Speaker 1: From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
Speaker 1: riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
Speaker 1: learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
Speaker 1: production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2: Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
Speaker 2: my name is Noel.
Speaker 3: They call me Ben. We're joined as always with our
Speaker 3: super producer, Dylan the Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you
Speaker 3: are you.
Speaker 4: You are here.
Speaker 3: That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 3: And if our grand recent conspiracy has worked out, you
Speaker 3: are watching this on Netflix.
Speaker 5: Gotcha?
Speaker 3: We did it.
Speaker 5: We ran the best syop of all time.
Speaker 2: Guys have been getting ready for this episode. I am
Speaker 2: so excited. I watched season three, episode twenty of X
Speaker 2: Files Jose chungs from outer Space. Do you guys remember
Speaker 2: that one?
Speaker 6: Oh?
Speaker 3: I do, yes, I do?
Speaker 5: No not that what I have been doing to rewatch
Speaker 5: myself and I prepared by watching the X Files crossover
Speaker 5: episode of The Simpsons.
Speaker 3: Hi Bring you Peace, kilm.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I prepared by dusting off all of our previous research
Speaker 3: over the years since we first began this show as
Speaker 3: a video series. By the way, on pre youtubeoo, nobody
Speaker 3: checks out.
Speaker 5: Creating Netflix as a streamer. It was back when Netflix
Speaker 5: was sending discs in the mail.
Speaker 3: So I dusted off all these old paper files from
Speaker 3: various government agencies, various episodes we did and realize that
Speaker 3: we've always had the same mission when it comes to UFOs,
Speaker 3: just like Molder said, we want to believe. And recently
Speaker 3: a lot of people were tuning into various programs or
Speaker 3: various news interviews, even congressional testimony about the nature of UFOs,
Speaker 3: what we call UAP and the concept of disclosure. What
Speaker 3: disclosure argues is that world governments not only possess evidence
Speaker 3: of intelligent non human activity around Earth and in near
Speaker 3: Earth orbit, but they also are on the verge of
Speaker 3: revealing this to the public. Now. I don't know about
Speaker 3: you guys, but a lot of the folks I have
Speaker 3: contact with have started to encounter something we could call
Speaker 3: uapf or UAP fatigue, because it's always almost about to
Speaker 3: go public, right.
Speaker 5: Or you know, when they did drop some info about
Speaker 5: it recently, it was all a little bit underwhelming, if
Speaker 5: I remember correctly.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, because you can't. Nobody is willing to go
Speaker 2: forward and do the thing that would considered illegal and
Speaker 2: that is to share the super classified, top secret documents.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: A lot of people have come forward, include David Crush,
Speaker 2: a lot of people who gave to testimony and they
Speaker 2: gave a lot of information to Congress right under oath.
Speaker 2: They they talked about things, but they would not or
Speaker 2: could not go into detail in a public setting, which
Speaker 2: is just like, yeah, makes sense, but it's disheartening. I
Speaker 2: guess for anybody who is not in that room right,
Speaker 2: who isn't going to get to have some kind of
Speaker 2: special session that's closed off with those guys to talk
Speaker 2: about that stuff if they have the proper clearance. So
Speaker 2: it's just you know, I get it. I understand the
Speaker 2: fatigue of it.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I think one great way to put it, folks,
Speaker 3: is it feels surreal and it feels like a heck
Speaker 3: of a wamp womp moment to have these experts with
Speaker 3: bona fides out the wazoo go straight to Congress the
Speaker 3: halls of power and say, I swear that I can't
Speaker 3: really tell you about this. That's exactly what happens, and
Speaker 3: that's why so many people are going, you know, look
Speaker 3: up there in the sky. Is it a bird?
Speaker 4: Is it a playing?
Speaker 3: Is it a secret government plot to hide the true
Speaker 3: story of UFOs. We know right now as we're recording
Speaker 3: on January twenty sixth, that there have been no official
Speaker 3: institutional admissions of alien activity, but more and more experts
Speaker 3: as well as politicians are talking about it openly. And
Speaker 3: this episode owes a lot of inspiration to a documentary
Speaker 3: we all checked out more than once called The Age
Speaker 3: of Disclosure. You're doubtlessly familiar with it if you check
Speaker 3: out shows like ours, and we do recommend you check
Speaker 3: it out. But there's something hidden in there which is
Speaker 3: even more interesting than the typical talk of UFO disclosure.
Speaker 3: It's something called the Legacy Program.
Speaker 5: The Legacy Program.
Speaker 2: And I know when we watched it, we thought, is
Speaker 2: it possible that that thing is real?
Speaker 3: Really?
Speaker 2: Could that be the thing?
Speaker 5: Another innocuous name that that that portends some shady business?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 2: Yeah? And the reason I brought up that X Files
Speaker 2: episode is because there is a specific organization that somehow
Speaker 2: in the nineties those folks were thinking about or talking about,
Speaker 2: that appears to be talked about in this documentary as
Speaker 2: though it's an actual facts thing.
Speaker 5: Matt, could you remind me, I don't remember the one
Speaker 5: the plot of the X Files episode just in broad strokes,
Speaker 5: because I do want to go check it out.
Speaker 2: The Jose Chung one is a very silly one that's
Speaker 2: told from a bunch of different perspectives about a UFO sighting.
Speaker 2: I specifically watched it because I wanted to get my
Speaker 2: Jesse Ventura on for this episode, and then he features
Speaker 2: heavily as a men in black that episode.
Speaker 3: Tracks Yeah, yeah, yeah, and so we see again, we
Speaker 3: see that interesting blend of fiction and fact which happens
Speaker 3: all the time in this sort of.
Speaker 4: Milieu of conversation.
Speaker 3: But I was also left with that question after Age
Speaker 3: of Disclosure, because it called back to so much research
Speaker 3: we had done previously, and I, like so many other
Speaker 3: people across the planet, was going, what is this legacy program?
Speaker 3: Does it actually exist? And if so, can we prove
Speaker 3: that existence? We'll be back afterword from our sponsors. Here
Speaker 3: are the facts. Let's start with the Age of Disclosure.
Speaker 3: How would we describe it? I mean, it's a documentary
Speaker 3: created by Dan Farrah and it's narrated by none other
Speaker 3: than Louise Elizondo, who we all remember.
Speaker 5: Hugely large looming figure in these types of conversations.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Luis is all over the inner if you look
Speaker 2: up the UAP phenomena, and that is because of you know,
Speaker 2: a tip. The party played an a tip and you know,
Speaker 2: he and a bunch of other people who actually looked
Speaker 2: into this stuff. Thanks Harry Reid for making that happen.
Speaker 2: I suppose the thing the standout part of this documentary
Speaker 2: is the number of human beings that it interviews, in
Speaker 2: high profile interviews of folks that a lot of times
Speaker 2: don't talk about this, some people who talk about all
Speaker 2: the time and that's all they talk about, and then
Speaker 2: others that, you know, especially with Marco Rubio, you go, huh, yeah,
Speaker 2: you're saying, what.
Speaker 3: Marco, Marco, what else was on your schedule for today,
Speaker 3: Little Marco. That's one of the things I was thinking, Yeah,
Speaker 3: And I think it's fair to compare this somewhat to
Speaker 3: a mixtape with a strong thematic spine with a narrative,
Speaker 3: because Age of Disclosure compiles tons and tons of interviews
Speaker 3: with ufologists. Right as we were saying, people who dedicate
Speaker 3: their life to this, as well as former and current
Speaker 3: government officials, politic titians, members of the military and intelligence community.
Speaker 3: We've mentioned a lot of these folks. Previously we went
Speaker 3: in depth to the testimony of folks like the former
Speaker 3: US Department of Defense Intel officer David Grush. You can
Speaker 3: check that out in full if you visit our catalog
Speaker 3: wherever you find your favorite shows.
Speaker 2: It's oh, just mentioning Grush. High Strange Season two is
Speaker 2: about to come out. That's Payne Lindsay's show, and David
Speaker 2: Grush is extensively a part of that season and he's
Speaker 2: got more to say, so you know, we'll have to
Speaker 2: kind of just wait, but it's very interesting stuff.
Speaker 3: Nice congrats, Pain, And we know that in age of Disclosure,
Speaker 3: the people interviewed, they range across political ideologies and you know,
Speaker 3: lines of belief in areas of expertise. But the thing
Speaker 3: they have in common is they all seem to genuinely
Speaker 3: believe alien intelligence doesn't just exist, but has visited our
Speaker 3: little cosmic suburb of Earth. I guess we should point
Speaker 3: out that some of the individuals interviewed might be considered
Speaker 3: you know, fringe or controversial. Right, let's just get in
Speaker 3: front of that one, because there are a lot of
Speaker 3: mainstream scientists who.
Speaker 4: Immediately dismiss this stuff as bubble.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, according to Lisa Simpson in the Simpsons
Speaker 5: X Files crossover episode, I mentioned the chances of being
Speaker 5: contacted by an alien life form of any kind are
Speaker 5: in the you know, one to millions in terms of
Speaker 5: the odds, And I'm sure he's referencing some of the
Speaker 5: practical data of the time.
Speaker 2: Oh for sure. Well, if you look to the writing
Speaker 2: of somebody like Michael Shermer, who writes for her Skeptic magazine,
Speaker 2: he points out Luis Alizondo as somebody that we need
Speaker 2: to be skeptical of, which is really interesting because this
Speaker 2: that guy, he's been at the center of this a
Speaker 2: TIP and UAP movement actually with regards to Congress since
Speaker 2: the jump, really and he's been he's been talking about
Speaker 2: it publicly a lot. But then somehow people always call
Speaker 2: in to question his actual involvement at a TIP and
Speaker 2: he has position there, and there's.
Speaker 3: A lot of infighting in the community itself, you know,
Speaker 3: like there are a lot of people like Grush will
Speaker 3: say that there are people participating in cover ups or
Speaker 3: that they are purporting to be part of a disclosure
Speaker 3: movement while actually managing access to it or attempting to
Speaker 3: control and suppress genuine information so even in these circles,
Speaker 3: not all of these folks trust each other one hundred percent.
Speaker 2: But then we have to decide who we trust. Because
Speaker 2: the official word out of the Pentagon from Christopher Sherwood.
Speaker 2: This is a quote from him, as quote by Michael
Speaker 2: Shermer quote, mister Elizondo had no responsibilities with regard to
Speaker 2: the A tip program. So we have to decide, is
Speaker 2: that the Pentagon put out, you know, an official story
Speaker 2: that's cover for something, or to you know, discredit mister Elizondo.
Speaker 2: I mean, we know that that's a thing that happens.
Speaker 3: Sure, sure, disavowing knowledge of activities, right, it's relabsolutely. We've
Speaker 3: got another quote here that I think differentiates Age of
Speaker 3: Disclosure from a lot of other documentaries in that same
Speaker 3: field because the director says he sought only to interview
Speaker 3: people who have direct knowledge of the government programs in questions.
Speaker 3: So he's not talking to people who heard something third hand.
Speaker 3: He's not talking to someone who just wants to sell
Speaker 3: a book and has some logical ideas. These are people who, yeah,
Speaker 3: as far as Dan is concerned, are in the trenches.
Speaker 3: That's also a note you can find in the Skeptic
Speaker 3: article that you're referencing there, Matt and and lo and behold,
Speaker 3: this approach met with phenomenal success. Only thirty percent going
Speaker 3: to Rotten Tomatoes. Because we're film nerds. Only thirty percent
Speaker 3: of critics seem to really dig it, But the popcorn
Speaker 3: meter gives it a ninety three percent approval rating. That
Speaker 3: means the general audience said, whatever, critics, you're stuck up,
Speaker 3: We love this thing.
Speaker 4: More aliads please.
Speaker 2: That's crazy that it's that low and rot tomatoes. I
Speaker 2: never would have expected that after watching it.
Speaker 5: Here's the thing, though, I mean, it's always super fascinating
Speaker 5: when the critics score and audience score are completely, like,
Speaker 5: diametrically opposed in one direction or another. A lot of
Speaker 5: times you'll have a movie that is blown out of
Speaker 5: the water in terms of like critical response and then
Speaker 5: has an absolutely, you know, abysmal audience score.
Speaker 3: So critics' Darlene.
Speaker 5: Yeah, Usually if there's a mismatch like that, it's probably
Speaker 5: worth checking out for one reason or another.
Speaker 3: That's a great point, Noil, I haven't seen something this
Speaker 3: divisive between critics and audience since the legendary Police Academy four.
Speaker 3: Oh gosh, you check that out as well. It's a
Speaker 3: spiritual predecessor to Age of Disclosure if you really think
Speaker 3: about it.
Speaker 5: Critics love that audience is now I have a feeling direction.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's really interesting.
Speaker 2: They're making the same remarks of I'm just looking at
Speaker 2: a couple of these men, the same remarks that we
Speaker 2: talked about at the top, where it's what's happening in Congress,
Speaker 2: it's what's happening on your social media feeds and all
Speaker 2: these posts and books and everything, a lot of really cool,
Speaker 2: unprovable stuff.
Speaker 4: And that is the kicker. You're going to hear us
Speaker 4: mention that.
Speaker 3: A couple of times, folks, because we cannot overemphasize at
Speaker 3: no point in the entirety of this documentary does Age
Speaker 3: of Disclosure present any hard physical evidence. There's nothing provided
Speaker 3: for the audience. We mean, there are tons of statements there.
Speaker 3: There's plenty of video footage, and a lot of it
Speaker 3: is older stuff you've seen before, like tic TAC videos.
Speaker 3: There in depth interviews with people who have heard hell
Speaker 3: as we would say in Tennessee, of are programs in secrets.
Speaker 3: But nobody takes the director or Louise on a UFO
Speaker 3: joy ride. Nobody is holding up a piece of let
Speaker 3: me see, nobody's holding up a piece of physical stuff
Speaker 3: or anxiety materials.
Speaker 2: This is just get that light.
Speaker 5: And that makes sense that you have critics kind of
Speaker 5: you know, dumping on this, because that is not something
Speaker 5: that usually bodes well for critical response if a documentary
Speaker 5: does not present good sources or they don't have some
Speaker 5: sort of like basis. In fact, I think that often,
Speaker 5: you know, is a ding towards a film for critics.
Speaker 2: Agreed, But have we learned nothing from agents Molder and
Speaker 2: Scully guys, We've learned.
Speaker 3: Those crews.
Speaker 2: Those crews always come in afterwards and clean up all
Speaker 2: the evidence. That's why there's no evidence to hold up
Speaker 2: into show. They've got they've got crews of people. The
Speaker 2: smoking man's in the court, or the cancer man he's
Speaker 2: over there. He's getting all kinds of different organizations to
Speaker 2: make sure we never see anything, we can never prove.
Speaker 5: Anything, right.
Speaker 3: This is what we were talking about off air. There's
Speaker 3: a weird rhetorical trap that occurs in this kind of
Speaker 3: stuff and also just something that grinds my gears a
Speaker 3: little bit, even as a kid watching X Files when
Speaker 3: they had the cleaner scenes and the cover up scenes
Speaker 3: The smoking man is not named. Ironically, he is always
Speaker 3: smoking cigarettes, and cigarettes have a very distinct, very durable smell.
Speaker 3: So if he is on the scene of a cleanup,
Speaker 3: eventually somebody's going to say, who keeps smoking this whole time?
Speaker 3: What does it always smell like tobacco? Whatever? We can't
Speaker 3: find a body.
Speaker 5: Also, I mean not named for nothing that you know.
Speaker 5: His job was to throw up smoke screens the States
Speaker 5: the truth clown people's views of true events.
Speaker 2: He's also symbolically a ca answer right yeah, inside the
Speaker 2: government that is trying to stop He's trying to grow whatever.
Speaker 2: What is he trying to grow? Well, we won't spoil
Speaker 2: xols for you.
Speaker 3: It's so long. Chris Carter would be so mad. He
Speaker 3: works so hard on it.
Speaker 4: Guys, just check it out.
Speaker 5: I'm more of a Monster of the Week kind of guy.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah. Also symbolically, you know, he represents a father
Speaker 3: big brother esque or Wellian figure. Anyway, when you're watching
Speaker 3: Age of Disclosure, another thing that stood out to us
Speaker 3: is no one introduces a known extraterrestrial for a chat.
Speaker 3: No extra terrestrial does not show up for an interview.
Speaker 3: Now are some of the people being interviewed secretly aliens
Speaker 3: will tell you when they email uspat but for now
Speaker 3: they all seem to be human presenting.
Speaker 5: Speaking of whether or not someone is secretly an alien,
Speaker 5: I highly recommend everyone go out immediately and check out Bogonia.
Speaker 5: The Yorgos Lanthemos movie amounts a group of canspiracy nuts
Speaker 5: that abduct a CEO of a chemical company or a
Speaker 5: pharmaceutical company because they believe her to be an alien.
Speaker 5: And it's fascinating and very in line with a lot
Speaker 5: of the thought experiments we talk about here on this show.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I would say, guys, I want to see
Speaker 2: I haven't seen it yet.
Speaker 4: No, it's great.
Speaker 2: I would say. The feeling you get as an experiencer
Speaker 2: of this documentary is that those alien bodies are right
Speaker 2: around the corner, right. You get the feeling that there
Speaker 2: is definitely something in a vault somewhere. These guys were
Speaker 2: talking to in the documentary just can't access it because
Speaker 2: it's impossible, But you something in you knows. Oh, there
Speaker 2: are multiple bodies somewhere.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's old school Hitchcock rules of film. Right. The
Speaker 3: monster is just outside of the frame, just in the corner,
Speaker 3: but it's there. It's there and you better straighten up
Speaker 3: and fly right. Okay, no more Mora leys for you.
Speaker 3: But there's also the talk of non human biologics, a
Speaker 3: very interesting term. But you'll never see somebody hold up
Speaker 3: a jar and say, yeah, you know, and they gave
Speaker 3: all of us one of these, you know, when you
Speaker 3: retire from the secret government program, and I.
Speaker 5: Want to know. I mean, one thing that was I
Speaker 5: think featured pretty heavily in the X Files movie was
Speaker 5: the idea of alien technology that far outpaces anything that
Speaker 5: we as consumers, as regular old you know Jo's and
Speaker 5: Jans know about in terms of what's available to the
Speaker 5: public or even to the government. And a lot of
Speaker 5: the u UAP sightings often get attributed to tests of
Speaker 5: this kind of secret technology, whether it be alien or
Speaker 5: just stuff that the government doesn't want us to know
Speaker 5: about yet. So why don't we have any of those
Speaker 5: bits of evidence. You'd think something would have come to
Speaker 5: lights Oh certain point.
Speaker 3: I love that point, because the argument is it's slowly
Speaker 3: trickling out stuff like Velcrow and man.
Speaker 5: Is that the height of a human ingenuity?
Speaker 3: That's the height that's good, that's the aliens weren't ever
Speaker 3: actually crashing They were landing and telling people repeatedly that
Speaker 3: they were excited about Velcrow.
Speaker 5: It just makes such a satisfying rip, you know what
Speaker 5: I mean.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was Actually it was kind of an MLM scheme,
Speaker 3: and that's why Uncle Sam is covering it up because
Speaker 3: we fell for it. Hook and Technology. They sorry, they
Speaker 3: fell for it. We're not the We're not the big
Speaker 3: weed on that one.
Speaker 2: No, no, no.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: The other big concept that exists out there in the
Speaker 2: UAP a verse, which is currently experiencing fatigue, as we've said,
Speaker 2: is that these stories about secret craft and reverse engineering
Speaker 2: and all that stuff is the cover, right, Yeah, that
Speaker 2: is the cover for the actual government stuff.
Speaker 5: That's an alternate narrative. It's a little easier to stomach.
Speaker 3: Is that kind of as old as time? And we
Speaker 3: know that's historically true, that has been proven.
Speaker 4: Back in the day.
Speaker 3: The FBI and parts of the CIA totally loved the
Speaker 3: Little Green Men's stories because it helped you. It helped
Speaker 3: you explain away a stealth bomber, right, And it's the
Speaker 3: kind of info war that you couldn't you couldn't improve on.
Speaker 4: It's just perfect.
Speaker 3: It ticks all the boxes for shutting people up or
Speaker 3: dismissing what they as he said, Matt experience, and this
Speaker 3: is all culminating right in Age of Disclosure, which has
Speaker 3: great pacing. Objectively, it's a roller coaster, it's a thrill ride.
Speaker 3: But because of all these points we mentioned, critics from
Speaker 3: the world of film and science and even ufologists have
Speaker 3: a lot of gripes with the project. I mean, we
Speaker 3: can just cut past the mainstream science problems with that
Speaker 3: we all know about those, and shout out to all
Speaker 3: our scientists in the crowd, thank you for doing the
Speaker 3: hard work. One thing I thought was really interesting is
Speaker 3: that some film critics and some ufoll specially ufologists, the
Speaker 3: people who we imagine would champion this documentary, Some of
Speaker 3: them are saying, look, this is just all stuff that's
Speaker 3: been remarked upon and presented plenty of times in the past.
Speaker 3: It just looks new because as a higher than average
Speaker 3: production value, it might be new information to the casual viewer.
Speaker 3: They're saying, but anyone who is lightly familiar with the
Speaker 3: world of UFOs has already heard this stuff. So that's
Speaker 3: one of the ufologists criticisms. They're saying, it's exciting, but
Speaker 3: it's not really news to us.
Speaker 5: Is this film getting mainstream attention. I guess I haven't
Speaker 5: really seen it. I mean, not that there would be a
Speaker 5: giant marketing campaign for any documentary these days, but is
Speaker 5: this getting an audience?
Speaker 3: I'm curious.
Speaker 2: There was a hype train for this thing, okay, oh yeah,
Speaker 2: and people are super excited for it.
Speaker 5: Because they thought it was going to reveal something new.
Speaker 2: Well yeah, but I think it has to do with
Speaker 2: what Ben's talking about there, the overall production value of
Speaker 2: the thing, the names that are meant and right in
Speaker 2: the in the trailers and teasers that came out, it
Speaker 2: just seemed it seemed like a legitimate UAP UFO documentary.
Speaker 2: And we know Jeremy Corbel, right, and Jeremy Corbell makes
Speaker 2: really high quality films. When he's talking about these things,
Speaker 2: this is even and it's no offense to you, Jeremy,
Speaker 2: if you're if you're watching this, but it is this
Speaker 2: is on another level. This is like a Hollywood film,
Speaker 2: but it's also a documentary about UAP.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's like shown in theaters level, you know what
Speaker 3: I mean. And I think it's fair to say that
Speaker 3: we all thoroughly enjoy this documentary. It just scratches us
Speaker 3: behind the ears. It's that nerdy conspiracy umami that we
Speaker 3: all love.
Speaker 5: And yeah, have you seen the poster? It kind of
Speaker 5: rips off our book. Yeah, dude, look it up.
Speaker 3: Look it up real quick.
Speaker 2: No, that's cool, man, What.
Speaker 5: Do you think?
Speaker 2: Am I wrong?
Speaker 5: I mean rip off is strong, But I'm just saying
Speaker 5: there's not that like we created this this template or whatever.
Speaker 5: But I mean, our buddy Benson did a fine job
Speaker 5: and it is a very similar layout and color scheme
Speaker 5: and like the beaming down from the spaceship and the
Speaker 5: like art style of it. I don't know. I think
Speaker 5: they might have seen it.
Speaker 3: Well that's pretty flattering actually if they have. But also
Speaker 3: to be clear, we didn't invent the the UFO beam up.
Speaker 2: There's the book.
Speaker 5: I mean, it is a thing, y'all. It's pretty funny.
Speaker 5: It is like the same It even has the same building.
Speaker 2: Dude, do you think gosh, yeah, new copier.
Speaker 3: See y'all there, proper.
Speaker 4: I love discovering these things.
Speaker 3: And also, if you want to check out more of
Speaker 3: Nick's work, I think he's fine with us saying this.
Speaker 3: You can find him on Instagram. He also does a
Speaker 3: ton of stuff for one of our favorite hip hop
Speaker 3: outfits run the Jewels.
Speaker 5: And also like our book is still available in hardback,
Speaker 5: and if for no other reason then to get Nick's
Speaker 5: incredible art. It's like a coffee table book with these
Speaker 5: beautiful images that are Buddy Benson designs. Oh, that's one
Speaker 5: of my favorites. There's like a hold on, like a
Speaker 5: like a this guy right here we got made into
Speaker 5: some pretty cool kind of what do you call it,
Speaker 5: shiny metallic posters that I think we all have.
Speaker 4: Yea, I love it. Good job the eyeball man.
Speaker 3: And uh, he's he's got of our smoking man or
Speaker 3: our our conspiracy Clippy.
Speaker 4: As we go through that book.
Speaker 5: Clippy is already a conspiracy unto himself. Man, that guy's
Speaker 5: got his finger on the pulse or really was it was?
Speaker 5: Clippy has little hands, don't he.
Speaker 3: He's got an attitude, that's for sure.
Speaker 5: I don't always care for his tone in my mom
Speaker 5: picturing him with like Mickey Mouse, like white gloved hands.
Speaker 5: But I don't think he has appendages that Clippy just
Speaker 5: big eyeballs.
Speaker 4: You know who's a real smoking man? Microsoft co pilot.
Speaker 3: I don't know that guy. You don't have to Microsoft
Speaker 3: co Pilot check out our AI episodes. Folks. Anyway, the
Speaker 3: king Man is this Skindy Will Pearson Google search him,
Speaker 3: you'll find him. Oh and just above their Connell Byrne
Speaker 3: dun Dun Dun. So Look, we're not going to relitigate
Speaker 3: that kind of stale back and forth about disclosure tonight. Instead,
Speaker 3: we want to explore that thing that really struck us
Speaker 3: like a bolt of lightning, like Colonel Kurtz says in Apocalypse,
Speaker 3: now a diamond bullet right in your forehead. The idea
Speaker 3: of the Legacy program or program for our brit friends,
Speaker 3: okay in a nutshell, for the idea is that for
Speaker 3: decades and decades and decades, the same people who can't
Speaker 3: for the life of them, get a lot of progress
Speaker 3: in the United States or get your taxes right, have
Speaker 3: somehow run above top secret compartmentalized projects or series of
Speaker 3: projects to retrieve crash UFOs. Not only do that, but
Speaker 3: to reverse engineer them in hopes of, like you said,
Speaker 3: no leveraging technology beyond the limits of human prowess. This
Speaker 3: is according to the true believers, operated by elements of
Speaker 3: the OSS and then the CIA, the US Air Force,
Speaker 3: the Department of Energy, a rogues gallery of private defense contractors,
Speaker 3: all of whom have allegedly retrieved crash vehicles and alien bodies.
Speaker 3: And sh, don't tell anybody, even though it takes thousands
Speaker 3: of us to do.
Speaker 4: This for generations.
Speaker 3: Sh Let's keep it a secret, because secrets are fun.
Speaker 3: It's a cosmically tall milkshake. It's an extraordinary claim.
Speaker 2: And how is all of that wrapped up in a
Speaker 2: new Cold war that, according to the creators of the documentary,
Speaker 2: is of more dire consequence than the nuclear energy and
Speaker 2: nuclear weapon battle that exists out there the Cold War?
Speaker 3: For those hmm, yeah, yeah, before we move on, you
Speaker 3: had a review of the film.
Speaker 5: Why this is a user review or like you know,
Speaker 5: one of the audience reviews in the Popcornometer, And I
Speaker 5: think this speaks to both sides of what we were
Speaker 5: talking about in its divisiveness. Maybe professional movie critics who
Speaker 5: don't know a thing about how bureaucracy operates are disappointed
Speaker 5: ET's Head wasn't trotted around on a spike. But for
Speaker 5: anyone else has studied or worked with the federal government,
Speaker 5: this movie is a revelation.
Speaker 3: Yeah yeah. And the thing about a revelation is technically
Speaker 3: it has to be the realization of a greater truth,
Speaker 3: this cosmically tall milkshake, this idea of a new Cold War,
Speaker 3: which is very exciting to us for various personal reasons.
Speaker 3: This could be a revelation, but to be revelation, it
Speaker 3: also has to be factual. So our question that becomes,
Speaker 3: is there really a legacy program like we have described,
Speaker 3: and if so, how would we set about proving it.
Speaker 3: We're going to make our level best attempt afterword from
Speaker 3: our sponsors years where it gets crazy. All right, First
Speaker 3: things first, we got to say it. This to me
Speaker 3: and I think to all of us, this is one
Speaker 3: of the coolest parts of this exploration. It is true
Speaker 3: that empires retrieve non domestic technology whenever beat me here, Dylan,
Speaker 3: whenever they can. It's such an old thing, like cast
Speaker 3: your memory back to civilizations of yr. They were trying
Speaker 3: to learn more about their enemy's toys. Oh that's a
Speaker 3: long bow, let's steal it. If we survived this battle.
Speaker 3: What the hell is that a rebouchet? You know what
Speaker 3: I mean? They were always trying to find these weapons
Speaker 3: war and the United States is no different. We've been
Speaker 3: doing that since the late seventeen hundreds. There are multiple
Speaker 3: programs that study down crash captured craft of all sorts
Speaker 3: and types, planes and drones to satellites and especially submarines
Speaker 3: and identified spacecraft. I mean, it's like World War One stuff.
Speaker 2: I just like the concept of extra domestic weapons and technologies.
Speaker 3: That's one. Yeah. I had this story years ago where
Speaker 3: it's a short stories fiction as far as we know,
Speaker 3: where the entire reason for one of the invasions of
Speaker 3: a rock was to break into a museum and steal
Speaker 3: ancient technology. But the acquisition of technology is a huge
Speaker 3: driver of things like the Cold War, right, the race
Speaker 3: for the atomic bomb, for example, or the race for
Speaker 3: the meanest hypersonic missile, the old space race even yes, yeah,
Speaker 3: just so man. And so with that in mind, is
Speaker 3: it not logical for us to assume that if extra
Speaker 3: terrestrial craft are a thing, we would then use a
Speaker 3: similar process to learn as much as possible. So if
Speaker 3: a legacy program of this sort does exist, it's not
Speaker 3: a brand new thing. It's an extension of previous proven tactics.
Speaker 3: You know, it's something that it's a process that people
Speaker 3: would have been familiar with before. Because the US is
Speaker 3: pretty good at committing acts of extra what if we
Speaker 3: just say about killing, extra judicial killing, which is a
Speaker 3: terrible thing as we record now and throughout the past,
Speaker 3: but also extra national, extra national acquisitions. He goes way
Speaker 3: past taking possession of a Russian shadow fleet tanker. They're
Speaker 3: very good at it, so so much so that if
Speaker 3: spaceship did exist in one part of the world, Uncle
Speaker 3: Sham would be one of the top candidates to go
Speaker 3: in there.
Speaker 4: And take it.
Speaker 3: Oh sure, I can't wait till we get to the
Speaker 3: to the part euphemistically called unwarned access. Well.
Speaker 5: The term legacy is really interesting too. Is something you
Speaker 5: see in government programs and initiatives often to refer to
Speaker 5: things they've done in the past that maybe aren't necessarily great,
Speaker 5: but when you call them legacy, it gives it this
Speaker 5: sort of positive sort of spin, I guess, you know,
Speaker 5: like legacy nuclear waste cleanup and things like that. It
Speaker 5: refers to all of the byproducts of you know, the
Speaker 5: atomic bomb, the aforementioned atomic bomb that have to be
Speaker 5: dealt with and that really there was not necessarily a
Speaker 5: plan initially when all that stuff was produced in order
Speaker 5: to win that race that we were talking about, And
Speaker 5: now they call those legacy programs.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's it's a common nomenclature, and we'll see how
Speaker 3: that leads to confusion as well.
Speaker 2: And let's just remember it, guys, we're not the only
Speaker 2: players in the game, according to the documentary, and that
Speaker 2: gets into the Cold War aspect of it, right. Yeah,
Speaker 2: the US has these existing things that we know about
Speaker 2: because this is where we are, and we can read
Speaker 2: things thanks to a couple of you know, a couple
Speaker 2: acts that went through Congress where we can actually get
Speaker 2: privy to some of the things, some of the programs
Speaker 2: that have occurred in the past and how they function,
Speaker 2: But we don't have any insight into let's say, Russian
Speaker 2: programs or Chinese programs that the Age of Disclosure alleges
Speaker 2: these countries have very similar, if not kind of the
Speaker 2: exact same thing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and as we expand the scope, we'll see more
Speaker 3: and more about that. It reminds me of a point
Speaker 3: that it feels always necessary to bring up when we
Speaker 3: talk about MK Ultra or creepy experiments into psychic powers,
Speaker 3: right and precognitive abilities. There was there were entirely separate
Speaker 3: programs in the other Big Three that were doing the
Speaker 3: same thing. It's something we return to again and again.
Speaker 3: And speaking of return, who got a return to this
Speaker 3: legacy thing? You raise such a great point, nol. We
Speaker 3: always know that innocuous, boring names are a weapon themselves.
Speaker 3: We know that bureaucracy creates and imposes its own relatively
Speaker 3: arbitrary rules and then holds onto those rules even when
Speaker 3: they're not useful any longer. And one of those is
Speaker 3: naming stuff legacy. So if you hie thee to your
Speaker 3: favorite Internet forum or platform, and you look back for
Speaker 3: years far before the release of the Age of Disclosure,
Speaker 3: you'll see people talking about something called the legacy program.
Speaker 3: You'll see people further claiming hand on Kuran or hand
Speaker 3: on the Bible that they have discovered proof of the
Speaker 3: Department of Defense's legacy program. And get this, fellow conspiracy realist,
Speaker 3: they're not blowing rainbows. There is a legacy resource management
Speaker 3: program in the Department of Defense. But it's a big disappointment.
Speaker 5: Yeah, another wamp wamp. Sadly, it has nothing to do
Speaker 5: with aliens. It has to do with funding initiatives to
Speaker 5: protect natural and cultural resources that are found on military
Speaker 5: bases and installations.
Speaker 4: It's important, it's a thing.
Speaker 5: It's yeah, it's it's definitely something that helps, you know,
Speaker 5: encourage military readiness and promote military readiness while also contending
Speaker 5: with perhaps some of the environmental risks and issues that
Speaker 5: could come with some of these construction projects. Though I
Speaker 5: you know, I mean not to pooh poo it or anything.
Speaker 5: I tend to believe that they favor the installations over
Speaker 5: the conservation.
Speaker 3: Sounds like it covered me, guys, right, Yeah, sorry, native
Speaker 3: people of this sovereign land. Nobody can come in here,
Speaker 3: not because we're doing experiments, but because we're cleaning the
Speaker 3: creek for fifteen years.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 2: The reason why the entrance to Area fifty one is, oh,
Speaker 2: I don't know how many miles away from the actual facility.
Speaker 2: It's a conservation.
Speaker 3: Yeah, oh gosh, And don't go, guys, don't go. They
Speaker 3: will shoot you. I know a couple of people who
Speaker 3: got bird dog hard just for driving by and.
Speaker 4: They didn't remember they had.
Speaker 3: Past the sign.
Speaker 5: They had that big old event, right, And our buddy
Speaker 5: Jordan Runtogg went. I think he did a right up
Speaker 5: about it for People magazine, and I don't think he
Speaker 5: was shot at. But maybe you know, safety and numbers
Speaker 5: that message.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's because there were so many people and was
Speaker 3: telegraphed so far in advance. I'm talking about actually a
Speaker 3: friend of the show in particular, who got out to
Speaker 3: the sign that says go go further, you will be shot.
Speaker 3: And even after even just getting within sight of the sign,
Speaker 3: then military vehicles came out of nowhere and.
Speaker 5: Chase them off like bumper to bumper.
Speaker 4: It got harry.
Speaker 3: So don't happen around X files.
Speaker 4: Yes, in multiple episodes.
Speaker 2: Just just for me, can we define bird dog I
Speaker 2: just don't know what it means.
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, chicken hawk bird. You know, they got eyes
Speaker 5: on you. They're coming hot and heavy.
Speaker 3: But I'm still learning English, guys, forgive me in this
Speaker 3: use in my head, bird dogging is like in a
Speaker 3: card chase where somebody is on your tuckis following you aggressively,
Speaker 3: right in a hostile manner. So we've actually I should
Speaker 3: have said this before because I've been using it in
Speaker 3: a couple of episodes.
Speaker 4: In the past.
Speaker 3: Sorry about that, but yeah, that's what it means. So
Speaker 3: we also know that the Department of Energy and the
Speaker 3: CIA get a little bit more interesting, uh, when we're
Speaker 3: talking about stuff that could be legacy programm esque. Also
Speaker 3: another badger in the bag here. This is kind of
Speaker 3: the rhetorical we were talking about at the top. There's
Speaker 3: been no institutional confirmation of any alien craft retrieval program.
Speaker 3: As a matter of fact, sometimes the US government doesn't
Speaker 3: even admit when they retrieve non domestic mundane technology because
Speaker 3: they don't want to play their hand right looking at
Speaker 3: you nuclear subs and.
Speaker 5: Just just for a flip perspective, since we are talking
Speaker 5: a lot about this film, I mentioned an audience review.
Speaker 5: Here is a critic review that addresses what you just mentioned.
Speaker 5: Ben from Daniel Flemberg at the Hollywood Reporter. My problem
Speaker 5: with the age of disclosure isn't the lack of opposing voices.
Speaker 5: It's that there couldn't be experts debunking anything.
Speaker 3: Here.
Speaker 5: Nothing is proven and thus nothing can be refuted.
Speaker 3: Yep, yep, hold of one. Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.
Speaker 3: This is why there's been no institutional confirmation. Though for
Speaker 3: the true believers to jump back on the other side, I.
Speaker 5: See, that would be a justification. Of course, there isn't
Speaker 5: because by design there isn't, you know.
Speaker 3: Right well, they would also that admission or confirmation would
Speaker 3: also inherently require official institutional confirmation that extraterrestrials exist at
Speaker 3: a visited Earth, so they.
Speaker 5: They're just not going to do they wouldn't do they
Speaker 5: wouldn't do it. That's not it's not in the best
Speaker 5: interest of the government, so be transparent to its citizenry
Speaker 5: when it comes to stuff like this.
Speaker 2: Is this where we bring in the Executive Order one two, three,
Speaker 2: five six of the Atomic Energy Act of nineteen fifty
Speaker 2: four that brought us these glorious things called special access programs,
Speaker 2: These things that are so compartmentalized within a governmental organization,
Speaker 2: not only a handful of people potentially even know about them.
Speaker 5: They're talking about firewalled stuff like like literally wheels within
Speaker 5: wheels of people who have access to the siloed information.
Speaker 3: Right, stuff you have to be read on, is what
Speaker 3: we call.
Speaker 2: It, to the point where the government itself likely doesn't
Speaker 2: know or in many cases, especially the government that has
Speaker 2: you know, people who get elect did to it that
Speaker 2: they have no idea about.
Speaker 5: And that's the smoking man of it all. That's what
Speaker 5: that character represents, is that the degree of insulation from
Speaker 5: even the actual powers that be, there are these operations
Speaker 5: within the greater government that even the greater government is
Speaker 5: not aware of and that's by design too, but it's
Speaker 5: also inherently like dangerous and flawed. I'm not saying that
Speaker 5: what the X files is positing is true, but I
Speaker 5: think that's what they're trying to represent, that these types
Speaker 5: of things likely do exist.
Speaker 3: And we do see a lot of what we do
Speaker 3: see is the opposite of official confirmation or coquettish implication. Instead,
Speaker 3: we have a lot of stark denials. I'm thinking in
Speaker 3: particular of the twenty twenty four report from ARROW, the
Speaker 3: All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office, which is a pretty cool
Speaker 3: job if you can get it. They dove deep into
Speaker 3: the files that they were they're part of the system,
Speaker 3: was allowed to see, and they said there's no evidence
Speaker 3: of anything like a legacy program, definitely not a singular
Speaker 3: legacy program, but also nothing remotely like it. They said
Speaker 3: that people have either accidentally or willfully confused the alien
Speaker 3: legacy with projects that have similar names, or they've fallen
Speaker 3: into something very dangerous, which we call circular reporting. That's
Speaker 3: when one person makes an unproven claim, like Tennessee says,
Speaker 3: that's Dylan the Tennessee pel Fagan, our producer. By the way, Yes, yep,
Speaker 3: we're introduced at the top of every show. Tennessee says, yeah,
Speaker 3: Dylan Tennessee, pel Fagan says, it is confirmed that the
Speaker 3: fast food chain Pals is now making case idellas Dylan
Speaker 3: has no proof, but somebody else reads that and they
Speaker 3: quote what he said, and then later people quote the
Speaker 3: person who quoted Tennessee, and then the original source might
Speaker 3: update and say, oh, update, I have confirmed this is
Speaker 3: true because I read this quote in another even though
Speaker 3: that source was quoting me. This happens all the time
Speaker 3: in the echo chamber of the internet.
Speaker 5: Well, and also, I mean now that, like whatever major
Speaker 5: news outlets are having to play in the same ecosystem
Speaker 5: as the Internet, you get a lot of knee jerk
Speaker 5: bits of reporting from them as well, you know, not
Speaker 5: naming names specifically, but it certainly happens. And it's a
Speaker 5: lot harder to retract something after a splashy headline than
Speaker 5: it is to report something correctly in the first place.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, the initial breathless claim. That's the headline
Speaker 3: that's on the sixty one. The retraction is next week
Speaker 3: on page thirty two b below the fold back. When
Speaker 3: people read newspapers, we know that the mainstream public in
Speaker 3: the United States largely agrees with this official explanation. Pew
Speaker 3: Research polls will show us that fifty one percent of
Speaker 3: the US public believes that UFOs reported by people in
Speaker 3: the military are likely evidence of intelligent life outside of Earth,
Speaker 3: but they're not worried about it because the same people
Speaker 3: in polls, eighty seven percent of them will say UFOs
Speaker 3: are not a threat at all. So people will tend
Speaker 3: to the public will tend to believe in UFOs with
Speaker 3: an extra terrestrial origin story, but they also tend to
Speaker 3: not be worried about them.
Speaker 2: Man, what is happening upside me? We're not afraid of
Speaker 2: AI uprisings anymore, We're not afraid of UAP, and a
Speaker 2: who's not who's not afraid of AI.
Speaker 5: We're all like, yay AI, give me that breaks me
Speaker 5: out beyond anything. No, no living times for sure. But
Speaker 5: you're right about the alien fatigue or the UAP fatigue.
Speaker 5: It certainly does not seem to be front of mind anymore,
Speaker 5: and in the way that it has been in the past.
Speaker 3: I remember when some big disclosure news came out amid
Speaker 3: the high of the COVID pandemic and everybody just sort
Speaker 3: of shrugged and said, Okay, I mean cool, I got
Speaker 3: I got a lot going on.
Speaker 4: What's up with toilet paper prices?
Speaker 5: But again, a lot of the stuff that came out
Speaker 5: was just a nothing burgers as people want to say.
Speaker 5: I do wonder. There's a big old blockbuster coming out
Speaker 5: later this year from Steven Spielberg called Disclosure Day. I
Speaker 5: saw the trailer for it last week and it looks good,
Speaker 5: looks very you know, like him his return to form
Speaker 5: in terms of like some of his alien type films
Speaker 5: like ET and what is it Close Encounters of course,
Speaker 5: of course, of course I do wonder if that will
Speaker 5: be zeitgeist enough to get people thinking about this stuff again.
Speaker 3: But we'll see, oh, one hundred percent. I'd also I'd
Speaker 3: like to go ahead and tease a show that Dylan
Speaker 3: and I are quite excited about the hits on the
Speaker 3: Nexus of Film and Disclosure and UFOs. It's called Sound,
Speaker 3: Light and Frequency, and it's heading to you very soon.
Speaker 3: We'll be talked talking more about it in the future.
Speaker 3: But we are as pleased as NASA when astronauts landed
Speaker 3: on the Moon.
Speaker 4: To tell you more about that in the coming days.
Speaker 5: Sure they did. Now that's awesome. That I'm excited about
Speaker 5: this show, Dylan.
Speaker 3: You know what, why don't you do the odders here?
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's a show that's the intersection of Hollywood UFOs
Speaker 5: and disclosure. Sounds incredible.
Speaker 3: So a lot of folks logically find it tough to
Speaker 3: believe a vast program is not just monitoring alien life,
Speaker 3: but capturing alien life and craft and functioning in secrecy.
Speaker 3: But this is the rhetorical trap I was teasing at
Speaker 3: the top. The true believers and those who appear to
Speaker 3: be in the know say the secrecy is more than
Speaker 3: successful because of the compartmentalization. This is information that is
Speaker 3: firewalled off such that Congress doesn't really know about it,
Speaker 3: the Secretary of Defense doesn't really know about it. The
Speaker 3: President of the United States from either political party doesn't
Speaker 3: know about it. And this is why Alessando is so
Speaker 3: interesting to us, because he has repeatedly stated that he
Speaker 3: had a big problem with this compartmentalization, that he made
Speaker 3: a moral choice to resign rather than continue this charade
Speaker 3: upon the American public. And then a lot of other
Speaker 3: people who also seem to be in the know, folks
Speaker 3: like James Clapper, they disagree with the idea that aliens
Speaker 3: are not harmful. They say that any unidentified aerial phenomena
Speaker 3: doesn't need to be extraterrestrial to be a threat. They're
Speaker 3: national security guys. Clapper is a big deal. He served
Speaker 3: in the Air Force between sixty three and ninety five.
Speaker 3: In Age of Disclosure, where he is interviewed, he talks
Speaker 3: about tracking anomalous activities that couldn't be explained, especially around
Speaker 3: Area fifty one or Groom Lake. It sounds a lot
Speaker 3: like the Legacy program. He also goes into the private
Speaker 3: defense industry later. I don't know, man, it seems it
Speaker 3: seems paranoid, but it also makes a lot of sense.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, Clappering, the official military folks that are in
Speaker 2: the documentary are extremely concerned with America's nuclear readiness and
Speaker 2: some of the silos that are out there in the Midwest,
Speaker 2: and how you know, there are these alleged incidents where
Speaker 2: unknown lights craft things in the sky caused a bunch
Speaker 2: of the nukes to go offline. And then you know,
Speaker 2: that's stated to you plainly as though it's full, full
Speaker 2: on fact in the documentary, and that is something that
Speaker 2: is that's something we've heard about for years, right, there
Speaker 2: have been rumors about that kind of thing, But you
Speaker 2: don't have a piece of paper or a video or
Speaker 2: anything like that that proves that that ever occurred. But
Speaker 2: if you've got somebody like a James Clapper saying that
Speaker 2: it happened, then it seems like maybe it happened.
Speaker 3: Yeah, because he was He's also the former Director of
Speaker 3: National Intelligence. And this is something I think we need
Speaker 3: to be very clear about for anybody who's unfamiliar with
Speaker 3: this genre of government official. This cold war hawk not
Speaker 3: a stereotype but a trope. These guys could not give
Speaker 3: less of a dang whether or not aliens are involved.
Speaker 3: Their focus is on what is a threat to national security?
Speaker 3: Anything that violates sovereign airspace could endanger aviation, which makes
Speaker 3: it a threat to the country. So this how far
Speaker 3: they go with it. If the government of China had
Speaker 3: literal dragons like smau in Lord of the Rings or
Speaker 3: the Hobbit, if they had dragons like the Valerians or something,
Speaker 3: or if Russia had I don't know, ginormous war geese,
Speaker 3: nuclear armed war geese just haul again through this right.
Speaker 5: That's my nightmare.
Speaker 3: What if that happened?
Speaker 2: The cockroaches that were actually like full on robots, but
Speaker 2: the size of cockroaches.
Speaker 5: But yeah, we're getting there.
Speaker 3: Those that third example that's real though, the cockbots. Uh,
Speaker 3: and that's that's what they're called.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I don't believe you, but I also totally believe you.
Speaker 2: Also X Files episode.
Speaker 3: So this is the issue though. We're saying that this
Speaker 3: documentary of course focuses on the extra terrestrial question, but
Speaker 3: some of the folks interviewed or talking just in terms
Speaker 3: of national security, drones and weather balloons can also fall
Speaker 3: into this category of compromising airspace, as we saw a
Speaker 3: few years back.
Speaker 5: Any bogies bogeys of any I love the word bogies.
Speaker 3: Who doesn't look at you? You a little bogie. I've
Speaker 3: been just a little shoot you down? Yeah, you a
Speaker 3: little bogey fighting those foods. Anyway, again and again, even
Speaker 3: before this documentary published last year, we see repeated allegations
Speaker 3: that this or some sort of retrieval program like it exists.
Speaker 3: So maybe, just as a thought experiment, why don't we assume,
Speaker 3: just for funzies, that the legacy program is real. Maybe
Speaker 3: walk through a purported timeline and a little bit of
Speaker 3: how stuff works.
Speaker 5: We love how stuff works, and a thought experiment how
Speaker 5: stuff could works. Indeed, be right back.
Speaker 3: A legacy timeline, a bit of how stuff works in
Speaker 3: our thought experiment. The story begins not in the United
Speaker 3: States but in Italy way back in nineteen thirty three,
Speaker 3: per David Grush and a couple of other folks. This
Speaker 3: is when a bell shaped object was recovered and it
Speaker 3: was placed under a media blackout, and then later the
Speaker 3: OSS is the short predecessor of the CIA. They obtained
Speaker 3: this object, they found it amid the chaos of World
Speaker 3: War II, and at the close of the war they
Speaker 3: spirited it away hashtagnugibli to the States. And this is
Speaker 3: to people like Rush. This is illustrative of later operations,
Speaker 3: tactical patterns, blackout, local recovery, diplomatic parkour, and then transfer
Speaker 3: to US custody, all in secret and do do Do
Speaker 3: do dooo. Please check out our series on the OSS.
Speaker 3: It is an amazing story and it is so crazy.
Speaker 3: The stuff they pulled in.
Speaker 5: Is the Office of Strategic Services, which was like a
Speaker 5: wartime intelligence agency that was sort of the precursor to
Speaker 5: the CIA, like you mentioned, Ben.
Speaker 4: Oh, yes, sir, they're wild boys.
Speaker 2: So we're thinking here that nineteen thirty three, whatever this
Speaker 2: thing is, it crashes out there. Right then during all
Speaker 2: of the build up I guess to World War two,
Speaker 2: like in between thirty three and then thirty nine, which is,
Speaker 2: you know, officially whatever. The start of World War Two,
Speaker 2: it was secreted away by let's say the Italian government,
Speaker 2: and then it's hidden and then the OSS gets a
Speaker 2: hold of it during World War two, and there's actual
Speaker 2: battles and everything occurring.
Speaker 3: Yeah, during the chaos of World War Two. The sometime
Speaker 3: during the actual war, the OSS grabs this and at
Speaker 3: the close of the war is when they get it
Speaker 3: over the pollen to the U States.
Speaker 2: So it was like discovered and then then as the
Speaker 2: secret mission or whatever it is to actually extract it occurs.
Speaker 3: That's good, yeah, and it sets this precedent, and from
Speaker 3: there the US approach to recovering this anomalous stuff becomes
Speaker 3: kind of formulaic. It's sort of procedural. Right now, it's
Speaker 3: just a technical problem. It's just a matter of the logistics.
Speaker 3: People aren't necessarily super duper excited. There's probably some guide
Speaker 3: in office rolling his eyes and going ugh, now, I
Speaker 3: need like seven fake passports to keep him.
Speaker 5: In my case, with my loose diamonds.
Speaker 3: Right, yes, which would be great. That would that would work?
Speaker 4: Actually, that's where I know you from.
Speaker 2: Okay, So do we know the.
Speaker 3: See?
Speaker 2: I guess we can't. It's in other things that we
Speaker 2: can't prove. I'm thinking about the history of the Groom
Speaker 2: Lake facilities there Mount Nevada, and you know, officially on
Speaker 2: paper if you look up things online, it's not established
Speaker 2: until the nineteen fifties. But I do wonder in the
Speaker 2: contiguous United States, where would you bring that craft? Right?
Speaker 2: Let's just theoretically, if if you got that craft from Italy,
Speaker 2: where do you take it?
Speaker 5: And how do you transport it like without being noticed
Speaker 5: as well?
Speaker 3: Yeah? Cargo ship? Wow? I see? Or how big is
Speaker 3: it too? That's the only thing we need to know,
Speaker 3: the dementia, because would it be a combination of flying
Speaker 3: it out somewhere which is way faster than just popping
Speaker 3: it on a train convoy or something.
Speaker 4: I don't know.
Speaker 3: This is cool. I love this stuff, you guys know me.
Speaker 3: I have a sucker for this stuff. Deep government secrets,
Speaker 3: ancient or aliad relics. Sign us up.
Speaker 2: What is the giant military plane that's used commonly for
Speaker 2: like cargo is that right? No, I think it is
Speaker 2: Sea one thirty.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Sea one thirty now, and are you talking about
Speaker 3: like back in the day.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm trying to imagine what would be the large
Speaker 2: enough aircraft, right because I can't just can't stop thinking
Speaker 2: about this, man, the actual things that you the stuff
Speaker 2: you would use at that time, and then what would
Speaker 2: the decision be. And in that moment, let's say we
Speaker 2: all discovered a craft, right, just the four of us.
Speaker 3: Oh, hey guys walking around, five of the five of us,
Speaker 3: because you're here too, So, hey, guys, we found a craft.
Speaker 3: Hey guys, look AT's a craft. What do we do
Speaker 3: with it?
Speaker 2: Well, don't mean really, and you would use everything you
Speaker 2: have on hand because it would be an emergency, right right,
Speaker 2: like you can't Okay, well, we need to develop something
Speaker 2: that's gonna be big enough to transfer this. You just
Speaker 2: use what you got, which is I think the most
Speaker 2: interesting part of this because as we're going back through
Speaker 2: and imagining this, if the Legacy program is real, there's
Speaker 2: gonna be stuff if it is real, if it was real,
Speaker 2: there's stuff that we saw or maybe was reported on.
Speaker 2: There was a part of this thing that you know
Speaker 2: has a completely innocuous version of it that we all
Speaker 2: somehow know, oh.
Speaker 3: One hundred percent. Yeah, I think about that all the
Speaker 3: time when because our fair metropolis of Atlanta, Georgia is
Speaker 3: a city where aviation and train lines took the role
Speaker 3: that was historically filled by waterways and rivers and coast
Speaker 3: so it's very common for us to see things like
Speaker 3: military equipment passing by on a train line through the city.
Speaker 3: Here's what strikes me. We hope you enjoy this, two folks.
Speaker 3: If you're ever stopped and you're watching a train go by,
Speaker 3: just start thinking about what might be in those cargo
Speaker 3: containers every time?
Speaker 5: Yeah, and when will it end?
Speaker 3: Train?
Speaker 5: So you can, you know, go on your merrywag.
Speaker 2: Ye dude is for real speaking of and don't want
Speaker 2: to get to polycharged right now, guys. But did anyone
Speaker 2: see the posts about the large shipments of ice trucks
Speaker 2: on the way Not for the ice storm?
Speaker 5: No, No, they're like in those types of vehicles that
Speaker 5: you see carrying like, you know, cars to be sold
Speaker 5: or whatever, stats trailer things. Yeah. I saw some posts
Speaker 5: that people had, you know, made videos from their cars.
Speaker 2: Mm hmm.
Speaker 3: I hope I make it back to the states man.
Speaker 5: We hope you do too bad. Yeah, please come back.
Speaker 5: It's great over here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we love it so we We also know the
Speaker 3: film mentions Halloman Air Force Space the incident there in
Speaker 3: nineteen seventy one. This stands out because it purportedly involves
Speaker 3: non human intelligent beings interacting with personnel from the CIA
Speaker 3: and the US Air Force. Like they came up and
Speaker 3: they said, what's good, you guys. We've got an exciting
Speaker 3: new thing we call velcrow. You gotta check it out.
Speaker 3: And man, they said, and they said, well to us,
Speaker 3: you're the aliens tots.
Speaker 5: Oh my god, mind blown galaxy brain. There's no chance
Speaker 5: that they would just be instantly able to just like
Speaker 5: kick it like that.
Speaker 3: They were that chill.
Speaker 5: I saw Independence Day.
Speaker 2: We've talked about it before with movies like Arrival of
Speaker 2: a Thought experiment like the Language of It.
Speaker 6: No possible way, yeah, right, unless there's just something that
Speaker 6: we don't understand about where in time space from perspective
Speaker 6: to mension these visitors came from right, and if they
Speaker 6: are of in some way that we just don't understand
Speaker 6: right now, they.
Speaker 2: Could communicate maybe right or get you to understand.
Speaker 5: There could be technology involved. I suppose, right, like in
Speaker 5: the dolphins.
Speaker 3: Something that can make a look squence exactly if the
Speaker 3: humans have figured out how to give dolphins LSD and
Speaker 3: how to make Google Translate apps, obviously hopefully the aliens
Speaker 3: are way better. There would also be well, we'll see,
Speaker 3: we're being anthrocentric here, because this could be something that
Speaker 3: is so incomprehensible, this culture, this organism, this communicative priority
Speaker 3: or medium, that there could be no real way to
Speaker 3: efficiently communicate past a very basic level.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 3: It's it's a problem that's fascinating. I love the way
Speaker 3: Rival tackles it. Please read the original short story, and
Speaker 3: I love the I love the concept too that tried
Speaker 3: so or not to just do dumb alien improv riffs.
Speaker 3: But I love the concept that it's a very real
Speaker 3: dangerous concept that humans could accidentally innocuously do something of
Speaker 3: great offense or something that is seen as posing a danger.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, you know, like what if hydrogen sulfide or
Speaker 3: any of the other of those fart gases. What if
Speaker 3: those are absolute anathema and poison to aliens and somebody
Speaker 3: is stressed out understandably when they meet the aliens.
Speaker 4: They're like, hey, guys, what's up. We're sick. Aliens want
Speaker 4: to hang out. Have you guys heard of Velcrow?
Speaker 3: And this one guy goes, oh no, And then two
Speaker 3: aliens die and now we're in our first innergalactic.
Speaker 5: War die or are incredibly offended, as they should be
Speaker 5: because that's gross. And then just you know, pull the
Speaker 5: nuke lever and we all, you know, poof, And that
Speaker 5: was our story.
Speaker 3: Also, one of the assumptions that a lot of Hollywood
Speaker 3: film makes, and a lot of sci fi too, is
Speaker 3: the assumption that extraterrestrials visiting are their civilization's equivalent of
Speaker 3: a crack team of experts. There is no proof that
Speaker 3: we're getting visited by the top brass, you know what
Speaker 3: I mean? Yeah, I mean yeah.
Speaker 5: There's the Aquatine episode Okatane Hunger Forces, where it's these
Speaker 5: like kind of stoner aliens whose dad owns a dealership
Speaker 5: and they're like, you know, uh oh wit no. It's
Speaker 5: also ignig Knock and err who are completely you know,
Speaker 5: unqualified to be you know, making first contact. So I
Speaker 5: love that version of events. Ben, I think that's entirely likely.
Speaker 5: These were just like folks that's intergalactically stumbled upon us
Speaker 5: and didn't really.
Speaker 3: Have a plare we go? They took a wrong turn
Speaker 3: at serious beat. That's a Dogon reference, folks.
Speaker 2: Oh snow, I don't know what that is. Do Petrie who?
Speaker 3: Yeah, who allegedly had advanced knowledge of serious A and
Speaker 3: B before the dawn of modern astronomy.
Speaker 5: Okay, I thought you were talking about Dagon, the HP
Speaker 5: Lovecraft adaptation also great, very well, you know, problematic but
Speaker 5: great writer. Some made some banger stories for sureoted for our.
Speaker 4: Interview with Dagon.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, No, not talking about Lovecraft.
Speaker 5: Are you talking about Dagon the Infernal One?
Speaker 3: Yes?
Speaker 5: He is good. Hang good? Hang that guy, good good?
Speaker 3: Hang Love's yacht rock?
Speaker 2: Oh man. So when we're talking about the non human
Speaker 2: biologics of all of this stuff that you know, folks
Speaker 2: have stated in Congress, and we're talking about right here
Speaker 2: Holloman Air Force Base nineteen seventy one potentially beings, right,
Speaker 2: biological beings of some sort, it makes me think of
Speaker 2: our explorations in all kinds of topics, like Project Bluebeam,
Speaker 2: talking about a AI in the past, talking about space
Speaker 2: exploration and the limits of the limits of biological entities. Sure,
Speaker 2: it just makes me wonder why in the heck you
Speaker 2: would make that decision, no matter where you're from, no
Speaker 2: matter what technology level you're at, Why would you send
Speaker 2: a biological entity down to greet the people rather than
Speaker 2: some kind of pro that can communicate whatever.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, but then that that's a great question.
Speaker 3: It also goes back to not just ideas of physical
Speaker 3: personal safety, right, which the same reason we send unmanned
Speaker 3: stuff deep into the ocean, but it also goes to
Speaker 3: the idea of a culture that humans simply don't know about,
Speaker 3: so it may be incredibly important, indeed sacrisynct to their
Speaker 3: diplomatic process.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you've got to slarg the girth, kid, or it's
Speaker 2: not an official, you know, meeting of another species.
Speaker 5: Is that the same as drops them sklang scracks them.
Speaker 3: I never get it, right, is it? If your fami
Speaker 3: it is? Yeah?
Speaker 5: Well, also, you know, it also presupposes that it's not
Speaker 5: your last idea, Ben, that they're just sort of like,
Speaker 5: you know, stoner alien wanderers that sort of just like
Speaker 5: found a way, you know, because their technology is good
Speaker 5: enough that they could just accidentally breathe Earth's atmosphere, or
Speaker 5: perhaps they're desperate and they don't have the technology, or
Speaker 5: they have to like brave you know, the atmosphere in
Speaker 5: order to make contact because they need help or something.
Speaker 5: I don't know, there's a million you're to cut it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I like that too. Know, we're we're the last
Speaker 3: gas station in the desert, it's cosmically speaking, so they've
Speaker 3: got to fuel up. You know what if they.
Speaker 2: Need hydrogen sulfide for fuel bin right right.
Speaker 3: I think of that same thing too.
Speaker 1: Man.
Speaker 3: It's like for anybody who's ever been on a road trip,
Speaker 3: it's a formative experience for many of US Americans. I
Speaker 3: think we've all been in that situation where you got
Speaker 3: to go to the sketchy gas station, you know what
Speaker 3: I mean.
Speaker 5: Or that stretch where you've miscalculated slightly and now you
Speaker 5: really have no choice and you may well have to
Speaker 5: stop at the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, you know, filling station,
Speaker 5: because that's the only one for miles and miles and miles,
Speaker 5: and the alternative is to just like be dead in
Speaker 5: the water, as it were.
Speaker 3: I will never be able to listen to that Dwight
Speaker 3: Yoakam song the same way again. It Yeah, man, you
Speaker 3: know what, well, we know that all of the experts
Speaker 3: in age of disclosure are unable or unwilling to disclose
Speaker 3: exactly how many events like Roswell or the Italy episode
Speaker 3: or Holloman have occurred. They say it probably ranges in
Speaker 3: the double digits, especially during the height of the First
Speaker 3: Cold War. And they said a lot of times they
Speaker 3: retrieved craft remnants or what they call artifacts, or what
Speaker 3: they call exotic materials. But as you were saying, Matt,
Speaker 3: they also claim to have recovered non human biologics that's
Speaker 3: a term that gets thrown around a lot, or organic remains,
Speaker 3: some kind of you know, something like that, right, something
Speaker 3: quote unquote natural. And this is what drove the program,
Speaker 3: the Legacy program, to an even higher level of secrecy,
Speaker 3: which is hard. It's already a tall milkshake. As we said, essentially,
Speaker 3: they're same Finding netto non organic material is amazing, it's
Speaker 3: tikety boo. It's all well and good. But discovering organic
Speaker 3: material raises some deep legal and moral questions and then
Speaker 3: serious concerns about possible threats to public health. You know
Speaker 3: what I mean, because we know what happens historically on
Speaker 3: planet Earth when one culture intrudes upon another. They never
Speaker 3: come alone. They come with diseases, they come with pathogens,
Speaker 3: and the local population historically is not prepared for those. Yeah,
Speaker 3: space measles, spacepox, space pox, that's the there, it is, spacebox.
Speaker 2: But we're also not ready for the tech, right, which
Speaker 2: is another huge part of this documentary, the concept that
Speaker 2: along with these non human biologics, they've got very specific
Speaker 2: pieces of tech that have been reverse engineered to become things.
Speaker 2: In the documentary they say they don't specifically say what technologies,
Speaker 2: but we might infer I know, I did a little
Speaker 2: bit when it comes to what type of tech has
Speaker 2: been recovered. You think about your phone, You think about sure,
Speaker 2: certain networking capabilities that we have now, the speed and
Speaker 2: the size of some of the tech that we use now,
Speaker 2: stuff on the nanoscale, stuff when you know, when you're
Speaker 2: looking at modern technology and how quickly stuff has developed.
Speaker 3: Material science is another.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you can imagine that, or you can let yourself imagine, oh,
Speaker 2: some of this is probably alien.
Speaker 3: M oh, absolutely, especially when you consider it sound like
Speaker 3: such an old entity now, especially when you consider we
Speaker 3: can make a great case that human civilization is still
Speaker 3: not prepared for stuff like the radio or television.
Speaker 5: Well in terms of like our cognition or like God forbid,
Speaker 5: we even bring the Internet into the equation. Like it's
Speaker 5: just like it's almost unnatural the way we've become so in,
Speaker 5: you know, all in on some of this technology. It's
Speaker 5: almost like we were never really meant for it, and
Speaker 5: it has fundamentally changed the way our cognition works, not
Speaker 5: for the better.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, exactly right.
Speaker 3: The society has not evolved in step with technological innovation,
Speaker 3: and human beings have not physically evolved to process, to
Speaker 3: efficiently process, to deal with all the stuff that's happening.
Speaker 3: It's a very exciting time to be alive. Some of
Speaker 3: the scary stuff here that we're talking about is a
Speaker 3: real world concerned of global governments, especially the stories of
Speaker 3: things that exhibited what they're calling ionization effects. These might
Speaker 3: pose a danger to surrounding materials, like change the color
Speaker 3: of paint on vehicles affect humans, possibly radiating them and
Speaker 3: leading to cancer or leading to burns. We're going to
Speaker 3: get moored to that in part two of our series here,
Speaker 3: but we have to let you know, folks. One of
Speaker 3: the most believable parts of the story is the bureaucratic
Speaker 3: description that they boiled it down to grab a thing,
Speaker 3: get it to the nerds, analyze it, and give it
Speaker 3: to our specific folks like the Atomic Energy Commission, the CIA,
Speaker 3: the DOE. Because when we do that, they're getting bureaucratic cover.
Speaker 3: This indemnifies you from some of the legal stuff we
Speaker 3: mentioned earlier, like feuer request. It gets you out of
Speaker 3: or invisible from a regulatory audit. You don't have to
Speaker 3: tell the president. This alien is, you know, just for us,
Speaker 3: just as a treat for us. We know that defense
Speaker 3: contractors begin playing and easingly large role because they're private firms,
Speaker 3: they work differently. It's way easier to sneak stuff under
Speaker 3: the Skunk Works radar, right, and they already by this
Speaker 3: point post World War Two, they have a pretty well
Speaker 3: proven track record of being able to keep a secret,
Speaker 3: so they're vetted entities.
Speaker 2: Well yeah, and Congress can't compel the folks over at
Speaker 2: Skunk Works right to disclose their information on their proprietary technology.
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly, sorry, trade secret. You guys wouldn't ask Coca Cola.
Speaker 3: So why are you picking on us? Which is terrifying,
Speaker 3: but that is kind of the logic and you're absolutely
Speaker 3: right there, Matt and we fast forward to two thousand
Speaker 3: and three, we see our good friends at the CIA,
Speaker 3: the Directorate of Science and Technology. They've created something called
Speaker 3: the Office of Global Access or UGA, like O Good anyway.
Speaker 3: UGA's job is to access what we call denied environments
Speaker 3: across the planet once a craft is detected. These guys
Speaker 3: again allegedly work with elite military outfits, you know, the
Speaker 3: real GYT guys, Delta and Seals and so on. They
Speaker 3: send them in to acquire whatever this thing is by
Speaker 3: hook or by crook, and that brings us to something
Speaker 3: that might not be familiar to everybody. Sack the Special
Speaker 3: Activities Center of the CIA, which I believe we've mentioned
Speaker 3: in a couple of different episodes over the years. This
Speaker 3: is the cinematic kind of special ops group of the CIA,
Speaker 3: directly descended from the paramilitary operations of the OSS. These
Speaker 3: are the guys who don't wear uniforms. These are the
Speaker 3: dudes and dodets who, if they are compromised, will be
Speaker 3: thrown to the Wolves and the wind Right. Their activities
Speaker 3: will be disavowed if they're caught. They're never anywhere official.
Speaker 3: Nothing they've ever done officially occurred. The euphemism for what
Speaker 3: these folks do in the Legacy program is unwarned access.
Speaker 3: That's a spooky one't folks of the government. Yeah right,
Speaker 3: they're like the uh they're the B and E guys
Speaker 3: on they're the breaking and entering guys on a much
Speaker 3: fancier level. They we were joking earlier about crafting dummy passports.
Speaker 3: These guys don't really need them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you've ever been nervous about some black Hawk helicopters.
Speaker 2: It's these guys.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but not officially, because nothing they do is official.
Speaker 3: Unwarned access is just so tar and spooky, man because
Speaker 3: that literally means that these guys will, at the direction
Speaker 3: of OGA. According to this story, these guys will just
Speaker 3: drop by. They don't knock, they don't send a text,
Speaker 3: they don't call, They just show up outside tran because
Speaker 3: a spaceship landed there. So okay, so we've got our process.
Speaker 3: Once the CIA and the military do their bit, any
Speaker 3: retrieved material goes to the contractors and their vaults for analysis.
Speaker 3: So this does two things. It gives us cover right bureaucratically,
Speaker 3: and then it also gives us some chances to start
Speaker 3: reverse engineering. And then at the same time, the Department
Speaker 3: of Energy has their own cabal of very intelligent nerds
Speaker 3: who get any anything that could be.
Speaker 4: Anything that could.
Speaker 3: Be associated with radioactive activity or unexplained emissions of energy,
Speaker 3: and they look at stuff that's also on you know,
Speaker 3: the weird end of the periodic table, the weird material science.
Speaker 2: So the Office of Global Access is a real thing.
Speaker 3: Yes, it is a real thing, and it.
Speaker 2: Is c I A. Huh, that's very strong. I mean
Speaker 2: it does that does seem like the actual collection arm
Speaker 2: you know that that would that could function if it
Speaker 2: was necessary for and an activity like this to collect
Speaker 2: a crashed vessel or something.
Speaker 3: Yeah, if you uh, that's the thing, Matt. It's it
Speaker 3: feels sticky, right, guys, because we already are talking about
Speaker 3: such a covert secretive intelligence arm in the first place, right,
Speaker 3: we we found mentions of UGAT on a CIA dot
Speaker 3: gov themselves. And then for people who think this really
Speaker 3: is the thing or the key to the legacy program,
Speaker 3: they're going to say, of course, you can't learn much
Speaker 3: about it because it's secret. Right, So again there's that
Speaker 3: rhetorical trap, and I don't know, I'd like the question
Speaker 3: then becomes Okay, the only way for all of this
Speaker 3: to happen with so many people and still maintain opsec
Speaker 3: and secrecy would be for not everybody to know the
Speaker 3: entire process, right, Like you might be flying the plane
Speaker 3: that transports a thing, but you don't know the thing
Speaker 3: you're transporting. You just fly stuff. You're just Jason Statham
Speaker 3: the transporter, dude.
Speaker 2: Let's read quickly from THECIA dot gov website says, the
Speaker 2: Directorate of Science and Technology applies innovative scientific, engineering and
Speaker 2: technical solutions in support of our foreign intelligence mission. Let's see,
Speaker 2: it's going into confronting intelligence problems with effective targeting, bold technology,
Speaker 2: and superb tradecraft. Yeah, isn't it weird when when something
Speaker 2: like the CIA has so many sub organizations with such
Speaker 2: specific things that they do. Yeah, doesn't it make you
Speaker 2: think of special access programs?
Speaker 3: Maybe I'm no, you're on base. It's a home run.
Speaker 3: It's the subprograms are necessary evil for sure, and not
Speaker 3: all of obviously, not all of them are related to aliens,
Speaker 3: and not all unworn access operations are related to aliens. Right,
Speaker 3: they might just go grab a cold Maduro. At some point,
Speaker 3: these things existed independently of UFOs, And I love that
Speaker 3: we're mentioning Science and Technology, because Age of Disclosure argues
Speaker 3: that if anybody knows the full picture, it would be
Speaker 3: the director of CIA Science and Tech. During the timeframe
Speaker 3: that Age of Disclosure discusses, this role was filled by
Speaker 3: someone named Dawn Marry X and the this person made
Speaker 3: no comment obviously, and no one's serting currently in the USAF,
Speaker 3: the CIA, the DOE, or any other associated agency has
Speaker 3: officially confirmed the acquisition of extraterrestrial craft or the stuff
Speaker 3: described in the film. True believers are convinced again that
Speaker 3: all these things, these objects are somewhere just off to
Speaker 3: the side outside of the frame, but skeptics argue this
Speaker 3: is a best a misunderstanding, at worst a cynical grift,
Speaker 3: and we have so so much more to get to. Guys.
Speaker 3: I'm excited that we we've made the call to create
Speaker 3: a two parter out of this.
Speaker 5: More than enough material we found to justify it, and
Speaker 5: I think we've Matt brought some really cool information that
Speaker 5: we're going to lead off with in the second episode.
Speaker 3: You want to tease some of that map.
Speaker 2: Uh, yeah, sure, this is just again kind of what
Speaker 2: we did in the In the second part of this episode,
Speaker 2: we're just gaming out right, what could be with what exists?
Speaker 2: What could be a part of this thing if it
Speaker 2: did exist? And we're just going to go down rabbit
Speaker 2: more rabbit holes like we did right here with the
Speaker 2: CIA Directorate of Science and Technology, which is I don't know,
Speaker 2: it's tricksy, it sure is weird.
Speaker 4: Oh, let's get in.
Speaker 3: I had so much of that stuff. Let's get it.
Speaker 3: If we're game, let's get into more of that in
Speaker 3: part two as well. Now, our ideal outcome vote and
Speaker 3: I can't believe I'm saying this, but hope springs Eternal.
Speaker 3: Our ideal outcome would be between the time we record
Speaker 3: chapter one of this series and the time we record
Speaker 3: chapter two of this series, world governments come out and
Speaker 3: confirmed that aliens are real, and an alien takes the
Speaker 3: podium and tells us you know, about what's going on
Speaker 3: with them, and hopefully they're chill.
Speaker 5: I would like, am I picturing Mars attacks? I don't
Speaker 5: know why that is where my mind goes immediately.
Speaker 3: I just love the idea, like what if before we
Speaker 3: get while we're still on the road, before we get
Speaker 3: to chapter two, we get confirmation that aliens are real?
Speaker 3: I say, we still do the episode just say the course, man,
Speaker 3: we worked so hard on it, you know.
Speaker 2: That's what That's what all the heads of these special
Speaker 2: access programs say. It's too late, We're already in too
Speaker 2: far critical mass boys.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they we'll get one of those. Weird. It'll be
Speaker 3: like when Wiki leaks had its heyday and the US
Speaker 3: government had to release this official statement telling all government employees,
Speaker 3: we know this is out there and you can read it,
Speaker 3: but guys, technically it is still classified, so just don't
Speaker 3: google it. Okay.
Speaker 2: When the alien just comes down and just says, gets
Speaker 2: out of the spaceship and says, do unto others as
Speaker 2: you would have done unto you.
Speaker 5: I bring you love, I bring you peace. Simpsons did it?
Speaker 5: Matt Simpsons did it?
Speaker 2: I was is this guy named Jesus?
Speaker 3: I would like him to land and say, uh, I
Speaker 3: would like, I'm still in love with very fart based
Speaker 3: alien civilization. So they go who onto others as you
Speaker 3: would have them who on to you and too far
Speaker 3: picturing No, this is never too fun. I pictured pictory
Speaker 3: world leaders going does this guy mean like literally literally
Speaker 3: have evidence?
Speaker 5: Do we have evidence of an international America incident caused
Speaker 5: by a fart? I would love to let us know
Speaker 5: about what. Nothing comes to mind, but it's they're certainly
Speaker 5: never too late.
Speaker 3: So what do you think, folks, could the same government
Speaker 3: that cannot figure out basic tax structure really be capable
Speaker 3: of spending trillions in absolute silence and hiding the biggest
Speaker 3: revelation in all of human history. Tune in for chapter
Speaker 3: two on the Legacy Program. In the meantime, we'd love
Speaker 3: to hear your thoughts. So you can find us online.
Speaker 3: You can call us on the phone, and you can
Speaker 3: always send us an email.
Speaker 2: Mm hmm.
Speaker 5: If for looking online, you will find us at either
Speaker 5: the handle conspiracy Stuff or a Conspiracy Stuff show. And
Speaker 5: I think Ben mentioned something about phone number.
Speaker 2: Yes, we have a number. It is one eight to
Speaker 2: three three STDWYTK. It's a voicemail system. Call it if
Speaker 2: you want to give us feedback. You'll be able to
Speaker 2: hear it on the audio version of this podcast. Find
Speaker 2: that wherever you listen to your favorite shows. If you
Speaker 2: want to send us an email, we are the.
Speaker 3: Entities that read each piece of correspondence we receive. Be
Speaker 3: well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void writes back. And
Speaker 3: if you want your correspondence to stay classified, we've got
Speaker 3: your back. In the meantime, we'd love to hear your
Speaker 3: favorite alien encounter in film or fiction. Tell us how
Speaker 3: you think an alien encounter would go in Hollywood and
Speaker 3: in real life. Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2: Stuff they Don't Want You to Know is a production
Speaker 2: of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 2: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.