BYP LIVE! A New More Accurate Analysis of the UFO Files of the Govt

[00:00:04]Welcome to BYP Live. Sunday night, July 19th. Holy cow, July is disappearing.

[00:00:13]Oregon squat says it's hot as hell there in Oregon. Yeah, it's hot here, too. I'm sitting in 98 degree weather. Hopefully, I'm in a good enough shady spot that I can knock it down to 91 or so. I'm going to try it outside one because I love being outside during the summer. I'm so stuck inside in the winter time. It's fun to be on the outside.

[00:00:38]So, here we are. What news have I got?

[00:00:41]The Iran war is back on. Everybody's throwing bombs at everybody else and solving nothing. Uh, I heard another American serviceman has died. I don't know how many that is. None of us do really. I don't think they're being truthful with the numbers, but the war is going hot and heavy. That's not good.

[00:00:59]America is down really close to no more strategic reserves oil when that day hits, which is right around the corner.

[00:01:08]Anytime now, our gasoline is going to shoot way up. Just get prepared for that. So, in the meantime, it's hot. I hope you're in air conditioning. I'm not.

[00:01:19]I want to talk again about the fourth release. I actually want to talk about all of the releases, but I haven't had time to Hey, his highness, good to see you. I'm glad you're here tonight. Great to see you. In fact, you'll keep me on the physics upside here. We're going to do some basian analysis tonight.

[00:01:44]Hey, Tristan Jones, good to see you.

[00:01:46]Gary Hall, good to see you. So, anyway, what was I lying about? Let's see. Yeah.

[00:01:52]Um, what I want to do is there is a way to look at the releases that the government's giving us. And I I'm going to just spill the beans right now. No, I didn't find any aliens with my basian analysis of these. I did not. Darn it. I wish I could. Uh, I think I side with Richard Dolan pretty much him and Bryce Zable when uh we're told that this is not disclosure.

[00:02:28]Uh, I suspect at least it's not catastrophic disclosure.

[00:02:34]So, meaning that we're not going to see any aliens in these data dumps that they're giving us, both videos and writing. Uh, I have not been taking them seriously enough because I wasn't quite sure how to analyze them. And now that I know how to analyze them, hot dang. I cannot wait for the fifth trunch. I really am serious. I'm looking forward to it. So, in this fourth trunch, what I've done, and I will show you the videos after I describe my analysis.

[00:03:06]We'll we'll look at and talk about the videos that I picked. I wanted to pick the three strongest videos that help determine whether we have a UAP anomaly or not. You know, I'm just trying to sift through the evidence to see what it is we have. Uh, a lot of these are very difficult to assess.

[00:03:32]They're not easy to even look at or see.

[00:03:36]Uh, one of them I actually found has been misidentified. I'm sure someone else has already noted that as well. So, hey, Dead Fish Cheese Spread, I have been working on your material all week this week, and I've just about got a video response ready for you. So, woohoo. Uh, you told me last week, take a look. I have been. So, I will do a video. Uh, in the title I will name it dead fish cheese spread, you know, duh, whatever. That way, you know, the video is responding to your very interesting orange orb uh situation that you found yourself in. Yeah. So, anyway, back to the tunch. I'm only going to analyze three of the strongest in tranch 4 tonight. Uh, and I want to set a bar of what kind of evidence is the best kind of evidence to use in trying to find the best case scenario for these. My impression is the government's just simply throwing all their old files out. First, that was my impression.

[00:04:52]Nate and I have been talking this last week.

[00:04:56]uh the government is what we're seeing, what we're experiencing, and there's nothing we can do about this. So, it's just tough luck. If you want to complain like I do, go ahead. But it's not going to change the nature of this beast. We are getting slow disclosure. No, really.

[00:05:15]uh the dramatic, you know, catastrophic disclosure, whatever you want to call it, where President Trump brings on an alien on the stage and starts talking to him and shakes his hand and the alien pulls OUT A LASER BUTTON and starts shooting everybody like in Mars Attack. It ain't happening, but we are getting disclosure now. This is remarkable. that changed my whole tune when Nate and I talk through all of this and he brings a wealth of knowledge and information into it.

[00:05:53]Historical background, personalities, their involvement with various different groups, clubs and secret societies, all of that noise.

[00:06:03]I'm convinced we really are in the midst of disclosure. I truly, but it's going to be slow. These batches that they're sharing with us are hints.

[00:06:18]They are not useless. I know I said they were. I was wrong. They are not. In fact, they hold some very, very interesting information. I want to share that with you tonight in the three strongest Hey, Savage for you. in this three strongest videos that they've been giving us in this last batch. I haven't touched the one, two, and three yet. I'm just going to do the the fourth trunch.

[00:06:46]Okay, let's take a look at some of this. Now, I did use AI to help me analyze the basian information on the analysis utilizing all of the evidence that the various reports talked about that came with the videos. There are, you know, we have some FBI files. We have some files that have been published on the official Arrow site on YouTube on the government site and we have some other dispatches elsewhere of people who have analyzed them. I have stuck strictly with the government files and the government descriptions and I have also kept the descriptions of those who took the actual video if they gave any. And I want to explain the ins and outs of where the value lies. The three videos are the Pantex video is by far the strongest one of all of them in all four uh batches so far. That is the nuclear sight one that occurred I do believe in 2022. I didn't put the date here. Sorry.

[00:08:04]The reason why the Pantex one is the strongest is because it radar was involved. There were several ground observers that makes a difference. There was binocular observation. There was a separate camera system and there was a later laboratory image enhancement that happened with this pantex situation. And I'll get more into the details as we go along tonight. My second strongest case that I found was labeled PR028.

[00:08:40]It's the military SWIR video.

[00:08:44]It also included a mission report, which is a very good thing. We want as much description as we can about these batches. I'm going to call them batches.

[00:08:55]Everyone keeps complaining about calling them trenches. Okay, good. I'll call them batches.

[00:09:01]So, there is also an estimated speed and altitude profile with this one. But the downside is there's only one sensor band produced a clear detection. The other one didn't. And then my third choice is the one labeled PR022.

[00:09:23]This is a genuinely military dual sensor recording and mission report, but it's extremely brief and it lacks the contextual measurements needed to characterize it. But I include it for other reasons that I'll share with you.

[00:09:41]That means that these do not receive the same equal evidence weight. Of course, not all videos are equal, right? Okay.

[00:09:52]So, here's our hypothesis.

[00:09:56]We want to propose the hypothesis that at least some officially reported UAP incidents that we have in these matches.

[00:10:06]They involve a real physical phenomenon that is not adequately explained by ordinary aircraft or balloons or drones or atmospheric effects. No, they're not birds. They're not center artifacts either. Although we do have some of the videos that do show what sensor artifacts look like, none of those are in these three videos or simple observational errors. None of that's in there. Now, this doesn't mean extraterrestrials, however, I want to point that out. It means that the nothing genuinely anonymous is occurring position may be incomplete.

[00:10:49]So our competing hypothesis to all of this is that what we have in these batches is ordinary objects just natural phenomenon. They're sensor effects. It's human error. Incomplete data or a combination of the above. All right. So that's the competing hypothesis.

[00:11:11]For each piece of evidence that we gather, here is what we're asking. How much more likely would we be able to encounter evidence like this if it's a genuinely anomalous physical phenomenon that sometimes occurs even if every case is ultimately ordinary?

[00:11:35]How much more likely is this evidence to be extraordinary is what we're asking.

[00:11:41]So if we set the likelihood ratio at just one, it means the evidence changes nothing. If we set it at two, it means the evidence is twice as expected under that hypothesis we're looking into tonight. If we set it at five, it means it's five times, 10 is 10 times, etc. Less than one would count against our hypothesis. So now these are necessary judgments that we have to make but they're transparent judgments. They're not the final say. So we have to start somewhere and they are changeable because when more evidence comes out we're going to change our updated knowledge. Of course, for instance, hopefully batch five includes some more information on what we have in batch 4 as well as some new information. That would be cool.

[00:12:42]That would rock. Oh, it's the 2015 Pantex incident. Let's take a look at this, shall we?

[00:12:51]Here, I'll tell you what.

[00:12:54]Let me show you the uh Let me show you the video.

[00:13:03]You'll know what I'm talking about. Here is the video. Oh, hopefully I can find it right there.

[00:13:12]Okay. Is this the one? This is the one.

[00:13:14]Okay. This is Let me get it on my screen now.

[00:13:20]This is the video I'm talking about.

[00:13:24]All right, this is the official released video.

[00:13:30]It's not a very long video, but this is the UAP that they were looking at.

[00:13:48]And it comes across the screen. It's a split screen.

[00:13:52]There's two different types of views.

[00:13:56]The flare and one of the other ones.

[00:13:59]It's hard to see. You can see they circled the little gizmo.

[00:14:04]It's hard to see it.

[00:14:06]Let me go through this one more time. It goes zippitydon pretty quick through the video like that. Then they changed the kind of uh detection.

[00:14:20]So, it's not much by way of video, but the crazy thing is this is by far the strongest piece of evidence. And the reason why is not because of the video.

[00:14:35]It is because of what was involved with getting this information.

[00:14:43]There were more witnesses. there was better uh electronic equipment involved in recording this UAP etc. Let me let me get back to my analysis. Approximately 7 in the morning September 1st 2015 most of us were alive then the Pantex ground surveillance radar detected an unknown object west of the nuclear weapons facility.

[00:15:09]This thing was moving north 10 to 15 miles an hour is all. It wasn't really flying super duper fast. And there were several additional radar returns were received as it continued north and northwest. So that is one of the things that gives it a better objective value.

[00:15:29]Protective force personnel then visually confirmed the object. So, we have radar and we have some of the people who are the I'll I'll call them the policemen of the facility, right? The guards. They also confirmed this object. So, there's another basis for establishing its reality at this nuclear site and they followed it by vehicle for several miles. Two officers exited their vehicle and observed it through binoculars for one to two minutes. So, we have another basis. The bonox helped them see this the item.

[00:16:09]They said they didn't hear any sound and they couldn't identify any visible propulsion system. So, that's what makes it really kind of weird. You know, the object reportedly increased speed and changed direction while they were following it. Now, the other cool thing about this particular one is a separate team tracked it through the camera on a Bearcat vehicle's remotely operated weapon system for 3 to five minutes. So, we have yet another corroborating tracking device on this object and it was at an estimated distance of 75 to 100 meters away. They estimated it was 1 to 200 feet above the ground and roughly 4 feet tall and 2 feet wide. The report says the radar tower video was sent to Sia National Laboratories for study and enhanced images were included in the report. So this is not merely someone saw a strange light.

[00:17:16]That is what this report is not. And that's pretty important.

[00:17:22]It contains several mutually supporting components. Initial radar detection, repeated radar returns. So, this object really was there. It wasn't a figment of their imagination. There were several security personnel. They had direct binocular observation. They pursued it in a vehicle. There was an independent camera system that also captured this.

[00:17:49]There was a radar tower video and there was subsequent Sandia imaging process and a formal security incident report produced at a nuclear facility. Now the visual observations are not fully independent of the radar detection. They occurred because the radar alerted personnel but the sensor mechanisms themselves are substantially independent. And that's powerful. That is what we hope for in many, many more of what they give us in the fifth drop when they make it for us. We're hoping they give us case files that has many independent observations from different angles, different stations, different people, etc. Because a single optical illusion would not normally create ground radar tracks.

[00:18:50]A radar artifact would not normally create a lowaltitude object seen through binoculars by several different officers. So that is one of the things that makes this particular video. Again, even though it's not very impressive as a video, that's not the issue. The report is what tells us this is a high probability of being an interesting case study to make.

[00:19:21]So now we've got to leave room for the fact that well this could have been a balloon you know it could be carrying either equipment or decorations you know uh it could be a small aerostat maybe an unconventional drone we leave that open uh distance and size estimation errors that might have occurred we don't know observer seeing a mundane object after being alerted by radar that's a possibility so it slow initial speed 10 to 15 m an hour is very compatible with a windborne object. Okay, that's fair. Its approximate dimensions and dangling or diamondlike configuration could also be compatible with a balloon assembly.

[00:20:05]Okay, we we can allow that. That's all right. The report does not establish extraordinary acceleration or transmedium movement. That is, it didn't go from air into the water and back into the air. It was always just in the air.

[00:20:22]Uh it didn't report any kind of impossible maneuvering or performance beyond our known technology. So we know that didn't happen. So this is excellent evidence for a real object.

[00:20:38]Now that's a fair conclusion. However, only moderate evidence for something intrinsically extraordinary.

[00:20:50]And that's how we are approaching these videos, especially those that have a good report card with them. We hope more of the videos they keep putting out have better and better reports. This first four batches didn't have a lot of uh typed up information or reports. We hope the next several have that because that is critical for our assessment. Right?

[00:21:21]So our likelihood ratio of this being a real object is about 5.8 8, which is substantial evidence, but it's not remotely close enough to being proof of an alien craft, but something was there. It wasn't a camera artifact.

[00:21:44]It wasn't a an optical illusion.

[00:21:47]Something real and physical was visiting this nuclear site. This is how we approach the various types of materials the government is sharing with us the public using basian theorem. And I'm simplifying this down dramatically. I'm leaving out the mathematics for you. I'm just more or less giving you the conclusions. Those of you who want to see the math, maybe I'll do another special video. I find very few people like the math even though that's the most interesting part in my opinion and it's not that difficult. I mean if I can learn it anybody can right?

[00:22:26]So this second case is the one that was in Greece and this was just a couple years ago just January 2024. It's P28.

[00:22:37]Let me let me get that one.

[00:22:43]Where is it? P28. Let me see if I can find this one real quick. I hope I marked it right.

[00:22:51]Yes, PR28 right there. Yep. And this is it. So, okay, let me get this on the screen and you'll see what one I'm talking about. And then we will analyze the data that was given with this.

[00:23:10]This is the actual video.

[00:23:17]All right, let's see.

[00:23:20]Let's play this. It's only a few minutes, I think.

[00:23:24]One minute. It's two different monitoring systems on this. That's why the one is fuzzy.

[00:23:34]You can see it streaking. And then it goes to the one screen.

[00:23:38]The split screen was for the first 10 seconds. And then here is the now that round halo thing that's got to be in the lens itself. But you can see it flying and the clouds in the background from this distance. It does look like an orb. It reminds me of Chris Bledso's orbs somewhat, but we can see the direction and speed through the background of the clouds. The camera's following it pretty steady here. That's kind of cool.

[00:24:10]This was in grace. Again, there's nothing overly spectacular about this.

[00:24:15]That's not what we're looking for. They do claim. I mean, how does an orb how does a round object like that fly? It's obviously moving steadily. You can tell by the the uh the cloud background. Let me show you that again. As it's moving, you can see the clouds and it's in front of the clouds. They're going by at a pretty good clip.

[00:24:58]So, that's a pretty good one.

[00:25:11]So, what have we got with that?

[00:25:15]All right.

[00:25:17]Here is my analysis of my second case with PR28 Greece, January 2024.

[00:25:24]Here is what the official record with this one states. Sentcom submitted approximately 65 seconds of footage captured aboard a US military platform using multiple selectable sensor modalities. So it's not just one type of sensor. They had two different types of sensors. That's what gives this a very strong case for being the second strongest in all of them that I've looked through that we've been given.

[00:25:56]The accompanying mission report describes a two-minute observation of a round or a diamond-shaped object with a straight non-maneuvering appendage or probe beneath it. It speed was estimated at approximately 434 knots. That's not hypersonic speed at all. The mission report says the object maintained a steady flight path, which we saw. It increased and decreased altitude. It didn't alter its trajectory. Its altitude and other kinematic values were explicitly marked estimated. They didn't actually get an instrument reading on its speed. So the object the object was reported as clearly visible only in a short wave infrared. And it's interesting because when the operator changed to the visible spectrum, the subject disappeared against the background. And when he went back to the swear black hot mode, the object was not reacquired in the camera. He lost it. So here's what strengthens this case.

[00:27:06]One, this is not an internet upload.

[00:27:10]That's good. It was collected by a military platform. They have the best tracking materials and tools and equipment on the planet. So, we always like it when the military platforms record these things.

[00:27:28]It's preserved with an official mission report. Good. We hope more of these have those mission reports. It was tracked for roughly 2 minutes. It was associated with an altitude changing flight profile. It was apparently identifiable in one spectral band, but not ordinary visible imagery. Now this is important because if we can't see something in the sky, right, we assume it's not there. But that's not the case. If it is under a different spectral band, it becomes visible like this video demonstrates.

[00:28:12]That's a very interesting item to ponder.

[00:28:16]That's interesting.

[00:28:19]So spectral selectivity is data that we have not merely witness interpretation. Now what weakens this case is the most dramatic figure 434 knots.

[00:28:36]That's estimated. It wasn't actually tracked with some kind of an instrument at that speed. So we don't have a published triangulated range. We don't have independently measured distance either. We have confirmed physical dimensions or calibrated velocity solution. We don't have any of that with this particular video. Without reliable range, apparent movement through the frame can be misleading. We have to grasp that. A distant aircraft, balloon, airborne debris, sensory artifact or ordinary object viewed under unusual contrast conditions can produce a strange looking image. We have to recognize that. Okay, so this platform did have multiple sensor modes which is a very good thing.

[00:29:28]It's not equivalent to two physically independent sensors confirming the same target. In other words, it wasn't confirmed from a ship over here and from a jeep on the land from over there in another direction. That would have been spectacular. That's what we're hoping some of these further batches of videos have for us.

[00:29:53]The optical and the sphere feeds are part of the same collection platform and therefore they may share pointing stabilization and processing assumptions.

[00:30:06]It's good that we got them however but it's not the gold standard but it's a good standard. So the likelihood ratio that this thing was real comes out to be three which is really good. This moves the needle meaningfully toward a real object, not just some kind of a fake hallucination or an illusion.

[00:30:31]But its evidential force is constrained by the uncertain range and various estimated kinematics that we just don't have physical parameters.

[00:30:44]Now I want to share another uh my final one.

[00:30:49]This third one is extremely important.

[00:30:54]Uh, let me hold on. Let me go grab it real quick.

[00:31:02]I want to make sure I'm getting the right one. That was PR22.

[00:31:20]PR22 Syria. Okay, let me go get this one.

[00:31:26]I could have swore I just did PR22 Syria.

[00:31:43]I did PR22 Syria. Uh-oh. I might have made a mistake here. Hold on.

[00:31:50]Or was that PR28 grease?

[00:31:54]I think I might have showed you the wrong one. Let me look real quick.

[00:32:01]Always some kind of a issue that comes up, huh? No, that was PR28. Now I'm going to show you PR22. This also was in a double banded uh shot.

[00:32:21]They had two different types of material on it.

[00:32:27]I hope this is the right one.

[00:32:33]It'll show it goes zipping by. It goes by pretty quick.

[00:32:43]No, that's the same one I showed you, I think. Hold on.

[00:32:50]Let me go get the PR28.

[00:32:56]Wh Sorry, hold on. This was worth it. Let me get the PR28 for you.

[00:33:14]All right.

[00:33:16]Now, this one, that was the PR22 I showed you. This is the PR28.

[00:33:24]And this one has some interesting situations, too.

[00:33:34]This is overhead up in the clouds. And this also has two different imaging modes. No, that's the one I just showed you.

[00:33:45]I'm sorry. Hold on. I'll get this.

[00:33:50]I will get this right.

[00:33:54]I just have to get it right.

[00:33:57]Right. That's 28. I've got 22 here.

[00:34:01]Let me get PR22.

[00:34:09]Oh, I've only got those.

[00:34:15]I've already shown you both of them.

[00:34:17]Hold on.

[00:34:29]Okay, this one is flew over Syria. Let me just read this to you.

[00:34:35]Sankcom submitted 14 seconds of video showing imagery from infrared and electrooptical sensors aboard a US military platform. Uh 5 seconds an object crosses the upper right portion of the center field of view. The accompanying mission report described it as moving north to south with observation less lasting less than one minute. So, the arrow publication description is really important on this third case because it warns that the video description should not be interpreted as an analytical conclusion about the events validity or the nature of the object or the significance.

[00:35:23]That's weird, isn't it? Here's a UAP.

[00:35:26]However, the description of it is seriously questionable. Well, then what the heck, Willis?

[00:35:34]What this establishes is an actual target or image feature was recorded, though. It appears during a military mission.

[00:35:44]The imagery was retained.

[00:35:46]A contemporaneous mission report existed and more than one spectral display was present. That is better than an unauthenticated social media clip. What weakens the recording is it was only 14 seconds long and the public record does not give us the range, the size, the altitude, the speed. It doesn't give us the acceleration. We don't get any radar corroboration, independent observer description of what they saw, any unusual trajectory. See, we're kind of in the dark. And yet this was turned in and it was explored by the government and it was put into arrows files. So we know they were looking at it. We know that it was a contemporary event and that they couldn't figure it out, but they were concerned about it.

[00:36:51]Now, could it be an insect, a bird, an aircraft, a balloon, a drone, a distant projectile? Yeah, it could be a number of things.

[00:37:00]But the point is, we do know it's an actual physical object. We just don't have enough public information to discriminate effectively among those possibilities. And that's a lesson because when they say it's unresolved, what they mean when they say unresolved is the evidence demonstrates extraordinary behavior is not what they mean when they say unresolved. It just means we don't have enough information. Apparently, there were some people who were saying that this meant that it had extraordinary behavior. That's not what it meant. So, that's very important to do. It's a lower likelihood ratio.

[00:37:53]And so, we get through those.

[00:37:59]And the reason I wanted to share these with you is because we've given we've been given some what 50 or 60 videos. The majority of them aren't really all that impressive. I agree.

[00:38:14]There are some who indicate for us to put our hat on that there is something going on that we don't yet have answers for. Does that mean aliens or supersonic spacecraft? Not at this point. But we've at least established a beginning evidence curve that we can work on and work through as more and more government drops occur. That's the main lesson of this. None of these are conclusive proof. And I got news for you. You know, when they give us the fifth batch and the sixth batch and the seventh batch, none of those are going to be conclusive proof either. It's going to be an accumulative thing. That's what we're involved with.

[00:39:10]This the tranches show us this. Now Nate has some information on some ideas that what we're seeing with these government files is what so many people have seen in the skiffs.

[00:39:34]And one of the remarkable things, and I won't I won't give Nate his his ideas away as such, but I will give you a very strong hint about it.

[00:39:49]One of the things we need to recognize is we've got kind of a what would you call it? a new batch, a new group of Congress people that are going into these skiffs with various different types of people, uh, you know, military, secret society, whoever, scientists, filmmakers, etc., UFO researchers, etc. They're beginning to go into these skiffs. Now I'm I'm thinking like Berett Luna has been in on it for quite a while, right? But Berett and uh and now Berles Berles's kind of the new kid on the block as it were, right?

[00:40:37]Well, they go into the skiffs and they don't know what's going on.

[00:40:49]They are shown videos like these and maybe even including these and they are told enough information in the skiffs.

[00:41:06]They are shown enough evidence and proof in these skiffs that when they walk out of those skiffs and they come to talk to John Q public, you and me on a news program, what did Burchette say, man? He said, "If you saw the dad gum stuff I've seen, oh, you'd believe. You can't believe what I've seen." Well, what did he see?

[00:41:45]Quite frankly, if these videos was all they saw, that wouldn't make sense, now would it?

[00:41:54]No, it wouldn't. Berles is taking this very seriously. He's flying all over the United States, if not the world, examining, interviewing, and looking into this.

[00:42:08]He's seen these videos and he's not a believer. Now, Bert claims he has become a believer by what he's learned and seen in the skiffs, right?

[00:42:25]But once you get in the skiff, it's classified. You have to sign a a non-disclosure agreement, an NDA, just to get into the skiff. So, in a way, see, this is the downside of it all. If Bett got into a skiff, he's not going to be able to tell us everything.

[00:42:49]Berles is a nonbeliever.

[00:42:54]But he is pursuing this with a more and more persuaded attitude than he had when he started. He is seeing some things that is now causing him to say, "Well, I do want to investigate this quite a bit closer."

[00:43:16]You know, when we stop and put ourselves in their shoes, something is happening in those gifts, that's very real.

[00:43:26]Burchette came out almost white as a ghost, and he has been blabbering ever since. Sometimes he gets so excited he becomes almost incoherent with excitement about, "Oh, oh, ba gum.

[00:43:45]Dad gum. If you saw what I saw, oh, you'd believe. You'd be a believer. I'll tell you, they they got so much dag gum stuff. You just can't believe what I've seen. Something happened that was not Burchette a year ago before the skiff.

[00:44:02]Well, listen. He did not have that fire inside him that he has now before the skiff. Something is going on.

[00:44:14]Luna has come out and said it as direct as possible.

[00:44:21]And I'm only sticking with the Congress people. Nate has all kinds of other people he'll bring into this orbit. I wanted to stick with the Congress people just to give you an indication of the direction that these batches of files are giving us the public. They are not just giving us trash and garbage. That's not what these are. Oh no, no, that's too shallow of a reading. Luna has come out and directly said without hesitation on a recent news interview that there is enough information that we have that we can talk about that will 100% demonstrate they're real.

[00:45:16]These batches of videos are some of the hints of what she's talking about.

[00:45:29]They establish a fundamental reality that the UAPs in some instances could actually be very well physical.

[00:45:45]And I get it that there are some who say, "Well, no, no, the physical isn't the important part. You know, they're interdimensional beings, things like that." Oh, that's good. That doesn't contradict what I just said.

[00:45:57]They're not just one thing and one thing only and nothing else or else there's a contradiction and all of this is noise and fake. No, no, no, no, no. That's too black and white thinking. This is much more uh nuanced than that. And that's the idea that I wanted to share with you tonight. One of the best ways. Sorry, it's so hot.

[00:46:21]I mean, it's hot. Hold on. I have got to wipe my brow and drink a swig of water.

[00:46:34]I'm seeing you guys are talking about the Tedesco brothers.

[00:46:40]Yeah. Oh, yeah. That's right. Yeah, I watched that clip the other night, too.

[00:46:43]Yeah, I interviewed the Tedesco brothers and we talked about dead fish cheese spreads. Uh, and the one Tedesco brother got so excited when I asked him the question that he forgot what he was saying. That was fun. That was hilarious.

[00:46:59]So, it's very interesting to me that we are getting part of this. And you say, "Yeah, but you haven't established anything even with these three strongest videos." Yes, we have. We have shown that in amongst most of the stuff that is given without context perhaps they are trying to gauge our reception of a little bit at a time.

[00:47:29]And do we want to actually see where the gold is hidden in these releases or not?

[00:47:44]Are they gauging our readiness to give us more by saying how we will receive the less it could be that and I'm just saying that as a possibility.

[00:48:02]What we do know is they're not going to give it to us straight like we would like them to.

[00:48:11]But my impression is that the world has changed.

[00:48:18]Governments are going to topple.

[00:48:23]We have 65 countable wars in our world right now.

[00:48:32]The world has gone to hell in a hand basket. Man, we are just we are doomed.

[00:48:39]So things have changed and they're giving us enough to keep us on the trail to truth, but we also have to work for it. They are not going to spoon feed us. And those of us who don't want to put the time and effort into figuring it out are going to be left behind. And I'm sorry if that comes across harsh, but it's the same thing in any field of endeavor.

[00:49:11]If if if you want to be told the answers in history without reading the historical records so that you two can know, then you're not going to be a very good historian.

[00:49:28]It's about the only analogy I can think of off the top of my head.

[00:49:33]We have a responsibility to ourselves to try to glean as much information out of what the government's giving us.

[00:49:42]And and this is going to contradict what I've said before. I get it. Go ahead and yeah, yell at me.

[00:49:52]Nate has just about convinced me now.

[00:49:55]Interestingly, this is a pretty big turnaround on my part. I'll confess.

[00:50:02]Right. But this is the basian updating with new evidence that one has to do in order to remain relevant to reality.

[00:50:15]And that is the government actually does want us to know the truth, but they can't just come out and say it.

[00:50:30]They have to give us hints and puzzles and we have to meet them halfway.

[00:50:39]They are not being allowed to spill the beans totally, but they are leaking out pieces that we can discover ourselves.

[00:50:55]You remember playing the game of clue when you were kids? What fun would have that game been if someone would have simply turned over all the cards? Oh, it was doc Mr. Lemon in the bakery with the rope. Game over. That wouldn't have made the game any fun at all. No, of course not. You have to go through all the different clues. You have to use your mind and by a sense of logic you have to eliminate some weapons that could have been used in some areas and you have to eliminate some people and include others and it's a case of testing all the options. That's what I propose this is with these trenches coming out. I hope the fifth trench has some better stuff.

[00:51:50]But I will say this fourth grouping had better stuff than the first one or the second one or the third one. So if it's trying to establish a little bit more, it appears that's what it could be and I might be reading more into that than I should be.

[00:52:12]I'll find out when this fifth group of documents comes out. But I am very looking forward to seeing those and I'm going to analyze them deeply next time upfront and give you the full report. I'm no longer going to poo poo these. I suspect we're being given the breadcrumbs on purpose so that the overlords of the government don't know that they're leaking the information to us.

[00:52:48]That's probably pie in the sky, but that's going to be my approach at this point. So, anyway, that's what I've got for you tonight.

[00:52:56]Um, I'm going to uh be back. I will do uh my basian analysis of dead fish cheese spread. I've been working on a a basian analysis of your materials and uh I will just simply follow the evidence just like I'm doing here. Uh I'm not interested in if you're right or wrong or it's irrelevant quite frankly what I believe happened or whether I believe you're telling the truth or not. That is not at all what I'm analyzing. I'm simply analyzing the probability of the evidence, the chronology, and the whole situation. That's how I'm approaching this. So, keep your eyes peeled for that one. I will have that up. I hope maybe tomorrow. I might. Yeah, I've still got a little bit more work on it to do, but I might be able to do it tomorrow. So, yeah. And Ryan Gray's first episode. All right. I will try like crazy to do that.

[00:53:54]Absolutely. So, hey, I appreciate all of you being here. It's been a lot of fun.

[00:53:58]Um, it is so hot out here, you guys.

[00:54:01]It's the hottest part of the day. I'm melting. I'm going to go inside now. I wish I didn't have to, but uh I'm going to head out. I will see you tomorrow here. Keep your eyes peeled. I hope you guys have a fantastic week. It's going to be a lulu. Uh I hope all of you can stay safe wherever you are in the world.

[00:54:21]the world. Unfortunately for most of us, dad gummit has become a dangerous place.

[00:54:28]And so I pray for all of your safeties.

[00:54:30]I really do because I appreciate my audience. You guys are the best. And I do not say that lightly. So all right, I will catch up to you soon. Be safe.