0:00 by the U.S. military. But in only a single case could the government explain what it was. So this is a Pentagon, this is a Department of Defense official saying, stop looking at UFOs because they're demonic? Correct. This is a person I respected tremendously, very, very senior person. He told me, he said, Lou, I want you to stop doing this. I said, okay, sir, I certainly can, but may I ask why? And he says, well, we already know what it is. And I said, okay, sir, so it's ours? And he said, no, that's not what I'm saying.
0:48 He asked me point blank, have you read your Bible lately? And I wasn't quite sure where he was going with that. And I said, well, sir, I think I know what it says. Where are you going with this? And he said, well, then you would know that these things are demonic and we should not be pursuing them. And what I've been trying to do is to use the special privilege that I've been given of getting access to a Harvard education and the law school education and with the Jesuits and all the different people and meeting Baba Muktananda and getting to meet all the spiritual leaders of our people and our planet is to try to develop a really intelligent, sophisticated, spiritually informed, but rationally developed set of policies for our dealing with extraterrestrial civilizations. The showings of the angels or the showings of God always showed up as orbs of light or things like that. And today we see this as, we see these as we call them UFOs. Or maybe again, the things that we have peopled our religions with in the form of spirits or gods or what have you are really just these things showing themselves as they appear to be now.
2:18 Religions have made conclusions about the data and have become set in their ways. And that is frankly what sets up this potential conflict amongst the religions, because they've all come to a conclusion and they're trying to prove the other one wrong. Yeah. A pillar of fire at night and confused Russian troops. It has some asking, are Ukrainians receiving heavenly help? There's some miracle happened. It looked like some spaceship, there was like an attack from the spaceship. There was some kind of a lightning was starting shooting from the sky and like sparks were going, were like spreading everywhere. And then they, on the morning, they discovered that the whole machinery was destroyed.
3:12 Revelation 16 says these unclean spirits, they go and they perform signs and wonders. And Jesus warns in the gospel of Luke, and it's repeated in the book of Acts chapter two, that there will be signs in the heavens. And a lot of people are gonna be seeing things in the skies in the last days. The Bible says that. And in prophecy. So we need to know what the truth is, what to believe and what not to believe, because I think that evil spirits are gonna use that to manipulate people in the last days. We're now less than 16 minutes away. The strategy that Wernher von Braun taught me was that first the Russians are going to be considered to be the enemy. In fact, when I met him in 74, they were the enemy, the identified enemy. Then terrorists would be identified. And that was soon to follow. We heard a lot about terrorism.
4:04 Then we were going to identify third world country crazies. We now call them nations of concern. And the next enemy was asteroids. Now at this point, he kind of chuckled the first time he said it. And the funniest one of all was against what he called aliens, extraterrestrials. That would be the final card. And over and over and over during the four years that I knew him and was giving his speeches for him, he would bring up that last card. And remember, Carol, the last card is the alien card. We're gonna have to build space-based weapons against aliens. And all of it, he said, is a lie. No, I'm not talking to you about this. What am I gonna tell her or him? You know, these little kids, you know, 10, 11 years old.
4:56 Yeah, that there's a force that exists out there that can control our environment, that can put thoughts in your head, that can lie to you, trick you, deceive you. To say that to a 12-year-old, I mean, we're already saying it to a certain extent. 14 minutes, 30 seconds and counting. If you're an alien and you wanna get baptized, the Pope is in favor of it. Pope Francis reiterated his view Monday that everyone has the right to be baptized. And apparently, that invite extends even to Martians. You know, there were no questions that prepared me for what I was about to get into. You know, people often say, oh, it must've been fun, it must've been exciting. No, it was pretty sobering. You know, I like, in this context, this conversation to like having a conversation with a loved one about maybe cancer.
5:50 Now, the good news is the diagnosis looks fine. You're gonna recover, but it's a serious conversation. This is something that we are challenging people to reevaluate their philosophical, psychological, sociological, and theological belief system. Anytime you ask humanity to do something like that, it usually takes generations. You can't just pivot because, you know, for example, let's just take culture, for example, of a country. It's like an aircraft carrier. How long does it take to turn an aircraft carrier? Well, it takes quite a bit of time and a lot of effort and whatnot. Well, this topic is the same way because we're challenging people to reconsider, if you will, reevaluate their understanding of what they've been told about the universe and more importantly, our place in it. What do you think that was? Just a hallucination or a?
6:42 To be perfectly honest, a demon. Yeah. That's my understanding of ghosts, anything of that kind of sort. You don't believe in ghosts? I don't. I was in the kitchen by myself and I felt it come up next to me and I said out loud, I said, God, whatever this is that's been posing as grandma for the past seven years, in Jesus's name, get it away from me and never let it come back. And it hasn't been back since. These so-called alien beings are actually manifesting at times as dead relatives during the abduction experience to challenge a person's belief system as Christian theology, in the idea that dead relatives can be talked to or even spoken to or that they're even around to be able to hear what we have to say. No evolutionary or religious belief system shows that this will end well by contacting these things. Evolution says that these things are likely to be superior and so survival of the fittest will destroy us. Religion says that these things are deceptive and dangerous, and the evidence, if you want to include all the theory and all the stories of these sincere people, it says they've damaged crops, they have mutilated cattle, they've abducted people beyond their will, they've messed with our highest security protocols, they enabled and disabled dangerous warheads, forced pregnancies, forced surgeries, burned victims, killed pilots and lied to people.
8:21 And most experiencers have experienced at least one terrifying alien experience so to say that these things, they haven't destroyed us yet so they must be good, is to deny the fact that there might be a universal court saying these earthlings are protected here on earth. And that's what Christianity believes. We've passed the 11 minute mark. Now T minus 10 minutes, 54 seconds on our countdown. Both of us separately without communicating, we're studying this and going, wow, there is something going on here. Since this is out, it's in Congress and they're discussing this right now. Right. This isn't conspiracy. Sure, sure, yeah, absolutely. Something weird is going on here. Absolutely, very eye opening. The Defense Intelligence Agency has just released that program's 2010 report on UFOs.
9:15 And among other things, the document tells us that the government can prove that UFO sightings have caused radiation burns, paralysis, and brain damage. The report also says that some people who saw UFOs experienced, quote, perceived time suspension. They also saw ghosts and other spirits. In all, that report lists 42 cases of adverse effects from medical files and another 300 adverse effects from unpublished cases, whatever that means. Mark, T minus 10 minutes and counting, T minus 10. But what they're saying to us now is it's going to affect Christian belief. There is a professor for the Pope's University in Rome. And he is a very highly respected intellectual. His last name is Tanzaniti, and he has written a paper now in which he is saying that very soon, not right in the beginning, we won't have to deny our Christian faith in the beginning, but there is information coming from another world.
10:19 And once it is confirmed, it is going to require a re-reading of the Gospel as we know it. And that's the kind of information that we are receiving from the highest levels of Vatican intelligentsia. I'm saying about the nuclear weapons, the UFOs were turning our weapons on, and they were turning our weapons on, and just so Russia could pick up that we're firing our missiles and fire theirs first. It was a big chess game. So these guys went into complete secrecy to start coming up with a defense system against this phenomenon. There's footage and records of objects in the skies that we don't know exactly what they are. We can't explain. How they moved, their trajectory. They did not have an easily explainable pattern.
11:26 And so I think that people still take seriously trying to investigate and figure out what that is. There are things flying around up there that we haven't fully identified yet. And keep in mind, there are basically a billion galaxies in an ever-expanding universe. I mean, you can't even get your mind around the sheer number of things that are out there. But you've seen this. You've seen the data. Well, no one knows, but I think that the probability is that there's something you would call life somewhere else. The mission of AATIP was quite simple.
12:12 It was to collect and analyze information involving anomalous aerial vehicles. What, I guess in the vernacular, you call them UFOs. We call them UAPs. You know how this sounds. It sounds nutty, wacky. Look, Bill, I'm not telling you that it doesn't sound wacky. What I'm telling you is real. The question is, what is it? What are its intentions? What are its capabilities? My name's Tom DeLonge. Most people know me as the founder of the popular rock and roll band called Blink-182. I started a company called To The Stars that eventually became To The Stars Academy of Arts and Science. We are literally the group that is responsible for why you read about UFOs in the papers today without all the stigma. It's the first time that we had the videos properly declassified. And because of that, then we had information as far as altitude and speed, eyes on target, different radar systems, different sensors that all corroborated what was happening.
13:14 People start to understand more about the UFO phenomenon and when they follow what Seeker Machines is going to teach them. And mind you, as we'll talk about this in a little bit, it's not all coming from me, it's coming from other people of the highest places. The term, the occult in that whole world is much more a part of the UFO phenomenon and that's part of what makes it more complex than just little green men in flying saucers and tinfoil hats. There is a very, very strong link between what people think demons are from the Bible and other religions and the UFO phenomenon. And what you have is something that doesn't like man, period.
14:04 And something that feels either jealous of or has some kind of plan for what man is to be. Over the next 10 years, I have now worked with over 400 cases of people that have been able to stop the abduction experience in the name and authority of Jesus Christ. This is documented evidence. But what they're saying to us now is it's going to affect Christian belief. Very soon, not right in the beginning, we won't have to deny our Christian faith in the beginning, but there is information coming from another world and once it is confirmed, it is going to require a re-reading of the Gospel as we know it. And that's the kind of information that we are receiving from the highest levels of Vatican intelligentsia. We're now passing the 4 minute, 30 second mark in the countdown. Still go at this time. And the priest told us...
15:23 Could I have a little bit more of your time? I want to tell you something very fascinating. He says the grain plain, the Master's grain plain, for harvesting the nations, for harvesting the multitudes of the earth into his cause, just before the close of the great controversy between the forces of good and evil. So he continued, after we expressed ourselves that we're deeply interested to know more about the activities of spirits. And he said it's going to be done in a unique manner. This grain plain is going to take people, people are going to eat the stuff. Because he says spirits, demon spirits, will declare themselves to be inhabitants of far distant planets in the galaxies that are coming to warn the universe and the inhabitants of planet earth of the impending destruction of the planet. Unless something seriously proper is done to avoid it. Welcome back. Thank you so much for joining tonight. Please hit that like button. It helps a lot.
16:22 And tell me where you're from. I'm very curious to see if we're international now. Looking forward to seeing you, hearing you, and we're going to do some audience interaction tonight. Talk to you soon. T minus 3 minutes and counting. T minus 3 we are go with all elements of the mission at this time. We just passed the 2 minute mark in the countdown. T minus 1 minute 54 seconds and counting. All indications coming in to the control center at this time indicate we are go. Guidance system goes on internal at 17 seconds leading up to the ignition sequence at 8.9 seconds.
18:02 T minus 60 seconds and counting. We pass T minus 60. To raise to the universe we were never meant to solve. But who we are and why we are here are not among them.
19:32 Ignition sequence start. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Welcome to Strange Normal. My name is Brad Burnham. We talk about the stranger things that happen in your normal life to give you a biblical understanding of what's going on. And boy has there been a lot going on. So let's get right to it tonight. Before I get into it though, I want to introduce my guest tonight. Eric. Eric's been on the program for quite some time now. He's a regular here. Eric, thank you for joining tonight. How are you? No problem. I'm well. Yourself? Doing well, doing well. We got a crazy night. You've actually helped quite a bit. You and Matthew cut up some clips because there was a four hour, four hour program that NASA put out talking about these events.
20:28 This is the longest one I've ever seen before. And I was like, oh my goodness, this is going to take forever to watch. But thank you guys for stepping in and stepping up and helping out. You saw a bit of it. What did you think about the overall picture? I mean, well, I had the first part and it was kind of from what you guys were describing. Yours was, you said yours and Matthew said his was rather dry. So I think the intro is, I mean, I know I clipped a lot because a lot of it is worth listening to. And some interesting points that I noticed that keep hitting, every speaker kept hitting on. Yeah. I thought that was fascinating too. In fact, I grabbed the clips. We're going to watch those in just a second. But I grabbed the clips and I kind of consolidated them and showed that several people are really wanting to hit a couple of points home. And I thought that was very strange.
21:18 Like they all got together and said, hey, let's hammer on this one point right here. What's up with that? I don't know, but. Because spokespeople for the government never get together and get their story straight, right? Who knows? But I think it's fascinating. But before we get into that even, I have, as the title implies, Joe Rogan gets it right. I think this is really interesting where Joe Rogan goes in one of his latest podcasts. I have never heard him talk about the demonic influence behind this UAP stuff. I think either, I don't know if he, he might be just joking around, but I think it's fascinating that he just mentioned it. So I'm going to go ahead and play that clip. So to whet everyone's appetite here. Check this out.
22:03 Now, in recent years, the subjects of unidentified aerial phenomena. Wrong clip, I think. That sure is the wrong clip. I probably put it out of sequence here. Here, check this out. Like someone is, someone has cut the organs out of that cow. A weird dude is more likely. Now, if it was a person that's doing it, but the way they're doing it is very unusual. No blood? Come on. Yeah. I mean, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Come on. Yeah. I mean, I don't know why the fuck aliens would do that. It doesn't make any sense. But it does make sense. What do you mean? They're weird. They want stuff. They want to learn. A lot of people lean towards aliens. Humans. But why would they do that? The same reason that a fucking alien would. But why no blood? You know what they had? The cow blood? Why would an alien want cow blood? To learn about our creatures.
22:48 About cows? Yeah. You got to start somewhere. Studying us. Like butterflies. Imagine if it was demons, but they couldn't quite, they couldn't quite, they didn't have the authority to go after people yet. So they let them have a few cows every now and then just to keep themselves. Cut it out, Joe. You're giving me the willies. They live for thousands of years. Like the dragons. They live for thousands of years, these demons. And they have to feast. And they really just want to torture humans. They got to feast. And gut them and suck their blood out and leave their fucking skin carcasses. Lil Nas X. Lil Nas X is going to come up here. Yeah. We're blaming it on aliens when it's demons. Just demons. Demons practicing. They're like, okay, go take a cow, you fucking freaks. They just go practice because once people are like inexcusably evil, once there's just like every country is ruled by evil dictators, we're like, probably that close.
23:40 That close. A little more sodomy. A little more. And then unleashed. Then we find out that Satan's real. Sodom and Gomorrah. We're going to get some good comments after this one. Satan is real, people. Golan writes, reports of cattle mutilations began in 1973 mostly in the West and Midwest. It was often small-scale ranchers who reported them when local law enforcement agencies investigated. They frequently found that the cow's ears, eyes, rectums, and sex organs had been cut away with surgical precision. According to the newspaper reports, more than 10,000 of the incidents occurred by the end of the decade. It's demons. Demons. You're fucking right. Dude, you're fucking right. It's demons. Jamie, bring up Chupacabra. They just have to practice every now and then. Demon Wayans. They want to. They want to do it to people, but God won't let them yet. Yeah, right. It's just Demon Wayans. But they need a feast.
24:26 Dude. You're a machine. So, okay. So, a few things. Wow. The title of this was Joe Rogan got it right, but I think he's more or less pushing the agenda using this. And this is why I think that. I'll ask you what you think in a second. But what I think is that Satan's going to play both sides in the end. He's going to say, well, you know, good cop, bad cop, if you do this, then this won't happen. But otherwise, things are going to happen down here. And he's going to say, well, you know, good cop, bad cop, if you do this, then this won't happen. But otherwise, things are going down here. And so, I find it fascinating that no matter if you're Joe Rogan on the program, talking about aliens and saying, oh, yeah, well, Satan, yeah, it is Satan, but that's not the whole story.
25:14 The whole story is that you can get, you can find saving grace in Jesus Christ. And so, that's the part he doesn't really talk about. So, I think, I think it's interesting what he says, though. What do you think? Yeah, I had not heard of that clip before, so that's new to me. So, that's really interesting that he, because he's talked about UFO and other stuff before, but never that connection as far as I'm aware. Yeah, it's an interesting thought what he mentions about them practicing. I mean, sometimes I wonder just how things fit into the Great Deception because you look at some of these events or UAP sightings or whatever, it's like, okay, what's the purpose? What is this building for? What specifically are they trying to do with it? Is it fun somehow in some kind of perverse way? But I don't think it's all that. So, it's, the idea of them practicing for future scenarios on humans is something I haven't really thought of before.
26:12 So, maybe because I don't, I'm not sure what other, if it is, if it is fallen angels behind all of these, you look at animal mutilations or different weird things that happen, it's like, okay, what is the point of them doing this specifically? And so, that's the question I ask. And a couple of programs back, and this is all my surmising, I have nothing to prove this, but this is my guess, my guesstimate, my educated guess by looking at all this stuff, is that if we look at cartel, look at the Mexican cartel, they often do something that's very terrible so that the police stay away from them. They, to tourists, to their own people, they, you know, I'm not gonna get too graphic here, but I've seen some terrible stories in the news about how they off people. And it's very, very violent, very gory.
27:08 And it's, and they put them in plain daylight so that it sends a message. If there is an agenda behind these cows and people are protected, I mean, we're a protected species by God himself, then they are trying to send a message and they're trying to fear something. And I think, truly, this could only lead to good cop, bad cop in the end. Hey, you do this or else something bad is gonna happen to you. I don't know. Just a guess. But it's... You have to wonder about the cows. It seems, I don't know if there have been any sheep mutilations or things, but you don't see it happening with like dogs or cats, you know, things that domesticated, yeah, I guess cows are domesticated, but, you know, pet animals, maybe one day it will start, but I don't know. I mean, I've been watching cows for decades, so I wonder if there's anything to do with that, but... That is interesting. That is interesting. Why cows? That's a good point. Bale, I don't know, I mean, animal sacrifice like in the old days, I don't know.
28:16 Well, let's jump into the NASA stuff today, the four-hour NASA program. We're gonna condense that down to about 20 minutes. Your... We watched it so you don't have to. Yeah, I thought that was funny, and I just had the background music, which was kind of neat background music, but... So check this out. Let's go over the definition... No, no, let's go over the changes or the intro. The intro was interesting. The guy who's talking about exactly what happened and why they're here to talk about this. Check this out. Now, in recent years, the subjects of unidentified aerial phenomena, nowadays termed unidentified animals or unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAPs, has captured the attention of the public, the scientific community, and the government alike, and it's now our collective responsibility to investigate these occurrences with the rigorous scientific scrutiny that they deserve.
29:15 NASA administrator, Senator Bill Nelson, believes that understanding UAPs is vital for several reasons, which is why he directed this study. First and foremost, it provides an opportunity for us to expand our understanding of the world around us. As an organization dedicated to exploring the unknown, this work is in our DNA. Secondly, this study aims to enhance situational awareness. The presence of UAPs raises concerns about the safety of our skies, and it's this nation's obligation to determine whether these phenomena pose any potential risks to airspace safety. By understanding the nature of UAPs, we can ensure that our skies remain a safe space for all. In order to achieve these goals, it is crucial that we employ a scientific lens for our UAP work.
30:09 It's precisely this rigorous, evidence-based approach that allows one to separate fact from fiction. This team is comprised of experts from various disciplines, which allows them to approach this work from multiple perspectives. And we have greatly benefited from that collective expertise. Now, why do we value a scientific approach? It's because science is built on evidence. It thrives on scrutiny. It demands reproducibility and above all, objectivity. When we approach UAPs from a scientific perspective, we do not come in with an agenda. We come in with an objective. Indeed, the primary objective of this incredible team of experts is not to go back and look at grainy footage of UAPs, but rather to give us a roadmap to guide us for future analysis.
31:06 And this is the very scientific method that NASA holds true to its heart. Scientific research is intended to be publicly available and transparent. And NASA prides itself on making its data and images available to the public. By holding public meetings like this one, we aim for open and honest dialogue with the public. We recognize that public interest in UAPs is high and that the demand for answers is strong. Conversations like this one are the first step to reducing the stigma surrounding UAP reporting. Moreover, transparency is essential for fostering trust between NASA, the public, and the scientific community. In order to ensure that our work is as robust as possible, we need to be open to the public and to the public.
32:01 And by maintaining open channels of communication, we can facilitate collaboration, encourage the exchange of ideas, and ensure that our work is as robust as possible. Not only that, but our commitment to openness is in itself a reflection of NASA's commitment to scientific integrity. To be honest and forthright and to follow the science. And by being transparent in our work, we uphold our dedication to scientific excellence. The meeting today represents the first deliberative actions that the team has taken. And so it's important to keep in mind that they still have several months of work ahead of them. Their final report will be released this summer and we will publish it on our website. NASA believes that the study of Mars and Mars is an exciting step forward in our quest to uncover the mysteries of the world around us.
33:01 By embracing a scientific lens, we ensure that our work is rigorous and reliable. And by valuing transparency and openness, we can foster trust and collaboration with the public. Simply put, this is why we do what we do. What we do. NASA is a global organization that is committed to developing and improving this world. NASA is a global organization that will build the future of our galaxy and the future of think? Do you think that the government is purposefully hiding this information about UAPs right now? 80% said yes. 20% said no. We're actually going to go over that question. They try to answer it. So I'm curious what they're going to say. But what do you think about this, Eric? I would say some in the government are hiding because, I mean, the government lies to its own people. So there's maybe this misconception that if you're in the government or you're in the military that you're like in the know. I mean, only the people at the very top who are like ringleaders of things have all the pieces. Typically, they try to compartmentalize. So I mean, there's probably a lot of these people are genuine in trying to, they don't know and they want to get to the bottom of it and they think it's something they can do with the scientific method. I noticed experts follow the science. We don't have an agenda in separating.
34:47 Fact from fiction. So that's the setup for basically this whole, you know, just keep that in the back of your mind as we're watching all these clips because, you know. We don't have an agenda. We don't have an agenda. Yeah. We're going to find out exactly if that's true or not. I think as we continue down this rabbit trail, at least I think so. This is fascinating stuff. One thing I did want to get into real quick, though, there was something said over and over again. And this is it. This is what we suspected too was going on. We're going to talk about the definition change. Check this out. And also, after this panel was convened, the National Defense Authorization Act, known as the NDAA, changed the A in UAP to be anomalous. Accordingly, this panel's remit was expanded to encompass not just aerial UAP. However, the majority of UAP sightings to date have been in the aerial domain. So it's fair to say that the UAP sightings have been in the aerial domain. So this panel's focus is on the aerial aspect of anomalous. The definition of UAP changed during the seven months of our fact-finding process. UAP initially stood for unidentified aerial phenomena with aerial referring to events occurring in Earth's atmosphere. That A is now defined as anomalous, which includes the space, air, and undersea domains. And more and more and more and more. They said it over and over again. So we kind of surmised that, though, didn't we, Eric?
36:17 Because they kept saying anomalous. And then in the news, it would say aerial. And then it was anomalous again. And then it was aerial. And no one could get the story straight on the news. So I think they finally told us, yeah, we changed it because they go underwater. We're not sure why. Although... We actually discussed one of those. Yeah. I don't know if you're going to play the clip. So, but if you... I don't have the clip. Are you going to get... Oh, okay. Talk about it. I made it for you. I know, but you made 45 minutes of it, too. I can't do a whole show that... A whole show would be the thing. Yeah. So no, it's... So when they talk to... Are we going to get to any of the sensor clips where they talk about the sensors? Okay. Well, I'll discuss it. Remind me then. Okay. Okay. Yeah. So definition has changed as we surmised. And that's good to know. We'll call it anomalous from now on and kind of go from there. Next, we have... This is the fun one.
37:17 This is something, another thing that was said... and over again then we're going to get into bad data we're going to get into the report we're talking about the sensors and what they're actually looking for but let's go over the we were harassed here we go you ready it's disheartening to note that several of them have been subjected to online abuse due to their decision to participate on this panel and nasa's security team is actively addressing this issue we at nasa are acutely aware of the considerable public interest in uap however it's critical to understand any form of harassment towards our panelists only serves to detract from the scientific process which requires an environment of respect and openness phenomena before i begin though i really do want to double down on dan's words that it is really disheartening to hear of the harassment that our panelists have faced online all because they're studying this topic nasa stands behind our panelists and we do not tolerate abuse harassment only leads to further stigmatization of the uap field significantly hindering the scientific progress and discouraging others to study this important subject matter your harassment also obstructs the public's right to knowledge our panelists are leading experts in the scientific aeronautics and data analytics community forgetting that users are analyse the value of their time around them and their behaviours and see what they should learn and if their comments serve help to communicate about intelligence we dare providebewildingCome on as we breathe this new language into communities we are very lucky to have them on board to share their invaluable insights to inform Nasa on what possible data could be collected in the future and how it can be collected to help us better understand the nature of uap we need to elevate this conversation we need to have this conversation in in an open environment like this where we aren't going to get harassed problem. We need to understand what is the things that are in all of our domains, space or air or undersea, and how do we make sense of that. So this was pushed throughout the whole program, all four hours. I noticed it because I played a bit of every other person's section too that they went over, and I thought, wow, I don't know what happened, but for them to say this over and over and over again, something internal is going on because, yeah, they got harassed online, but hey, it's online. It can't be that. It's some anonymous 17-year-old to 12-year-old. Is that what they're concerned about? I don't think so. It sounds like they're dealing with stigma inside, and they're just kind of pushing it off as, you know, we got some major flack online.
40:00 What do you think? What's going on here, Eric? Who is NASA security? That's what I think. I got the picture of like in the beginning, back to the beginning, back to the beginning. The future where he's got the suit on, and he puts the headphones over George. Is that what they do? They send somebody to your house in a space suit and just like, you know, I've never heard of it. I am not a data. Yeah, that's the one, yeah. No, I think it could serve, like you're saying, it could be putting it out there, kind of deflecting from inside issues, but also maybe just sowing the seeds of like any misinformation or harassment. Of people, you know, official sort of air quotes, official sources promoting certain information or narratives. Any criticism of that will be met with some type of security, state security response, you know? So maybe NASA security now, who knows in the future, maybe the FBI or, you know, one of the other letter agencies. So just maybe, maybe sowing seeds. I don't know. Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. Interesting. Yeah, I think, I think you're right. What do you guys, think? We got, we got quite a few people in the live chat right now. And we have a lot of other clips from this. Like I said, I'm going to put them on Patreon, patreon.com slash strange normal, if you guys want to view the rest of them. But we've got plenty more in this program that we're going to go over. But what do you think's going on here? Are they having some, dealing with some, some immaturity inside their, their, their facilities? Or is this something that's more spiritual? As we dig into this further, let's go over bad data. This is something that, that they said over and over again. I kind of felt was an agenda that, because it sounded like they weren't taking an unbiased opinion about this as they kept saying, oh, well, you know, yeah, we can, I don't know if this, well, this is just bad data. We can't look at it because of, just watch this. Right now, there is very limited number of high quality observations and data curation of UAP.
42:07 Existing data available from eyewitness reports are often modeled and cannot provide conclusive evidence that supports UAP recognition and analysis. Additionally, an object's background can complicate the data further and render it unusable due to conventional objects that can mimic or overshadow the phenomena completely, such as commercial aircraft, military equipment, the weather, and ionospheric phenomena like auroras. This lack of high quality data, make it impossible to draw scientific conclusions on the nature of UAP. Now this team has used unclassified data from civilian government entities, commercial data, and data from other sources to inform their recommendations, and as Dan noted, they will be published in a public report that comes out this summer. I want to emphasize that there is really great benefit to studying unclassified data rather than classified data for this study. First, Unclassified anomalous phenomena sightings themselves are not classified. It's often the sensor platform that is classified. And you can kind of think of it, if a fighter jet took a picture of the Statue of Liberty, then that image would be classified. All right, that's probably right there. That's actually a good thing to talk about here. We've talked about this previously in the program where the government has come out and said, you know what, this is not actually what we're trying to do is not stop the conversation about UAP, UFO.
43:36 What we're doing is a lot of this stuff appears around our most classified boats, classified weaponry, classified stuff. And then when we have to go into these meetings to talk about this stuff, we say, oh, what about the UFOs, UAPs? Well, now we can't talk about anything. We can't even say that where we're at, because we're not supposed to be there or we're in a classified location. Or we have a classified sensor that we don't want to to reveal just how far we can zoom or what data it can access or how we're accessing that data. So that makes a lot of sense as to how this is happening. But we have to understand that these UAPs are not necessarily just a robot. These things are spiritual entities. So they know that. And so they are drawing up a lot of, oh, what's the word? A lot of curiosity about this just because they know that some people can know about this, but it doesn't always necessarily are able to talk about it. So it's kind of that, I got something interesting to tell you, but I can't tell you exactly what's going on, which fosters that curiosity, I think, a little bit more. What do you think? Yeah. So, I mean, there's legitimate concerns. So if you think about how many billions of dollars go into defense projects. So there is still, it's a lot of curiosity. It's weird because when I was in the military, I just focused on things from a human perspective. And so when you have this spiritual, when you know what's going on spiritually behind the scenes, it gives you a different lens to view it through. But there's still that lens of that's purely earthly that, yes, there are nation states that have national interests and they're preparing to fight wars. And so if you look at it completely from that lens, yeah, you don't want to, if you spent $10 billion to develop some sensor, you know, by putting it out there, now you've just wasted $10 billion of taxpayer money, which, I mean, these days isn't much money anymore for the government to waste, but that's another story. Yeah. So there are legitimate concerns. There is an over-classification problem in the military. So there's a lot of stuff that's classified from decades ago that doesn't need to be classified anymore. And it just is. And so that's another issue also. But I mean, it's convenient for those who want to hide the truth because there are legitimate reasons to classify things and there are legitimate reasons to keep, like, defense secrets when you're talking about that. And so they can hide it under the umbrella of national security or we're doing this for defense reasons. And then that just kind of stops the conversation. Or just get someone to read it. You put classified on it. That'll make them read it. That way, that's what I've heard other people say. You know, we just, we classify everything.
46:30 Yeah. So that we can make sure that people, because it was classified. Hey, I want to know what's going on here. I don't know. That was, that's not a legitimate reason, but you said over-classified. Everything's over-classified. That might be one of the reasons why it is. Yeah. I mean, stuff there, I mean, there's stuff that you look at and it's like, if somebody knows this, it's not the definition. So there's, there's three classifications. There's confidence or clearance levels. There's confidential, secret, and then top secret. And the criteria for secret classified information is essentially information that will cause grave damage to the United States or the national security of the United States if it's released unintentionally. And then top secret is it will cause exceptionally grave damage. I don't, those seem kind of arbitrary to me, but those are like the, that's the reason ostensibly that things are classified. And so there's stuff that you look at and it's like, one, other nations probably already know this because it's been around for, or it's an old system or whatever, or two, you know, you, it's like, it's, it's been so long ago that, this event happened that nobody cares, but it's still, if it has, you know, that classification attached to it, there are consequences, you know, associated with divulging it. Interesting. Interesting. I didn't know those three classifications. I had, I only know the classifications they mentioned in the old James Bond films I used to watch before I quit. Let's continue. Not because of the subject in the picture, but because of the sensors on the plane. Second, unclassified data make it possible for our team to communicate openly.
48:00 To advance our understanding of UAP, not only with each other, but across the scientific community and to the public. This ensures a clear and transparent pipeline of information that can be built upon through the general, through generations to expand our understanding. This study relies on open data. Everything we use at NASA is open and anyone can look at these records. The current status of the, of the data about UAPs does not meet these standards. The data collection is inconsistent. It's inhomogeneous. It's uncalibrated. The data are poorly documented and largely incomplete. They're also not, not systematically retrievable, which poses a problem in automation of the analysis. So WAP could benefit from data science and machine learning methods, from artificial intelligence that is developing at a rapid pace, but machine learning and AI cannot be applied until the data meet these standards.
49:00 Many organizations exist to track sightings of anomalous phenomena in the Earth's atmosphere. Move on. Both non-profit, for-profit, and otherwise. The study panel concluded that much of the inputs collected by these organizations are not considered scientific data in nature. And that they do not contain unbiased information. They're not repeatable. And that they typically come with eyewitness accounts, which we've heard, even today that there's hesitations with using only eyewitness accounts to recognize or identify UAP. To the point about commercial or companies, there are a lot of space companies that some lobbied hard to get in to present to us. They have troves of data, but they're collected for a variety of different purposes than the purpose of UAP.
49:57 And those systems, while they are well calibrated, are are only one source of many that could be used. One source of many. So they... I get it. I get it. So they don't want to talk about people's experiences. Because that's not science. It's feelings and things that they can't really calibrate. They can't really... They don't have a sensor on it. You can't replicate it. And that makes sense. I appreciate that. They are also saying, though, that they don't want to take anything that has been collected in because it... Um... It doesn't represent science. What do you think? Well, I think... I think what she's saying... I think that's a pretty weak... Uh... What she said is a pretty weak argument. But I kind of think I know where she's going with it and that...
50:44 And there's other clips that have to do with this as well about... There's a difference between... Are you going to play the clip about what military sensors are designed to do? I don't know. I don't know if I have that one. Okay. Anyways. So there's one of the speakers. It was either the... The person that runs Arrow or the FAA speaker that talks about that when military sensors are designed to essentially get warheads on foreheads is the term that, you know, the vernacular that's used. That's... So you have a known threat, you know, if you're building an airplane or ship or whatever, you know, other nations have airplanes and ships. So that's what you're building your sensors and your weapons and your defensive platforms around is a war on Earth against human adversaries. So they're not built to specifically... Target something like a UAP, an anomaly, an anomaly by definition is something that's weird, something that's not normal, right?
51:37 Strange, normal, perhaps, but that might be where she's going, where it's like, okay, there are sensors. There are things that we have or somebody has that can that is specifically targeted towards UAPs. And when we get stuff from other sensors, it can't, I would imagine you can't have the same confidence in it. Just like, for example, the pilot. For example, the pilots, you know, military pilots have mistaken certain things and they go into this, one of the speakers goes into this about how it's been mistaken and it's like, well, okay, the pilots aren't idiots. They're well trained. It's just their sensors and their aircraft are designed for aerial combat against other aircraft, human made aircraft. So it's not designed for that. So I kind of get where she's going. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Or for example, like an F-22 was not designed to shoot down a high altitude. It was designed for the Chinese spy balloon, right? That's, I mean, I'm sure you could purpose build a weapon to do that, it'd be a waste of money, but the F-22 was designed that they shot that down with, was designed for a different purpose.
52:40 So when you have to repurpose something, it takes like, we went over this when we did the Chinese spy balloon, our analysis of that, it's like they're recalibrating. It's like, yeah, you, you know, the, the sensors that we have on the planet have a wide range of things that they can do, but you can only do a few of them at a time. And so when you're looking at. You're looking at air traffic control or military applications, you're kind of filtering out all that other data. Um, and it seems like they're discussing, you know, okay, we want to, again, do a recalibration so that we can focus specifically on this. And that's, in addition to maybe building some purpose built sensors or things like that. And that's, uh, maybe, maybe I do have that clip. I got, I got to check, but we're, we're going to go over his report, the UAP reporting, uh, trends and stuff here in a second. Um. Because that was fascinating. Uh, this is an update from a previous, uh, one, but, um, I do remember seeing that clip.
53:35 I don't know if I included or not. Let me check here and run this clip. This is a longer clip. It's about six minutes long, but it's got some fascinating information. Maybe we'll stop it, but, uh, check this out. So some of you probably saw a version of this at the open hearing, uh, last month. This is an overall, uh, uh, review of all of the analytic trends of all the. Places that we have to date, and while the numbers may have changed a little bit, um, the overall trends remain the same. Most of what we are seeing reported, uh, by aircraft are at the altitudes where we fly aircraft. That should not be a surprise. You will note, however, that I have no space reports and I have no maritime reports. That is notable, even though we are looking across all of those domains. On the upper right, we have UAP morphologies.
54:31 The vast majority of what has been reported and what we have data on, a little less than half now, are orbs, round spheres. Boom. And in the bottom right, you will see in the, really, the, the HEATS map of the areas where we get most of our reporting. This is very much a collection biased map. This is where our sensors are. Our military. And our IC and some of the FAA data in the middle, which is what we call our typical UAP characteristics for the vast majority of the cases that we see. One way of looking at that is a, is a, we'll call it a target package. This is the thing we are out hunting for. I'm going to pause it right here for a second, because I, I think it's interesting. Uh, at first, when I first heard this, I was like, what are they saying that NASA doesn't do space?
55:26 What? Oh, I can, I can already hear the, uh, the ruckus in the background, you know, all the conspiracy going crazy. Well, depending on how you view it, I mean, maybe they don't. I mean, we don't really know. Yeah, yeah. I mean, they're saying we don't have any sensors in space. We're not up there. But I think it's also interesting to point out, I'm going to bring that, that clip back up here. In most cases. Pause it. And, uh, check, check this out. I'm going to pull back a little bit. Um, see that on the bottom left there where it has the mountain and the plane above it? Even though they say, hey, all our sensors are on the ground here. We're only looking at stuff in, on earth. They get less and less as it goes up. I mean, yeah, I, I get it. You're going to see less and less as you go up in, in the sky. But the most of them are around that middle point here. And so you got to wonder, hey, are these things on earth? I mean, primarily, uh, yeah, we're not sensing out there in, in, in space and stuff.
56:23 And maybe somehow they can, you know. Go to and fro on the earth and then go and, and report back to wherever they're going. But this was, you got to look back in the Bible. The Bible says that, that, um, this earth is the headquarters of where the rebellion, uh, is, is coming from. And so obviously there's going to be more spiritual activity here on earth. And this is what we're seeing. Spiritual activity. Yeah, I mean, if, well, if you look, it's, it's like the, um, you know, where do demons attack humans? Where there's humans, right? You know, these things appear, the people who went into space, uh, you know, allegedly we need to, that's for you, Mikey, if you're watching this, um, you know, they were, they were the ones reporting visually that they were seeing something, right?
57:13 There's a difference you need to have in order to, to sense something, you have to have a sensor there. And so if the goal is to make a show for humans or to somehow influence human perception, then you want to demo, do your display. Yup. Theanter for those birthdays? You guys mention this on Alliance for this guy. Yeah, right? I'm not sure. Yeah, I don't know. Um, and it doesn't help. So actually them to have a useful mouth, they just want to literally look and say, oh, here's myąda- Can we do word power? Dude? For the human. Yeah, they're supposed to see it to make you and know exactly what he's doing. Yeah. And they're, they're just trying to look at theということ with a camera and, you know, and, um, they want to see that. It takes, what? pilots are more trained. They're more professional than your average, you know, probably the people, most of the people riding it. A lot of pilots are former military. So, you know, if you want a credible story or you want a credible display that, you know, the person, oh, the person reporting this is an airline pilot or a military pilot, well, then you're going to display yourself to where those pilots are. Whereas, you know, we have sensors on the ground. There's all kinds of things that cause sensor anomalies and it, you know, it could be, and all that is, is a blip on a screen, right? You know, the opera is, it's a lot less dramatic than something seen visually is what I'm getting at. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. Fascinating. Let's see what else he has to say.
58:45 On a target package, this is the thing we are out hunting for in most cases. This is an example of one that I showed at the hearing recently. This is a spherical orb, metallic, in the Middle East, 2022, by an MQ-9. I will come back to the sensor question that David raised here in a moment. This is a typical example of the thing that we see most of. Most of? All over the world. And we see these in, and making very interesting apparent maneuvers. Interesting. This one in particular, however, I would point out, demonstrated no enigmatic technical capabilities and was no threat to airborne safety. While we are still looking at it, I don't have any more data other than that. So, so that, what that tells me right there is that they, they have seen these things quite a bit and they look like these round silver orb things, not disc. Now we're not talking cylindrical disc, but primarily round looking balls of metallic material. And I, I think that's interesting. Number one, I mean, we, we don't know exactly, uh, uh, what these things are going to portray themselves as, but we, when they see these things, he said that, um, this one wasn't primarily displaying anything abnormal. Okay. So that let's extrapolate the data from what he said here. He's saying that we have seen a lot of them that do something very strange that don't just go in a straight, straight line all the way, or hang out in the middle of nowhere. They, they, they, uh, maybe they go up, down and take a right angle at high speeds as, as we've seen before. And, uh, and these are the things you see the most of. And so these are the things when, when, um, they're talking about UAPs. This is what they're talking about primarily is the majority of the, uh, objects that they see. And also they are, seeing these things quite a bit when at war. We're going to, we're going to probably explore that a little bit later. What do you think about that, Eric? Yeah, it seems like he's saying like this was a, a less anomalous anomaly because he still doesn't, hasn't explained what it is. Um, and I can't tell from looking at it, what that, I mean, the only thing I could think of is some type of drone without visible propulsion. So that's, you know, interesting.
1:01:26 And so being able to come to some conclusion is going to take time until we can get better resolved data on similar objects that we can then do a larger analysis on holdings. At the time of my open hearing, we were at 650 cases ish. We are now over 800. Um, we are putting together our, uh, annual report, Mm. which will be due August one, uh, to the hill and in it, and there will be an unclassified version as there always has been. Uh, we will have those updated numbers at that time. We roughly get, I mean, you can do the math, you know, it depends anywhere from, from 50 to 100 ish new reports a month. Now, the reason we had such a big jump recently is because I got FAA's data integrated in finally. And so we ended up with like 100 and some odd new cases. Um, so there's, there's reason why it's going to fluctuate the numbers that I would say. So we're going to, we're going to try to do a little more, uh, um, fidelity on some of the analytics when we report out. But the numbers, I would say that we see are possibly really anomalous, are less than single digit, uh, digit percentages of those, that total database. So maybe two to five ish percent.
1:03:10 So what it is, what can the FAA detect and, and surveil? What can, can we not? Uh, this slide gives you, uh, a by altitude slice of what it is that we can detect. So if you look at the, the, the square that's labeled a thousand foot AGL, This was interesting. by sensor for an aircraft that is a thousand feet in altitude, what is the range at which we can detect that aircraft? And so on, as you get higher in altitude, are further higher in altitude, you can detect it at further range. And that's basically a phenomena of the coverage of the earth and the line of sight aspect of these, these radar systems. So pretty good coverage across the, the US at 10,000 feet and above. Uh, this is a mathematical model based of pure line of sight, uh, as well, some geographical screening. As you can see in the western part of the U.S., there is screening due to the mountains and those sensors. I need to take a little bit of time and talk about the nature of the targets. These line of sight models represent an input of a target that is one square meter. So think of a sphere of one meter in diameter. That's the assumption that goes into these models. So if you think about that in the context of other forms of aircraft, a fourth generation F-15 or F-18 is in the proximity of about one square meter, perhaps a little bit larger. A large airliner is perhaps 100 square meters. A small UAS is perhaps a .01 square meter. So the range of these detections or the size and the ability to detect these targets from an F-15 or F-16 or F-15, large airliner, 100 times larger in size. A drone, 100 times smaller in size. So the detection and the surveillance capability really largely depends in part to the target that we're talking about and the ability to surveil that target.
1:05:19 So break that down, Eric. I don't think I understood half the things you said there, but all I could think about was looking at that map right in the center and going, man, I wish I could live in that little white spot down on the . . . . . . . . . where nothing can get me. I'm sure this has nothing to do with me, but I'm like, man, I bet that has some great country area where the radars can't reach. Anyway. Well, can you bring that up, that slide up? Yep. Can you pause it there? Let me see if I can . . . I'll have to get it quick because sometimes it likes to go ahead of me. Play back and start. The range of these detections or the size and the ability to detect these targets . . . Okay, right there. . . . can you pause it? Yep. Okay, yeah. Okay. Yeah, so what he's saying, basically, is if you think of a sensor on the ground looking up . . . I'm trying to see where my hands are going. Okay. You have a horizon that's 12 nautical miles away at sea level, right? But you can see farther than that if you angle upwards. And if you've ever looked at an aerial or an airspace chart for flight operations or things like that, they call it an upside down wedding cake because the controlled area from like zero . . . that's seriously what it looks like. It's rings that get larger as you go up because that high altitude is where the commercial airliners fly and where the flight routes are. So I forget what the altitude is, but between like zero and probably 1,000 or 5,000 feet, it's really not controlled until you get right near an airport. And then everything else is kind of . . . that's why you see Cessnas and things that are just flying over houses because it's just not controlled like that. But also, it's a combination of that, it seems, and the fact that sensors on the ground looking up are going to be able to see farther the higher up you're looking. So . . .
1:07:10 Gotcha. Yeah. And I think he mentioned these cooperative . . . elsewhere he talked about this, and I think . . . I might be mistaken, but I think what that means is if it's just the radar . . . I think cooperative in this instance means like, okay, you have a radar signature and then that aircraft is also like . . . Pinging out an identification and those two can like correlate and cooperate. I could be mistaken on that though, but he . . . they did discuss something like that. Okay. All right. Very good. Yeah. This was an interesting one. Radar line of sight coverage above the ground. See, I fly drones, not the military drones, but the DJI . . . In the chat. Yeah. In the chat, Walt says transition altitude in the U.S. is 10,000 feet. So, okay. Yeah. So, I can kind of get that and understand that. Let's see. Let's see. Oh, yeah. We have Joe in the chat. Now, CE4 Research. Ask him questions. He has a lot of information. Joe, you missed the part where they talked about MUFON. They didn't specifically say MUFON, but they were like, we're not going to talk about MUFON. We don't want to have anything to do with them right now because they're not science.
1:08:26 I think we're inferring . . . They were inferring that they were talking about things like MUFON. Yeah. Like, they gave some interesting indications, but it might have not been. But that's how I took it as I think they do a great job, to be honest. I think they are very calculated and very scientific in how they approach the things. So . . . Oh, that's one thing you just reminded me about this. So, the clip where he showed the sphere is . . . there . . . this seems to be only focused on the shell. Yeah. The craft, right? And like you mentioned before, there's a whole other part to this phenomena that involves human experience, but it seems like everything that they're doing is involved with explaining . . . I guess if you wanted to try to look at it as like an object, a physical object, a physical craft, that seems to be the direction they're approaching this from, which, as we know, is just . . . they're going down the wrong trail . . . Mm-hmm. . . . disregarding all of . . . and Joe Jordan's written about it in his book. Was it over 400, Joe? Human experiences that are just . . . if you read that book, you're going to just be blown away by the amount of people all saying the same thing, similar things.
1:09:43 And so, yeah, disregarding that completely, they're not going to arrive at the right answer, because the right answer that you get to can only be arrived at by taking a Bible-based spiritual worldview. Absolutely. Absolutely. You've got to have the foundation before you can . . . . . . . build the hypothesis. Hypothesis. Hypothesis. Yes, that's the word. Let's continue on. In the program, we have this one next, which is . . . that was a report, and what are we looking for? This guy is . . . this got a little animated. I thought this was kind of funny, because I thought this was more of an internal discussion, but he kind of went off the script. Everyone has a script. Everyone has this . . . this teleprompter. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And we've got the teleprompter they're reading, and this guy's like, nah, watch this. We're just going to . . . This is probably good. This is probably more of a frustration than anything else, so I don't know how helpful it will be, but I think we're not looking for a needle in a haystack. We're looking for an anomaly in a haystack. We don't even know that we're looking for a needle that . . . It's just a discolored piece of hay. I'm from Montana, so I love good hay analogy. I don't know what the phenomenology is that looking for. We say anomalous. Again, this question earlier, what does that mean? Anomalous acceleration? I think as we try to look at the data, we're starting from an almost impossible position when if we don't know what we're looking for, is it a radiation signature? Is it something electromagnetic? Is it something like that is why this is so challenging and frustrating to me that we're talking about monitoring something that we don't even know what we're supposed to monitor.
1:11:23 And let me just offer, Josh, before you jump in, the scientific process of hypothesis-driven research, right? While we don't know all of the possible outcomes in the entire world, we can ask very specific questions and go about it in a very scientific process to understand. So you're right, we don't know exactly what we're looking for, but we know hotspots, as we've seen from both FAA, and Arrow. We do know some of those conditions that we might be looking for. So if you start with kind of what you know or places to start to go and look, and you start with the data that we have available to us, we might start being able to untangle the chicken and egg problem. Jen, what is the phenomena that we're looking for? So we've heard them from Sean. I would pull up Sean's chart, but I can't remember. I can't quickly do that. Of the criteria that he said on the trends, I use the word criteria, he said trends, of six or seven phenomena, I guess, of specific size or within a specific motion range. And it's something different than what we've seen before. Something we don't recognize. Look for something you don't know. Something that you don't recognize. It can't be. It can be pretty easy, and that we've fooled ourselves today and even watching some of these videos of what's going on. But when you're able to corroborate that with three or four other sources, it starts to make sense. Right? So something that looks like magic to the naked eye or to that camera and that sensor isn't once you understand all of the effects of what was going on in the surrounding environment.
1:13:19 Now, I'm going to go into what he said about the... I'm going to go into this. But I think that was an interesting clip, because what you're looking for is magic. You're looking for magic, Eric. Help us find... I can't imagine the programmers on the other end going, I need to write AI to find magic. Can you help? Can you work on this? Oh, AI will help you find magic, all right. That's another show, another week's show. No, I'd love to know who taught her how to apply the scientific method, because what it sounds like, what she's talking about is only asking questions that you actually want to know the answer to, when, in reality, the goal, when you make an observation, and you ask as many questions as possible, and there is... You develop... You're supposed to have multiple working hypotheses, and the goal is to try to kill them all. And then the ones that survive, you try to kill them, you... You give those to... After a certain amount of time, you keep trying to kill it.
1:14:23 and you give it to somebody else and they try to kill it and if it still won't die then it becomes a theory and you know their evidence is built up to support it theory is as high as you go in science by the way everything you know theories are always subject to either revision or completely discarding them if new evidence comes in but you're supposed to ask as many questions as you can think of and most of your hypothesis you know it'll be a really simple process okay yeah it's not this it's not a flying spaghetti monster it's not you know fish that got caught up in a tornado and are raining down from but you can ask those questions but what she's talking about is i don't honestly i don't know what she's talking about i don't know what she's trying to say magic eric magic yeah magic find the magic come on as a developer as a programmer which i have been that's it's going to be very difficult to find the find the magic especially when you have to tell it hey this is everything else you need to know about and find something that's not like it one of these things is not like other hey maybe with the new ai front that we're entering into we will have better better tools but that's hard i don't know about that because ai is coming out in lies like yeah an article i i linked it today in the discord about how a lawyer got caught a judge tossed out a legal brief because the lawyer used chat gpt to write it and the chat gpt made up fictional citations and case law and put it in this brief that was actually submitted in a court like so it just i think it's it's not it's not right for you to take away from or to relax and say oh yeah it was about you know an me and i and i can't believe i didn't have to do that so i'll let you know but it's that's the hard part because the good thing about it is like it doesn't change the way in which you're using it because that's the other thing is like we talk about sensors and also tools that you're utilizing to analyze the data that you get from sensors the the conclusions you can draw are only as good as the quality of data coming in that the sensor it's recorded on and then the tool you're using to analyze it so if any one of those is goes bad like in the case of you know your conclusion is going to be all the way out in the field there's another link in the discord talking about how they're teaching them in the discord talking about how they're teaching um ai to lie and so it's it's a fascinating thing because you know i i equate this whole ai thing and i don't want to get too far off in this rabbit trail but we should have a whole um after show about this ai stuff because it's fascinating but this um there's a lot of interesting parallels that you can draw from this artificial intelligence that humans have created and this intelligence that god has created and so uh if you wouldn't teach it how to lie it wouldn't lie just like if you would follow what god said we wouldn't have this sin problem and so i think it's it's really fascinating that um uh what's going on there's there's so many parallels i'm gonna do a whole show on that but anyway let's get into what what it is we're looking for is the uh the bit of it here we go your first question on what makes it anomalous to me we actually developed some definitions on all of these things we gave it both to the white house and to congress i think we've got some of that into law now but essentially anomalous is anything that is not readily understandable by the operator or the sensor right so it is doing something weird whether that's maneuvering against the wind at mach 2 with no apparent propulsion or it's um going into the water which we have we have shown is not the case that is actually a sensor anomaly that we've now figured out and we're going to be publishing all that you know those kinds of things make anomalous signature we'll call it signature management but it's things that are not readily understandable in the context of hey i've got a thing that's out in the light it should reflect a certain amount of light if it doesn't reflect that amount of light something weird it's something find the weird stuff just just find it all well see that's that's that's a more sensible um way to approach it than what that other person was talking about you know it's because that's the goal it's like okay we know that the mic is off the power mill it's what it's supposed to be like but it'll just lightweight it from the low side to has that and you we use the colletے no you mean how it's светling outside without the RPM it doesn't vigorously at least it's straight up it's chosen it goes instead of the low side they have you know yeah something weird it's something find the weird stuff just just find it all well see that's that's that's a more Jorge know since night to the 19 when did Roswell happen 1947 47 49 okay so we had this type of aircraft that Mankind was making and as far as most people knew this was the only thing in the air so if you
1:19:05 see something that's not that okay what is it who made it where did it come from that's an appropriate question that makes sense um the thing about not being uh not going under the water I think was something that we haven't discussed before is when you get these sightings out in the middle of the ocean where are these things coming from because it can't wait a lot of the explanation tends to go to oh maybe it's a drone or maybe it's like an adversarial Mason is testing out some type of new weapons technology or drone technology or whatever it's like okay well what's the launching platform where's the platform that's controlling it because you need either line of sight or satellites to control it and to get it out in the middle of the ocean if it's a drone it has finite fuel so it didn't fly from mainland China or something to the middle of the Pacific so that's something else that I haven't heard too many people talk about that is it kind of blows the whole um weapon or drone uh explanation out of the water at least in most cases absolutely absolutely um that's the last clip I have for tonight and usually I don't say that because I like everyone to stick around I know I know that's the last one I got but unfortunately I have to go I uh would uh ask everyone to pray for me because I smell smoke in my house and I need to run I didn't know what's going on I don't know what's happening here but hopefully it's just someone burning wood outside but I I we get an hour we're at the top of the hour and I appreciate everyone if you would pray us out Eric I uh I'd appreciate it Heavenly Father we thank you for this opportunity to come together to discuss current events in light of your word and Bible prophecy and we ask that your spirit be upon those who hear this message may you draw them to an accurate understanding of your word and what they're seeing in the world so that they can prepare for your return and we also ask that you be with Brad as he deals with this issue in his house and hopefully it's nothing serious in Jesus Christ name we pray amen amen thank you so much for everyone joining tonight we look forward to seeing you next time on strange normal good night thanks for watching this segment subscribe to our channel and join us every Thursday night for more daily strange topics and more find us on Discord by accessing patreon.com strange normal