SPACE THREATS - Terrestrial and Extraterrestrial

Show Transcript

The latest news of a national security threat from space, which is an evolving story, has been pointing mainly at a new threat from Russia concerning space based weapons. However, there's also a lot of chatter about the UFO UAP threat from space. So today we will dig into these news reports and rumors. and try to look behind the headlines, as well as cover space threats such as asteroids, solar storms, and developing arena of space for dominance and other space threats. (00:46) Hello and welcome to this episode of Mysteries with a History. We will be taking on a wild ride into the unknown, the strange, and the mysterious. Like you, I have questions, and like you, I want answers. And with each episode together, we will peel away the layers to look for the truth. While it might seem black and white in some aspects, this topic and what we're going to be covering today has a lot of layers to it, and we have a lot to cover. (01:12) So let me bring in my co-host, Jimmy Church of Fade to Black Radio. Hey, Jimmy. Que pasa? You like that? It was pretty good. Cleaning up your Spanish. I like it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Doing what I can. I'm back from the Conscious Life Expo, which went on for four days this week. It was absolutely incredible. Hello, everybody. (01:39) And yeah, wow. Wow, what a week. I'm going to say two weeks on this subject, and it is really heating up, not only Washington, D.C., but it's certainly geopolitical, and it has a lot of of impact, not only on our community and the conversations that are going on. And we'll be jumping into all of that today. (02:07) We're not going to leave any stones unturned, but it's all happening at the same time. And this is, you know, when it occurs that way, Christina and the audience, of course, when it happens like that, that's when I just step back and go, OK, all right. Something I've been saying a lot lately is we have the facts, right? We have the facts. (02:37) We have facts. And then we have the truth, which is hidden, you know, somewhere behind those facts. And that's what we try to do here is get to the truth. We deal with the facts. Let's look at that. And then let's move on past that and somehow get to the truth. Now it leads me to the question of, What was it that inspired you to do this today? There was something over the last couple of weeks where you had to, because this is an important, hot, heated subject that we are going to discuss today. (03:21) What happened, Christina? Well, yesterday, Representative Mike Turner spoke at Capitol Hill and saying there's a national security issue. This is a national security threat. I cannot dive deeper into it, but the Biden administration needs to address it. And then he just dropped the mic and walked away. And so the media took that and ran with it. (03:44) They're like, what is he referring to? What is going on here? Is this UFO related? What is this national security threat that he's mentioning? And so then you have all of this is within like less than 48 hours. And, and, and, and, and you just left out the most important point. No, you're right. But then he dropped the other bomb, which is we need all of this public. (04:14) Yeah, that's it. We need all of this out in the open so everybody, not only with the United States, but everybody around the world can start discussing this. And that is interesting. Yeah, so people were freaking out and saying, what's going on here? The media created wildfire with it. And then we have other representatives coming forward and saying, no, don't worry about this. (04:44) What he's saying means absolutely nothing. And then... Today, the White House finally addresses it maybe less than an hour ago, giving an answer on to what he was referring to. But is that the actual truth? And I'm going to go ahead and tell it to you. Then we'll kind of talk about the articles that were released yesterday and early this morning. (05:05) And so what was being addressed, at least according to the White House, was that Russia has anti-satellite capabilities. So it's not harmful to humans on planet Earth, but more so it can cut off communication and a few other aspects as well, which is leading to a possibility and people's thoughts of, are we going to have, is World War III going to be in space instead of on Earth? So that's one aspect of many that we're going to be covering today. (05:38) But it's something that caught a lot of people's attention. And we can definitely bring in the UFO phenomenon into this because, Jimmy, like you had stated, the timing is impeccable, especially for those that have been following this topic. I would just say for a month at the very least. It's bam, bam, bam, bam, bam. (05:56) One after another, every single week, one thing is dropping. Referring to UFOs, referring to UFO transparency. Kirkpatrick's after he resigned says they were holding me back. UFOs are a thing. It's not just manmade. And then you have this dropping as well. So it's odd. And when you put all those little pieces together. (06:17) It creates some kind of mural. Now, what is it? We haven't gotten all the pieces yet to fully understand it, but there's definitely a bigger picture to this. I have always stated, so I am going to start here and not to freak everybody out, but let's be realistic about something. We have weapons in space. (06:46) And that's it. I'm talking about the United States. I'm going to address other countries and what they have and what they are proposing here in just a minute. But we have weapons in space. And I'm going to say this, maybe controversial, but I think that we can all look at this logically. Of course we do. (07:12) And if we don't, we're idiots. Okay? It's that simple. If we aren't ahead of the curve, then what do we do? We have to have something there. The purpose of them, which we will be discussing, is another matter entirely. But of course we do. If you thought that we didn't, what? Right? No, of course we do. (07:47) We have to. The secret stuff that is going on, one of them, if there is a secret program that is in place, and it is in place, by the way, it's called the SBL. I'll get to that in a second. To have space-based weapons platforms up there is something that not only is expected, but it's needed. Because the other guy, whether it's E.T. (08:20) or another country, to expect them not to have something up there is insane. Is insane. Now, the prospect of that, which is what we're dealing right now with this idea of Russia having a nuclear weapon in space to take out satellites, two things would result from that. One, we go back to the Stone Age. Everything is... Oh, wow. (08:48) For a second there, I distorted. That might have been my headphones and not projected out. Somebody let me know if you heard that. I heard that. Oh, you did? Yeah. See, that's the man trying to stop this show. Right there is twofold. We go back to the Stone Age. All of our communications, the GPS in your cars, transmissions, the news, Internet, everything. (09:20) If that gets crippled in space and suddenly we don't have a way to communicate. to send and receive information, news, anything that stops aside from the monetary system and, and the banking system and everything else, just think about how far backwards we would go. But there's a second problem with that. (09:45) If Russia did it, they would also damage their own communication infrastructure, right? It all goes down. So it just wouldn't make any sense to me for Russia to have something like that in space. Now, do they have the capability? I'm talking about a nuclear weapon detonated in low Earth orbit. Do we have something like that there? No, I don't believe that we do. (10:14) Do we have laser-based defensive systems in space right now? Yes. And I'll get to that. What is up with my audio? That's crazy sounding. Did that go out? Yeah, I heard that as well. It's bizarre. But, Jimmy, you're bringing up some really great points. And also the timing is fantastic in the aspect of SpaceX had launched – a few rockets on Valentine's Day as well that were classified. (10:48) Right, right. So SpaceX yesterday did two launches. One of those launches was for the Space Force with six classified satellites on it. That was USSF mission number 124. I reported on that yesterday. Nobody announced this launch in advance. So on the day of the launch, the Space Force did their press release. (11:17) Yep, we got six satellites going up into orbit, two are for this and four for this. But that's it. No information on the mission or what these satellites are doing or supposed to do. And that combined with everything else that is going on, like you had said, right now the news is coming at us fast from all directions. (11:45) It is. It is. And just timing. Timing is everything here. Before we continue, I just want to say a big thank you to Ulf. Thank you for that. And Lou Weezy. That's a fun name. Thank you as well. Right now we have 316 people watching this live. Only 150 likes. If you're enjoying the topic so far, hit that like button. (12:03) right down below. So let's go ahead and cover the article or the news that was released just yesterday referring to Mike Turner. I'm going to share an image here of what Mike Turner looks like before we read on one of the many articles that covered this topic. The one I'll be reading is from ABC News. (12:23) Let me just pull up this image. All right, there it is. And it says that the top security advisor at the White House and key members of Congress tried to reassure everyone on Wednesday after the leader of the House Intelligence Committee alerted the public to a national security threat. And the threat involved a worrying military move by a foreign country described as so crucial that President Joe Biden was urged to release all information about it. (12:53) People familiar with the discussion in Congress mentioned that this concern involves Russia's plan to place a nuclear weapon in space. However, the purpose wouldn't be to attack Earth directly, but could target satellites. This information referring to these... Satellite anti-satellite capabilities have been known for years, as Kirby had mentioned, and he is just he's a spokesman for the White House. (13:20) And he's saying, look, we've known about it for a handful of years now. But a few months ago, if not a few weeks ago, we began to realize that this is becoming more commonplace. What's the word I want to use here? Like more real before it was theory and in practice, and now it's becoming more legitimate. (13:39) And so that's probably maybe what Mike Turner was referring to. Now, when we are dealing with government statements. This is where it gets. It's a catch-22. It's a double-edged sword here. Is this a time when you believe them or when you don't and you think that there is another narrative behind it? Is this just like a nice little cushion for people to fall onto to brush off what Mike Turner had mentioned very vaguely yesterday on Valentine's Day, by the way? Or are they being serious? This is the reason why and (14:12) people should know about it, which, yes, people should know about this. But let me give you a little bit of background on Mike Turner, and maybe it might make this information a little bit more relevant because he is a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and has previously served as the lead Republican of the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee, as well as the Strategic Forces Subcommittee. (14:34) He also serves as a vice chairman of the Defense and Security Committee of NATO and And prior to his time in Congress, he was a mayor of Dayton from 1993 to 2001. So he's been in this field for a very long time. But based off of the offices that he's a part of, it has to do with security. It has to do with defense. (15:02) Like that is that's his background. And so for him to say something like this and then to be brushed off, it just seems a little weird. Out of place, maybe. Sort of. Sort of out of place. The curious part about his statement was his follow-on statement, of course, that I just mentioned, is that this needs to be declassified. (15:30) This needs to go open now. What I have, everybody should know. Now, here's... Let's get to the facts. So let's get to some facts really quick about this. That shooting at another satellite and taking it out in space, yes, we have that capability and others do too. Okay, so let's start there. There are also ground-based lasers that have already been used to blind observation satellites in low Earth orbit, right? So we've got a country positions a satellite to photograph and capture images of something on the (16:21) ground that we don't want them to see. We blind them with ground-based lasers. Now, that's one aspect. But the other part of this is, is it a global defense network for an adversarial threat from E.T. ? Are they preparing for something that we don't know about? Do they know something that we don't? Are there bad ETs out there that have bad intentions for us and we need to defend against that? And the other part is asteroids or some other cosmic debris that That could impact Earth. (17:07) More on that in just a minute. But there are reasons to have these platforms in space. It's not necessarily testing, measuring, which we do a lot with lasers in space. You can measure and map terrain. There are reasons to use lasers from space that aren't particle beam or direct energy weapons, directed energy weapons, DEWs. (17:40) And we hear a lot of chatter about that. Those things are real. Has a DEW been used from space on Earth? Well, look. I don't jump into the deep end of the pool when you hear these conversations start, not only in our community but in social media in general. So I don't jump into the deep end of the pool, but I will say the capability is certainly there, all right? And to think that that technology is not in Earth orbit right now is a little naive. (18:25) Those weapons platforms are in place. The reason for that, if there is some fast walker, some fast mover, some object that is not of this earth that is approaching us and we don't want them there, do we have a capability? I hope that we do. Right, and I'm assuming that we do. Now, let's talk about this for a second before we move on. (18:59) Laser satellites. Laser satellites, right? We've all seen them in the movies. The United States SBL, Space Based Laser Program, is a constellation of laser weapon platforms in space, which provides a credible air and ballistic missile defense system for the United States. Due to the recent interest by Congress and the Department of Defense, The General Accounting Office, the GAO, reviewed the existing space-based laser SBL program and assessed program progress, potential, and current management structure. (19:48) So... that answers all of your questions right there. Do we have a space-based laser program? Yes. And it is a constellation of satellites. All right. Now, Here are some of the weapons currently under development right now. We have chemical lasers. We have particle beam weapons. And we have military space planes. (20:21) Right now. Now, when we go back to the Ronald Reagan era, we don't discuss politics on this show, but let's go to the Ronald Reagan era, which was the Star Wars program named after the movie because of what was happening in the country and pop culture at that time. He told Gorbachev, okay, man, check this out. (20:48) Sign this missile treaty because everything you got is not going to work anyway. We have the Star Wars program. Now, what he said back then, Christina. wasn't the truth in that he implied to Gorbachev that we already had it. We already had space-based lasers. We already had the capability to shoot down their missiles while they were in their missile silos. (21:24) They started to turn on. And that freaked Gorbachev out. And Gorbachev believed it. And he signed the treaty. So that Star Wars treaty, it was signed and we started to reduce things. Back in 1967... The original space treaty was signed that there would be no nuclear weapons in space. All right? And as far as we know, everybody has adhered to that program. (21:55) But France... just announced the Ares program. It's called the Action Day, I don't speak French, Resilience in Space program. And it is a 100-kilogram satellite with a high-power laser to be launched. It's a defense weapon system to be launched in 2030. The United Kingdom, during a trial at the MOD's defense range, the Dragonfire Laser Directed Energy Weapon, the LDEW system, achieved the UK's first high-power firing of a laser weapon against aerial targets. (22:44) The range of Dragonfire is classified, but it is a line-of-sight weapon and can engage with any visible target. All right, now put that on the satellite. What have you got? China has developed a new cooling system that allows high-energy lasers to operate indefinitely without overheating, an innovation that could point a laser-sharp threat at the United States space program right now. (23:15) China has developed a microwave machine. Check this out. It's called the Relativistic Klystron Amplifier, the RKA. There is a lot of... of defense news about this specific weapon. It can jam or destroy satellites in space. The device can generate a wave burst measuring 5 megawatts in the K-band. And although China denies the RKA is an actual directed energy weapon, if the system was built at scale, it could set beams strong enough to rip through metallic materials moving at speed. (24:00) Very interesting things to talk about how they say it like this. Metallic, right? At speed. Metallic objects at speed. And all of this... uh could damage or destroy anything in its path uh equipment satellites uh people but to deploy this in space and to have this capability we have it the russians have it china has it uh the uk has it france is deploying theirs and I don't I again I think it would be naive to just assume that this is just to shoot down earth-based satellite systems. (24:49) I think that there is another reason for this. They know something. If this is the part of the subject that we know about publicly, what is the real intention? What is the real truth behind the facts? And those are the legitimate questions that we need to ask. What is the real purpose? Because you can say some very flowery, nice, beautiful words to the public, but it doesn't mean that they are 100% true. (25:15) It could be one aspect of many. Ilyan, thank you so much for supporting the channel. And Android, thank you so much for that as well. And luckily, Jimmy addressed it. And it says here, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, signed by the U.S., Russia, and other countries, bans any weapons of mass destruction in outer space. (25:36) That is right. And... It still holds today. All countries are still abiding by that treaty. I did have to look that up just to make sure that no one walked out of it. And I did find that information online. But I just want to touch on the Space Force one more time because there are a handful of other countries that have their own Space Forces. (25:59) But let me just say this. They were all created around the same timeframe. So you have China that created theirs back in 2015, the USA back in 2019, Russia in 2015, France in 2019, and Iran in 2020. So we're looking at 2015 and in 2020, a five-year time frame where countries are saying, you know what, we don't need just an Air Force or a Navy or just your... (26:29) basic army, we got to go into space. Space is our future. We need to go there and conquer space. And if anything happens, if we have a war in space, will it protect the people, right? There are all these different thoughts and maybe so many others. But here we are seeing a pattern of that is the time they decided to, hey, let's put in some funding. (26:54) Let's make some more advanced tech. Let's put some rockets up there with our equipment. up just right outside of planet earth orbiting the planet why during that time frame maybe compared to the cold war maybe during the time of the first moon landing why pick 2015 up until 2020 versus 40 50 years ago All of these are great questions. (27:24) And the other part, if you go a step deeper into all of this, China and Russia, their goals right now. Oh, the other launch yesterday, I found this very interesting. I forgot to mention this from SpaceX. was another lunar lander from a private company from the United States to land on the moon. And isn't it funny, which is what I'm getting to right now, isn't it funny how we successfully landed on the moon in 1969 and now we just can't get back. (28:11) You know, forget about putting humans on the moon, right? Israel tried to get their lunar lander to happen. China landed on the dark side of the moon. We've had multiple attempts over the years and one a couple of weeks ago, another one in Japan, nose dived in and went nose first with theirs. What was it called? The chin? What was it called? The chin? Anyway, we've got another one on its way to the moon right now. (28:43) It was launched yesterday. Again, this is a real space race, which brings me to my next subject. If you look at each country's programs that have the capability to do any of this stuff, Russia's short-term goal right now is the moon and Mars and people. China's program right now, what they are doing is to put people on the moon and people on Mars. (29:16) Those are the immediate goals, and those are ours with the Artemis program and SpaceX and Elon Musk. And then at the same time with all of this, are these space-based weapon systems. It's like a science fiction movie that just seemed like it was so far in the future that we could just write about it and be entertained by the ideas. (29:47) But suddenly, all of this is playing out now in real time. Back to Mike Turner. The comments and the response from defense officials, military experts that chimed in on this said, yeah. But Russia doesn't really have the ability to do that. So it's not an imminent threat. Now, that's the fact. That's the fact that was presented, you know, that was said in public. (30:22) What's the truth behind a statement like that? When we just today, Malmstrom Air Force Base was put on a lockdown. They had an active shooter. They called it a world threat, right? Okay. And I talked about it on the news. Pretty crazy. But here's the situation with that. Russia, many countries have intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads on it. (30:52) Those go out into space with a nuclear warhead on it and then reenter the atmosphere somewhere else on the earth. If you have the ability to do that or to put a satellite in space, what is the difference of a nuclear weapon on a satellite being shot into space? The technology and the ability to do that is the same. (31:19) So it's strange to have everybody chime in and go, Russia really doesn't have the ability to do that. What are you talking about? What do you mean? They have thousands of missiles that have the ability to do that. Our astronauts, their astronauts launch on Soyuz rockets to go to and from the International Space Station. (31:44) What's the difference? There isn't the space shuttle program deploying the Hubble telescope in space. Well, it could have deployed anything. We have our own X-39B space plane that goes up for two years at a time in space in these secret missions. What is it doing up there? So you can't listen to somebody that would come out in public and say, eh, nothing to see here. (32:14) Oh, there is a lot to see here. With this news article, the question that comes to mind is why this secrecy behind it? Why say it's a national security threat? And then why, when other representatives were asked about it, they didn't really give a definite answer. For instance, according to Newsweek, the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, Virginia Democrat Mark Warner said, And Florida Republican Marco Rubio, who serves as vice chairman, said in a statement on Wednesday that the committee, quote, has the intelligence in (32:50) question and has been regular rigorous rigorously tracking this issue from the start and continues. We continue to take this matter seriously and are discussing an appropriate response with the administration. In the meantime, we must be cautious about potentially disclosing sources and the methods that may be key to preserving a range of options for U.S. (33:14) action. So in my mind, I'm trying to think and rationalize of why make it sound scary to begin with. Why did no rep just say it has to do with Russia and like anti-satellite capability equipment? You could just say that. These aren't satellites that are equipped with lasers that are – Ready to shoot down on planet Earth. (33:38) No, they're shooting down at other lasers, which other satellites, which, yes, can still be kind of scary in the sense of control and communication. But it's not in the sense of, I don't know, horrifying. But that could lead into a World War Three, which in that aspect, yes, it's detrimental. That is horrible. (33:57) But this is information that humanity should know about. Because this is still important. But there was like this level of just vague touching over it just barely for about 48 hours with no one saying anything of what it really was about other than saying, yeah, it's pretty spooky, but it's not going to ruin your Thursday. (34:21) Then just say it. Just lay it down. We can handle the truth. It reminds me of the movie Network. The truth, you can't handle the truth. But, yeah, we can. And then let's talk about, I want to get into asteroids and EMPs and some other things here in just a minute. But then we have Sean Kirkpatrick. Now, Sean Kirkpatrick, the UAP task force, turned into the aero program. (34:56) He sits in the hot seat for a few months. Did he hit a year? He did, but just barely. Just barely hit a year, and then he bailed out. He tapped out. That picture right there, okay, you can take it down. No, we're going to leave it there. It's just going to make me angrier. In that, here comes Kirkpatrick. (35:21) We know that he has access to a lot of information. Not everything. Not everybody is giving Arrow and the UAP task force all of their information when it comes to UAPs and what may be going on. No, no. To think otherwise, like the CIA and the NSA and the Air Force is just dumping all of the real information on Kirkpatrick. (35:49) No, that never happened. But he did have access to a lot. And then he turns around and says in his two hearings that he did, and let's not forget about the paper that he wrote with Avi Loeb. Okay, so... He writes the paper with Avi Loeb about the possibility of an ET mothership, not my words, his, right, deploying probes to planets in our solar system. (36:25) It went viral. The press picked up on it. And then a couple of weeks later, he's sitting here. And he goes, well, you know, whatever. Nothing to do with E.T. I can tell you that E.T. is not part of the phenomena that we're studying. And I said, wait a minute. You just published this paper with Avi Loeb that says the opposite. (36:55) And now you're coming here. So which one is the real Sean Kirkpatrick? Then he came back for his funding hearing with Gillibrand. and which you and I broadcast live together, and that was a great day too as well. But he came in and talked about money, budgeting, staff, and personnel, and again, removed the ET component from everything. (37:21) Now, we've got another version of Sean Kirkpatrick. Not the one that wrote the paper with Avi Loeb. Not the one that went in front of Congress and the Senate. But somebody that is saying he was gagged. He was prevented from telling the truth. That the Pentagon interfered and said, you've got to be a team player here. (37:57) You are not going to discuss E.T. or anything like that. And Sean, and I'm looking at his quotes over the last week. Some of them are pretty dramatic. But one of them, one of these, you know, you just pick out these nuggets, Christina. One of the nuggets is, hey, man. We've got metallic orbs, right? His words again, metallic spheres. (38:28) And we don't know what they are. And without saying that they are ET, he is now implying, right? He has done a complete flip-flop here. He is implying an extraterrestrial component to this metallic sphere phenomenon. Now, a metallic sphere is anything, right? It can be anything of any size, of any shape, and to call it a sphere is even more interesting, by the way. (39:00) But to use these descriptors like this after everything else that he did in the public, which one do we trust and which one do we believe? And I'm going to ask you that, Christina, where are you now with Kirkpatrick? It's a tough one, and I'm really glad you bring this up because there's something that I do want to address on this, and Cassidy, thank you for that, but you're actually going to be in this conversation for this one because starting off with the sun. (39:31) uk, Kirkpatrick Mentions what you had just stated, but despite his claims of being restricted in what he could reveal, the Pentagon denied such allegations, asserting that Kirkpatrick had the freedom to communicate his findings in his push for transparency. So Kirkpatrick says after resigning. He noted that the eminent release of declassified material intended to educate the public, including footage and documents on UFOs. (39:58) And he lamented the challenges of conveying the truth within the Pentagon's constraints, emphasizing the need for greater openness in addressing the mysteries of UFO sightings. So Cassidy here, he is a big fan and an amazing supporter for this channel. He wrote to me, quote, because I'm reading this verbatim, and it says, I thought of something today. (40:19) Lou Elizondo was a part of AATIP and resigned because of pushback and the withholding of information by the Pentagon. And then he became a whistleblower. David Grush, who worked for the NGA and NRO... resigned because he pushed because of the pushback and the withholding of information by the Pentagon. And then he became a whistleblower. (40:40) And now Sean Kirkpatrick, the then head of Arrow, has resigned because of pushback and withholding of information by the Pentagon. So Do you see where I'm going with this? Dr. Kirkpatrick could become another whistleblower. And if we're looking at this pattern here, I don't see why not. People had mentioned before Aero, the UAPTF, the AOIMSG, all looked very similar to Project Blue Book. (41:09) And then with J. Allen Hynek, after years of sitting on information, he finally spoke out about it. Could Kirkpatrick do the same, but in a shorter timeframe, as we're kind of already seeing already? It's funny you bring up J. Allen Hynek. I was reading his book again last night, and it's such... (41:33) The book, The Report on UFOs, which was released in 1977, published in 1977, I think was J. Allen Hynek's apology to the public. Okay, that's the overall flavor, but it's also filled with... Anger's the right word. I've talked to his son, Paul, about this directly. He said, yeah, yeah, my dad was angry because he was a tool and he was used. (42:06) And he was used to spread misinformation and disinformation online. about the reality of UFOs. But you bring up a really, really good point about this. And going back to not only with what J. Allen Hynek wrote about 1977, we're seeing it repeated today with Sean Kirkpatrick. Because if you listen to what he is saying right now, and then read the Pentagon's response to Kirkpatrick. (42:42) They clearly state, and they are not messing around here, yeah, he was free to talk about what we would let him talk about. That's what they said. That's what they said in the press release. We didn't hold him back. Everything we allowed him to say, he was free to talk about. They didn't say he wasn't free to talk about classified information. (43:11) They didn't say that. Like, no, he was free to say whatever he wanted. No, that's not what the Pentagon said. The Pentagon said he was free to talk about what they were allowing him to talk about. Isn't that strange? Which is exactly what J. Allen Hynek talked about in 1977. And we could even go back to Eisenhower's speech in 1962. (43:41) Beware the military-industrial complex, man. That's a thing that runs itself, and they answer to nobody. And that's where we are today. Now, was that the reason why Kirkpatrick resigned? He said he retired because he was going to move into the private sector, which is usually what they say, right? Well, not only that, but he also mentioned that I've done everything that I needed to do as well. (44:10) He did mention that in one of his resigning statements. I do want to state that right now we have 490 people watching this. Let's get to 350 likes if you're enjoying the show and all the topics that we are covering right here, right now. That link, that link, that like button is just right down below. But, Jimmy, when we're looking at this and we're looking at Kirkpatrick and his statement, because that particular article was written February 9th, so really not too long ago. (44:35) And then we're just seeing the timing of this. We can even bring up the inspector general, Robert Storch, who made a statement or who who made a summary of a paper that was written in August of last year of what We need the government. We need the military to have a consensus on creating UAP data. We don't have one yet. (44:59) We're still going to kind of talk about it and figure it out. But we don't have one. And that's why we're having these issues with these UFO reports. He didn't have to make that information public. That was a classified paper. Again, that was written in August of 2023. But he came out in early February of this year and said, you know what? I think I should mention this now. (45:18) Why now? And then we have Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick resigned, then we have Storch, then we have this information with Mike Turner coming out yesterday talking about a national security threat. Could it have meant more than one thing? And now when we look at all of this in its totality, is there – and I know you alluded to this a second ago, but it's worth mentioning and exploring a little bit deeper – Is Kirkpatrick positioning himself to be unchained? What do you mean by that? Could he turn into a grush? Could he suddenly go, you know what? (46:05) I've seen the data. I've seen the stuff. And it ain't us. And this is what is going on. Is he positioning himself for that? Because he distanced himself deliberately from the UFO community and any idea of an extraterrestrial component to the phenomena. Now, in this abrupt flip-flop, what is the long game here? What is going on in Sean's mind? Is it a book deal? Is it a movie deal? Is it for the community? Is it for the world? Is it to share the knowledge about nature and the universe that we are entitled to? (46:51) What's the long game? right, if it was a perfect world, that Sean is getting ready to and preparing himself to maybe help with disclosure. So it'll no longer be an SEP, someone else's problem, but it'll be his problem. Do you remember that? And here's the thing. Hate's a strong word, Christina. (47:23) It is. I felt it during that hearing with Jilla Brown. And I'm entitled, and I do this all the time, I am entitled to change my mind. And all of this, everybody listening right now, collect the data, right? Read through it, understand it, get to know people, and let history play out here. We have the right to change our minds. (47:53) So I think that Sean, again, I keep going back to this, but let's not forget that paper that he wrote with Avi Loeb, that was Sean firmly in the open mind camp. Right. Right. And then he, you know, he appears for the House and he appears in front of the Senate and flips all of his public statements suddenly with Arrow and everything else was the opposite of Avi Loeb. (48:26) And now he's apparently flipped again. So let's see what he does. I have the right to change my mind and to change my opinion. And I think that there's something else in play here. I just don't know what it is. It is difficult to change your mind and your opinion when you are a public figure and especially when you have a military job. (48:51) And when it comes to Kirkpatrick, and John brings up a good point, even if Kirkpatrick wants to disclose info, who is going to believe him just because he is a two-faced coin saying, yes, UFOs, no UFOs. And by the way, Tim, Tim, thank you for that so much. But there's this lack of trust there. So if he were to say anything, would it mean anything? Well, any good defense attorney, any good attorney, anybody with logic, you know, is going to go, okay, well, which one of you is speaking right now? Because once you, (49:36) he hasn't perjured himself, I'm not going to say that, but he has certainly changed his public position on this. So you need to, and once you, if he goes solid one way or the other, Everybody on the other side of the fence is going to go, dude, you said this before, right? You said this before. Now you're saying this now. (50:01) And in court, that doesn't fly. Once you blow it once, there's nothing you can say. And any good defense attorney, like I said, any good attorney is going to attack you on those grounds. You bend a little bit once. You muff the truth once. You make conflicting statements in a public forum, and you do that once. (50:28) Your credibility is shot. So is that part of the play? Now let's think about this for a second. Kirkpatrick comes out. He's now a whistleblower. Is he just crazy like the rest of them? It's very easy to attack the person and the message. No matter how much of it is true, you will have the open door, right? Your defenses are down, and it is an undefensible position to find yourself in. (51:07) So, yeah, very, very, very interesting situation to have all of this come on the heels of, all of the laser-based, nuclear-based, space weapons conversation that is going on. And I will say it one more time. Let's circle back to this. We need to defend this planet. For a lot of different reasons. It's not just an extraterrestrial threat that we have to always consider, right? But there are asteroids. (51:41) There are meteors. There are comets. There are EMPs. There are cosmic situations that we also need to be aware of. Maybe. And Android says here, maybe Kirkpatrick found a legal loophole in his non-disclosure agreement allows him to tell the truth in non-US news networks because he made that mention on the Sun.UK news outlet. (52:11) So Android, you're bringing up an interesting idea. And by the way, thank you for supporting the channel as well. But I think it's something that needs to be at the very least thought about. And the question is, why now? Why mention it right after resigning? Because he walked away in December of 2023. We're only two months in to 2024. (52:34) Now, when it came to Hynek, for instance, or even Grush, or even Luella Zondo, they sat on information. They didn't come public for a few years. In this case, for Kirkpatrick, two months after, he's like, bam, bam, bam. Here's some info. Kind of. He's not the first person to approach this idea, right, this model of getting information out. (53:04) And that is going to another media outlet outside of the United States. Yes. Is it a loophole? It certainly is a generic protection measure. from United States-based law. So you go to another country's media outlet and let it all hang out. He's not the first to do it, and he's certainly not the first to do it about UFOs. (53:32) This has happened quite a bit over the years. So it's not only a good point, but I think it's a valid one to consider. Now, let's... I can't believe... We're running out of time. How... And I just want to keep going right here. I could do Sean Kirkpatrick and everything else that is going on for the rest of the day, no problem. (54:01) But I want to bring up... Don't look up. The movie. And... The movie, if you haven't seen it, just go and watch it after some of the things that I am about to say right now. Because they all tie into everything that we're talking about. Now, in the movie, Don't Look Up, which is brilliant. A comet is spotted. (54:36) An object is spotted. In this case, it's a comet. It's going to impact Earth in six months. Okay. Now, what do we have to defend against something like that? Now, you can have comet. You can have ET destroyer spacecraft, right? We can have, oh, man. Such a great movie. All of it. All of it. What is portrayed in the movie is the ability for us to rapidly put something together. (55:19) a missile-based defense system firing nuclear weapons into space and heading out to this asteroid. And do we have something like that in play? It's exactly what we're talking about right now with Mike Turner and others and this space defense network that should be should be there. Now, do we have an asteroid defense program in place? Let me ask you that. (55:54) Christina, do you think we have an asteroid? Do you think we have a defense setup plan right now if something was headed to Earth? We do, but not on a grand scale. Right now we have DART, which stands for the Double Asteroid Redirection Test. And NASA launched the DART spacecraft on November 24, 2021, using a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. (56:25) And the spacecraft was directed towards a pair of asteroids. And these asteroids were chosen not because they were a threat to Earth, but because they were suitable for testing this new technology. However, these two asteroids were rather small. And after traveling for over 10 months on September 26, 2022, DART successfully collided. (56:46) with the asteroid that was in target at a speed of roughly 14,000 miles per hour. And this collision was intended to change the asteroid speed and orbit around the larger asteroid that was right next to it. And the mission aimed to demonstrate that we could... internally direct a spacecraft to an asteroid and modify its trajectory through a technique known as a kinetic impactor. (57:16) But one key takeaway is that it took 10 months for DART, the DART mission, to get to that asteroid, which... in the grand scheme of things was not I mean it was decently far from earth but let's say we get one that's coming in a little bit more rapidly would we have enough time to help its trajectory from planet earth so we we have some stuff in play but No, we don't. (57:48) The short answer is no, we don't. If, yeah, the DART program, which I have reported on for years, and it's exciting, and boy, do we need it. You know why we need it? Why? Peace of mind. Right? Peace of mind. You want to think, you would assume that we've got this stuff dialed in. Right? You just want to assume that. (58:16) Okay, here it comes, but we're going to be okay. Do you want the opposite? Well, it's coming, and there's nothing we can do. You got six months to party. Right? That's it. Whatever it is that you wanted to get done, you got to do it now. And the idea of this is not far-fetched. We have... Let's not forget, 65 million years ago, an asteroid roughly 10 to 15 kilometers, right? 10 miles. (58:58) That's big. Mount Everest, right? Okay. Hit the earth. And in what is now Mexico, right? In the Gulf of Mexico, that impact killed everything. Everything. If you weren't a fish, right? If you weren't a fish, you died. It's like 95% of all mammals wiped out the dinosaurs. Everything, all species on earth wiped out. (59:34) It's really that simple. Now, the other part, it was the impact, but it was also the change in climate. Oxygen is disappeared and sucked out of everything. A cloud layer enveloped the earth. No sunlight got in. Everything died. It's really that simple. So the thought of that, and it's like, well, that could never happen. (1:00:04) It happened in 1908. The Tungusta event, which not only is modern, go and look at the photographs of that. And they are guessing, this is just through math, because nobody actually saw the explosion happen. Thank goodness it was in a remote part of Siberia. But it was only 30 meters. And it exploded in the atmosphere. (1:00:42) That thing leveled everything around it. I mean, look at it. You can still see it to this day. Look at the photographs of that event and just think about that. We had another one. When was it? Two thousand and fifteen? What is it by? Okay. I'm just going to say it. What is it with Russia and exploding asteroids? Has anybody, you know, it's the obvious thing there, Christina, but I'm just going to put it out there. (1:01:20) We haven't had anything like that happen over the United States or any other country for that matter. But Russia is a magnet for this. Coincidence? That what you're showing there is one of the craziest images ever. Do you know that the meteor is still in the ground? I did not know that. Some say it's a spaceship. (1:01:50) Dun, dun, dun. That is metallic. Yeah, yeah. I've done many stories on this, but this is one of the great images, and that's real. That's crazy. Now, Shoemaker Levy. Shoemaker-Levy, which was, it was called Levy 9 because there were nine of them. This was an asteroid impact that was anticipated for a long time because we saw, we knew the trajectory. (1:02:25) It was all being measured. And we had the ability to watch this and film it and see it and capture images. This was a string of asteroids impacting Jupiter, right? jupiter's big if those asteroids were to hit earth like that one after another boom boom boom boom uh it would be good night here but we watched that to and to think that these events don't happen shoemaker levy shoemaker levy nine we watched happen in real time and that's enough uh to freak out and then we had a um uh the one I was just talking about back in 2015 (1:03:13) in russia that was captured on on all kinds of dash cam video and cell phone videos that thing exploded over the city and and to watch that uh blow out windows and the damages and the volume of that and how that was felt and that was just a small meteorite again blowing up over russia The chances of this, Christina and everybody, I'm not here to alarm or to freak anybody out. (1:03:42) The chances of something like this, a collision like that in the near term, are very small. We have many, many, many, many systems and subsystems active here on Earth looking at any near Earth object, right? Now, the... The major ones we know, and we know their orbits. But we're also surprised all the time, aren't we? Where something is spotted the day before or the day of an event happens. (1:04:17) Either coming into our atmosphere like what just happened over Berlin two weeks ago. That was spotted that day. That day, it was discovered that day. It wasn't like we knew about it weeks or months in advance. It snuck up on us. But the bigger stuff and the odds of something just surprising us, the odds of that are very, very small. (1:04:46) It's not to say that it's never going to happen. It will happen. The question is, are we prepared and will we have a defense plan in place? Or is the space junk around us a defense blend? Because since 2022 on to where we are today, we easily shoot up 2,500 satellites per year into Earth's orbit. And that's just including the new satellites. (1:05:18) And we have thousands of other satellites from previous years, some that have been broken apart, and so many other things. junk that is out there, AKA why it's known as space junk. But the thing is that could maybe space junk be a protector in one sense and look really trashy in another serious question. Is it, is it, um, it's like, uh, having you, you're watching a movie and, And you want to get up and get a drink from the refrigerator. (1:05:59) And you trip over your ottoman. And you're deflected from getting to the refrigerator momentarily. Yeah. Not only does that offer a layer of protection because it's just stuff in the way and it could deflect something or damage it or break it apart and have it then burn up in Earth's atmosphere. There's that part of it. (1:06:27) But maybe something larger already in space where we don't have to launch it, right? We only have to direct it. Now, we are always talking about, that's why I like the space-based lasers. We're talking about firing a missile at it or the DART system. But lasers are at the speed of light. And having the ability to fire a particle beam weapon at the speed of light across space at something, yeah, maybe to blow it up, but maybe deflect it or push it. (1:07:05) Remember Avi Loeb talking about space sails. and using a laser at a space sail to have a space probe not reach the speed of light, but certainly 10%, 20%, 30%. But that's a force. Is it possible to use a space-based laser weapon system, a directed energy weapon to push something out of the way? And the short answer to that is yes. (1:07:37) So why wouldn't we have something in space to do that, to push something out of the way? And I like that. You don't have to, right, move it just a little bit just to get it out of the trajectory of orbit to impact Earth. Just a little bit, right? Just a little nudge would be enough to do that. And I would feel a lot better if I knew that we had something like that in place. (1:08:09) And here's one other thing I want to talk about before we get to EMPs. We're always talking about blowing something up. Bruce Willis, right? Armageddon. You know, going out to an asteroid, drilling down, putting a nuclear bomb in the middle of it and blowing it up, and somebody's got to sacrifice their life here on Earth to go and get that done. (1:08:34) Okay, I get that. But why not take the opposite approach and have something land on the asteroid with a big rocket engine on the back end of it and fire that thing up? and push it into another direction. Why don't we talk about that? Hey, you know what? I should write up a white paper for DARPA. Just draw that thing out. (1:09:03) But why aren't we talking about that? Or a space tug, right? A space tug, something to go out, fire in some cables, with some cramp on some hooks, and then pull it. you know, a space tug into another direction. I'm just saying these are ideas. They've probably thought of that scientists, but there had to be there. (1:09:31) I'm praying. There has to be a reason to why they don't execute those ideas, but instead went the dart route where they are shooting at an asteroid or any kind of space junk just for it to be moved out of space. the trajectory of earth because you're right I i think your ideas are valid we see them in a lot of sci-fi movies as well but scientists and those that are paid to do that job have probably gotten thousands of emails that start off with hey stupid did you not watch x movie why don't you do this they (1:10:06) probably roll their eyes like you're right you're right space tug is a boring movie Is it a real movie? I've never heard of it. No, no, no. That's why it's never been made. Who wants to watch a tugboat pull an asteroid? It's much more exciting to see Bruce Willis fly out. It's like Skinwalker Ranch. (1:10:31) We could do experiments at Skinwalker that aren't exciting. You know what's more fun? Blowing stuff up, right? Fireworks. Rockets. Rockets. Right, right. Yeah, it makes total sense. Now, here's my big fear. If I have something that keeps me awake at night. Other than coffee. Is an EMP. And you bring up coffee because, one, I had this crazy vision years ago. (1:11:12) And I did a series of shows about it, and I certainly talked about it a lot. And it was, I got up, and this is all real. This really happened. I got up in the morning. And I found myself doing my routine, which is making my coffee. I've got my cell phone. I'm flipping through. I'm looking at my mail and maybe the news, and I'm doing this thing in the morning. (1:11:43) But what if I go to make my coffee and my coffee maker doesn't turn on? Right, and I go to my phone and I'm assuming that maybe my circuit breakers have broken on the house, right? I paid my electric bill, the electricity should be on, what's going on? So you walk outside, you check the panels, okay, the electricity is off in the neighborhood. (1:12:17) That's the start. right? Nobody else is freaking out because power goes out all the time, right? So we're not in freak out mode yet, but when it doesn't come back on and it doesn't come back on and doesn't come back on and you don't have the news on your phone, it's not working and you don't have the ability to find out what's going on. (1:12:45) How long does it take? for everything to come unglued. Where? Oh, wait a minute. There is no electricity anywhere. How long does the news then take to spread? Right? If the satellites are out, they're gone. Electricity is gone. Anything with a metal component in it is gone. How long does it take for everything to completely come unglued? Right? Because food... (1:13:28) Logistics, transportation systems, everything that moves stuff in and out. How long does it take Los Angeles to run out of food? How long would it take? How long would it take until absolute anarchy, absolute madness? How long? Less than 24 hours. You'd say 24 hours? I'm going to say about a week. I'm going to say about a week. (1:13:58) But after that, maybe four days, five days. But you better be able to defend your house. That's all I got to say. And so that's where EMPs really freak me out. Now, there is the natural right here. We're looking at the screen. The natural version of an EMP from the sun. Now, EMPs come in a lot of different flavors. (1:14:25) Okay, they do. But one from the sun, a solar flare, a massive solar flare hitting us. Going back to the Carrington event, which let's not downplay this. The Carrington event, which went down in the middle of the 1800s, The Carrington event at that time, we had just developed. Electricity is just starting to, you know, sort itself out. (1:15:02) Cables, right? The ability to communicate across the ocean from London to New York and telegraphs and the idea behind this was brand new technology. The... The... Electric cable, the cables, the system that was around the United States at that time was very limited. We had stuff between New York and Chicago. We had laid the trans-oceanic, transatlantic cable connecting New York and London. (1:15:40) And so telegraph lines were just being installed. We didn't have the infrastructure that we have today. But when the Carrington event happened... Those cables that we laid and strung from poles, the transformers that we had in place at relay stations to get all of this communication happening, they all blew up. (1:16:10) They caught on fire. That's what it does to electrical systems. Now, if the same thing, if the Carrington event happened today, that level, and I'm not here to freak everybody out, all right? It's our son. It burps. That's what it does, right? And it has burped bigger than Carrington. It's just burped in the wrong direction, and it missed Earth. (1:16:49) We have them all the time, and they skate by us, right? And we've just been lucky. But the odds of it happening again are 100%. It's not 99%. It's going to happen. The question is when. And what do we have to defend against it? But the knowledge of the Carrington event and what an EMP is, what do humans do? You turn it into a weapon. (1:17:22) Oh, well, that too. That's the first thing you do, right? So do we have? Yes, we have. We have EMP weapons, all different kinds. Now, the old versions of our televisions, you don't remember this, but we used to have TVs with a television tube in it, right? See, you're already confused. What are you talking about, Jimmy? It's called a TV tube. (1:17:52) Those TV tubes were surrounded by a degausser. It's this cable that went around it, and it would neutralize the magnetic activity and buildup inside of the TV to keep the TV screen perfect. It's called a degausser. Degaussers are strong. Degaussers can erase everything in your house. If you took that out of your TV and plugged that sucker in, everything electronic in your house wouldn't work. (1:18:29) All your credit cards would be erased. Your computer wouldn't work. But the idea behind that goes back to the principles of EMP, an electromagnetic pulse, which is what a degausser does. And there are other things in play like that that can be used as weapons. And so what do we have to defend against that? Our electrical infrastructure. (1:18:58) If an EMP was released by a satellite over the United States, it's not a nuclear weapon that would freak us out. It's a nuclear weapon being detonated in the air over a large piece of land because everything below it doesn't work. Nothing. Nothing, nothing, nothing works. And that's the scary part. (1:19:24) If you go back to, this is where E.T. comes into play. Do you remember the movie by Steven Spielberg with Tom Cruise, The War of the Worlds? Yes. Remember that? What was the opening scene of the movie? An electromagnetic pulse. That was the weapon of choice from the Martians. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Remember the cars wouldn't start? Remember that? And the cars lined up on the freeway? Nobody had a way out of town? Remember that? That's what we're talking about. (1:20:04) And that's the part where our technology, going back to 65 million years ago in a mass extinction event where we have developed as a civilization, as Homo sapiens sapiens, we have developed, we have evolved, we've gotten smarter. So now we have an infrastructure that is based on the internet. That is how you and I are communicating, but it's also how we are fed. (1:20:32) It's how our planes fly, our ships navigate the seas, our cars, our navigation systems, our cell phones, our lives are all based on that. So we need to protect that infrastructure from anything crazy that would happen because if all of that just gets removed, everything is based on that now. Money, banking, everything that you do in your daily life is connected to the internet our water systems our traffic lights uh food distribution refrigeration everything is wrapped around that now and if anything comes in to (1:21:13) interfere with that and certainly et would know this if that gets disrupted in any way going back to my coffee scenario in the morning How long would it take without communication for civilization to come unglued? And could we recover from that and continue and do a hard reset? These days, no. Everyone's so dependent on their phone. (1:21:42) This is a message to you listening or watching. Go to the store, make a bug out, backpack, all right? Stock up just a little bit because you don't know when this might happen. And let me tell you, people will be knocking on your door. Do you have a bug out bag? Heck yeah, I do. What's in it? Ramen. Some chocolate bars. (1:22:03) No, I got some good stuff in there. Ropes, flashlights, lighters. Yeah, yeah. I've got all of that. I've got all of that, and I don't ever want to use it. Here in California, earthquakes, wildfires, and all the other stuff, there's other reasons to have it. I've got a Jeep. I've got a four-wheel drive Jeep that if anything goes to crazy town... (1:22:32) I can have that thing packed in minutes. Everything's already packed, right? Just open up the back. I've always got a full tank of gas. I never, never, never, never do not have a full tank of gas. I've got water. I've got stoves. I've got solar lanterns. I've got solar wind-up emergency radios. (1:22:58) Not that those would work. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I have one of those as well. Yeah, I've got all of that. So, yeah, that's always my plan. Just fill it up, right, with what I need, open the garage door and bail and head to the mountains. Just drive as far as you can in one direction. And don't take the highway if you can. (1:23:19) Just get away from Los Angeles. Just get away from here and go somewhere else and do it alone. But yeah, yeah, you're right. And it's not in any way throwing up fear things or anything. If the power went out just for natural reasons in your neighborhood, wherever you are, you want to be able to deal with things for a couple of days. (1:23:48) You know, winter storm comes through, power goes out. Are you good to go? Yeah. I mean, there's lots of reasons to do it. But yeah, I'm prepared. I'm not a prepper, but I'm prepared. There's a difference. And so if you're listening to this, that's a sign for you to be at the very least a prepper. (1:24:09) And Mark Kasaka, thank you so much, as always. Really do appreciate it. And I think for today, we covered the bulk, the main topics that we had to cover for today's show, referring to a national security threat that was really addressed by Representative Mike Turner. And then we were able to go on very... deliberate and specific tangents for today's topic. (1:24:37) And I think we touched on a lot of things that are important, but did we miss anything? I wanted to ask you one thing. I meant to do this earlier before we got into this whole prepper, prepper thing, space force, because we had the United States space command and, And then we had the creation of the Space Force. (1:25:03) I've hung out with Space Force. I've been on the bases. And, you know, okay, all right, all right. And the logo, very Star Trek-y, by the way. Is the Space Force there for everything, for every contingency? Absolutely. Like a UFO UAP threat. What do you think, Christina? Do you think the Space Force, is it the coolest logo? It's a pretty sick logo. (1:25:35) When it comes to the Space Force that was created back in 2019. we don't have a lot of information on it. We don't really know what's happening behind closed doors. We don't know their conversations as, as for any military branch, but this one specifically, it's very, very secretive that like your average person, they've heard of the space force. (1:25:56) They know has to do with space and protection, but that's as far as people's knowledge goes on it. And I'm saying like the majority of people, even those that feel like they are well-versed in this topic, That's going to be our biggest takeaway from this. And so when we're looking at this sixth branch of the U.S. (1:26:15) armed forces, it was created to address the growing importance and complexities of space operations for national defense and to ensure the United States' dominance and security in space against evolving threats, particularly from strategic competitors like China and Russia. And the Space Force aims to protect U.S. (1:26:34) and allied interests in space and provide space capabilities to the joint force. That's what we know about it. Yeah, that boy, that is politically driven, isn't it? I mean, it's it's politician speak. Yeah. Right. Yeah. Right. Right. To me, it has to be there, and they have to be ready for everything. (1:27:07) And yes, for E.T. Christina, I get it where, and I've said this many times myself, if E.T., had bad intentions, we would never know because we wouldn't be here. That's it. We would never know. And it would be instant, right? So there's that. So does that mean that every species, every ET culture is positive, enlightened, And no negative thoughts? No. (1:27:53) Talk about naive. That's naive. Okay? Now, is the Space Force dealing with that on those terms? Do they have a contingency plan? I would say that if we have the ability to shoot down another country's space planes or satellites, and we have a weapons platform orbiting this earth to do that, you can point those in the other direction. (1:28:24) Yeah, yeah. So I would think that it is, what's the word, that 360-degree focused. It's just not at other satellites. You can use it for anything. And I'm comfortable in that thought. Now, I would say that most ETs are cool. Because they haven't messed with us yet that we know of. But just in case, maybe that's why Space Force is there. (1:28:56) And if so, have they learned a protocol on how to handle ET and first contact? It would be reassuring if the answer was yes. But once again, when it comes to the Space Force, very little is known about it. Right now, we have 551 people watching. Before we end today's show, can we get to 500 likes? If you're enjoying the show, hit that like button right down below. (1:29:20) Jimmy, thank you, as always, for doing this show with me. I always appreciate it. We're at 473. Are you kidding me? 473. Come on, people. 500. It's not much to ask, is it? Let's just get to 500. Do you remember? Thank you, everybody. I'll see you tonight on the show on Fade to Black. My guest is Dr. Damon Abraham. (1:29:45) We're going to be talking about technology. Meeting parapsychology. And I want everybody to go back and think about the STS-88 mission, the film Space Shuttle, and look at that film, which apparently shows some objects in Earth's atmosphere and something being fired out at them. I'm still very curious about that. (1:30:13) And is that an example of something defending this planet? Christina, you're the best. I'll see everybody here next week on Mysteries with a History. I'll see you tonight on Fade to Black. Bye. Thanks, Jimmy. And that's the first time Jimmy has ever said the show title correct. He usually does it backwards. (1:30:31) So you know what? And he's laughing. He's laughing behind the scenes. But I had to give him props for that, for saying it right. Like, rock on to you, Jimmy. But that is it for today's show. If you enjoyed it, please subscribe as we do three live shows right here on this channel every single week. And comment your thoughts on the topics. (1:30:47) the cases and the information that we covered right here on this channel your insights your opinions are very valuable not only to me but to everyone else that reads them as well as you have the potential to filling in gaps answering a lot of the questions that we had on today's show tomorrow is going to be strange news you do not want to miss it as I said it will be alive so make sure to hit that notification bell so that you will be notified when I go live. (1:31:14) We're in 2024. So here is the QR code to all of my social media links to my website and where I write all of my articles for these shows. You can find it right on this QR code or in the links in the description box below. If you're listening to this, follow me on Twitter at eyes underscore on the skies for all of my updates and news. (1:31:33) on Instagram at strange paradigms. But if you want to continue the conversation, bring it over to my discord server with 3000 other like minded members. So your thoughts, your insights, your experiences and more. I want to say thank you to everyone watching this live. Those that caught it on replay to all the super chat, super stickers, YouTube members, patrons, supporters, and of course, all of my amazing moderators. (1:31:56) You know, I can't do this show without you. That is it for today. I will see you tomorrow. Be safe and remember, keep Your eyes on the skies.