Eugene Poglonoff and then he is connected to Ning Lee and he was connected to a community folks.

So you just kind of get into this community over time and you make connections and again you know you give that a few decades right and it's just reaching out and asking about podcasts and you know it's like hey you know would you like to do this podcast and and then one thing leads to another I guess so it's just kind of becoming part of that part of that community you know and I guess one of the things that I'm kind of coming to terms with now like I don't know if I should out myself but I just turned 50 this year And one of

the things that I'm dealing with is a lot of my mentors have already passed away and now I have a lot of younger people that are approaching me, you know, and they're like, Tim, give us advice. And I'm like, don't look at me. I'm an idiot. But [snorts] but you know, but then it's like, okay, they don't have other folks, right? So it's like, okay, now I have to start to think more seriously about mentorship and it's like, how can I pass things along the same way people passed them along to me?

So >> absolutely. And I'd say it's a responsibility. It's not really something you can either choose to have or not, right? It's a responsibility that we all kind of have as we fall into a leadership role or role in which we're passing this information to people. >> And if if if we're not influencers, then I mean, if we're not influencing people, then why are we influencers, right? And and even you, I mean, why are you doing all this content? Because you're influencing people.

You're trying to get these ideas in front of people and and have them take them seriously by putting prestigious engineers on on them. I think you said that you the safe conference. I think you actually even asked me if I was going to one of the stave conferences when we first met and I should have said yes at the time and now I look back and I say those are the places where you go find these guys because they're they're out there in the open but nobody really knows who they are. They don't get they're not on like Tyson >> if you Yeah.

I mean, some of those things like this are out there, right? They they come up. STA was uh it was co-sponsored by I believe it was the University of New Mexico, if I remember right, and the Air Force and it was the old space nuclear conference and really the dream it it started out as like, okay, we want to put a nuclear reactor on the moon to power our, you know, our next rover. And so they had lots of like RTGs and stuff like that. Uh in fact, they used to have demos.

You could walk down the hallway and they would wheel in these these portable nuclear reactors without any fuel in them and they'd be like, "Look, you know, you can buy one of these. Put it on your next shuttle." It's like, "Okay, cool." Well, so they they ended up bringing in all of the nuclear folks because they were in New Mexico. They were near Sandia. They were near Los Alamos, right? They were in that area.

And and so you could go there and just hobnob. And some of the some of the gossip that was going around there was like I remember I don't I shouldn't say this in public, but it was one of this was a senior guy. I'm sure he's retired now. Very senior guy at I think this was Los Alamos, but I it might be Sandia. And he [snorts] was joking with the salesman, very loud, right? They were drinking beer.

He's joking with the salesman standing around the conference floor about fixing one of their breeder reactors with plumbing parts from Home Depot. And I'm just like, you could say that out loud. That's amazing, right? I don't know. Probably breaks 20 laws hearing that, but you know, whatever. So, breeding for fusion or nuclear reaction.

Yeah, that's interesting. So, you interview these guys and you're finding them at these conferences where they're very prestigious. I mean, these are people that are the military, aerospace, defense contractors for decades and decades. Like, everybody you've engineered. Their credentials are beyond question in my opinion. Do you ever suspect though that they might be, you know, doing stuff for the government?

You whole, we're looking at UFOs flying around in the sky. And the question everybody's asking is, is that ETS or is the government hiding technologies? And then you start talking to these guys and they're talking about stuff that the public doesn't think is real or is, you know, 50 years beyond where we're at. We're talking about Thomas Towns Brown asymmetrical capacitors that is ion wind. Do you ever wonder like are these guys like secretly building stuff for the government and they just can't talk to me about it? >> Well, so you're going to two you're going to two issues. Okay.

And I want to address this. I I want to go to the biggest one first though and we we talked about this on the phone and this is like if there was like put a pin in it, right? This would be one to put a pin in. So UFOs, right? This is in Congress.

You've got Tim Bett and David Grush and all of the usual folks wheeling out their stories for the public, you know, and one of the things that hits me about this is in addition to the whole Lockheed is supposed to have the secrets to X Y and Z or it's buried here or it's buried there. We're going to find the truth. Disclosure is only day away, right? It has been for the last 75 years. In addition to all of that, you have all these other conspiracy theories like MH 870 might be considered one. Uh the World Trade Center 911 might be considered one, right?

You've got like Pizzagate, you've got I mean you just you can go down this massive list of conspiracy theories and and these are little micro cultures, right? The same way that like uh for instance, Cold Fusion has like a tight little group of folks who are into it and the rest of the people have heard about it but only they are really into it, right? Same thing with gravity modification. Okay. So, conspiracy theories are the same thing. They're little intellectual communities.

And the part that bothers me about this, and this would include the government guys that you were just talking about. >> Mhm. >> All of these folks are like, I think the government is lying about this. I think the government is lying about that. Right. But when you take when you take a step back and you look at it, what is the what is the common theme there? Nobody trusts the government because the government isn't trustworthy.

And like if I could if I could put that on repeat, that is like the biggest takeaway that I've heard in in in these online communities and even the government people believe that. Nobody trusts the government because the government is not trustworthy. That's a problem, right? And like in the in an era of fake news where you can't trust what's online, there's no arbiter for truth.

You're supposed to be able to fall back and say somebody is honest. Well, if if CNN is pushing things left to compete [clears throat] with Fox News, who's pushing things right, you can't trust anything that's on the media because it's biased, you should be able to fall back to the government and say, "Hey, what about those 2008 financial bailouts? What really happened there?" But you're not going to get a straight answer because they never give straight answers. You know, that's >> So, what's the what's your point then, though?

Well, I mean, I I think that the larger point is like the the fundamental problem is our government is not trustworthy. I I think that's and that's not a Democrat or Republican thing. That's a US government that we need serious reform. Right. >> Well, so let me push on that because I'd say you're right. A lot of people don't trust the government. Personally, I'll trust the government if they tell the truth and they actually show something that makes sense with evidence.

I absolutely I'll trust them. But in general, you're right.

And I think people should be somewhat distrusting especially after co I mean we got a lot of mis mixed messages during co but regardless of what side you're on and when you're getting mixed messages you're going to not trust the people that are telling you the information and I think what the government cares about the most is exactly that the government wants to be trusted and unfortunately that makes an incentive to lie because if you if you did something that was wrong in order to stay trusted you can't tell people that >> you tell people that you were wrong you lied you're going to lose

trust and so this is my problem is that this would be a good incentive to hide this technology. This would be a good incentive to hide gravity manipulation. Why? Because we've been lying about it and we'll lose all trust. Like imagine we have this low level of trust. >> Well, trust is earned. Trust is earned. And and again, the the representative government, especially the bureaucracy, you're right.

I don't think it's an overt I think it's CYA. I think it's cover your ass, right? I think it's like, oh, we made an error. Something happened. We weren't on top of it. Well, we're not going to go public with it.

Let's just let's just forget that it happened. And if anybody asks, we'll say we don't know. Well, when that happens repeatedly over and over again, and it happens with bigger and bigger stuff, you end up with a pattern where you can't trust anything that's said. And that is a major problem. So, >> but it's good for the CIA because if you're hiding this technology, that's exactly what I want. If you're hiding, let's just call it gravity manipulation.

You that's exactly what you want. You want them not to be able to trust anybody, not be able to trust what anybody says. And because that's how you keep it secret. That's how they kept nuclear weapons secret. When that guy posted the nuclear weapons secrets in posted that and published in that journal in like what the 80s or the 70s, they just didn't say anything because if you don't say anything, no one can confirm or deny what's true or what's false. >> Yeah. So I I like I and I'm I'm being open.

I'm trying to be candid, right? And so I'll probably piss off half the UFO community. One of the things that has really troubled me over the last couple years, I'm I'm kind of going down my list of of complaints, but the big one, again, I've been in this area. I've heard all of the UFO myths going back 30 years. I've heard that like, trust me, nobody out there has heard. And um I am completely, thoroughly, absolutely burned out with UFO drama.

Some people call it UFO politics. Other people should rightfully call it UFO because the US um I would say the US DoD has a long history of whistleblowers who show up. I do not know who they are or are not. And that is the problem. The problem is it comes down to a friend of mine said he said it's what they call trust me bro. And I'm like yeah and and he's like I don't trust you.

I'm like that's the problem. He wasn't talking about me. He was talking about UFO whistleblowers. And so the issue that I where I'm at with UFOs right now is and and I can go into some of the like the defense folks that I know in a sec. >> Where I'm at with this right now was so a friend in the defense community, right? Former chief futurist of the Air Force got me into UFOs in 2017. He's a closet UFO nut.

He calls me up, Tim, you're not going to believe this. This Nimtts thing, this story just broke. And I'm like, dude, I'm I'm doing serious stuff. I was like, I don't want to be an S. He's like, no, you got to get into this. You got to start reaching researching this.

So, a while later, you know, I I start researching. I'm like, okay, yeah, it looks like something really happened. I was like, I'll be damned. You know, after after decades of like BS stories, I was like, it looks like something really happened. And so, I keep researching it. And so, more and more starts coming out.

You start getting these reports. It wasn't just the Nimtt sightings. It wasn't just Ryan Graves. It wasn't just uh there was something in 2019 where they were firing I did research on it looked like they were trying to fire a grappling cannon to snag drones and again this was off uh off Catalina Island. This was a different one. I I mean there were all of these events that were piling up and what you had in common was you had multi-ensor analysis.

You had overlap, right? It's like you've got IR footage. You have visual footage. You have radar footage on the Nimmits. Apparently, it set off the anti-bballistic missile warning system when it came in from space. You had a massive pile [snorts] of data, you know, and so that's where things were and it just kept adding and it was getting more serious.

Um, they came out in 2021, right? They did the uh the the I forgot who it was, but the director of national intelligence, I think, did that report and said, "Okay, yeah, UFOs are a real thing and it's a risk to flight safety, a potential risk to flight safety." I'm like, "This is going somewhere." Now, for me, this is the part where I get lynched for saying it. That changed for me when David Grush started speaking, okay? Because when he came forward, when he did that big interview, he spun it full circle back to myth and legend.

And it was trust me, bro, right? And it's like, "Oh, he's so credible. He's got a big pile of stuff." Okay, well, that's awesome. I don't know David Grush. I've never talked to David Grush.

I I have no idea about him as a person, but that for me is kind of like, okay, I'm just going to suspend disbelief. I understand that he gave a big stack of information to the government, right? That's cool. Okay. So, it's like we'll give it a couple years and see where it goes, but I I still haven't seen it. It's been like what, three, four years? >> Yeah.

I think my take and I'm curious of your take on this because then the question becomes, well, what are they doing? What's their objective? What's their goal? you know, why would you come out if you have no evidence and all you have is stories? Because you got to know that people aren't going to take it seriously. >> And so to me, I think it's more of a he's trying to send a message to I think he really was in some privileged position in the intelligence community where he had in access to information, but that doesn't mean everything he's saying is necessarily true.

Because the way this works in the intelligence community is that you get get given a piece of information, but somebody else may give a different piece of information on the same topic. And the only reason why they did that is they want to figure out who the leaker is. Right. So, >> and the the other the other part of that, Travis Taylor said point blank that Grush never had access to firsthand information. Everything he had was secondhand. Now, I that may or may not be true.

I don't know. I don't I mean, I guess he worked on Travis Taylor's team for a while. You know, >> Travis Taylor's no weird one, though. I can't tell that guy. I played a lot of poker in my life. I've played at very big games in the Vegas and I can't tell if that guy's a really good liar or not because here's the problem I have. >> This technology, gravity manipulation, what have you.

This, you know, if this is real, and I think it is, and I think you probably think it is, too. This is clearly a national security issue. You know, it's undeniably a national security issue. That's that's weaponization, resources, right? I would reason to lie. >> I would go I'd go I would go beyond that. National security issue.

Yes. But this is like a human race level issue. This is beyond national security, right? Like and and so the problem with what you're saying, I' I've kind of thought about this in the past. >> You could you could make the same claim about the second coming of Christ, right? It's like there's Jesus standing there. He's like, I'm back.

I'm here to save you all. Holy This is going to disrupt our government. That's national security issue, right? >> Yeah. Right. It is. >> We we'll put them in the warehouse with the ark of the government. Don't let anybody see them.

Okay. The problem is there are things that are bigger than national security. You know that's why >> I mean I would agree you know there are and you know if this is free energy then that is absolutely bigger than national security and that's why I push forward with it in my opinion is I agree with you on that front but we also have to think about it practically from the government's perspective from the perspective that you just mentioned in terms of they care about trust and people caring about them. So then the question is, let's just assume hypothetically this technology user.

What is what's going on with David Grush, the UFO files, Lu? It seems like there's multiple factions. Like David Grush isn't in the same faction with Lu Alzando. They don't seem to be friends exactly. And David Grush is working with Congressman Berles or at least was working with him to I would imagine try to find >> I guess. Yeah.

I I mean I like and and I [snorts] don't have any insider knowledge there. So like >> what's your opinion though? I mean because you know about like you know about the technology and that gives you a unique insight I think in terms of why would they even be talking about this? Why put anything out there? Why present any files if you're trying to keep this covered up? I don't I don't get that.

I guess >> yeah I I'm trying to I'm trying to frame some stories from kind of my perspective. The the super short version of where I'm at right now is if there is a conspiracy, if there is some kind of government cover up on UFOs, it's buried in the Department of Energy. It's DOE. And every time I say that, people tend to agree with me because they're the atomic people back when the Roswell crash happened and all that stuff. These were probably considered nuclear secrets, the whole nine yards. That's who would they would have given it to.

And if it ended up at Lockheed or Northrup or whoever, that makes sense as a contractor basis, but DOE, but would have been the warehouse for that. The other part that aligns that is like on my channel, but also I I know tons I know tons of people in the CIA, the DIA, the NSA, all of the letter agencies, you know, like not fake people, like real people who work there, right? That's like their job. >> Yeah. And just like everyone else, about 38% of the American public believes in UFOs, right? That's that's the the average, you know, more or less.

I think the last time I looked it was 38%. That includes the government. About 38% of the people I've met, right, just about half the folks I know are like, "Yeah, yeah, something's going on." The other half are like, "No, this is BS." You know? So, so >> I want to point out something you nailed here real quick, which is the nuclear secrets thing.

That is so huge. And I'm not sure how more people in the UFO community haven't connected it. They kind of have where they're like, "Oh, the UFOs are turning off the nukes, but like what if UFOs just are nukes? What if they are nuclear technology? What if like when you solve the atom?" And I think if you understand the physics, you understand that that's a very real reasonable take.

Especially if you understand how Pluto's ground state of the hydrogen atom where he's saying that every atom is interacting with zero point energy. If that's the case, then UFOs are have to be some form of nuclear energy advancement that we're looking at.

Well, you could even take that further and say, okay, with the kind of power output that you have to look at there, right, even if the drive system is bending time, space, even if they're able to cheat their way through the physics, >> that the kind of systems that are involved with that kind of propulsion, you have to have a power density where it's either highly advanced zero point energy or nuclear. One of the two, maybe both. So, so yeah, I would these things be nuclear in nature or would they be classified that way? Yeah.

And and the other reason that I I kind of go the DOE route is knowing all of these folks in these these agencies, the Air Force, the whole nine yards, right? None of them know anything definitively. None of them have found smoking guns.

One thing that the Twitter conspiracy theory land misses and they miss this and because they don't know but once you start to work with scientists and engineers and military people you start to realize that 38% of people inside the government who are interested in UFOs are quietly digging and they do have access >> and they're not finding anything >> and so >> yeah it's it's protected it's really buried and the part I would say on that is if I knew let's say I was in the DOE and I knew that we for Billy stuff. I would be a UFO believer, too.

But I would be like giggling as I do. I'd be like, "Oh, yeah. I believe in the UFOs." Uh-huh. Yeah. They're they're definitely real.

And people be like, "Why are you giggling about it?" I'd be like, "No reason. No reason at all." Because like, you know, you're building stuff and everybody's, you know, thinking it's UFOs. And I'm not saying the aliens can't be real. I think that they can be, too.

But I want to point out, did you see the John Harrington interview with uh Jesse Michaels? Because one point in it, this guy's like kind of on everything UFO related. He's kind of saying that this stuff's not real. He's telling this story, this apparently story about some guy saying that he told him about aliens says that's not real either. And then he gets asked about Cold Fusion. He says he suddenly goes super quiet and he's like, I think there might be a breakthrough there.

Like maybe someone will suddenly discover it. And you're like, this is weird. He was the department the energy secretary when Cold Fusion got shut down. >> Dude, there's tons going on Cold Fusion. One more point on that is that he asked Jesse Michaels, he said, "Would you believe me if I told you there's a nuclearpowered airplane in a hanger in Ohio or something like that?" >> Did did that struck out to me because I've been researching nuclear propulsion and I'm sure you have too. And the big reason why we don't do nuclear propulsion is neutrons, neutron radiation, neutron damage to a nuclear reactor.

Like that's a huge huge problem. >> Yeah. Uh, I think there is a nuclearpowered I think that was something they built back in the day. I mean, >> I think there's myth like lore about it, too. But he was basically just saying it's real. Like that's whatever that story is, I don't have it on hand right now. But the reason why I thought it was big was because doesn't that imply fusion?

Like the only way I know you can make nuclear power work without damaging a craft would be a neutronic fusion. >> No, >> maybe they have a small nuclear reactor that doesn't radiate much neutrons.

That's another obvious possibility >> that was back in the day they were working on kind of kind of like um yeah there was a project I remember reading about that um there there have been projects for like on nuclear submarines right they have small fision reactors there it's it's like steambased you know you're spinning turbines right same thing with aircraft they were working on that for aircraft but there's there's this interesting if you're ever feeling bored like if you watch Fallout you can see some of the cultural stuff from it in the in the TV show Fallout Well, >> I played all the games.

I'm the biggest most hardcore Fallout player. Continue. >> Okay. So, so you know, in Fallout, they have a lot of this in the 50s, you know, it was like, you know, the birth of the nuclear age, you know, and like big bold letters and everybody was super excited about it was nuclear everything. And they had some I mean, pardon my French, but they had some batshit crazy stuff going on. Like they had one uh I I I've done research on this. uh did a couple of stories and stuff. Uh the Davy Crockett, that's one nuclear RPG, right?

And and the next question is how can you fire a nuclear RB? I mean, the the distance of this thing, right? You're talking a few hundred meters or something, maybe a mile. Okay. And it's a nuclear weapon. And so >> ruining my childhood right now.

I will hear no more of this blasphemies of you debunking the physics of my favorite post-apoc. >> Oh, no. I'm not debunking it. I'm Yeah. So, so they they this was um they were so terrified of the communists, right, that they the this basically if you fired this thing, you would die either from the blast or from radiation poisoning. Another thing they had was nuclear backpacks. This was a portable nuclear munition. They would give them to frogmen, right?

Because this was before the Navy Seals. The the frogman would basically swim into the harbor, go up to the Russian sub and just detonate. I mean, this was they were hardcore back then. >> And I'd wondered to myself, I was like, I was I've been trying to put myself in that mindset. Like, how do you how do you reach that point, right? But like they at the time they were doing duck and cover drills. My mother did those in school.

You know, they they were worried about the Russian bombers, the whole nine yards. And then one of the other things that's kind of occurred to me, and this may this may seem weird, but like um those old-timers were basically these World War II commanders, right? And after World War II ended, everybody bailed out. They're like, "The war is over. We won. We're at peace.

The communists suck, but we have to live our lives." And so they went back and they started the baby boom. So if you're one of these World War II era guys, right, where you're, you know, you're you're hardcore,

right? you lost thousands of people on the battlefield kind of a thing and you're like never again you know and and now all of your folks are gone and it's like okay I have to protect this country that's full of babies you'd probably be kind of hardcore and paranoid too you know >> I think you nailed it in fact I think that's the exact mindset of probably the Oenheimer's tellers yeah >> you know Manhattan project people of the world when they figured out zero point energy and the implications of it, which include everything you've ever researched, they said, "We're putting we're shutting this down."

If there is, if there really is a cover up, then that's the reason, right? Is they looked at and they said, "This is too dangerous. These children, these babies can't acknowledge it,

and we have to keep it hidden beyond congressional oversight." like put it at the highest levels of secrecy above nuclear weapons where only people that have the access that have that we trust with this can have it which presents its own problems in my opinion which is why I think this is actually a political issue more than anything >> it it is and and again circling back to David Grush and I don't want to cast dispersions right he seems like a very nice individual that the issue there is the issue there is that it it's this what would you call it it's this vacancy of

hard knowledge to the rest of us, right? He is in a bad position. The government is in a bad position. Everybody's in a bad position. He's like, "Look, I have all of this information, but I'm not allowed to tell you what it is."

Okay, we we get that. He's trying to follow the whistleblower rules. The whistleblower rules are like, "Okay, now you can come forward, but you can't tell anybody what it is." Right? So then it puts every single person in a bad spot and it further erodess trust in everything because we don't know is that secondhand information that he was told like you said were they feeding him crap? I mean he he if my understanding was he was doing research for the UAP task force he was trying to find solid information.

Well, our our government has a lot of folks in it who who I I I've never understood this. I've met a lot of them. They they literally get kicks from lying because they know you can never verify it. They like that's their thing. They'll tell you the biggest fish story ever and then a few years later you'll find out this person was totally full of crap. Well, okay.

So, so did he run across some of those people or did he meet absolutely legitimate people and then then the question becomes he he he piles all this stuff together and he gives it to the government. Okay. So then what happens to it in Congress, right? Did was was Congress blocked and told okay well we know you're Congress but you're not going to get the information and you're not going to say anything about it either. Right? And again, >> it's it's this it puts all of us in this area of no trust. And that's a horrible place to be in a democracy. >> Yep.

I think once you get to talk though, you just go quiet. And you'd say, well, why though? I mean, if so many people want this to come out, want the truth about UFOs, how come all these people are being quiet? Because the bigger issue is really going to come back to something like free energy where it's something that's so massive, the implications are so huge that any normal person that gets told the truth is going to be like, "Oh that's what this about. Okay, keep it quiet." Right?

Like Marco Rubio for example, right? Look at >> depending depending how paranoid you want to get. Okay. I I read I mean if we're if we're like if we're going down the paranoia rabbit hole, one of I one of the ones that I've wondered about I've wondered about this. I tend not to think, but okay. So, I saw a news story, this goes back to the Nimmits era, about lawmakers going into some secret UFO briefing.

This was in mainstream news. They didn't say what they heard. They just said, but but they said when they came out of it, some of them were pale and shaking, right? Yeah. >> And and so I'm like, okay, the [clears throat] world that we live in, >> you know, like like for instance, people have been asking me about Steven Spielberg's Disclosure Day. >> Yeah. >> It was giant. It unveiled so many things. I'm like, nothing in that movie was new.

I'm I'm like, did you like the movie? Did you not like it? Okay, cool. That's fun. But like that movie was not a breakthrough. That movie was a rehash of like a cultural collection of stories that everybody knows.

The reason I bring up Disclosure Day is these Congress people go into this secret meeting. They get briefed on whatever they're going to get briefed on. They come out pale and shaking. What could be revealed to them that would make someone like that you're you're 40 to 70 year old, right? And they're hearing stuff every day like they hear horrible stories every day like the Russians are going to kill us. The Chinese are going to kill us.

Here's how they're going to do it. >> What is it about UFOs that would make them pale and shaking? It's not UFOs are real. That would not do it. >> I mean, >> it's the implication of UFOs, right? It's like something related to the topic. It must be really dark, right? >> The the I I was trying to think. I was like, what what would be the only thing what would make me pale and shaky if I went into a government meeting?

If I'm if I'm in some meeting and they're like, "Okay, swear on the Bible. You can't talk about this. We'll shoot you." The whole nine yards and now we're going to tell you something that's going to scare the crap out of you. I'm like, "Us are real?" I'm like, "Yeah."

Be like, "Duh." Yeah. I saw Independence Day back in the 90s, you know? Like I I had it on >> Xiles, man. >> Yeah. Yeah. X-Files.

Independence Day. I mean, like, there have been hundreds if not thousands of movies about UFOs. like this is a story that like this is so thoroughly part of our culture, you cannot avoid it. So telling someone they're real, like it'd be like duh. Yeah, I kind of figured. Um the part that got me was I was like, "What if it's abductions?" And and what if the story is, look, some of these child trafficking cases, some of these FBI reports that never get solved, we know that these people are being abducted and they're not being returned, right?

And and something like that, that would scare the crap out of me because then the people who are supposed to be keeping us safe are like, we can't and there's nothing that we can do about it. >> Yeah, that could be it. I think that that also seems a little small for me. I mean, yeah, sure, it could be that.

And I think that aligns with what Michael Herrera and some of the other guys, maybe Jake Barber were saying, which is I mean, Michael Herrera is convinced that what he saw, the UFO he saw in Indonesia was that they were abducting people that might be have like more latent sigh powers and that they go around just doing human trafficking with no oversight whatsoever in third world countries, which that's pretty damn scary to me. But I would say the scarier thing would be finding out that like our society is managed, right? Or that like Salvador Pais says that like we're somebody's property.

Actually, it's not just him that says it. I think a lot of people are saying that now that we're, you know, that there's some kind of overlord that controls us and we just don't see it because we're not even at that technological awareness level yet, you know. But I think you made a really good point about the UFO topic in general, which is no evidence. We got a lot of evidence with the Nimmits, with the the UFO Navy videos. They had made huge strides and then the evidence just kind of petered off and disappeared.

And now they're releasing these these five batches, six batches now of UFO videos, which is something. But here's the problem. I spoke to Anthony Williams, who's a pseudonym for an intelligence community guy, and he says they've got anal analysis on all of these videos. They are doing basically what I do on my live streams, reviewing videos. They do that in the CI, that's what they do. They review like these videos.

They see these orbs and then they try to figure out what it is, where it comes from, who built it, how it works. That's what they do. So, for them to reveal all these orb videos and then pretend like we don't know what this is. Here you go. Here's just some video, no context whatsoever. Some of them might be like balloons or something like that and they know other ones they know are anomalous and they don't put anything next to it.

Really goes to show you they're not trying to like inform us of what's going on. And it's more I think it's more of just some kind of awareness campaign of like here you go, these things are actually real, but we're not going to tell you what they really are yet because you're not ready for that. >> Yeah. And and and then what was that that other line again since I'm pissing people off today? It's like never ascribed to malice what incompetence can explain or something like that.

I remember when >> to mouse what can be adequately described with incompetence. the Chinese spy balloons and they started asking this was like the senior NORAD people and they were like and and I'm I'm kind of paraphrasing but they I I remember reading articles about this and the NORAD people were like um basically they were like did you guys know that the Chinese put a spy balloon over us and oh my god what are we going to do about this and and the like the defense folks came back and they're like oh yeah they've been doing that for a few years yeah we just try

not to deal with it like What? Okay. You didn't think that this could have been kind of a problem, you know, like these giant weather cameras and like that >> cuz we got surveillance on everything. That was the part where like, oh yeah, there's a Chinese spy balloons are just floating over. I'm like, huh? How how is that just randomly slowly?

Oh, we don't monitor slow moving thing. That's where I'm like, yeah. Yeah. And you don't know where MH370 is either. Even though we're tracking every airplane in the sky, every satellite and piece of debris in space, but you don't know where a giant plane went, but you weren't tracking a balloon floating over. Like, I don't know.

Some of this I, >> you know, if you look at the art of war, a lot of battle strategy is projecting weakness when you're strong, projecting strength when you're weak, things like that. Yeah. So a lot of what the military says and claims and things that they tested that they say didn't work or did work, I I just kind of put in the fuzzy zone. >> So So this this goes back to the whistleblower part, right? Which which is like um the folks in the DoD and the intelligence community that I know, right?

I'm not saying the entire I'm just saying this is like my my anecdotes, my experience. They are again as as I said about roughly 50% of the population believes in UFOs. Folks who are in that position within the within the parameters of their job. They're not breaking the law, right? They do their best to try and find out if they're interested, right? And you or I would do the same thing.

Like I I had one fellow who worked at the he had access to the US Air Force Library and his pet project. This was he he had the TS clearance. He was able to go through all their archival records. He's like, "Hey, I want to go through. I want to see what's there on UFOs." And he did.

And And I So I I did a I actually asked him about this and and he's like, "Well, I went through and he's like, I" He He was stationed in that post for a while. And he's like, "I went through and I saw the classified versions of basically all the stuff that was foyed." And he's like, they crossed out some, you know, names and dates, but he's like, there really wasn't anything new there, you know, and and he's like, so he he went through all of this US Air Force archive. He didn't find any smoking guns.

And that's the consistent story that I'm hearing within the DoD and the intelligence community. And if you look at the stuff like look at the the White House releases or look at the uh the presidential unsealing, they have more material coming out. It's not really smoking gun material, right? It's it's all kind of more questionable. So, so what that kind of leads me to think is if there's something going on, I haven't seen any smoking gun stuff within that DoD, maybe it's in the DOE because they're not if if you look closely, I don't I've never heard of any DOE whistleblowers.

I you don't hear DOE people talking. There are no DOE rumors. It's all DoD and intelligence folks. And the DoD and intelligence folks don't seem to have any hard evidence. So >> yeah. Well, they didn't keep a secret for 80 years by just having pieces of paper that a random person could foyer and leak out, though.

That's the thing, too, is that people say, well, you know, there's no smoking. There's not going to be a smoking gun. Like Edward Teller, Oenheimer, they learned from the Manhattan Project specifically. Uh I think it was that CIA guy that got caught with the gold bars recently. Uh David Gush was talking about that on Joe Rogan and he was giving information that I think the public wasn't listening very closely on, but he said two big things. Number one, that they use a continuity of government program to do that.

Meaning they were using end of the world CIA programs to hide that, which means that's how they do the no oversight situation was the first thing that he said. Um the other thing I'm I just lost my train of thought on it, but um he said something else about how they covered it up related that guy. It'll come back to me in a second here. Uh, but yeah, there there's they're not going to find a smoking gun rel Oh, yeah. That he papered everything. That's what Grush said that the whole project was papered.

Meaning that there was no electronic record of that special access program. So, you're telling me we're going to try to foyer something, but they don't even have paper. They only have paper records. We can just be burned or disappeared or be locked up in a vault somewhere? Of course, we're never going to get that. Like these people that covered this up, people have the mis misnomer that they're all incompetent, but they're actually very smart.

That's the opposite is that the people that are the black project engineers, the ones that have the NDAs that say that they can kill you or put you in jail, they're very smart and they're not going to break those NDAs. That's what I would argue. >> I I mean, yeah.

I this again all of this for me like and half the stuff I've said and what you're saying right now this all falls into that trust me bro category for me because it it's like you know it like you're saying it's papered over there's no electronic records it's like but then again we're we're taking someone's word for it and it comes back to do we know this person well enough to know that they are being honest and even if they think they are being honest were they lied to and >> well so let me take let me take let me set that because I want

to add a real scenario IO for you that you can respond to here. Before I say that though, I want to say that with respect to the evidence, the solution is pretty straightforward for people that are listening out there. Just reveal the MH370 files. If I'm right about that missing plane, if we teleported a plane with some magical plasma orbs, fusion reactors, whatever they are, then the government has files on them because that's an operation that we did. And this is what I say is that people want evidence. We're never the government's never going to say, "Here's our illegal thing that we did."

You know, here's our UFOs that we built. go ahead and crucify us over this. That's never going to happen. But a real missing plane that they have that they they know what happened to it and they're hiding that. That might be something we can get and that will expose everything. So that's just people can take it or leave it, but that's the way forward if you want evidence because otherwise I don't know what people are expecting.

Now with respect to the conspiracy angle and the trust me bro stuff, how I would respond is do you think that Gary Stevenson is legit? because he goes on your show like three times now talking about gravitywave laser beam >> and making a spin a spin transition in a dissimilar superconducting Josephson junction that can turn electromagnetic photons light into gravity beams and he talks about it very detailed and he worked for EG&G and Boeing >> as an engineer >> well he worked for NASA yeah no I've known you say do I No gravity maybe.

Well, yeah, because Gary Stevenson's talking to you about it and saying exactly how to do it and apparently built a microchip that does it. >> Well, so these are I I don't think he built a microchip, but the Yeah, these are proposals. So Gary Gary specifically Gary is part of again this is an engineering culture and an engineering community. And so he studied under he's not a PhD, but he studied under Dr. Robert Baker, Dr. Robert Baker Jr. who's won achievement award. Robert Baker did lifetime achievement award for gravity waves in 2011. Lifetime achievement. >> Yep.

And then he studied under and he was deeply influenced by Dr. Robert Forward going back to the 60s, right? And so so this is kind of an intellectual lineage and and so yeah, I've been like I yeah, I know Gary really well. Gary's he's absolutely wonderful person. He's one of the good guys. He's an >> Don't you I I think he's a good guy, too. But don't you think like Robert Forward, Bob Baker, Gary Stevenson, you're looking for like a secret culture of black project engineers that might be building stuff for the government?

I go, "Huh, that looks like a lineage that I would be very interested." In fact, I'm sure Robert Forward is involved in the exact technology I'm seeing zero videos. >> I mean, yeah, I again, I know all of these folks from the conferences. I know many of them personally, you know, I I know their families. I've never seen anything weird there. You know, Gary's close. >> So, it's not trust me, bro, though, right? Because is it Well, you tell me.

Is it trust me, bro, when Gary Stevenson tells you that you can make a gravity wave laser using dissimilar Joseph's injunction superconductors? Cuz that's reason specific. >> Well, that's that's a proposal, right? That's a proposal. He's I mean, and he's supposedly showed that it can work. So, that's that's what I'm saying, though, is that it's a proposal, but do you believe that it's that it works out? Do you believe that Gary Stevenson build it and test it? >> Yeah.

I I think I think I think it would work. I think it's worth testing and validation, right? But that's that that's different. That's different than saying it's been done. It's out there. It's being hidden.

What he's saying is it can be done. Let's do it. I'm all for that. That's the difference. Okay. When you go to the States conference, right, Paul Sizz, you were talking about a neutronic stuff.

Paul Sizz was talking about the was it the 2050 aerospace vehicle where it was a hybrid um a neutronic fusion hypersonic craft right they weren't saying it's been built and hidden they were saying this is what we want to build somebody please fund this you know and they never got the funding that we know of and >> they they I found a specific paper just the other day where it's George Miley and uh Robert Ford and or no George Miley and um David Frroning, they were working on the exact concept of integrating fusion into zero point energy. I found your paper about it as well.

Interestingly enough, the AI doesn't find that right away when it says it doesn't realize that they were also integrating 0 point energy into their hybrid craft along with a neutronic fusion. And yes, you would say, hey, 2050. Yeah. Well, that's >> let me push back real quick. You because you say this is just a proposal on something they want to build for 2025 or 2050. Isn't that the perfect cover for something that you already built secretly for the government that's going to be exposed in 20 years?

Like how what would how would that look any different if that's the case? Because you can't say, "Hey, yeah, we built this for the government." >> It it it would be, but I mean you you could say the same thing about like I'd like to Elon Musk wants to colonize Mars, but is that a cover for a Mars colony? No. Right. So Elon Musk is saying, "Hey, I think that we can do this. I want to do this. Let's do it." And he's got a proper >> if Elon Musk actually built rockets that could take you to Mars.

Those guys actually were building scramjet engines and building those things for defense contractors. They weren't hypothetical. Now, in terms of those exact designs being hypothetical, >> no, I wouldn't go down that route.

I I would say these are I I would say that these and people are more like again if they visit the altpropulsion.com site you can look that story is on I think it's on the main page or near there but they can look any of this stuff up they can find the papers you know I I myself as well as other people out there have been trying to keep a lot of this stuff alive um the way that I would frame this is I would frame this as visions of what is hopefully possible right these were not infallible people.

This is what they thought could be built and why it should be built. That's not to say that it would necessarily work, but like I I would say that these folks had a dream and that is the important part of it. And and we're all just trying to kind of keep that dream alive because what we may be able to do is come back to this in a few decades and say, "Hey, this ain't neutronic thing, we've solved X, Y, and Z and we got tons of money. Let's do it." You know, >> I would push back. I my take is completely different.

My take is they aren't speculating. They've already built this behind the scenes and the only reason why they're writing the papers is because they already know it's going to work and it's not hypothetical. We're they're presenting it to us. Let me finish here is that they're presenting it to us as hypothetical. That's my take on it. And my take on it is also that they also did figure out zero point energy infusion interaction and integration.

And what I would ask you then is if you do find out that the gravity the gazer gravity wave laser that Gary Stevenson is talking about is real and does work, would that not vindicate what I'm saying right now? Or are you going to then say, "Oh, he was just speculating. He just got lucky." >> No, I I think he was I think he's just working ahead. I mean, you know, [laughter] he he's looking at the physics, right? I mean, that would be like we can build a particle accelerator.

This is how a particle accelerator is built. This is what we can do with it. if somebody comes along and does that. But go and go let me go back to the hypersonic thing for a moment. So the the the only conspiratorial story that I know of there was Paulis uh I I was talking to him. In fact, I think I got this I think I recorded this.

I think this is up online. [snorts] So he he worked on he worked on for for folks who don't know he was one of the pioneers in hypersonic aircraft >> and he had some interesting again this is the malice versus incompetence thing he had some real complaints he did not like NASA he said that NASA should never have built the shuttle they screwed the shuttle up if they hadn't built the shuttle like we would be decades ahead in the space program if they'd done rocky he said the air force back back in the 60s had a plan for reusable space rockets that they could put

up. And what happened was he said that when they when they handed the space program over to NASA to make it like this peaceful joint project that the you know world will embrace. He was like when we did that they shut the air force down. They said okay you guys don't do this anymore. This is this is not a war thing. This is a peace project.

And the Air Force was like, "Oh," or the the So the Air Force, they turned off the reusable capsule program. They gave everything to NASA. NASA was like not invented here. They were like, "Well, we want to do a shuttle. That's our vision, right?" And then they fought with that and blew them up on re-entry several times.

Blew a couple up going up. >> And and so in in his view, NASA was the biggest setback to American space ever. And >> he was again he >> he was one of those he was Yeah, these guys they had strong opinions. >> Didn't think I could like him any more than I already did, but you just made me like him even more. Paul says is literally my spirit animal. I love that guy. Every clip I've ever watched him.

I love my favorite one of him is when he's doing the presentation with like mar leak maribou in the audience and he's showing the image of the UFO and everybody's wondering why is he showing this UFO and he goes and this is a microwave powered plasma thing that is over Russia right now and if we don't do something if we turn off all the lights on the research then this is going to be over our you know our country soon and I'm going are people listening to this guy like >> I've never se I've never seen that one I've never seen that one. >> Oh

well you're about to watch it right now. Get ready. Here we go. I've already got it. Paul say >> you got it queued up. Okay. >> Oh, I've got it queued up.

Uh, here it is. >> Careful. If we keep shutting the lights off in the United States that one of these days, and I have leaks leak sitting right here in the audience, one of these days we're going to see that light orbit. And that's a microwave powered spacecraft based on plasma propulsion. And one of those right now is >> that's a microwave powered spacecraft based on plasma propulsion that he's showing clearly in the '9s at some hotel conference room on an overhead projector. >> Why the former Soviet Union. >> Yeah.

Interesting. >> I I don't know if I can go and touch it, but I I've seen the video of it. And it won't be too long if we don't enter the 21st century in the United States with that railway train escape so people can look out and say this is what we've accomplished. This is what we can do. This is the we've made a tremendous economic breakthrough that's providing us the astein and economic base that we've never envisioned before. We can't do that, then someone else is going to do it.

Thank you very much. >> Wow, I love that guy. >> Yeah, never seen that one. >> Never seen that one. >> Sorry. Go ahead. Um [laughter] I was trying to remove that. >> Yeah. No, that's awesome. That's awesome. Yeah.

I uh so the the story that he told me that that and I I'll just put this out there. This is again this is the guy who developed um [snorts] he basically developed Aurora, right? if that exists. I think it exists. I think he thought it existed or he I don't I >> secret hypers spacecraft, right? Is it what that was? >> No. No. So, Aurora was uh in um Okay. So, Popular Mechanics did a Popular Science, one of the two did a full page spread on a Mach 6 hypersonic spy plane in the 90s.

I think it was 94. [snorts] >> And the name of it was Aurora. And this was the successor to the Blackbird, right? So the SR72, I mean, this thing was outdated. They wanted something faster. I talked to Paul Sizz about that a lot, right? And I was like, why would you want this?

And he talked about stuff like I mean, obviously you can use it to get really fast quality photos of the enemy territory. But he's like, you can also use it for stuff like submarine interdiction, right? where if you have a Russian sub come up off the coast and you want to go see what's going on, you can't get there fast enough at Mach 3, you need Mach 6 to get there. I'm like, okay. So, so you know, the the government had their their, you know, moneywasting reasons to build one of these things. And it's very likely that they built one.

There was uh again this in the '9s, Popsai, Pop Mechanics did a massive spread. I believe it was Bill Sweetman whom I know who did this. And believe it or not, if you if anybody out there is able to do research and find a cover of that, Bill Sweetman said this was just a month ago. He said the person who did the cover art for that, the Aurora cover art was Mark McCandish. >> Really? >> Because he was an aerosp Yeah. He was an aerospace illustrator. So Mark McCandish did the cover art. >> So that was Aurora Mach 6.

It's like, okay, that's fast, right? That's that's stinking fast. I was like, yeah. So um in the 1980s Paul Sizz because of his experience was was made chief scientist. He was one of the program heads on NASP. That's the national aerospace plane. >> That was they called it the Orient Express. That was a Reagan era thing. And it was like hey let's get to China US to China in three hours.

I'm like okay I don't know why you would need that but in case you do right. >> Yeah it's mentioned in this book. book uh David Froning worked on NASA NASA aerospace plane as well. They also talk about uh fusion propulsion integrating that and actually even teleportation in this particular video this book which is >> so people out there. >> Yeah. So NASPA hypersonic, it's chemical, right? I I mean it's it's it's very advanced, but it's like what they were talking about is basically like a wave rider.

And in fact, this is how they from, as I recall, I could be mixing some things, some little details up, but this is how they discovered the Aurora program was they had these supposedly they had these UFO groups in Northern California that were like, "We're seeing these weird UFOs. It's like a string of lights, you know, string of these lights and they're going they're going west, you know, every every week or two. We don't know what's going on. And they're like, "Well, damn, that's weird." Okay.

So then then sooner or later they start to hear from these like San Diego folks, UFO nuts, and they're like, "Yeah, we're out there looking at night. We see these string of lights and they're going east every couple of weeks." So somebody does the math and they're like, "Wait a minute. What time did you see these?" They start doing the calculations. They're like, "This is something with a string of lights that's going west, you know, and a few minutes later it's going east." Okay.

And so they're like, "Well, what what could this possibly be?" They were like, "This is one of these hypersonic aircraft." That was how they figured out, or at least they believed they figured out this thing existed. And and this is the downside of these aircraft is these things are going so fast using conventional propulsion that it basically takes the entire state of California to do a U-turn. That's that's insane. >> Well, so and this is where I obviously this is conspiracy theory.

I don't have evidence to support this, but I think that the reason why hypersonics are so secret and why we don't ever see the images of them is because it's not what we conventionally look at. It's not just using only conventional physics. The same way where people talk about the B50, the B2 bomber having like Thomas Townson Brown electrical charge in its wings. I think that's what's going on in hypersonics. And what I'll say is specifically what they're doing is something Paul Sizz mentions. They're using a plasma sheath.

Plasma sheath reduces the drag and reduction that will work in the water. That will work. That's how you >> that I can I can speak to that a little bit. >> One more thing though real quick and then you can go ahead and speak to it. And then what they're they're also doing something additional like they took this let's say fusion reactor but it's really just a plasma pump uh in integrator. They integrated zero point energy into it by turning it into something that can pump zero point energy out. How?

But the real trick of how they did this is actually right here in this book by Terrence Barrett is they they found a way like Tom Bearden to polarize the light to change the phase of the light the electromagnetic beam to so that it does exactly what Gary Stevenson's talking about that it turns electromagnetic wave into a gravity wave. That's what Terrence Barrett did for David Froning and figured that out. and you would say, "Oh, that's the answer for how you can do all the things that Paul Sizz is talking about."

And it also explains why it's not public and why they can't talk about it publicly in their papers and patents because that's that's classified. That's the specific thing that's classified by the government is how do you convert an electromagnetic beam into a gravity beam? And my question for you then is >> I'm not familiar with that at all. So, >> well, Gary Stevenson is talking to you about it, but he's talking to you about it from using a spin transition in in a superconducting Joseph's injunction, but this is the analog to doing that on the larger scale, not on a microchip scale.

I actually sent Gary Stevenson an email about this. He didn't respond, which >> kind of I think confirms what I'm saying. The question I have for you then on this line is why do you think Ron Pandalfi wrote up Bob Baker in the Jason group claiming that Bob Baker was helping the Chinese giving them information about gravity waves. To me, the only reason why that would ever even happen and Gary Stevenson told this story to you on your show. The only reason why that would ever happen is if gravity waves are a national security thing that we're cover.

If gravity waves aren't real, we can't produce them. Why are you writing somebody up for talking too much to the Chinese about it? >> Especially a guy that won a lifetime achievement award gravity waves. >> Oh, are you >> Sorry about that. Somebody was trying to call through. >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah. No, can you hear me? Okay. Yeah.

Somebody's trying to call through and >> I have no idea what's >> Yeah. Um, so you're talking about the JSON analysis of HFGW, right? And uh I I had questions about that to be honest. So I understand kind of where Ron was. I I've read that report. Um so on the And that's Oh, that's a whole that's a whole separate issue. I have >> Yeah, we don't need to write the whole thing, but my question is how do you rationalize that?

If you say, "Hey, maybe there's not a conspiracy here. Maybe there's nothing going on. Maybe there's a 60% chance the UFOs are nothing." I mean, I'm kind of paraphrasing here. How do you reconcile that? >> Well, you're writing up a guy for gravity waves. >> Well, you have to you have to you have to understand the threads and the relationships and the connections. Otherwise, you're just putting pieces together randomly, right?

It's it's like if you have a puzzle, >> you have a p It's like you have a puzzle box, but you can't see what's on the puzzle pieces. You're like, "Do these two fit together?" Yes, but they're not supposed to fit together, right? >> Well, let me tell you how I'm fitting them together, and you can go ahead and correct me however you think I'm wrong.

G I I would say Bob Baker was building stuff for the government using his gravity wave knowledge and Ron Pandalfi got upset because he spoke a little bit too much to the Chinese about it and therefore wrote that's how I'm putting the pieces together. >> So no the the way the way the accurate this is what I felt about Bob Baker. [snorts] >> So Bob Baker was looking for funding to build stuff, right? He and he had val he had >> and he wanted a graduate telescope. Go ahead. >> Yeah. Well, he he had a bunch of he had a bunch of ideas.

Bob Baker had a difficult time as best anybody knows. Like from what we can tell, he had a difficult time being taken seriously in terms of funding. He would get like a little bit here and there to do a paper or whatever, right? He had his company grav.com. He did tons and tons and tons and tons of papers. He was one of those guys who wrote tons of papers [snorts] and he was having trouble being taken seriously, you know.

So, he started working with a Chinese research group. They're still doing their research at I forgot what the university was, but it's over in China and they were doing research. They built a gravity wave detector. And Bob's like, "Look, these Chinese people are doing it. They're really awesome. I'm going to work with them."

And it's like, and and this was the part where I looked at this sideways. And I I wouldn't say Ron was any different. So Bob is doing all of this theoretical work saying we can do X, Y, and Z with gravity waves. We can initiate nuclear reactions with gravity waves. We can do, you know, remote destructive weapons with gravity waves. He did papers on all that stuff and that's all public.

You can look it all up on a research gate. You know, he's like, we can do all of these really cool things with gravity waves, and I'm going to work with this Chinese group because they're doing it. And it's like, well, wait a minute. Okay. Yes. But like Bob, you're getting into kind of dangerous territory.

So you can initiate remote nuclear detonations with gravity waves. Okay. That's really cool. And you know, you're working with a company like you're going over to China. You're buddies with a group of people. They're doing real science.

They're nice folks. They're well-intentioned. They are also part of a communist regime. everything they do goes into whatever communist regime they're working for. That was my concern. And I think that was that was Ron's also [snorts] >> then that doesn't matter. >> Well, if if the whole thing's fake and doesn't work, then none of that matters. >> But you can't make that you can't again that's you're making a logical jump there. You're saying just because somebody talked about it means it's real. >> That's not you're doing the opposite.

That's the problem here is you're saying well just because someone talked about doesn't mean doesn't mean it's real. Yes, that's true. That's fine. That's what I'm saying. But if you say that somebody [clears throat] Hey, look, if I go if you come to me and you say, >> "Ashen, you're selling you're you're giving secrets to the Chinese on how to make unicorns," I would laugh at you. I wouldn't even acknowledge.

I would just laugh at you because unicorns aren't real. >> But if you're going, you're telling the Chinese how to make gravity waves. >> That's not if if you're go Okay, so let's say let's say I've got a really good idea to build a nuclear bomb. Let's say great. >> Yeah. This is the thing though. This doesn't So this is >> But it hasn't been built. It hasn't been built cuz I can't get money. Cuz the people in my own government are like, "Look, we already got our own nuclear bombs. They're awesome."

He was like, "No, you're going to love this one." Right. And and and it's like, "You know what, Bob? This is a great nuclear bomb, but damn it, we've got our own. We don't need it anymore. We don't need this special type."

Okay. Well, fine. I'll go over to China. They'll help me. >> Yeah, >> I'd be pissed. So being pissed is different than ruining it doesn't mean it doesn't mean that it was built, >> right? >> So the the Jason paper was actually a pretty scathing and and there was an interesting part of this too. There there's there's kind of a side benefit there.

The reason that they did that was the reason that paper went because if you look if you look at that paper you had >> it did get him off the hook which is interesting >> because they said that the effect wasn't strong enough so therefore he didn't help the Chinese enough. So, but that's doesn't >> it also said no, it it said something it said something more important too, which is interesting. >> It said the effect wasn't strong. They didn't even think it was necessarily real.

So, >> and and Gary Stevenson argued that it was the Gersstein effect and they completely ignored him. >> Yeah. >> Now, Gary Stevenson saying that the >> G Hold on, hold you're missing a part. You're missing a part. This they were going to classify it. They didn't classify it because of that. They were going to classify all of that research and it got left open. >> That doesn't that means it's not real or what? >> I Well, it means I in a weird way, Ron did them an enormous favor because he kept it open, right?

By saying, "Hey, this is all Don't pay attention to >> He did him a huge favor by saying it's all and debunking him." Does that that would that be a favor to you if I debunked all your theories and your research and and say, "Oh, well, we're not going to try you for treason and put you in prison. We're just going to debunk all your work and put you make >> I don't know." And you know, and then to take things and I again, I was I was doing the the business job, so I was out of it by then.

But they had another big that entire community had another big get together, I think, in 2018 in China. So, you know, and they did another conference there. >> Let me push back because I I enjoy this conversation. I'm glad you're willing to have this with me, by the way, which is because I like to back. >> I'm happy to share what I know. >> That detonating of gravity waves thing is mind-blowing to me because you hear that and I go, "Absolutely.

I would be writing him up to the Jason's if he's talking to China about anything about detonating nuclear weapons with gravity waves because yes, I've actually been saying that this is why nuclear weapons are obsolete. if gravity technology is real. Because you can detonate their nuclear weapon the moment they lift it off. >> And this is what I'm saying about why they're hiding gravity. Because it unlocks fusion instantly.

That same concept of detonating a nuclear bomb remotely can be used to reduce the coolum barrier in nuclear fusion. >> If it was built, if it works, to the best of my knowledge, these were all just proposals. And again, we're just saying if it works though, the government absolutely would have to cover it up and have to lie about it. And we're saying that you've done the most research. I mean, you are convinced that this is out there somewhere. And if it is, it has to be getting covered up somewhere. And all I'm saying is that that's where it is right there.

You're staring right at those people. I mean, who else could it even be? >> You know, I'm saying that it has to be the Gary Stevensons of the world, the Bob Bakers of the world, the Hal Pudas of the world, the Paul Scissors of the world. There aren't another group of engineers that are super intelligent that are working on this gravity technology. Maybe they are and they're hiding in DOE labs and nobody knows who they are, but I don't think so. I think they're just walking amongst us and they're justified.

Like to your point, >> I think a big part of this are the the dreams of these people. Now, that being said, let me if it's okay, let me close up my Paul's story. So he said after NASP, he said he felt like NASP was a basically a funding tool to develop the engines for the SR72, the successor to Aurora. And and I said, "Why do you think that?" And this was actually I got this on tape and he said he's like, "Tim, I had this call." He's like, "I was I'm retired."

He was He went He taught He taught college for years. He retired and taught college. Yeah. He said, "I'm I'm home from school. I'm grading papers. I'm doing my thing.

I get this call late at night. There's this voice on the phone." And I'm like, "Yeah, you know who who is this?" And he's like he's like, "Dr. Sis," he's like, "You don't remember me, but I used to work for you." And he's like, "I just wanted to let you know that I'm standing next to your baby and she flies." That was it.

And he's like, >> "Okay."

So, so he's like for me my interpretation of that was hey we we must have this NASP thing it got shut down for we couldn't continue the funding after the 80s we developed the engines for it I bet that those were used for whatever came after Aurora and I was like what do you use something that can go because if you're going faster than Mach 6 which they already did I was like what do you need for that well there are different things that you can do with it but even assuming assume like assuming there's no way neutronic stuff on board, right?

Assuming that they didn't get that because that's complex. If you've got a chemical burning thing and you're starting to push rocket territory speeds, at the very least you can use it to deploy satellites in orbit and you can do that in trajectories that the Russians can't track. And that's important, right?

Because right now, if we boost up a spy satellite, they already know the minute that thing takes off, they know from the trajectory what the orbit's going to be, you know, and and so being able to put stuff like that up secretly has its own value or in theory being able to fly over Russia at Mach 20, I guess, has its own value. You know, >> I have to say, you've been validating what I've been assuming and I don't think you realize it, which is fine. I don't care.

I don't mean people to believe what I'm saying, but exactly what you just said about the NS NASP, that's exactly what I've assumed is that that whole program was just some program for them to secretly advance. >> That was what Paul That's what he thought. >> No. Well, not necessarily Paul thought that himself and he was the guy that worked on not but but but you got to not not necessarily fusion, right?

The the 2050 the 2025 2050 proposal. >> Well, no. I mean that look up what NASP was. that was chemical rockets or that was >> normally I would agree with you but we're looking at plasma orbs floating around everywhere now like 50 videos that the United States government has revealed. So, I'm I'm going with definitely they figured out fusion because I mean, what else are those plasma orbs, right? When it comes to orbs of plasma moving around, the amount of physics that can explain it is very very small.

And fusion is one of the only mechanisms. >> I don't I don't know if those are if you're talking about the same thing I'm thinking of orbs. I don't think that those are ours. >> Well, okay. Well, fair. That's fair. But either way, even if they're not ours, they have to still use physics. And the only physics that even makes any sense to me is either zero point energy or fusion for those orbs.

I mean, and so the point being I'm just presenting an argument and my theory that that they did advance this this technology propulsion and the 2025 2050 that Paul S was talking about with his hyperspace is real and that's exactly what they developed. Now, what's interesting to me is that it might not necessarily been Paul says that did it. That story that you just mentioned where someone calls up Paul says and says, "I worked under you. I learned under you and we built your shit." That could be very reasonable too.

And that is a story by which I would want to hear how PUDA or somebody else say that before I actually start to believe it. But that's an out for these guys because otherwise I'm looking at their technology. These guys wrote 38 durs that have all this paper, all this physics all outlined in them, including a neutronic fusion, everything. And I'm going, well, these guys are obviously the ones that built this. But there's a possibility they didn't that somebody else just figured it out from their work and that it's happened underground.

So I don't want to just say these people are necessarily >> just because it was but yeah just because I'm not making a judgment at all there but but the thing that I would say is just because they wrote about building it just because they said we want to build this please fund us we can do this >> doesn't there's all all of these guys there's always been a shortfall of funding for these projects right they always put them so >> that's something to keep in mind is they're trying to sell something to the government they're trying to sell this project because then they can

build their pet but >> you know doesn't mean that it was built. >> But that actually I would push back and say they aren't doing that. I actually see you see a lot of people that I call like the grifter husters of these communities that are always trying they're always trying to sell their thing, right? And they're always have a link to it. Click this. These guys do the opposite. These guys actually don't even promote their work.

Hal Pudof never promotes his own stuff. Almost zero self-promotion ever. You would think you would be self-promoting way more. But anyway, I want to just dig into one other topic on that and kind of transition to the superconductors. But the >> I was going to talk about the plasma orbs. That was >> Oh, okay.

We can talk about that, too. The SR72 supposedly was just reset recently. There was a news article like last week about how they tried to get in touch with some people about resetting up the SR72 thing, which I think people should be paying attention to because I think there's some thing going on here with the story you just told SR72 pulses. But >> I I don't know.

Um I I don't know. and and there's there are some wrinkles and again this doesn't involve anything exotic but the the wrinkle in the hypersonic stuff is the kind of the roadblock to it believe it or not is satellites and and so there was a if you want like breaking you know breaking news that's not exciting I guess um there was at Hillsdale was it Hillsdale Hillsboro College uh Lieutenant General Steven Quast did a presentation he said we can get you from anywhere on the earth to anywhere else on the earth in an hour, right?

And there has been a line of conspiracy theory on the internet for the last several years. So I asked him specifically, this was I don't know last year personally specifically. Yeah, yeah, I know, Steve. >> And I said, "Were you talking about AFRL rocket cargo?" And he's like, "Yeah." And I was like, >> "You should probably say something about that in public because people think you're talking about some weird exotic propulsion system."

So what he was talking about, and this has been around for years, was this idea that if you can get the economics down like SpaceX wants to do with Starship and and this could be in a weird way using traditional rockets, this could be just as big as exotic propulsion. If you can get that cost of access down, you can basically compete with luxury airline tickets using a rocket, point-to-point rocket, right? which is crazy, impractical and in in my view not not the brightest move but you can do it.

And so AFL had this program called rocket cargo and in fact SpaceX is working on that with them. Uh SpaceX Earth has has picked that up and the idea is okay if you know it's like FedEx right you pay you pay some extra money you can get stuff across the the country in a day. Okay. Well, if you want to get it across the country in an hour, you know, and you're the US government, we really need this satellite dish in California 30 minutes ago, you put that thing on a rocket. You can get it there in an hour.

I'm going to have to push back. I'm going to say no chance in hell. Total There is no way in hell that anybody is getting from one point on the Earth to another point on the Earth in under an hour using conventional propulsion. Not possible. When was the last time anyone went to the airport? Just going to the airport alone takes over an hour.

Let's watch the actual clip and judge for ourselves. Here it is. >> Okay. >> The seed corn of all development, all growth, all survival, survival, energy. >> So, energy, transportation, information, and manufacturing. These are the things that change humanity that will change world power. And they are descending upon us in ways that are very unique. The technology is on the engineering benches today, but most Americans and most in Congress have not had time to really look deeply at what's going on here. But I've had the benefit of 33 years of studying and becoming friends with these engineers and these scientists.

This technology can be built today with technology that is not developmental to deliver any human being from any place on planet Earth to any other place. in less than an hour. To deliver Wi-Fi from space where you never need a cell tower to connect >> to deliver energy from space where you never have to plug your phone in and it trickle charges and you can use that energy over time. >> We say this energy we can charge a phone from space.

Go ahead and try to explain that to me using conventional electromagnetism because energy falls off by the square. even using impedance matching you are not beaming energy from outer space at any sign at any rational efficiency. So when people always like to point out and say, "Oh, that thing where he said the one hour from one location to the next," people like to point out and say, "Oh, that's him just saying conventional propulsion." But no, the larger context, he's not talking about conventional physics. He's not talking about conventional technology.

He specifically mentions that he has become friends with these engineers that this technology is not developmental. That's implying directly he's talking about breakthrough technology there. And then he even adds it with the the point about the electricity. So to me when I look at that I go I don't know how you can say that he's just saying that's conventional technology.

And if you say you spoke to him and he backtracked I would say of course he backtracked because he was afraid that he was pushing national security issues and that he was either told that he had to backtrack or he just did it because he thought he needed to. Okay. So those are my main reasons why I think that even though you can explain to Steven Quas our thing it I think that the larger context seems to imply that it's a little bit more special than that. >> Yeah.

I again so um in terms of pointtooint in an hour that's AFRO rocket cargo and then you mentioned a moment ago you mentioned beam power um that is something the air force is working on mic basically satellite to groundbased microwaved beamed power. um and they've looked at that as well. So, these are all, you know, these are all projects that have been examined pretty thoroughly.

Um the the thing that I'm excited about in terms of rocket cargo is if we're able to lower that cost to space access, again, that means that in theory someday people like you and me might be able to get into space. And again, what what people should look up, I guess, if they're doing research based on this is they they could Google AFRL rocket cargo. They could also Google SpaceX Earth that I think came out last year and that's kind of a revisited spin on the idea. U Brian Wang at Next Big Future has also written about this.

He did a cost breakdown on the economics for it and that was the part that got me right because you know for for like for you and I for our entire lives it's been like oh I'd love to go into space. Well do I have millions of dollars to get there? No. Okay well we're screwed.

And what Brian was saying was if you work the launch industry, you use reusable rockets, you work on the fuel, you work on the infrastructure, all of that stuff, you can bring it down basically, you can get into space for roughly twice the cost, maybe even close to the cost of a luxury first class airline ticket, you know? So it's like, could I a first could I afford first class to Europe? Well, I wouldn't do that to fly to Europe, but I might do it to fly to space, you know. >> Yeah.

And that's a big aspect of the pulses papers and all the guys that were doing aerospace engineering. They're actually looking to lower the cost and they're looking at efficiency and ISP. And it's not actually so much about alien space propulsion. It's actually about efficiency. And they're thinking about from an aerospace engineering perspective of how we make this commercial, which is what I love about those guys is that actually it's all business at the end of the day.

He well Paul so Paul had this vision for he what did he call it he uh he was talking about the wagon train to Mars and he was like okay we don't just need to get to Mars we need to colonize Mars right the same thing Elon Musk is talking about he was like what if going to your fusion drives he's like what if we have a fusion drive but it never lands we go up and dock with this thing and so then you've got your big fast spaceship that's going back and forth and you just dock with this thing and he's like we could

transport massive amounts of cargo. We could colonize Mars. Then another fellow who I used to meet him at the stave conference. He passed a few years ago. I This is one of those men that you just you have to love this guy. I used to go he he was he was this massive wild man.

He was just crazy. Full of energy and ideas. He was a nuclear submarine. Uh >> what are we talking about? >> Ed McCulla. Ed McCulla. and he was a nuclear submarine engineer for years. He ended up being the section E which was the colonization chair at the stave conference and he had he actually went through and did all of the calculations, all of the engineering to build a massive lunar dome and that was his thing.

He was into that. But but the the other part was and if I could just share an anecdote and I think this applies to us today, [snorts] all of these folks had multiple interests. So, I went into this was one of the years that I was at stave. Um, the the place if you're ever going to a conference like this, the the place to go, you want to go into the sessions and hear that, the place you have to go is the bar, right? Because you get a couple of beers in these guys.

And all of a sudden, all the stuff that they're not supposed to talk about starts to come out. And so, I go into the bar and there's Ed with a group of folks around him. He looks over at me. He's had three or four. He's really excited, right? He's got this like ear to ear smile.

This is like a So Ed was big African-American guy. He looked like Don King. He had big crazy Don King hair and and he was massive, like 6'4, right? Intimidating. And and in fact, when when he was doing his his chair job, people were intimidated by him. They were people were physically scared by him sometimes, right?

Because he was serious. So he's in the bar. He's got this smile all the way around his face. He sees me walk in. I was with a couple other people. Tim, come over here.

Come over here. I'm like, wow. I was like, okay. He's got five or six people around him. I was like, what are you looking at? He's got a picture.

He had a video of of cellular machinery like inside of our body, inside of our cells. And he had a picture of the ribosomes and the chemical machinery going and he's like showing and he's it's an animation. It's a detailed animation of this. And he's like, "The centrial is a computer. This is a computer." He's like, "You tell me how this is not a robot."

And I was like, "Well, that's inside of ourselves." He's like, "Yes, but this is a computerized machine." Right? So, the the reason I mentioned that is he just like everyone in our community had this diversity of interests. You know, his his big thing was space. That was his dream.

That was his primary passion. But he also had this incredible rich diverse interest in life sciences and the human experience. A lot of folks are into sail, right? So, you know, I think that's something to keep in mind, right? These are in a weird way, these are our these are our people. This is our community.

We're all dreaming and envisioning things. >> Yeah. And I think that's what people need to probably accept. This is probably going to be the harder thing to accept is that if there is technology being suppressed, covered up, whatever, however you want to explain it, rationalize it, that the government has anti-gravity and the public has no idea, then the people that did that are walking amongst us as as our friends. They're not villains that are hiding in the shadows. They're our friends and our neighbors and they're just like us.

And that's what I think people need to start to realize is that this is going to become a a sticky touchy subject because we don't want to our friends are the ones that have been hiding this and they've been doing it for generally good reasons. First person I think about is Charles Chase. I have immense respect for Charles Chase. I think he's probably one of the smartest people on the planet.

And as somebody that spent 20 years in corporate America working on projects and things like that, the amount of people that could build like plasma orbs and some of this other stuff for the government, I can probably count on one hand. And Charles Chase is one of those guys that has all the skill sets required, all the background required, worked with Ben Rich, worked in locking marks. And this is what I want to ask you about him is that now what is he doing? Now he's saying he's going around saying that he believes in unlimited abundance.

That's just another word for free energy. >> And he's promoting five how many different free energy microchips? At least three different free energy microchips. Garrett Mell, Sunny White, Paul Tibido, and probably some more. His own as well. He has his own. >> Oh yeah. And that's something I'm I'm really we're we're the problem is we're we're we're touching on like 15 different subject.

If it's okay, let let me let me hit the plasma orbs thing for a sec. Sure. >> So [clears throat] in terms of Okay. So, so when you say orbs in in the way that I usually visualize it, you've got basically you're talking about two or three different things. Um, the the orbs are associated with UFOs at Skinwalker Ranch. They saw orbs. People report orbs all the time, right?

We we associate those with UFOs. But the problem, and this is the part that I think needs more attention, the reporting for that they get lumped in with UFOs does not necessarily mean they're the same. Some people say that this is disembodied energy ETS. Other people have said that this could be like maybe it's a wormhole of some kind, right? I mean, there's a story that Skinwalker, maybe a Bigfoot came out of these. I mean, there's all sorts of wild stories with these things.

What when when I did research on this though, what came back to me was what we call orbs, what we commonly think of as as plasma orbs. These date back centuries or millennia. They go by different names, right? They've called them different things. Ghost lights, you know, I mean, willow the wisps, there there have been lots and lots of different things. They're talking about the same thing.

So if it is NHI, if it's some kind of an ET thing, it has been around for a very, very long time. It seems to be, it's different than UFOs. UFOs are like a concrete physical manifestation. It's like this is some kind of vehicle, right? The orbs seem to be more like energy and then from what people report, I I don't know, but from what I've read, >> they seem to be more connected to us as humans. Like, >> well, so this is where I push back and I would use your own arguments.

I say this is really just kind of trust me bro story stuff, right? Yeah. >> And especially when we start talking about oh well this goes back thousands of years and then also when we're trying to connect everything just because we use orbs doesn't mean all orbs have to be the same. So let me just make my argument point here is I would say these are the orbs that I'm referring to. I've made a quick clip here of them. These are not immaterial. This is not ghosts.

This is a physical thing. That's electromagnetism. We're looking at a magnetic field, closed magnetic field lines that are entrapping plasma specifically. And I can tell that that's what that is because I can see it changing like this, meaning that it's not solid structure. >> The other proposal for orbs, and this isn't this isn't Charles Chase.

The other proposal for orbs that I've seen >> is basically and and I'm not going to get the physics on this right because it's been a while, but if you use two lasers, if I remember correctly, two lasers that intersect, I don't remember if it's microwave or visible or what. >> Mhm. >> Basically, you have two two laser beams. >> When when the laser beam goes through the atmosphere normally, it's just below the level where it disrupts the atmosphere, right? It's just below that. When it hits the other laser, it creates a spot.

And so what you can do is basically you can create almost like a cursor in the sky where you have these two lasers that intersect. You move where they intersect >> and you could do that. That >> you can do that maybe. Yes. And people say that that's not what's happening in those videos. And we can tell because we don't see laser beams in shooting into those. >> No, you wouldn't see them though.

You wouldn't see them. You would only see You would only see glowing balls of plasma where they intersect. You wouldn't see the lasers themselves. You would see you could you could in fact >> where the lasers coming from do you think >> satellites? >> How are they at that distance and a laser? >> Oh yeah. I mean you could do that wouldn't be super easy. But >> but then >> my point being is people can make I'm not making that argument.

I'm saying those are physical objects and it's an internal fusion reactor and it's not lasers making. Those are way too big for lasers to make. That would be my argument. Now ultimately that's not super huge. Everybody has their own opinions on. Sometimes people think they're ghosts.

I know that the um Jax Patrick Jackson thinks that there's like an orb like defense mechanism. Look, everybody can have their own theories on it, what have you. I just want to know how the physics works on it. And I've pointed that it's specifically fusion. I could be wrong. Absolutely.

I can be wrong about stuff. I don't think I'm going to be because David Grush just told Joe Rogan that the orbs are using MHD propulsion. He specifically referenced the defense intelligence reference document on MHD propulsion and said that's potentially what the orbs are using and that's already what I said that how they're using because that's what Paul says is saying that the air breathe those national aerospace was an air breathing mechanism and that they had proposed pulling fusion into it.

So maybe um so yeah I I mean most of the plasma so when you talk about plasma sheets and again that that material is out there um that does that references like Paul Sis had talked about that but a lot of folks have talked about that um >> that goes back to TT Brown there are different and and it ties into this B2 bomber thing that's an area that's kind of within my Bailey wick and has been for decades >> well because that's what I want to ask you about his MHD and like this spinning superconductor thing because you've been talking to pot multiple times

and everybody out there saying, "Oh well, this is fake. His experiments didn't work, what have you." I've been digging into pot and tajmar and all. >> That wouldn't be well that that would be something different than MHD though. Pogconov stuff is different than >> Yeah. Okay.

It's not it's not exactly the same as MHD. I'm not Now we're I'm kind of switching angles. You're right. But the reason why I bring it up is I'm talking about superconductors and magnetism and gravity uh modification which is what this is supposedly pulling off. >> So in these experiments, one thing that's bugged me about this is that George Hathaway has been the main guy like testing all of this and he always seems to find that it doesn't work. He always says, "Oh, I want this to work."

You know, and okay, maybe I'm being unfair to him if he wants >> I don't know if he's tested MHD stuff. I don't >> No, no. The spinning superconductors. So he's testing the spinning superconductor stuff and he's saying, "Oh, this stuff doesn't work. It's not it's not I wish I really wish it would work, but you know, I couldn't get the recipe just right." And then from Panov's perspective, well, he's saying, you know, there seems to be some kind of miscommunication there. Pmanov's saying, "This is all working."

Russian Federation seems to be taking it seriously. So where do you land on the credibility of those claims being the person you've been talking to him directly? >> Yeah. Well, again, I've known George forever and then I I know Poglet. I've known him for Yeah. you know. >> So what I mean there's a big disconnect between the two >> and they they [clears throat] worked they worked together on it. They were in fact Poglonov came over and stayed with him.

He's got photos of Pog. >> So um yeah what what Poglonov was doing what Pogclanov like what he's constructed is very difficult to construct and believe it or not this is one of the things we don't like to admit that kind of mechanical chemical engineering the Russians are better at than we are. they have better procedures, you know, than we do. I And so, uh, like for instance, NASA tried to construct one of these. So, when I got into this, NASA came out with the big thing. Uh, Pogllinoff had his paper out there since the '9s. Dr. Ning Lee was doing papers on it.

She claimed to do some basic experiments and saw some stuff. NASA was like, "Yeah, we want to do this, too." So, NA and this is interesting because NASA ended up lying too about this. So NASA had a team that self- financed. Tony Robertson was on that team. They tried to replicate the pogloff superconductor and they found that it was and he actually helped them with it.

He gave them advice and he provided them they worked with a subcontractor and they they funded this out of pocket. Basically they had very very little funding. They tried to build this experiment. The device they built they number one Poganov said it needs to be like a foot in diameter roughly. Theirs was only a few inches and he said it needs to spin at thousands of RPMs. I don't remember exactly what. They only spun theirs to like 10% of the speed his was at.

Right. And they didn't get any results. Okay. So that's that's Tony's team. Now the Tony didn't do anything disingenuous. So now NASA leadership, this is the part that's NASA leadership comes along and says, "Oh yeah, we tested that.

There was nothing there." Well, no. Number one, you didn't really fund it. Number two, you didn't really give the people what they needed to do it. And number three, you lied about it. So, you know, so so that makes the whole thing look dirty. And and that comes back to poor communication and bad leadership, right?

And so, so I don't know. >> So, what do you think though? What do you I mean, do you think it's real or not? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I think there's something there. I think there's something there. >> I think there's something there, too. And I think you're right.

I think that it they just needed to spin it faster or they needed to follow instructions more specifically or uh it was actually Amy Escridge, I think, confronted Tajar about this and said that don't you think like don't you know that all the best interactions happen at the what is it the boundary between the gaps between two regions? So he says basically she was saying they needed to use two different materials and that a single a single spinning plate wasn't going to work but you needed two to cause a transition to happen.

And the reason why I thought that was so relevant is it's so similar to what Gary Stevenson was saying about having an electromagnetic transition through a a superconducting Joseph injunction where we're using superconducting and by the way superconducting ceramics. >> One of the properties of superconducting ceramics is their super high permitivity. Gary Stevenson wrote a scientific paper specifically saying that these superconducting magnetic energy storage systems. It's just a tooid with a super high conduct a super high primitivity material in the middle or coating the boundary of the tooid.

This would imply that Gary Stevenson's find a direct connection between the spinning superconductors and his own dissimilar superconductor forcing the transition to occur. Maybe you're again you're hopping subjects again. You're losing me. >> Well, maybe we could ask Gary Stevenson about it because what I'm saying Yeah. Sorry. I'm trying not to hop top subject. I'm trying to just connect two similar pieces of physics here. >> Yeah. No. Well, I my brain So, I'm I'm like three steps behind you.

I'm still on the MHD stuff. I'm I'm like >> I kind of skipped past the MHD because I wanted to talk about the super conductive. >> If it's okay, let me come back to the MHD. There there's there's something. So, so um Okay. So, let's talk about the B2 bomber. That was I believe I think this was Paul Lava.

I think he was the guy who put this out there but I could be mistaken. This was in the late 90s early 2000s and there was this idea this the story here's how the story was broken. B2 bomber has anti-gravity. That's how they broke the story. It's like oh okay so we we dig in there. Well what exactly do you mean because that's kind of nebulous.

Oh well we think it's using the Bfield Brown effect. I'm like okay well what exactly do you mean because that doesn't tell us much. So, as I dug in, there was this idea that they're using a super high voltage on the B2 bomber. And I was like, "What makes you think that?" They said, "Well, we found these structures on it that look like they're they're on the leading edge of the wings and this would be the basically the positive or the negative anode and then you've got the cathode back here. You've got this gap."

And I'm like, "Okay, I'm again because I'm building these things, right, at the time I was building these things." And I'm like, "Yeah, dude. I'm building stuff like this all the time. I'm like, this makes sense. I see this. why would you do this? Right?

So then I started to dig in. I'm like, okay, I I'm yeah, I'm I'm down with you. I kind of get this, but I don't fully understand it. So the idea behind the B2 and and this is this is kind of big. That's why I think it's good to touch on this. Um MHD gives you a bunch of advantages for aircraft.

So when you have a wing going through the air, in fact, let me think. Let me think. Let me help you out with this and I'll I'll give you this one. >> You can jump off. Okay, go for it if you want. >> On Under Siege 2, the movie, horrible movie with Steven Seagal. Not the best, but but you know, it was an action movie. I watched it when I was a kid.

Um, they have the B2 bombers on the way to destroy the train. The stealth fighters, right? It's like, okay, it was it was under siege on a train. They're going through the mountains. Nobody can find them. It's dead area.

Oh, you know what? We'll use the stealth fighters. We'll bomb them into oblivion. Steven Gaul is the only person who can save us, right? I think it was Eric Marches and I I may be wrong or something like that who was the the bad guy on that. He's got it figured out.

He can't see the stealth fighters using the satellites that he's hijacked, he can see their wake. Anything that's going through the air, anything that's going through the air leaves a wake. How do you get rid of that wake? Manipulate the MHD stuff. you manipulate the boundary layer. And so why would you want a B2 bomber? This is a big flying wing.

This is a big thing going through the air. Even if Russian radar has low visibility on the aircraft itself because the materials and all that, this thing is pushing air. You're going to be able to see the air moving unless you can reduce the air movement. And you can do that by charging the leading edge of the wing. And why do you think those orbs are just moving through the air, moving through the sky so fluidly at a very low temperature that has a very low visible cross-section? >> Could be. >> Oh, because it's perfect for a defense weapon that might be.

Now, let me add on to this is that and I'll explain that you don't need trust me, bro. Once you understand the physics, it's actually very easy to understand the physics of electrogravidic propulsion, especially regarding the B2 bomber. But before I bring that out, I also want to say that all you described there too, like you said, this technology can be used as let's call it multisspectral stealth is that if you have this capability of plasma, this can be used as a stealth mechanism.

Who's an expert on multisspectral stealth? >> Well, Charles Chase of Locky, >> let me let me let me add let me add two pieces to this. So, one of them was um I know a guy who flew B2 bombers. He actually flew them at Area 51. He flew stealth stuff at Area 51. did testing on it. >> Who did? >> I'm not gonna tell you his name. I'm just gonna say >> Oh, you know somebody. >> Yeah. And and this this story was there at the time.

And I said I was like and and I was I was just, you know, I was yanking his chain. I'm like, "So, you got an anti-gravity switch on this thing?" He's like, "No." He's like, "It's an aircraft." I'm like, "Yeah, okay." I was like, "Do you have an ECM package on it? Do you have a switch for that?"

He's like, "Yeah, we we've got that. We can turn on I was like, so if there is, because he didn't know, he didn't know and he didn't tell me. I was like, if there is some kind of a boundary layer reduction, it's in the ECM package, right? That it's in the stealth package. You turn the stealth on, the boundary layer go. Now, does that mean that this is an anti-gravity effect? No. But what it does mean is it would modify the flight dynamics.

It would give it a lower cross-section. It could do all of the stuff that people claimed and it would do it for valid reasons, not the anti-gravity reason that everybody thought. The other thing that that the other question there was how do you generate this massive voltage that's required, right? And actually TT Brown himself solved that. It's called the TT Brown flamejet generator [snorts] and it's actually a really ingenious idea.

So what you do is [clears throat] ordinarily without getting into it you can either generate a lot of voltage at a low current or a lot of current at a low voltage for a given amount of power right those are your limitations and and if you want to do a lot of current at a high voltage which is what you need for this then you've got to use a lot of energy right maybe an extra engine or something like that >> or what you could do is use this flame jet generator.

What you do is you take a a medium high voltage, you inject it into the exhaust of the engine and you use chemical energy that's going to wasted anyways to accelerate that to a higher voltage. So basically, the further that voltage gets down the exhaust, the higher it the more it increases. You put a pickup, you just put a wire behind it, you just drag a wire behind you, it picks it up from the exhaust, and you can create lots and lots and lots of high voltage. TT Brown came up with it in the 50s. I think it's called the TT Brown flamejet generator.

Basically, it just uses the the fuel, the wasted chemical energy that's in the exhaust from the turbine engines to step up lots and lots of voltage. You could use that to uh you know change the boundary layer on your wing. That would not be anti-gravity. It would probably not provide any kind of direct upward lift. But >> I don't know how you say that when you're the guy who's building lifters. I mean, obviously it does produce some lift.

This is like this is the problem is that >> not for an aircraft. >> The pilots that say, "Well, we don't have." They don't know because here's the thing. The physics is being hidden right underneath normal physics. Veritasium has a video of him lifting up a 40 lb flywheel over his head with ease. >> How is that not anti-gravity? Clearly the weight is being reduced in that. The problem is that we are Let me finish.

The problem is that we are perceiving that as not weight reduction when physically it is weight reduction. This is the same problem with anti-gravity. You say that's not anti-gravity. Why not? It's doing anti-gravity. It's doing the exact same thing you attribute to anti-gravity. >> I wouldn't I I don't think it's lifting I I I never saw any indications that this would lift the craft up.

What it would do is reduce the craft's it would reduce the air resistance for the craft. So you you'd have a performance improvement, but it wouldn't be up. It would be forward. That's my >> either way, you're just changing your direction. But here's the point. What are they actually doing?

And you kind of nailed it. You have to create a separation of charge. That's what you have to do in order to pull off the additional propulsion. So you would say the front of my wing is positively charged. And then we're going to shoot these electrons out the back. Why are we shooting and accelerating the electrons out the back?

Because we're creating a separation of charge. the electrons want to come back to the positively charged wing. So therefore a force gets generated. >> MHD MHD is >> the basic concept. It's not >> comp there's a lot there's a lot there. I did believe it or not I I created I did a this was an M this was experiment I did. Um in fact I have photos of it somewhere. I took a candle.

You can do this. You anybody can do this. You basically put a high voltage emitter on on one side right next to the flame or you can have the flame going through it through a high voltage wire, right? And then you put a high voltage collector next to it. The flame will go up and curl around. You can actually make a candle flame burn upside down.

You make it burn in a big U-shape. And and the reason is because even a regular candle flame is around 10% plasma, but because that 10% is interspersed with all of the burning, you know, the air molecules and all that, it it will modify the trail of the whole thing. And so you've got MHD stuff you can do anytime you've got chemical combustion. You've got some stuff you can use for MHD. You can manipulate that.

Another thing you can do is we were talking about hypersonics a moment ago. anytime you're going like Mach 3, you're going to have enough air pile up in the front of the craft that you're going to have at least a little bit of plasma. That's something that people have looked at. In fact, uh Daniel Davis at the Alt Propulsion Conference, and again, I would urge people to Google him. I I've got stuff there. He had talked about could we sort of kind of use the MHD in front of a hypersonic aircraft as a warp drive >> sort of the plasma.

I mean, that's the whole point of an air breathing plasma. turning that into the working fluid which you can extract the energy. And this was actually also in the 2025 2058 paper. They're producing gigawatts of excess energy from this fusion reactor that they've created out of the the air flow through the engine. And so you're right, you would need an extra energy source in order to pull this off because you need to charge at least 30,000 volts if not higher I think to start seeing some of these effects on a practical scale. So that's one big downside is that you need another energy source.

This is why I keep going back to fusion because you start running out of energy dense sources that you can pull off. >> Now, one last thing I want to say on this, let me finish please, is that the the in order to pull off one of the mechanisms, not it doesn't have to be this, but one mechanism that you could to produce this separation of charge would be a plasma actuator. Plasma actuators actually control the flow of plasma, the turbulent flow of plasma. And this can help to create a separation of charge.

Now, one person that has patents on this is Charles Chase or Loheed Martin. And I bring this up because I'm trying to show people that the people that are building the alien technology that it's not aliens. It's not secret physics. It's just normal physics and they're just applying it in intelligent ways. And if you look at everything Charles Chase does and what he promotes, the free energy micro, you'll see this repeatedly. He's even the guy that says the casemir effect doesn't prove vacuum fluctuations, but I believe we can use vacuum fluctuations to pull energy out. think about that.

Right. Go ahead. >> Yeah. And and again, we're we're jumping topics in terms of the CMER effect and the vacuum fluctuations and stuff like that. I'm really excited about that. I'm also surprised as hell. For me, this this kind of fell on me last year.

I mean, I've been following uh like Dr. Fabitio Pinto in Italy has been talking about the Casmer effect for 25 something years. You know, I've been reading his papers. I've done podcasts with them. that that goes way way way back. The Casmer effect itself is pretty well known. It's been back there for a while. Uh Robert Dios was doing stuff at Tesla on this years ago.

So this has been this has been around, but people have been like, "How well can we harness this?" And the part that fell on me was I did a podcast with Harold Sunny White, right? I did a podcast with Sunny last December and he's like, "Oh yeah, yeah, I built these chips. I'm getting power from them." And I'm like I'm like hold on >> raise 12 million. >> I'm like you're like they're built you're generating power like right now. I'm like that's mind-blowing.

And and and the thing that gets me is that most people if they said that I'd be like yeah that's right buddy. You know but I I really respect him and he has a lot on the line. He has a tremendous career right and and I'm like he he's not the kind of person who'd lie about this. he's not the kind of person to be wrong about this. And so I started researching it and I'm like, "Okay, well I was like, and then I found Dr. Garrett Modell.

Garrett Modell is doing something slightly different, but making the same claims. We're harnessing 0 point energy to produce electrical power." And I'm like, so again, I this is the part where I start to feel old because I'm like, I did not think that I would see this in my lifetime, right? It's like I I have difficulty believing this, but I trust these people. Like, right, this is like trust me, bro. I trust these bros. And I'm like, >> I trust them.

I believe they're telling the truth. I'm struggling to incorporate that into my my world knowledge. But >> I mean, you're the one who researches it all, so you know all the physics. So, that's why you shouldn't you shouldn't question. Sunonny White's the guy that tested asymmetrical capacitors in 2014 for NASA and found anomalous thrust. people can pull the paper up right now. Anomalous. >> Yeah, but that's different.

That's different than like so what what he was >> it's not different. Here's the thing. It was it was um uh David Froning that in the 80s suggested that if we extract 0 point energy, it gives us two things, not one, two, propulsion and energy. And that you get one and the other together every single time. >> So it's not necessarily different. This is why I connect these. but in in theory. But but the difference the part that got me was it's not it's not a proposal.

It's not a paper. It's not it's not a mechanism. It's a hey, I've got chips and it's producing power and I'm measuring it. >> That's the part where I was like, "Holy crap." >> And isn't that a disconnect? Because all of physics says that's impossible. And yet he's got it. And he was on Joe Rogan holding the prototype up, handing it to Joe Rogan saying, "This could power your phone forever."

How are people going to be able to rationalize? We have phones that run forever, but free energy is not right. >> Well, this and this takes us into for me this is really exciting territory. The other thing that's really exciting about this is he is pushing towards a chip fabrication process, right? And I know you're your day job, you're in the computer industry as well. And so this is something that that definitely hits, you know, where you're at too. Like one of the problems, especially with Beefield Brown, is you're getting into custom stuff.

It's hard to build. There aren't that many people who know it. It's weird. You know, things break, they don't last. You get into stuff like chip fabrication, you can align that with an existing industry. And so the stuff that Sunny is doing, once he nails it down, it'll just get better and better and better and smaller and more powerful. And it'll be like the it'll be like the Intel processor, right? where it's like, you know, oh yeah, it's a thousand times faster now than it was 10 years ago just because because that's how we make them.

And it's like, wow. So, if we can do that with ZPE, what what he was talking about, if I remember correctly, his >> what he's claiming in terms of energy generation is roughly similar to what a solar cell can do for about the same size. >> Very small. Yeah. It's it's enough to power low energy devices, but there's very very real commercialization. The thing is solar cell is and a solar cell is like >> it's got to be flat. It's planer.

You've got to have access to the sunlight. They have they have all sorts of issues with wear and tear, right? Like you get like damage >> legit free energy out of out of spaceime. >> Yeah. This is like you stack it three >> and and I'm like if you're starting out comparable to a solar cell and you know you can improve this thing over time. Holy crap. That's so like I'm you know like on Tim's wish list. Santa, please help Sny White.

Please help Sny White. >> You and me both, man. That's why I promote those all those guys because I want that to come out because that will be the vindication for everything else, too. Because like I said, if David Froning's right, then that means all the propulsion is real. That means Charles Buer's propulsion thing is real, which is probably very similar. Now, one thing I want to kind of give you a piece of information here that may help you, maybe not. I don't know because I know you're a good researcher and you've been looking into this.

So, what about engineering the Casemir effect on a large scale? Nobody's really digging into that. Let me throw something out there. What if we take the concept of magnetic energy storage? We can store energy in a magnetic field that has no mass. So we can charge up a magnetic field and that is energy stored up energy that doesn't weigh anything.

And then we take the concept of AC holtz 1979 resonance field propulsion and now we say what if we build this giant magnetic field using a mega gals we take the Thomas of brown we charge it up to 100,000 volts we separate the charge and we make this huge magnetic field what if then we make a pattern out of it like the orbs make attach three of those things together you can imagine in your mind the magnetic field that it would create. Now, I'm going to collapse that magnetic field. I have a giant magnetic field.

All this energy stored up in the magnets, and I'm just going to remove it. Okay. So, so what you're talking about there, and you're you're mixing, you're kind of mixing like the the physics. You could probably do that. The physics would be a little bit different.

If if I was going to store this is this is just me but if I was going to store a massive magnetic field the the way the way that you store that is a current inside of a superconductor but what you're talking about is okay so what happens if you have a a coil this is called a coil disruptor you have a coil with a very high current going through it and you destroy the coil right like hypothetically let's say you've got a really powerful magnetic coil and you put a big firecracker in it. When that firecracker goes off, that coil is destroyed.

What happens is in that split second when it's destroyed, the the voltage goes to infinity and you get a massive EMP. And so, yeah, and that's something that has been proposed >> almost like a lightning strike. In fact, I think it's exactly the same as magnetic reconnection. Exactly the same as the mag and why we're testing magnetic reconnection because when you remove those, what happens? the magnetic fields need to realign to match the new pattern and they can't. And so what do they do? They approach infinity.

I think this is I think this is and I don't know if any other people are saying this so maybe I'm throwing it out there. I'm saying this is the mechanism to engineer the kasmir effect at the large scale. The magnetic fields can act as a boundary condition because electromagnetism interacts with zero point energy. >> And so what you're doing there is you're creating a bubble and then you're collapsing the bubble and it has nowhere to go. It has nowhere to collapse. So where does it collapse to? >> Through spaceime itself. Wormhole >> could be. >> So I'm throwing that out there.

It's an idea to percolate on. >> No, that that goes there's some interesting stuff. Yeah, the wormhole thing is in I'm I'm really into I I'm I'm really intrigued by wormholes. I got bit by this er equals EPR bug. I'm going to blame Jack Sarfat on that because he preaches. >> You're not giving me credit. I've been saying it for three years. Okay.

You're giving Jack Sarat the credit. >> That's where I first heard it. And that was Juan Muldisa. Uh, Juan and and Juan turned me down for podcast because I've asked him about it. And um, and I forgot the other guy. >> Ron, you said was saying that too. >> No, Juan Juan Mulena. >> Oh, Juan Maldoscina. Yeah. Yeah.

He turned who proposed who proposed >> Sus Maldina. >> Yeah. And Suskinand Suskinand has been very quiet. Uh, Jack actually has worried that he might be having health problems. He's been suspicious. Um, so the the idea I get yelled at by physicists when I mention this. So in in science er equals EPR is like Einstein Rosenbridge equals an Einstein Ponoski Rosenbridge, right? Which is basically black holes and wormholes are doing the same thing.

And >> quantum tunneling is the same as a wormhole is the idea. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. Wormholes and entanglement. And I'm like, >> "Okay, so if that's the case, wouldn't that mean that entangled particles are connected by wormholes?" And that's the point.

Every time I say that, I get yelled at. And I'm like, >> "Oh, it's great." >> I was like, "It's not ER is like EPR. It's like E this equals that. If if these two things are equal, isn't this what's going on?" Every time I ask that, I get yelled at. I'm like, okay, you know what?

I'm I'm just >> That's how you know you're saying something where you're over the target, by the way, Tim, because you're If you think about it, doesn't it make perfect sense? Because then what does it mean a black hole is? Because then it just means that a black hole is actually just a giant wormhole. And in fact, does it have to have only one out destination? No. Can a black hole be kind of like a sprinkler where everything comes in and then it just shoots it out somewhere else like that? >> I don't know. >> I don't know either.

But I think that it's a beautiful thought and it resonates. That's what I like about What intrigued me was there's this idea that wormholes require lots of energy. This goes to so I I had there there are very few things that I feel super privileged about. I w had the privilege to talk with Arthur C. Clark. We had many many emails before he passed. >> You knew Pudof.

Yeah. >> Yeah. And and well Arthur C. Clark I like Hal. I've talked to Hal but but Arthur C. Clark is another level, right?

I mean 2001 Stanley Kubri you know >> and he co-authored a book called the light of other days and I think that this is a really important book with Steven Baxter him and and Baxter worked on this together and the idea was about actually it was for me it's one of those books that the idea comes back to mind it's probably worth reading this when the internet first came out they they wanted to tackle for as science fiction guys they wanted to tackle the idea of privacy so in a weird way, it's more relevant today than it was then.

And they they had this simple proposal. They said, "What if you had what if you could create a nano wormhole and use it as a camera? It could only capture a few photons, but that would be enough to get a photo that you could digitally clean up." They said, "But the advantage is what if you could use computers to put this nanoworm anywhere, right? All of a sudden, no one would have privacy. What would that do to the world?"

And so that was the premise behind it. But then they started to get into how would this thing work? How would it function? What could you do with it? And as the story progresses, right? And again, this is largely about the social like what happens if like for instance you use Google Chrome and every single thing you ever look up ever is tracked and analyzed and someone knows how are you going to behave differently, right?

And they were exploring issues like that. Well, but then they started to get into these other issues with it. Like, >> okay, so what if I take this nanoworm hole? It can only get a particle or two of just a tiny amount of energy. What happens if I drop the other end of it into the sun? Can I can I can I get fusion from the sun? >> Can I just tap in energy in a distant location?

This is why that's actually why I tell people that teleportation must mean free energy is real. Because even if you can't pull energy from nothing, you can just pull energy from far away and bring it right to you. And if you can do that at a lower energy cost than energy you're bringing, then that's over unity. That's free energy, too. It's just a different way of thinking. >> You know what's what's interesting was I saw an article. This goes back a year and this was a paper and this is another this is another interesting part of it.

Um so there are all these ideas about wormholes and as well as warp drives and the the physics they keep coming up with new physics models. Dr. Eric Davis who is a close colleague of Halputoffs. Eric Davis did papers years ago saying that if you spin the warp drive field you can basically use that if I remember correctly you can use that as your negative energy. And he was saying okay you can at least reduce the energy requirements if not eliminate them completely just by spinning your field. So that's one.

But then with wormholes, >> the centrial force, I believe, just to add on, the centrial force can be used as a negative energy replacement, I think, is what he described. And then the last one real thing, too, is I would argue, I don't think a lot of people said this either, that EM drive and warp drive and wormholes are actually all the same physics. I would argue that it's just a matter of turning up, let's call it a gravity beam, stronger and stronger and stronger and stronger until you break through >> light barrier.

Well, and and I I'll tell you what, if you want to this this might be a second podcast. This is >> Yeah, I'm thinking we should, you know, we can do another one. We someday I will tell you that the legend I I make no claims about the veracity of it, but the the the big one the big one that got away for me was the when I was doing American anti-gravity, it was um Einstein's unified field theory, how it connects to torsion physics, connects to the Philadelphia experiment, connects to the Nazi bell, connects to the Hutcherson effect.

And I had all of those wrapped up in a nice pretty package. So, and >> Charles Chase had told you Charles Chase said the a vector potential is the secret sauce. And you spoke to Ferris Williams. >> Um, yeah. No, I knew so Ferris his model Ferris model for anti-gravity because he explained it to me several times. He basically thought it was like a I'm not thinking of the right word. He said visualize visualize it like an umbrella where you have your your energy coming in and spreading out and where it spreads out you'll get a reduction in gravity.

And so he said if you have energy coming in through the top of the umbrella and then it spreads out over it the the area that it spreads out over will you know so that was that was his model and then he was also into fusion reactors. >> They are >> he had his own model for that. It's because they realize if you can manipulate gravity then fusion just becomes trivial. And once you realize the geometry of manipulating gravity because I think what they realize is you look at the polarization thing they're manipulating the geometry of light and all fusion is is geometry.

It's all geometry. even Salvatore Py it's just counterrotating fusers that the point >> um and >> the same ideas as >> yet another podcast and I I I can't speak authoritatively on this at least not yet but I'm I'm starting to dig more into lenr and cold fusion and there are I would say real this goes to what Amy Escridge what you were talking about her saying at the boundary between two systems you get sheer effects, right? And in fact, John Daring had said that about the the unified field theory.

He's like, so so one way to visualize it would be, okay, I've got two fields, whatever they are, right? Just very theoretically. I've got two fields. Both of these are pretty weak fields, right? Maybe they can modify spaceime a little bit, but you're not getting any magic happening. Not with the kind of energy levels that we can do as humans, but where these two fields intersect, you get a shear effect.

And that where that sheer effect happens, that's where the magic is. That I think that might have been what Amy was saying. And that would also be, believe it or not, what might be going on with these cold fusion effects because people have talked about stuff like, for instance, they've said, okay, >> hydrogen atoms are pushing into these crystal defects in the hydrogen well >> into the live structure. >> Yeah.

So most of your hydrogen in in your electrolytic solution, most of it, the energy isn't clo even near enough, you know, but but for these few atoms that make it in there, they get wedged in. That field pushes them in. Maybe that creates some fusion and maybe there's a little additive effect there. >> And and transmission resonance model. People should check it out because all they're essentially doing is pulsing a current. They're putting water, hydrogen, heavy water into metal lattice, pla uh uh >> palladium, platium, platium lattice.

And the idea is the hydrogen gets stuck in the lattice as in like literally imagine being stuck in a crevice and then you vibrate it and then suddenly probabilistically it tunnels and they fuse. And what they find is that at certain frequencies the tunneling probability skyrockets. Like normally it's like a very low probability but you hit like like hitting a radio station. Suddenly it's like boom tunneling probability is massive.

This is what I think they missed in cold fusion because you look at you say well how were some people able to get it some people not able to get it because there's some other mechanism missing like if >> George Miley George Miley also told me he said the dirtier the solution is the more the more contaminated the solution is the better it works. He didn't use the word contaminated but he was saying that that what they do is they he's like somebody will report this. They'll be like, "Yeah, we did this and this and this and we got an effect."

All of these people, because they're good scientists, right? They're like, "Okay, we're going to build this experiment." And so they do their electrolytic cell, they put their cathode in, all that stuff. They don't see anything. He's like, "One of the things that they were," he told me this a few years ago. He said, "One of the things that we're finding is these are too clean.

They need to have the contaminants. They need to be run for a while. They need to be beat up for it to work." He's like, "It's the defects. It's the problems that make it work. Yeah, it's it's a good thing to research and I think that yeah, we should do another podcast on some of those other additional topics.

I think we got to a bunch here today. Um, this has been a great conversation. I've enjoyed the back and forth and you know challenging. >> I hope I wasn't too I hope I wasn't too negative on the UFO folks. I >> of course not you didn't honestly you could have been way more negative. You know how the UFO community is. Everybody's toxic as hell.

So I think that you should be bold about your ideas especially when it comes to UFOs and that if we really want the truth we need people that are pushing unique ideas out there. I mean the old song and dance isn't getting us there and at some point people have to look. >> It's not. Yeah. And and I think that would be to to bring things full circle. I mean um again I I work with scientists and engineers and there are as you were well aware there are tons and tons of ways to better understand what's going on.

This whole idea of like let's chase the government and get them to tell us what they know if they if they know it. If they even know what they know, right? Because because our government has the tendency to put things in boxes and forget about it, you know. So like to bring things full circle to that trust issue. It's like trust but verify. Maybe that's the big part, you know, that that we have the technology now to be able to solve some of these things.

Um that we need to do that and and just continually chasing the government for answers that hasn't worked for 75 something years. It's it's the system that is broken. But then it is a younger generation that is able to fix that system. I think >> yeah and that's why we got to bring in the new blood. So I think [clears throat] you know you've been doing a great job of educating people. I'm trying to follow in your uh footsteps to some degree and not exactly doing the same thing you're doing but we have a lot of crossover and I like to promote all your content.

So I want to let everybody know definitely check out Tim Ventura. Make sure you're following him on Twitter on his YouTube channel. His interviews are amazing. you're probably going to see me doing live reviews of them for the the Black Project engineers that I love to follow. But where else can people find you and what kind of message would you want to leave people with? Um, you know, because a lot of people are getting this information. They're wondering what they should believe or if this is true, if they should be afraid.

So, what would you tell people? >> So, I right now I I would say I'm Tim Ventura on Twitter. It's just my name. I I would love to add more Twitter followers and connections. I try and follow people back. Um, altpropulsion.com. Uh, I am in the process.

This is maybe my secret announcement. We're looking at expanding it from alt propulsion to alt science and that is to include stuff like cold fusion, things like that. So, that's something I'm actually working on right now. Um, I have a YouTube channel. I post those on Twitter as well. Um, the other thing that I'm kind of looking at doing is like I go back and forth from big issues to to like technical stuff.

I'm kind of going back towards technical stuff. So, like in the next week, um I'm I'm going to be working more on Cold Fusion and some of that. And what I'm trying to do, this would be different like with Jesse Michaels and stuff like that. They're doing kind of big dramatic personalitydriven stuff. What I'm trying to go back towards is more technical, you know, and and it still has value, right? Like I just did one with Dean Raiden on sigh abilities and that's up on Twitter.

It's more technical though. It's really not about his vision. It's more about, okay, here's a series of experiments that led to a patent. So, that that's kind of that's kind of where I'm at, I guess. >> Yeah. Well, I think people need to check that out. It sounds like a pretty exciting thing.

I'm I'm personally all about the science myself and I think there's not enough people that are digging into the science like you are uh with that. So, highly respect you for that and uh thank you very much for all your time, Tim. Thanks for coming on my show. Let's do it again. >> Awesome. Thank you. >> Have a good one. And that's it for Hardruuth podcast. Thank you everybody for checking us out.

We'll be back next time. Follow us on Spotify, on Apple, anywhere you can find your download your podcast and on YouTube. Have a great day everybody. Later.