Dr. John Alexander UFOs

The Batroom series is time at the 20th International UFO Congress at the Fort McGowl Resort Arizona. Now, under the ownership of openmines.tv, amongst a brilliant set of world class speakers from Robert Dean Lloyd-Pyne, Linda Moulton-Howl, Jim Mars, Leslie Key, Nick Poet and many other of mine speakers. We featured two back-remittance with Dr. Carol Rosen and Dr. John B. Alexander. Full lectures available from WBDOT overmines.tv. And now Dr. John B. Alexander, who features an insider's look at how the US government deals with the physical reality of UFOs highly controversial. Dr. John Alexander. Well, sir, you have a couple of weeks to a UFO conference. I'm a master-cast and when I want to get beat up, my primary field, of course, is a national and international security. But I used to run an interagency group that looked at the phenomenon. I finally decided to write about it and put the word out. The basic premises, UFOs are absolutely real. And yet, the universe is probably more complex than we ever imagined. And there's not going to be any simple answers. I'm saying the set. Who's saying that's actually happening? Well, you mean, you talk about large physical crap. They come from many sources. One that I use in here is a night sighting with multiple commercial airplanes. Both of whom were piloted by former Air Force officers with lots of experience in night flying. And because of where they were, and the relative position, we can extrapolate the size of what they looked at. And that one was over a mile across as a minimum. We have other sightings, for instance, here in Desert Southwest, with people flying over and seeing a craft spanning a mesa, we know that the distance between is a mile across and yet this is overlapping both sides of a multiple witnesses. This is not a light in the sky. Just that this is important for us to hear saying this is real. Oh, absolutely real. There's no doubt about it. The problem is when you come to, therefore, you know, what is it? And I frankly don't know. My argument is to go on that we need to make it permissible for scientists to get involved without doing damage to their career. So you get the right kind of brain power. Which is very important, but it's been not getting that. Yeah, that's it. This is currently, this is toxic. And that's totally true in the scientific community. And it is in the political community. That's why you're not going to find politicians who are willing to step out and take a stance. The few that have, get ridiculed. I use the example of my friend, Senator Clayburn-Pell, a six-term senator in his obituary. The Washington Post ripped him over his interest in phenomenology. So you see the exo politics movement, you'll see faster than all that. That's a little bit of a push-in on the political agenda of the industry. Well, one of the things I argue, Steve is a great guy. But he is the only UFO lobbyist in Washington. You compare that to the smoking or healthcare industry. When the healthcare bill was every congressman will get in get five to six times a day. And it tells you the size and the strength of that kind of lobbying effort. So you want to compare it to one poor guy. Because you know, running around doing the best job he can, it kind of fails. It's very hard to get their attention. And you still have to get over the Giddle factor. And you do have, I will say, and I know he's been successful. As you may know, we almost had hearings at one point. But the people were very leery of having their name attached to it. And you know, it's a very risky issue. Part of it's arguably a scientific community. It's not too good for us to get encouraged to get involved. Well, the scientific community talks about advances provided you talking small incremental advances. There's very few things that they will get in and really really want big leaps. As Mike Sparks had science advances one funeral at a time. Yes, unfortunately. And getting in the problem is too cold. And here again is that the Condon Report, which was terrible, frankly, the particularly conclusions in it, ill-founded, not well-researched, even though the body of the text had talked about real UFO. But the perception that was put forth in the scientific community was that a thorough scientific report, which it wasn't. And it is contaminated everything to this date. Now when you talk to most scientists who have had no exposure to the field, they will tell you, well, that's been done. And it was done. And just a couple of issues. One of them is that the question to Condon was not our UFOs real. The question was, is this a threat to the United States? It was really denied to bury the weapons. Oh, that was the Air Force wanted it to go away. Well, an action pass is an action handle. And by doing this, by making it go away, you don't have to commit resources to it. And so, and Condon here, I'm right, because we haven't had an invasion, you know, sense. Well, I understand, but at least you know, you don't walk outside and see the alien space, could have hovering out there of things of that nature. The point is that the scientific community thinks it was well done, which it wasn't. And they also know that the few that venture into the field that they become contaminated in trying, and I was much specific, in example, if I might. I was doing an interview with Scientific American who came in with an ad-homony of attack in 1993, and it said basically that Alexander Belien sends the most scientists or skeptical of, therefore, my judgment must be questioned. And the point is, we weren't discussing you at both. We were discussing non-lethal weapons. So, they didn't like that topic. They were using this to attack me. Oh, no, no, no, this was early on. They didn't think much about it. You know, weapons are a kill people, and I was arguing, no. Not lethal weapons are a very, very broad category, and they run from low things, you know, about from tasers and pepper ball and, you know, even water cannons and things of that nature, all the way to strategic incapacitation. By that, I mean, going after, say, the electrical infrastructure of a nation state or things of that nature. And lots of things in between. But see, my argument is that water is not about killing people. The more is about imposing will. And so, having options in between doing nothing and doing too much are essential. The other thing is, because of the fact that the phenomenologies, because one of the things that I have arguments strongly for is what we need is a step back. In other words, instead of talking about UFOs, near death experience, we're both killing the people, the people, the guys, whatever it is. Many of the things are probably at a level of labor. And what we need to do is to put on the observations that we see. And from that go back and do macro pattern analysis and see where it goes. Unfortunately, today, we draw boxes. Like, it's a UFO. Well, well, again, what's a UFO ball's of light, very large, or related phenomena. And which one is good, which one is don't fit. This is where I say, we're not about to answer these questions. What we need is to formulate the right ones. And that's where you need a lot of brain power brought into it. As well as people who've had a breadth of observations and can report on. So, we have a folksic back in the scientific community. I just posted that. With great difficulty. Now, it's just a little bit strange. It's got to be more confident. And this is not the comfort. The problem with the UFO community is that there are worse enemies. And they come in with things that are patty ridiculous and demonstrally false. I want to take individual names on, if you will. But I mean, I literally saw people out here with 10-foil hats on. Now, there were being speeches. But, you know, that is the perception. You know, what happens with the skeptical community. They glam onto the things that are farthest out. They have the least probability of being true. And then extrapolate and seeing it, therefore, all the rest of these guys are freezing. Why would you ever want to get involved? The other one is frozen, they're going to be on top of it. Oh, but I'm very, very much so. Well, Nick Pope was in the morning of this call. This is a little bit of a series of homework. Good work. He's got the way up. It certainly is. But you also noticed that he mentioned that they didn't talk about UFOs. They talked about a generic exobiology approach. And so, when I did the studies, I ran an interagency study on. We called it Advanced Theory Medical Physics. And it was specifically, so we could get around both for you and people, you know, the Giddle factor because it allowed us to meet and have discussions with people. Otherwise, would never have talked about it. Well, again, there have been interactions between UFOs and other systems, with a teacher-quick-one system, as well as tactical ones as well. In general, it's been a two-tup to handle. But there was a whole series of fighting, but they call it a Northern Cheer-Sightings, over a strategic arsenal, and some direct interaction with web-resources. And that's a similar thing experienced by the Soviet. Saying they shut down if you can't a web-resistence, you can't talk about it. Well, I use this example. In our case, we had a situation in which a number of missiles were brought offline with UFOs above the Soviet attack was one in which UFOs are hovering there for hours, seen by lots of people on the boat ground. And their missiles are spinning up getting ready to launch. The difference was the command and control system. We trusted our people in the silos. They didn't. So ours, the guys could launch it, so shutting it down was a bad thing. For them, Moscow was in control. And so spinning it up, maybe it was not a control. That was a bad one. And they totally tore the one system apart. The assumed it was electromagnetic anomaly of some kind could not find it. Unfortunately, our approach has been where they started it and look at it and say, what the hell? Don't have a good answer. So they put it in the two tough to handle, Ben. If it happens again, we'll come back and get serious. What about the theory that purpose recently? German, not Japanese, but Japanese. Maybe a skateman with third party and maybe that's the thing. I don't have enough information to me. I hear the same rumors you have. I don't believe it. I do think they were working. But of course, my point would be if they really advanced, they lost. If they were really good, you would have seen it. And this is one of my arguments. Another technology that requires it not there is they were now in the longest war that we've had. I would expect to see these technologies emerge used. There's been some researchers in the community that have seen their resolve to contact from the delivery of duct tape. And some people call these military duct tapes. And my labs, very familiar with this. So is this the military? I think it was the military. It's basically not happening. I mean, that's a non-started. And I have lectured on this when I'm in Europe. I've been picketed. I've had the pull-a-side outside. It probably happened again in May when I'm in Germany. And I have the pull-a-side comes in to contain the pickets. It's the reaction. Well, the point is, even they're nice folks. I sit down and discuss these things with them. The more practical answer really gets down, when you look at the number of people who are sure they're saying to start. For instance, the number in the population around the world that are probably could be classified literally as a paranoid. These are all 0.5%. That doesn't sound like a lock. And to say, if any matters see, that's a big thing that they're trying to do. And when you start putting real numbers on it, do I believe that? Do I believe if I take it from the other side, that's why it's long. And that's an answer they can never answer. It's come up with. Why would you do this? You're risking an awful lot because this would be going to jam us absolutely cring if I'm a child. And you would be risking your career, your life, your life, really good for a very little game. Why would you be no game in the final moment? I can find out what? What would I find out? Well, we know how to do or conduct psychological studies. One of the first things that you want to do in these areas is to establish parameters. Therefore, you would not use folks who are running around freely that you can't control and can't control the parameters and that follow-ups and all that. It just pails by making sense. That I'll extrapolate one further by a very disencamera meditations that the military or in bulk. That also makes no sense whatsoever. If you want the data by the cows, you could buy them and serve dishes laying and do the same task with no risk. Yeah. So, I believe it's time to the argue of those that are very large. They're very small. They're very small. What's the contact as the military has? There's a big attitude in the US, already description. Right now, virtually none. And here again, we get back to the counter-record. And we must distinguish between individual interests and institutions. Because one of the things I point out is, like being a dog population in the US, probably 70% of not just the military, but government workers have seen you up up. And they've had a breadth of experience. We had folks here talking about walking up and touching. Guys, I happen to believe that you had a kernel coming in. That is the best water state of service. But you had Chuck Altman and talk about some other pretty amazing things that happened. 80-key witnesses from there. And you also heard what he said happened when he turned on the report. You know, first one was, so, go up to the limes. The Brits said, throw it back to the hospital. Well, throw it back to the hospital. Not my job, Mom. I don't know what it is, make it go away. So, but the weak of the situation, but I'm not a story as on the list. Still, I think that we have seen your daughter, the water is in the US Air Force Base. On the other hand, at times, I told him how to cure water. So, where do you think this is going to be? Well, don't know. And again, the point here, I think, is that one of the cases that's coming. The high quality data, high quality witnesses that are involved, having said that there's also a lot of smoke and nerves. And if you remember that, to kind of help, a dressed one where a guy wrote a book, and I had talked to him about this guy for years, and highly improbable that he was even present. I'll go with became the first hand account for the team up. So, that's the problem. The problem, most of the things, is the water is getting muddy, pretty quickly. What don't know, well, the so-called halt memo came out. That really kind of opens the dams. So, the floodgates were there, the book would have really gone away, don't know. But the one thing about the bedwaters' case, that I've watched this for a long, long time, is that it gets stronger and stronger over time. The ones that are not so good tend to dissipate over time. This one gets better, more witnesses, and there's a lot more to it. There's still pieces to come out. One of the things, what are those things? Oh, one of the things that I was mentioning yesterday, and that was that, by the way, these things had started in the 70s, and were other cases that just never did make it into the public domain. They weren't quite as dramatic as this particular case. The other thing that I learned was that this one is so interesting that the staff of the base they actually had radio communication at home, which was a normal thing. This was not evident, but it got to wear the families and everybody were monitoring the MP nets to hear when the UFO came back. And it went on for one of them. Again, the signings weren't quite as dramatic, but they were getting... What are we like by the wild? Well, that was in once. Because there's events being reported there by the civilist to this staff. Yeah, well, I don't got it, and the point is you go back. Back to work work. I have a paper that you may be able to find some players. I don't think they get word of a published one. We'd have to run it down. But when I looked at it, it was your anatomy of phenomena, and how many things emerge. I don't remember. I actually have to look it up. And I should remember one published it, but I didn't know I got asked to do it. Me or me or me, the UFO, during the... I know I did give a talk on it, at least I've seen it. We were that signing for scientific exploration. But it's, how do you analyze the phenomenon you have an event? And the point is, in pre-sune, you've got multiple events, and then you go out and then you start doing, you know, grouping analysis on it. And then eventually you do kind of a macro analysis. And what you almost always find out is that these events started long before you thought they were. And you probably, it probably was a misnomer because it kind of gets the the normal places of establish, you know, by the critical event, flying saucers where that came from, is in the classroom, you know. I'm not familiar with that, but I would not be surprised at all. If I look at a skin block of land, and where we had incidents that happened, and then it should start looking, some of those went back centuries. And there were unusual events happening in here. Not sure. I hear those rumors, but I don't, the other piece I have, you know, the second and I talk to the principles involved, the other is more generic. I put that in the, if you believe, my publications after this, I did future war, winning the war, which had to do with, not me, for weapons, and other weapons systems. I've done the Sherings of Monninger apps, so I share I have a chapter in the future of bioluxed the warfare, and I've done one of them, just how I'm a convergence of how special operations forces and civilian law enforcement are coming together, particularly in fighting tourism, and I've just recently done one of the regular warfare in Africa. That's the kind of things that I know, right? Well, as again, I have been interested for almost six decades, so this is not like a new interest, but it was, yeah. Well, I knew a fellow Karso before the book came out, and after I was really in the week before he died, and the problem is there's every no evidence to support any technological advantage or that this ever occurred. If you look at the history of almost technologies which we did, to see the straight line progressions, at no point you see a step function that should have happened if there was something interjected that would take it to a new level. What was the transfer? There's a host of transistors, there's fiber optics, night vision, there's a one in most of the way in the go to the state of Campellia, islands, and the guy who literally built an open night vision lab as a personal friend, and they addressed that with him. And here's the conundrum, is that in the Phil tells the story of going down with $5 million and giving a tool to make this advance. The incident is actually in the organizational history, the name was not Phil Karso. You have those real, the phenomenon is terribly complex, and we really need to make it permissible for scientists to get involved and do so without personal risk to their scenarios. Well, that's a whole another set of briefings because my main briefings are in the geoteins for me, so changes that are taking place in things like the nation state as a failing concept and what a... Well, I have a cute slide in there that says, and I use this in the street briefing as well, that the E.T. didn't answer the phone, you know, the world is declining rapidly, as we look at wealth that's acquiring and building to a neural and narrow path poverty across the world is increasing. Food prices are now at an all-time high. We're seeing climate change that really needs to be addressed, and these are issues that we'd really better get to get moving and energy of course is a key factor in them, all in favor of high-risk high pay off. We also hypothesized, you know, when I had the study, that there were things to be gained, even if you didn't have a UFO, if you just had the ability to take the observations and give you the model for where you're trying to go, that's critically important in innovating in any given field. But where did he get that connection? Where did he get the calendar from the effect of working in the next election? He was actually a whole bunch of people thinking he was a whole bunch of all of us were fortunate to have. I think that that whole work worked. Well, again, I think we need to go back to the beginning. What we need to do is to analyze the process and come up with the right question. I think we're approaching it long, and, you know, if you don't start with the right questions or the right parameters, you know, if you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there. But what are those questions about our data? Why don't know? That's the point. That is what we need to sit down and you get a lot of bright people to sit down and discuss. And right now you can't do it. It's not permissible, you know, without great rest. And what you saw with Nick, I thought that was kind of interesting. Some of these things like consider a post-biological universe. That's pretty unique thought. Maybe you can get there, but you didn't say post-biological universe that is governed by 18 or UFOs. And you leave those emotionally charged words out of them.