All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 25, 2005 - Art Bell
02:29:50
Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Chip Proser - Colonizing the Moon
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The second hurricane hit, of course, and I think that I'm a little bit of a victim of watching too much of the coverage, and it really does begin to affect you.
I mean, Ramona and myself have watched virtually every second of the coverage of the building of the hurricanes, both of them, and then the damage they have done.
And we've just watched every second of it, you know, going from CNN to Fox to MSNBC to all the different, you know, services that show us what has, you know, become of the area.
And it's not good.
Not good at all.
Headline, Gulf Coast emerges from a battering by Rita.
In fact, for the storm-shattered Gulf Coast, the images were all too familiar.
In fact, one ran into the other, right?
Tiny fishing villages in splinters, refrigerators, coffins, bobbing in floodwaters, helicopters, rescue boats making house-to-house searches of residents.
It's all too familiar after New Orleans.
Of course, eight feet more of water in New Orleans in the ninth.
And it's just been a very, very rough year.
I mean, a very challenging year all the way around.
Now, I have a very good friend.
Virtually a lifelong friend, really.
As you well know, his name is Lynn Whitlake.
And he lived in Lake Charles, Louisiana.
And I called him the night before the hurricane struck land.
And I happened to catch him at quite a dramatic moment.
getting stuff up off the floor you know equipment off the floor of his home and getting it up as high as he could he had his car packed up in his dog ready to go and he was trying to decide if he was going to leave or stay and I told him uh uh don't stay do not stay do what you've done and get in the car and go I said we've got a house here will you know put you up for as long as you need to be put up And so I don't know what he has done.
Communication, of course, to Lake Charles is severed.
And so Lynn, if you're out there, please get hold of me.
Please call me.
You've got my private home number.
And you know you've got a place here.
The authorities there are saying they don't want people back yet.
And you can understand why.
There are no services.
There's no good water to drink.
There's no electricity.
There's no service.
The police chief Yeah, I know.
The police chief in Lake Charles has been on the various networks and he's doing a bang-up job.
Lynn was worried about looters.
In fact, on the night I talked to him, he said there were some very suspicious people just going up and down his street.
And he was concerned about looting.
Well, if you are to believe the police chief in Lake Charles, and he looks very, very determined, He said, if I have to, I'll cuff people to my bathroom.
Believe me, you don't want that.
He's real serious.
They've already arrested, I believe, about 13 looters, and there's a no-tolerance attitude, a severe, strong no-tolerance attitude, so Lake Charles, obviously not a place to loot, but that's something Lynn was worried about, and I said, Lynn, it's my judgment.
The storm is coming at you.
We had been watching the of the jog of this storm, and it was reportedly jogging west, but you could see, you could actually see the storm jogging north if you were watching the radar very carefully.
It was obvious that it was moving more to the north.
And I said, I think it's going to get you.
And he agreed, and he was in a panic.
So, I hope he made the correct decision and got out, but in any case, many of you down there, of course, know him as Rob Robin.
He's a weatherman there.
Lynn and I used to chase tornadoes in Amarillo, Texas together and he went on to become that.
That was his career.
He loves the weather and he was telling me, you know Art, I feel like I should stay because maybe I can get up with this queen or something if the roof blows off and try and save something.
I said, uh-uh.
Your life, buddy.
That's what we're talking about here is your life.
So you just, you know, you go.
So I hope you got out.
And Lynn, wherever you are, or Rob Robin, if somebody knows him by that name, please have him call the number that I gave him or contact me by email or whatever.
He's got my private home number.
Call me, Lynn.
And that's just one story in, well, millions, really.
All those people in Houston who Well, we learned another lesson here, didn't we?
And the lesson is that if you're going to call for a million or two million people to evacuate a city, then you damn well better get gas reserves out on the highways that they're going to use.
And you do have enough time to get that, so it seems like it's a great lesson of this hurricane.
Fine, call for evacuations because it saves lives, but prepare for what you're ordering and you know people are gonna run out of gas when they're you know going four miles in nine or ten hours you're gonna run out of gas so the next time this happens and there will be a next time by the way the Atlantic is a percolating along right now I know nobody but nobody wants to hear this but they're watching several areas of low-pressure
very carefully in the Atlantic right now and it's storm after storm after storm in a way that's what we're going to be talking about tonight is our environment and what we might be able to do about it not as in controlling by the way there's a bunch of rumors going on out there some of them being promulgated by people I'm surprised at I do not, for one second, think that either one of these hurricanes was thrust at us, or more to the point that one of these hurricanes was created by our own government.
That sort of thing is starting to go around out there.
Nonsense.
Absolute nonsense.
we'll be right back all thank god for radios all i can say
Guess who's on the line?
Guess who just called my home number?
Yo, Lynn!
How you doing?
Lynn, how you doing, man?
God, I have been scared to death for you.
You remember the last conversation the two of us had, right?
Yeah, I've actually forgotten about it because it was just before I made the decision to chicken out and leave Lake Charles.
You wanted me to come out and spend the hurricane out there.
That's right, that's right.
And you were getting stuff up off the floor, you had your car packed up, you had your dog ready to go with you, and you were telling me you were thinking about sticking around so you could put this squeen over your roof, or what was left of it if it got torn off.
That's where we left it, and I said, go.
Okay, well, eventually what I did, my best friend, He came up right after I talked to him, as a matter of fact, and urged me not to play a hero, you know, and at about that time, the final fog moving the projected trajectory even closer to Lake Charles than it had been before, which would have brought it up as it indeed happened across the Sabine River area, the border between Texas and Louisiana.
I figured, well, that's too close for comfort, and I decided to take off with my friend to Baton Rouge, and that's where we spent the storm.
Baton Rouge, all right.
Indeed, that's where I am right now as I'm speaking to you, because I have not been able to return to Lake Charles yet.
All right.
I know that you've watched the coverage of Lake Charles very carefully, I'm sure, from Baton Rouge.
Are you able to conclude anything about your area?
Oh, yes.
Uh, when I get back, it's going to be an entirely new skyline.
Uh, and in fact, my neighborhood, which of course is enshrouded in a, I think I've told you before, a forest, has been literally decimated.
That's from what I'm told.
You said there were like 100 foot plus trees all around your home.
Yes.
Yes.
And, uh, one person managed to get through that forest.
And in fact, he had to park his car a third of a mile away on the four lane road that runs into the residential street that I live on.
Because the trees were just so strewn across the road in every direction, mixed with telephone poles, transformers, and power lines.
Took him a good half hour to get to my house.
Wow.
And when he did, he found a humongous oak tree that crashed right into the roof of my garage.
Oh my god.
But my weather tower is still standing.
Your weather tower?
He's got all this weather equipment, radar, and all kinds of stuff in his house.
Any idea how high the water line got?
I'm sure you asked.
Well, certainly, because I only live about five houses from what is known as Contraband Bayou, and of course we were expecting a storm surge to come into Lake Charles.
And it indeed did, but did not reach my house.
My house was all quite elevated.
We have kind of a terrace area off the street, fill the street with water, not from
what he told me, get into the house.
So that will not be an issue, but the wind issue probably will.
We don't know exactly how extensive.
I have some more friends expected to go over to the place tomorrow, take a look around and see
what the prospects are for me to return there, you know, and maybe get up on generator power and maybe get back on
the air again.
Well, according to the authorities, there's, I guess, there's no water or electricity yet.
So it seems to me, and I think, you know, the authorities are asking everybody to just stay away for now.
How long do you figure to give it?
Two or three days or something or what?
I'm guessing somewhere in through there now.
I've got the water and the food.
Uh, and of course, like I said, my emergency generator.
The question is, the gas lines go in at the top of that garage where they feed the generator, which is in the garage.
Oh.
And if those lines have been severed, then I'm out of business.
Yeah.
I don't know yet.
The guy, you know, who made the initial inspection just told me that he looked in through the windows and could see sunlight shining in my garage.
Oh, God.
Not right.
Oh, boy.
But apparently it did not hit your house.
Is that correct?
Well, see, that tree's about 100 feet high, and depending upon how it came down, it could have very well extended back into part of my house.
I don't know that.
He couldn't get around to the backyard.
So I have other friends more bound and determined than he was to make a thorough inspection today.
So I'll find out.
All right.
Well, listen, buddy, the offer remains open.
You know, we've got a guest house here, and you're welcome.
Anytime you want to get in your car and drive, you're welcome.
But I understand why you're going to stay relatively close, of course.
Oh, yes.
I think it's kind of expected for the weather person to be back on duty when the populace returns.
As a matter of fact, you were telling me on the phone that scary night that they were waiting at the radio station for you to give word, you thought, to shut it down and get the hell out.
Actually, he stayed on a little longer after I left, and eventually put it on automation, and then it shut itself off, you know, when the storm came in.
All right, my friend.
Thank you.
Thank you so much for calling, because you have been on my mind so heavily the last few days.
I was hoping the phone would ring, and there you are.
Well, I sure appreciate the thought.
I don't think I don't.
I really do.
All right.
Take care, and remember, if you need a longer-term place, it's here for you.
Well, I appreciate it.
Thanks a whole bunch.
Take care, Lynn.
Bye-bye.
All right.
Oh, there's Lynn Whitlake.
Thank God.
That's been on my mind, because he was thinking about not leaving, so that he could get up there with his queen, which seemed like a poor idea.
Well, so there it is.
Storm after storm after storm.
Big, bad storms.
Records for the past 35 years, and we've been keeping them for some time, but accurately for 35 years, show that hurricanes have become stronger in recent times, according to a global study.
This fits with mounting evidence, which suggests the big storms The biggest storms actually around the world, hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones, are in fact intensifying.
Some US scientists say that greenhouse warming might be driving the most severe events, like Katrina.
Though more research is needed to be sure, their assessment of hurricane activity is published in the journal Science, a very reliable publication.
The idea that global warming might have an impact Makes sense, in theory at least, since tropical storms need warm ocean water to build up strength.
That is their fuel.
The warmer the water, the better the fuel.
But most scientists believe there is currently insufficient evidence to make such a claim, partly because of the lack of reliable long-term data.
Now scientists at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Georgia and the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado have analyzed global tropical cyclone statistics since satellite records began and Dr. Peter Webster plainly says, quote, I think Probably the sea surface temperature increase is a manifestation of global warming.
Now, whether it's man's hand, all the fossil fuels were, you know, burning, or just a plain cyclical event long ago, I decided it's not worth the fight.
It's not worth the controversy.
It just isn't worth it.
It's happening.
whether it's a natural cycle or man's hand, let's get over it and start to do
something about it because it is happening. In fact the Earth's magnetic
field is fading away. As a matter of fact today it is about 10% weaker than when
the German mathematician Karl Gauss started keeping tabs on it back in 1845
and And if the trend continues, our field may collapse altogether and then reverse.
Compasses would point south instead of north.
That would take a little adjustment, wouldn't it?
Not surprisingly, Hollywood has already seized on the twist in the natural disaster genre.
Last year, of course, Tinseltown released The Core.
Actually, a very good movie, I thought, in which the collapse of the Earth's magnetic field leads to massive electrical storms, blasts of solar radiation, and birds incapable of navigation.
Now, it was very entertaining, but that is not what they think is going to occur if we get a field reversal.
In fact, the field has reversed quite some number of times in the past.
Of course, not in our lives.
North has always been north, right?
Well, that may change.
Now, I'm going to have to put the following in rumor category, because I don't know that it's true.
I have no way of knowing, but Tamara passes on to me reports she's heard of quite a few bird deaths in Toronto.
She says one park in the city was reporting quite a few hundred, if not a few thousand.
Yesterday there was a report of 30 more on a golf course.
I can't seem to find anything on it, so I'm just passing it on to you, as I am passing it on to all of you.
Something else to worry about, like we need something else.
The initial outbreak of what could explode into a bird flu pandemic may affect only a few people, but the world will have, at that point, just a few weeks to contain the deadly virus before it spreads and kills millions.
This is from Reuters.
Chances of containment are very limited because the potentially catastrophic infection may not be detected until it's already spread to several countries like SARS did in 2003, but they're saying SARS was a relatively easily contained disease and this one will not be.
It will take scientists four to six months to develop a vaccine that protects against the pandemic virus, by which time thousands could have died.
There is little likelihood a vaccine will even reach the country where the pandemic begins.
Now, all of this is a worry that doesn't have a trigger pulled yet.
In other words, the avian virus Has killed human beings but very few and as of yet it is
not transmissible Through the air you know from human to human, but they're
worried that it's going to be I Don't know why they are so fixated on the fact that it's
going to be transmissible that some form of it is going to come
along very shortly That is going to be like the flu or maybe even combined
with a flu, but they seem absolutely sure that it's not if but when and
So this is something you're gonna want to keep your eye on the contagious
H5 n1 virus which thus far has killed 64 in Asian countries since first detected in all three
might not be the one trigger of the pandemic but instead a
A genetically different strain that could develop that passes between humans.
So there you have it.
They're thinking there's going to be some genetic modification now.
There's a million diseases out there and I don't fully understand medically why they are so concerned about this particular one.
Why they feel this tiny genetic change that'll make it a disaster for human beings
is going to occur in this particular case I just have no idea
as I said my guest at the top of the hour virtually thinks that what's going on right now is just a
warm-up to an event that is going to have us looking to the moon
or looking to other planets certainly looking to space because we may need we may need that help
It's going to be an interesting interview at the top of the hour.
In the meantime, on the international line, you are on the air.
Good morning.
Good morning.
How are you doing?
I'm all right, sir.
Where are you?
I'm actually in Toronto.
You're in Toronto.
Alright.
I had kind of, as you know, what I build as a rumor, because it was from a listener, that there were a number of birds dead in your area.
What have you heard?
I'm actually taking a look at it right now.
I heard this yesterday.
And they've actually found 30 dead animals.
So I guess it's a combination of birds.
And I guess other rodents and things like that.
But it was actually found on a golf course.
On a golf course, yeah.
She mentioned that.
Yeah.
It's still gone.
They took it out for testing.
They sent it to Guelph.
So they still don't have the results.
But apparently last week another 10 birds were found in an elementary school playground.
Boy, that's frightening.
And you want to know exactly why this is going on.
Because, you know, like the parakeet down in the mine, if the smaller animals start dying, well, you want to know why.
Let's put it that way.
Absolutely.
Right now, they're just assuming that they were poisoned, but until they get the results, we can't really confirm anything.
Alright.
Do us all a favor, and whoever's doing the show, when you find out what the story is, please do a follow-up.
Call the show and let us know.
Would you?
Absolutely.
I can actually even get you guys a website with a little bit more detailed information if you want.
I can be put on hold and send that out for you.
Well, you can't be put on hold because there's no one here to pick it up, but go ahead and send it to artbell.minespring.com or well, that would be the one, artbell.minespring.com.
Okay.
You got it.
Okay, buddy.
Take care and thank you very much for the call.
So, apparently something is going on in Toronto.
Whenever you hear of small animals dying in mass like that, you want to know why, and usually there is a reason.
It's kind of the state of the world right now though, where something like that has to be examined very quickly.
You want to get it examined very quickly and make sure there is a logical reason that doesn't have bad news, contain bad news for us.
By the way, on the website, I want to point out a picture Denise sent this to me during the week.
I thought it was quite good.
Two reasons, really, to go to the website.
One, my webcam.
It says Arts Webcam.
Yeah, there it is.
Arts Webcam.
If you look at that, those are our two latest additions to the house.
In the foreground would be Abby Dos.
And behind Abby is Dusty.
Beautiful kittens, both of them.
We're having a blast with them.
Our large cat, Yeti, isn't too wild about them, but nevertheless I share that photo with you and Denise shares a photo on the front page of the website that I think is pretty compelling.
I think it's very compelling.
It's a photo of Her departed cat, or that's what she believes it is, and certainly the photograph itself, would seem to show a cat ghost, if you will.
I mean, clearly, that's a cat.
I don't think anybody would argue that.
Moreover, I see a little crinkle through it, so it looks like, instead of some Photoshop creation or something, that this is an actual photograph that was scanned, making it all the more impressive.
But that certainly does look like... Would anybody argue that that's her cat?
I would not argue that, and I thought it was good enough.
You know, I pass up a lot of these in the course of doing this show, but every now and then one hits me and I go, hmm, you know, that's pretty good.
And you just never know about this sort of thing, but this is definitely under the category of, hmm, that's pretty good.
Right there on the front page.
Oh, and oh, one other thing to promote.
Don't forget, take a stroll by a place called smeter.net.
On the nights when I'm not here, many times I can be heard on what we call the Pahrump Receiver in the evenings.
So if you want to peek into the world of shortwave and you want to hear me chatting with some of my friends, then that can be done through a site called smeter.net.
That's S-M-E-T-E-R dot net.
Matter of fact, if you didn't get it right, just look at the picture of my two little kittens and you'll see www.smeter.net, right above it.
First time caller line, you are on the air.
Hi.
Yeah, Art.
I mean, yeah, Art.
I've got it right this time.
Yes, sir.
There's Meter Logic, a logical person that was talking up there and being interviewed.
Talking where?
Excuse me.
Back up.
Talking where?
It was on Fox News.
Okay.
They interviewed him, and I'd never seen, never heard his name, and I didn't catch it because it was so fast.
This guy was kind of a radical, you know, and the first time the guy asked him a question about global warming, and no, no, no.
And then he says, well, is it true that the warmer waters cause it to increase?
And he just exploded.
He says, the only thing that will stop hurricanes from coming is the Nino to start working again.
He says, every time we have a year with the Nino, it affects the upper atmosphere.
Well, let me get this straight.
in a high atmosphere and hot on the bottom for something to happen.
Well let me get this straight, when it was suggested that the hot water caused the hurricane
to grow in strength, he went berserk?
Yeah.
He says what causes the hurricanes not to form is if the Nino warms up the upper atmosphere.
You've got one on the bottom and one on the top, and it just can't form.
Well, sir, there seem to be as many theories as there are belly buttons, so thanks for passing that along, but I'm not surprised.
Now clearly, in my mind anyway, the amount of heat in the water clearly, clearly will tell you how vicious a hurricane is going to get, how bad a hurricane is going to get.
And the warmer the water, in fact, I thought the meteorologist on CNN was very good.
He's the one during the first hurricane who got kind of testy at one of the anchors, and I don't blame him by the way.
throw the papers on the floor and said if you'll just let me talk he is excellent really really good at explaining The scientific dynamics of what's going on with the storm and exactly where the warmer waters are and why the hurricane at one point increased drastically, almost mystically and magically in strength as it went through a very warm portion of water and then why it degraded as it went through the cooler water.
He really had it together all the way through.
Kudos to that guy.
Wild Card Line, you're on the air.
Art, they discharged that guy in the next couple of days.
Uh, for CNN.
Uh-oh.
No, yes, it was in the Atlanta Constitution, I believe, on Friday.
Friday, uh, the 2nd.
Well, you're not referring to the same, uh, meteorologist I am, uh, I can guarantee you, because, uh, he was on there as of last night, so.
Okay.
Well, look here, uh, last time we spoke was on the 29th, early morning, right before the storm hit, or Katrina hit the first time.
Yes, sir.
And I'm gonna tell you, I think we have learned Everybody in this country, and really the world, has learned a whole lot in this past month.
We have, that's true.
And the list is really too long to go over.
There's just so many things that people have gotten out of these two storms.
And we really dodged a bullet with Rita here, because if it had gone into Galveston, right there in Texas City, Yeah, there's no question about it, but you saw the colonial pipeline there.
The We Dodged a Bullet thing doesn't sell too well in a lot of parts of Louisiana and Texas right now.
I know.
We lost a lot of good folks down in South Louisiana.
Those are some really good people there.
I worked there when I was in college during the summers.
And there's some really fine and good-hearted folks there.
The amount of damage is just heartbreaking.
You know, you were talking about watching this news.
I had to turn it off.
I mean, I literally had to turn it off, because I was getting clinically depressed.
Yes, yes, yes, yes.
I had dug out some old albums that I haven't listened to in years, and I just turned the TV off.
And I'm a TV junkie like you are.
Well, there you are.
I agree with you completely, and I think that it almost contributed to a little clinical depression for me.
I mean, you can only watch so much of it.
I'm drawn to it as a fly to a, you know, some sort of light.
But as you continue to take it in, it's just so heartbreaking.
And there's just so much of it, as if one hurricane wasn't enough, then another follows on and destroys the western part of Louisiana.
Yikes!
The damage in some areas is so comprehensive.
Indeed, some people dodged a bullet, but the bullet still hit, and from what I can see, There are some areas that just virtually got erased.
Just about erased.
East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
Hey Art.
Hi.
This is Marnie in Pittsburgh, Kansas.
Yes.
And you know, we have, we've been slammed with so much, but I'm one of these people like you.
I want to know what's going on to make it better and prepare for later.
Sure.
And that's part of what Coast to Coast does for all of us that listen.
And when I see movies, that really affect me you know I I don't forget them and one with Testament back in 83 oh my god Jane Alexander and I love the man that had the shortwave radio yes Testament probably was one of the most depressingly potentially real movies that I've ever seen in my whole life I mean it was just almost too much to take it was it it is a movie though that I think
You know, a lot of coast-to-coast people would like to see once.
I agree.
Well, I keep it, but I've noticed I don't take it out.
I actually took the day after tomorrow out the other day and watched it.
I have a DVD copy of that, but Testament is so bad.
By degrees, it's several degrees worse, and it's really depressing.
On the other hand, It's wonderful that they made those movies, because maybe even on the other side of the world, some people who count in the Soviet Union decided they weren't that crazy.
Well, one thing that impressed me was the little stand where they were selling batteries like gold.
Yes.
So, yes.
Have a good night.
You have a good night, too.
It was so awful.
In other words, virtually the end of the world.
Mankind had exchanged all we had in mega tonnage and it was the end of the world.
There were several of those made and you know I think Hollywood did us a favor because of course those movies make it around the world and I'm sure many of our enemy watched that and You know, back then at least, the assumption was made that most people were ultimately rational, that they were not suicidal, they would not push a button that would result in their own death.
I'm not sure that that kind of thinking remains in totality around the world today.
I think there are people who would indeed push that button at the expense of their lives and their families' lives.
That's the kind of world we live in today.
It was almost easier, wasn't it, in the Cold War, when your enemies were certainly your sworn deadly enemies.
But at least you could credit them with not being suicidal.
Not necessarily true today.
West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
Hello.
Hi, Art.
This is Max in California.
Hey, buddy.
Yeah, it seems like the whole country's focused on the weather and all this domestic stuff, and it seems like the Middle East, Israel, etc., etc., is ready to go up in smoke.
Uh-huh.
What are you seeing in the Middle East that particularly worries you right now?
Well, they're shooting rockets into Israel, and it looks like Sharon's going to be voided out, and Netanyahu will be coming in.
He's certainly a hardliner, and the whole area is so unstable to begin with.
Well, it is, and if you follow what the Bible tells us, then that ought to be the fuse that ends it all, right?
Well, we're moving that way, no doubt in my mind.
Well, in fact, a rocket hitting Israel for the first time recently in a very long time.
Not necessarily the end of the world, thank you, but continuing to point at a very difficult part of the world.
And certainly it's true that while we have our eyes on our domestic problems, which by the way is kind of nice for a change, I'm glad to see the country focusing on itself for a change.
You just never know what might kind of pop up elsewhere when you least expect it.
First time caller line, you're on the air.
Hi.
All right.
Yes.
Thank you for having me on board, sir.
Sure.
I wanted to share with you and the Coast to Coast listeners a really wonderful thing that happened to me today.
This is the sixth anniversary of my dad's passing over to the new life or whatever.
Yes, sir.
You know, last night I had my kids over the weekend and, yeah, I said, you know, let's go to church, let's pray for Grandpa's soul or whatever.
And, uh, you know, last night I was listening to Coast to Coast and I'm thinking, recently Sylvia Brown, is that the woman that she talks about the afterlife?
Is that the lady?
Yes.
She, I was thinking, you know, these things that she talks about people coming and telephoning you and Leaving signs that they're there with you, you know?
And these things would never happen to me, and that sort of thing.
But, uh... What happened?
Like about 8 o'clock this morning, there was a ring at my doorbell.
My doorbell is not electronical, and you know, it's one that you have to physically push in.
Yes.
And it woke me up, and it woke up my daughter.
And I went to the door and there was nobody there, you know?
And you view that as some sort of sign?
Absolutely.
Well, it might be.
Although, here's what I fight with all the time.
Our brains are reaching out and wanting to find something like that.
And I'm not saying that sign wasn't the one that you hope it was or feel it was.
It may well have been.
Or it may not have been.
Our brains really try to find and make sense of things that we want to make sense of.
So, I don't know, that's a gray area for me.
But I must say, I've seen such signs, or what I consider to be such signs, with the passing of my own father.
Really strange things.
We had a, right after my dad passed, there was a bat that landed.
It just landed.
And it wasn't, there wasn't anything wrong.
It may have been hot or something.
I don't know.
Landed on our porch.
And we carefully picked it up and put it in the shade.
And night time came and it went away.
That's never happened before.
On the day my dad passed.
Wildcard Line, you're on the air.
Hello.
Well, Art, sounds like you're batting a thousand there.
How you doing?
I'm good.
John from Cleveland?
Yes, sir.
Art, I got a timeline for you.
A lot of the things, a lot of the subjects that you cover on your show, I was experiencing 30 years ago.
I don't have exact dates, but I do have a 30-year timeline of various things.
Well, I've got a timeline for you, and it's less than a minute.
We're coming to the top of the hour.
It was 30 years ago that many of the things that you covered that we're experiencing now, such as the weather, etc., that I was going through and seeing.
It was 26 years ago that I moved to an area that was supposed to be a safety land.
Well, there are many, many people, sir, who are seeing and have seen what we appear to be experiencing right now with the strength of storms, that sort of thing.
In fact, I would urge many of you to go back And look at the predictions made with me by Evelyn Paglini.
Of all the people that we've had on the air here, Evelyn and perhaps one or two others have simply been dead on the market.
Researching several key developments such as global warming and peak oil.
We talk a lot about those things here.
Chip was moved to come up with some solutions.
Actual solutions!
To the dire road we're otherwise headed down if we don't start planning accordingly.
He has written and directed a film called Gaia Selene, which illustrates why space exploration is, in his view, crucial to the economic and overall survival of humans on the edge of crisis here on Earth.
A timely appearance.
So, Chip Prosser in a moment.
Certainly science fiction writers have predicted the future very accurately.
Arthur C. Clarke, for example, the Clarke Belt, that we now have to thank for geosynchronous satellites that we so depend on for things, by the way, like tracking these monster hurricanes that we've been talking about.
A very timely appearance, indeed, tonight.
Chip Proser, welcome to the program.
Thank you, Art.
Thanks.
Pleasure to be here.
Great to have you.
Remember, stay good and close to your phone for us.
All right.
Chip, I assume that to one degree or another you've been following fairly closely what's been going on in the Gulf, in the Gulf area, and I suppose in a way it's going to fit in quite nicely to everything we're going to talk about tonight, isn't it?
I believe so.
In fact, in my film I predicted the super hurricanes, not that that was a great prediction, but you know, we see two category fives in a row, and we look at the temperature in the Gulf, which is 82 degrees, which is hotter than a lot of swimming pools out here.
We can see that the climate is changing.
It was as much, actually, as 90 degrees for Katrina.
Wow.
Parts of the water, parts of the currents were up at around 90 degrees.
And so that's why, of course, we get the category fives so quickly.
Right.
And there's a reason why that ocean water is, or that gulf water in this case, is so hot.
Right.
You know, the climate has changed.
I just was at a taping of a thing with Al Gore where he was going into all this and all the new studies they've done, and if you look at the charts in the last few years, especially after 1970, things start going off the charts.
Things just, you know, the acceleration is very scary.
Yes, and now I'm kind of sick of Human beings engaging in the argument about whether it's man's presence, the burning of fossil fuels, or just some sort of cycle.
Either way, it doesn't matter.
It's happening.
Right.
And we've got to find ways to deal with it.
And really, that's kind of what you're all about, isn't it?
Finding ways to deal with this?
Right.
Well, the central idea is we've got to stop burning this fossil fuel as soon as possible.
Because in a number of places we're reaching the tipping point, where there's a feedback, a positive feedback loop, and things get out of hand.
I've had a number of stories like that, mostly coming, by the way, from Great Britain.
I notice a lot of stories they won't print here come from Great Britain, but using exactly that word, tipping.
Yeah.
Well, of course, Great Britain doesn't have a faith-based administration, but we won't go into that.
One of the things that was shocking to me was the idea of the ice caps melting.
Because, and one thing I didn't really realize until I saw this presentation was, ice is reflective.
So most of the sunlight hitting white ice was reflected back and the heat goes back into space.
That's correct.
When the ice melts and it hits open ocean, 90% is absorbed.
That's correct.
So we're going to see a... as the ice is melting, and it is, and they've shown that in Satellite photos.
Have you seen the satellite photographs, Chip, of the North Pole, for example?
North Pole and the South Pole.
And the South Pole.
But most worrisome to me is the North Pole at the moment, although the South is also worrisome.
But boy, you look at the North over 40 years, which is about how long we've been able to take those kind of photographs.
It seems like about, I don't know, what would you say, 40, 50 percent of the ice is gone.
Yeah, yeah.
And they're looking to During the high point of the summer, all of it being gone.
And that's very scary because they had another graphic which was the area up around the North Pole of permafrost.
And the permafrost is melting because of the heat in the Arctic Ocean will melt the permafrost next to it in Siberia and so forth.
When the permafrost melts, there's a lot of methane that's sequestered in the permafrost.
That's correct.
And that is released into the atmosphere.
So it's a positive feedback loop that accelerates things.
And actually I've heard that methane, in terms of environmental damage, is significantly worse than that which we emit from fossil fuels.
Right.
Methane would be much more damaging.
Right.
So the main problem is we've Got to find alternate forms of energy, and right now fossil fuel is around 85% of our energy.
The big problem that, you know, when I started doing this documentary, I started doing, just to go back a little while, I was a Hollywood screenwriter and I started off writing a science fiction type of thing, high-tech science fiction, so of course I got offered then To rewrite just about every science fiction known to man.
And they were all so dumb that it just got to me, and I started researching into what really we should be thinking about the next hundred years in near-Earth space, rather than in a galaxy far away with pointy ears and bad makeup.
Looking into this, I started wanting to do a documentary, just saying, Technically, why we aren't on the moon, which we all expected to be, and what it would take to get there.
I started filming or videotaping a documentary.
While I was doing it, it all changed because I read a paper by Marty Hoffert and about 30 other of the top scientists who looked at global climate change from a totally technological point of view.
In other words, Forget politics, forget taking congressmen to lunch to try to get them to do something.
Look at it from a purely technological point of view.
What if we decided tomorrow to do this?
What would we need to do?
Their finding was very scary, and they found out that all of our earthly technologies put together would not be able to produce enough energy, primary energy, that we're going to need in 50 years.
So I started looking for other means to get energy.
Are you convinced, Chip, that going to space in a big way, utilizing the moon and satellites for energy is our only hope?
Is that what it comes down to?
According to these scientists, you know, we can ameliorate things.
Everything that we're talking about doing will help to some extent.
The big problem is, right now we have about, depending on who's counting, 6 billion people on Earth.
They're projecting 10 billion by 2050.
Right now we're using 12 terawatts of power a year.
They're projecting that we'll need 30.
Now, the problem is, you know, in our developed nations... Wow, let's actually consider that for just a moment.
Sure.
We're using, you say, 30 terawatts of energy?
This is a worldwide figure.
Yeah, 12 right now.
12 right now.
12 terawatts.
12 terawatts, and in 50 years we're going to need, did you say, 30?
30.
That's the projection.
And that's because... Of more people.
More, not only more people, but more people wanting to have our lifestyle.
Which is rampant around the world right now.
Right.
China may be leading the world in a race toward trying to get what we have.
Well, let me just give you one statistic.
Our cars are, we're adding our cars at 1-2% a year.
China's adding at 85%.
So they are China and India and a lot of Asia, Vietnam, etc.
Everybody's trying to change over from bicycles and rickshaws and things.
Private cars.
Yes.
And you can imagine what that's going to do.
I can.
And on a scale, people have to understand the scale, for example, in China is so gigantic that there's no comparison to be made in the US.
I mean, they're so big with so many people that if they really do achieve everything that we have, maybe that 30 forecast is accurate or even low.
And we don't have that much energy, period.
Right, and that is the problem.
So, you know, we can get cleaner cars, we can put windmills in, we can put more photovoltaics all over the desert and so forth, but we're not going to catch up with the tremendous new demand in energy, and in primary energy.
So we're going to have to get it from somewhere.
If we get it from fossil fuels, and if we just go completely ape and burn everything we can, we won't be able to breathe.
I mean, you know, kids are getting asthma now.
Yes.
The coal is putting mercury into the atmosphere.
We can't eat tuna fish.
We can't eat any of the large predators of the sea.
I'll tell you a story, Chip.
I was in Bangkok, and when I was in Bangkok, the air was so bad that it actually hurt to breathe it into your lungs.
And that impression was backed up by the fact that about 40% of the traffic police In other parts of the world, this is very serious and getting worse at a rate that we're not going to be able to keep up with it.
We're going to have to have energy from elsewhere.
Just before we move there, Chip, what about oil?
There's great arguments that go on about how much is left, whether we're at peak oil getting as much as we're ever going to get right now, whether it's downhill from here.
What's your take on that?
My take on that is it's taken four and a half billion years for us to get the oil that we have and we've used more than, or nearly half, probably more than half since the Industrial Revolution, so in less than 200 years.
Whether you argue it's going to end next Tuesday Or 20 years from now, it's not really relevant.
It's going to end.
It takes an extremely long time to build up oil reserves.
And as we use them, you know, every mile that you drive in your car on oil today is a mile nobody else will ever drive.
There just is no more.
It's a finite resource.
Nobody knows how much is really there.
The Saudis, you know, you cannot trust what they say because they project different things Yes.
for different political reasons yes people have described the earth is a pincushion
and that we've drilled in every possible place we've gotten all the low-hanging
fruit were were
resorting to uh... exotic technologies to get the rest of the oil out
and so forth and no matter whether you know it's it's not like it we turn
off the tap tomorrow it's as it goes on the downward slope
it gets more and more expensive which has all kinds of uh...
ramifications For instance, you know, everybody thinks that, well, if we, we won't be able to drive as much.
Well, just as an experiment, look around the room where you're sitting right now and look at everything.
See if you can find anything that was made totally with human Muscle power.
Animal muscle power.
I'm a very bad case, Chip, and the answer is clearly no.
Everything I have around me, and I have a lot in the way of electronics, is all silicone and metal and plastics and every form of everything you can imagine that was originally petroleum for the most part.
Right.
And you're not alone.
I mean, the only thing, if you had a mirror, you would see yourself, that's the only thing made with total muscle power.
However, Since we are what we eat, everything we eat has to be grown, transported, distributed, cooked, refrigerated.
All that takes power.
That's what I mean when I say here in the West, here in the developed countries, we use up percent of the world's power.
You know, Chip, I really think, Chip, that we come from a generation that still has the mentality that it'll just keep coming.
I mean, it's always been that way, and it's pretty tough to adjust to the concept that there really could be an end to all of this.
It's very hard to adjust to that concept.
Yeah, you know, nobody wants to adjust to the concept.
You know, somebody said the other night that people won't do anything unless there's a crisis.
You know, if we look at a long-term development, nobody gets that excited about it until it, you know, sneaks up on us.
When I started shooting this, which was a year or so ago, a little more than a year, oil was at $28 a barrel.
And now it's at, you know, what it is.
So, you know, this is how fast things are changing.
Now we're used, we're getting used to oil at $70 a barrel, or around there.
Now, if you told somebody five years ago that would happen, they'd look at you like you're crazy.
But this is the trend, and as, if you look at the slope of how many, you know, another four billion people on the planet, most people on the planet go to sleep hungry.
There's two billion people or more on the planet that aren't on any kind of electricity grid.
In other words, they don't have power, so they don't have an infrastructure.
When you look at energy, energy is wealth.
With energy, you can do anything.
Without energy, you can do very little, except go to sleep at night when the sun goes down.
You're quite right.
It means everything.
So when, you know, we cannot stop people from wanting to have our lifestyle, we don't want to give up our lifestyle.
So, if you look at the Earth as a closed system, it seems logical that you have to go outside that system to find energy.
Right.
It is a closed system presently.
If anything, we have retreated from manned spaceflight and exploration.
Right.
Let me step back just for a moment and ask you what Gaia Selene means.
Now, Gaia, of course, I guess means Earth.
Gaia is the ancient name for the Earth Goddess, sort of the Mother Nature in Greek mythology.
Yes.
And it's also secondarily the name that It was Lovelock gave to the Gaia theory, which is that the Earth is one giant interrelated organism.
And so the whole name, Gaia Selene?
Yes, Selene is the moon.
Selene is the moon goddess from ancient Greek mythology.
So, Gaia Selene, I'm trying to get across the idea that we should look at the Earth and Moon as a two-planet system, you know, not as a dead thing that affects us only in tides and things, but as part of an
integral part of where we live.
Which is pretty unique, certainly in the solar system, possibly in many solar systems,
to have this type of a planet, large moon, that close, that we could use, and we should be using.
All right, now that's what I want to know about.
Use the moon for what?
I mean, we sent man there, he collected a few rocks that are now quite precious, brought them home, and then we packed up and stopped, you know, the whole idea of going to the moon, and sort of withdrew generally from space to the point where these days we're worried about keeping the space station in orbit.
I mean, that's... Right.
So we've really, in these years, withdrawn severely from space.
obviously you feel that we should be back on the moon and we should be doing
things on the moon and that the moon somehow will save the earth.
Once again, Chip Frozer and Chip, I think the people, at least a very great
number of the people who listen to Coast to Coast AM.
I'm going to go ahead and close the video.
They've had enough death, destruction, and predictions of more of the same.
I think that most of us kind of agree we're in rough shape.
Whether you want to look at the oil, the energy, the amount of population coming to the planet, all of the climate, all these things that we've detailed, I think the majority of this audience probably agrees what they're looking for now is any light at the end of the tunnel? Any light at all?
Anything positive? Anything in the form of a solution?
And sure enough, science fiction has detailed many of the things we now use.
What do you... what is it about the moon that might save and be a solution
for Earth? Well, first of all, it's a new frontier.
And if you look at it as a new frontier and look at it as analogous to the American frontier,
Europe was in terrible trouble.
Europe was overcrowded, polluted, had all kinds of old political forms.
When we developed the new American frontier, first of all, everybody got rich and a new land of opportunity opened up.
The moon is the same place right now.
In fact, we're far ahead because Technically, we know how to go there and get there and do what we need to do.
We know how to build out lunar bases.
They say it's not rocket science anymore, it's just engineering.
We've been there, and when you look at how we got there 40 years ago with the equivalent of a Dodge Dart, and look at the technology you have in your cars today, it's amazing that we haven't been there all along.
What it gives us is hope in a great number of areas, and mainly in natural resources.
When we get off the planet, suddenly all the natural resources of space are open to us.
All right, well, help me out here, Chip, but the last time we did go to the moon, we brought back rocks.
They analyzed the rocks.
I don't remember anybody jumping up and down, then or now, about what a great deal it is, and my God, look what we found!
We've solved the energy problems of the Earth.
Frankly, they were just sort of rocks, weren't they?
A great lead-in, thank you very much.
Well, those rocks turned out to be the secret, the keys to the kingdom.
In fusion research, which is being done among other areas at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, there are three... Let me start off with fusion as opposed to fission, if I can take a little long route.
You may.
Fission, you are splitting heavy elements and getting energy out of that.
In fusion, you're taking very light elements Infusing them together and getting energy out of that.
All right.
Fusion offers a relatively poison-free, supposedly, form of energy, but we have not achieved fusion in a commercial way at all yet.
We're not there, correct?
Correct.
Because when we did fission, we were in a war.
We threw 20 billion dollars at it in the three years we developed it.
We haven't done that with fusion yet.
The amount of Money we've spent on looking into it is minuscule compared to the Manhattan Project.
And what we need is a Manhattan Project because we are facing the same challenge and even a bigger challenge.
It's not a world war with Nazis, but it's going to be a world war over energy.
So fusion, when you, fusion comes in in three stages.
In the first stage, different stages are in the fuel you use.
The first stage is a tritium And deuterium reaction.
Tritium, there's very little of it.
And it's an element that's basically comes into place because it's used in atomic weapons.
And so there's very few kilograms, a few hundred kilograms on Earth in total.
And deuterium is heavy water.
In thousands or millions of molecules of water, you'll find a few.
Heavy water, deuterium, which is a radical.
Right.
The two of those in a reaction is not a very good reaction because it's still radioactive.
The second stage reaction is when you take deuterium and helium-3.
Now, helium-3 is a radical of helium, and the problem with helium-3 is there's virtually none of that left on Earth.
Just to go on to stage 3, So, Helium-3, is that rare that there's actually very little left on Earth?
Again, that's correct?
Very little landed on Earth, and I'll explain, because Helium-3 is propagated from the Sun.
The Sun is a giant fusion reactor, and as it fuses, it propagates all kinds of electromagnetic spectrum, plus Helium-3 in the solar wind.
Now, Um, when they were looking for, uh, developing these reactions, and by the way, the third reaction is helium-3-helium-3 reaction, and that's the one that eventually gives you just water as waste.
So your atomic waste is water.
You can make tea with it.
So, in other words, are we sure that with Helium-3 available in quite large quantity, I guess, on the Moon, that we will come up with a practical fusion reactor to produce energy here on Earth?
How locked down a deal is that?
Well, it's still in the research stages, but I was at the University.
I saw a room temperature uh... uh... reaction vessel
as big as a large beach ball and there was uh... to bridge inside of this thing
uh... there was helium plasma uh... accelerated from the outside
of the sphere into the middle
so that it was hit one coming from the other side
When the two hit, that's a fusion reaction.
They're getting milli-watts out of it.
Milli-watts.
That's very tiny amount of power.
Very, very tiny.
But... Are you talking about a cold fusion reaction now, or a hot?
Cold in the sense that it's not a tokamak.
Okay.
Now I've also, you know, a tokamak is an enormous structure.
I've also visited that.
There is one at General Atomics in La Jolla.
It's as big as An apartment complex, just about.
It takes a tremendous amount of energy.
It holds the flux in a magnetic donut.
And that has been working for many years.
So, there are, you know, different technologies heading towards this.
They know that theoretically it is possible.
uh... it's a question of again engineering and research and uh... and
getting enough money to do the engineering research there everyone i i i thought i'd talk to
uh... seems to believe that it is possible There's no technological reason why it wouldn't be possible.
Alright, so maybe Helium-3, if we have it in sufficient quantities, would provide us with fusion, but it's only a maybe at this point.
Right.
Acknowledge that, right?
Yes.
Okay, Helium-3 is available in what kind of quantity on the Moon?
Well, let me first tell you about why it's at the Moon.
It comes from the Sun, and helium-3, the waves, the flux of it, is blocked by either magnetosphere or an atmosphere.
Now, the first two planets, Mercury and Venus, one has a magnetosphere, the other has an atmosphere.
On Earth, we have both.
Right.
Because we have an iron core, and we have an atmosphere.
So, none of it got through the magnetosphere or the atmosphere.
That's why we don't have any on Earth.
That's why it's not here.
Okay.
The Moon has neither.
A magnetosphere, or an atmosphere.
So it has washed over the moon since the beginning of the solar system, and the moon dust, or the regolith, is what it's called, is very sharp, crystalline structure.
It has been trapped in there to a depth of like eight feet.
When, and it was going back to the moon rocks, so Gerald Kuczynski and the other people At the university, in doing the research and saying, we believe this fusion is possible, we don't have a good fuel, we can't find any helium-3.
Then suddenly, they realized that the Apollo astronauts had brought back moon rocks.
So they went down, they flew down to the Johnson Space Center, they walked in, they talked to the scientists about the moon rocks, and they said, you know, Do they have any trace of helium-3?
Yes.
And they said, yeah, of course.
So what?
So they're saying, well, we know how to do fusion, we think, but we don't have any fuel.
They have fuel, but they don't know what to do with it.
So the two of them got together and they realized that there is enough helium-3 on the moon to power us for as long as we need.
And because once we get to the moon, It's a stepping stone to other areas in the solar system.
Yes.
And the big gas planets are made a lot of Helium-3.
So, eventually we'll be going to the big gas planet and scooping it up for free.
But meanwhile, it's right in our neighborhood at the moon.
And it's held in very loose chemical bonds.
In other words, you can scrape up the Helium-3, boil it off using solar-powered you know
ovens collected at the liquid and ship it back to her
uh...
uh...
uh... ton of helium three or basically uh...
is worth at the time when i started uh... filming this
with twenty dollars a barrel i would be worth four billion dollars
equivalent equivalent in oil
now that much energy How much again?
Did you say a ton?
Yeah.
A ton of helium-3?
So a shuttle load, just taking a shuttle as an example of a large cargo carrying thing, could handle 25 tons and could power the U.S.
for a year.
That's the equivalent of energy stored in the helium-3.
How stable is helium-3?
Is it a stable element that is safe to transport, assuming that you mine it, you purify it, or do whatever you're going to do, and you've got helium-3.
Is it safe?
Yeah.
It's not like plutonium or something that's going to radiate everything.
It's something that is It's been stable on the moon for eons.
So, it's when you accelerate it toward each other and get it to fuse that you get the energy out of it.
So, they say that you could have a fusion reactor in the city, in the middle of the city.
There's no danger.
There's no danger like a fission reactor where it can go critical and have a China syndrome.
Right.
This, if it goes critical, it just stops.
Plus, in fission, You know, it's not only the fuel you have to worry about, but it radiates the containment itself.
So the containments themselves, all the plants after a 40, 50 year lifestyle, life cycle, sorry, are themselves nuclear waste.
For example, in San Onofre, we've got a big We don't know what to do with it.
I know.
No one will take it.
But again, for this not to be pie in the sky, there has to be a proven fusion reaction using helium-3, right?
Right.
And how far are we from that?
Nobody's going to go to the moon and spend a whole bunch of money digging up helium-3 until we have the absolute need for it, that's for sure.
Right.
And that requires funding.
I mean, I can't give you a specific timetable because the funding is so low for this area that it's nothing like what we spend on fission.
Well, I hate to move toward politics.
I really do.
But it's sort of inevitable because our leaders make these decisions.
For us.
They either foresee a great danger, a fuel crunch, the world in trouble, and they do something about it, or they don't.
And one would think, at today's juncture, with these giant storms and all the other things that are going wrong, we would be thinking along these lines, Chip, but we don't seem to be.
Any comments on that?
Without getting in political trouble?
I remain in political trouble.
As I said, this is self-admittedly not a rational-based administration, but a faith-based administration.
We do know, however, that one of the big companies, Bechtel, has plans for a lunar harvester, a helium-3 harvester.
In fact, I have the animation in my show.
Well, if that's true, then Bechtel must be pretty sure that helium-3 is going to be the answer to fusion.
I believe so.
Theoretically, it is the answer.
With how soon we develop engineering to make it happen is the question, and that's the question of Do we recognize the challenge and take it up, or do we... Well, Chip, you know, more than ever, though, there's a force working in the other direction.
In other words, with all the troubles that we have here on Earth, including, for example, the cost to rebuild New Orleans, whether or not that's a good idea, the cost to rebuild New Orleans, the cost to rebuild the damage now in western Louisiana, east Texas, you know, people are going to say, space The moon?
Come on!
We've got troubles right here at home, and right now it's a pretty powerful argument, isn't it?
Not to me, because the UN did research on these climate change controlled catastrophes, and their research says that On average, it costs us $60 billion a year for these things like the heat wave in Europe, so forth, growing at a rate of 10%.
Now, that is in my show, which has just got blown out, because now we're looking at $200 billion for the first hurricane.
I don't know how much for the second.
I know.
And no one knows how much for the next one's coming in line.
I know.
So, do we want to spend money Looking for a solution, or do we want to play catch-up?
Do we want to keep rebuilding things?
Or are we going to take control, try to take control of these climate changes and do something about them?
And I don't see how you cannot try to do this.
And helium-3 is only one of the things I'm talking about.
The other is lunar solar power and space solar power, which are proven technologies.
And there's no legitimate, as far as I can tell, question about them.
Why aren't we doing it?
That's a legitimate question.
I've heard about solar collection things in orbit and then microwaving power back to Earth.
It seems a reasonable idea.
God knows we need the energy.
Right.
Why aren't we doing that, Chip?
Cost to orbit.
Now, cost to orbit is what NASA has not Made any gains of in the last 40 years.
It still costs a whole lot of money per pound or whatever to orbit.
$10,000 a kilo to orbit is what it costs.
Mainly because we use chemical rockets.
Most of what we're sending into orbit is the fuel to get into orbit.
But the problem is, and Peter Glazer at MIT came up with this idea in 1981, put solar panels in space for the very good reason that The solar flux in space is eight times what it is on Earth.
You get eight times the power.
That's because the Earth spins, we have day and night, we have atmosphere, we have rain, we have fog, we have the inclination, and so forth.
In space, you have none of that.
You have direct sunlight, and it heats everything, so you have eight times the power.
Now, putting things in orbit is a good idea, If we could afford to send that much material up there, and that's the problem.
The other problem is, in orbit it's going to be hit by micrometeorites, and eventually become space debris, blocking us from going into orbit.
We'll surround our own planet with more space debris than there is up there already.
You know, I'm not sure that I agree at all with our fast blaster who suggests that
somebody told us something like all these planetary bodies are yours but
stay off the moon.
you know or something similar.
Not that I believe that, mind you, but we have done so very little since we did go to the moon, It's almost like you could believe something like that, and I know a lot of people do.
Chip, you're probably not one of them, are you?
You don't suppose we were greeted by somebody who said, don't you come back here now?
No, I don't believe it.
It's been all these years, decades actually, so what the hell happened?
Actually, somebody did say it.
It was Ho Chi Minh, I believe.
Ho Chi Minh, wow.
Yeah, we spent the money.
In that war in Vietnam.
So we didn't have the money to go on the moon.
And actually, there was a secret military, two secret military plans to go to the moon.
Three, counting the Russians.
Military plans?
Military plans.
I take it wasn't to collect Helium-3.
The military probably had something else in mind.
They wanted to base nuclear weapons on the moon.
Yeah, there's our military.
Now, this Project Horizon, There was an Air Force one and an Army one.
And the reason was, during our Cold War with the Russians, when we had bombers carrying nukes, it took hours or a long time to get to the target.
When we transitioned to ICBMs, it was a question of minutes.
So first strikes became something that could be thought of.
I know, but how does it help to have nuclear weapons and missiles on the moon?
That's two and a half days.
That's right.
So, if you have weapons on the moon, you wipe out the U.S.
with a first strike, even if you do, you can't wipe out the moon.
You can't launch things to the moon without being seen, and you need two and a half days to get there.
So, no matter what happens on Earth, you'd have a retaliatory strike coming from the moon.
That was the theory.
I see.
So, when we've thrown everything we have from Earth, then we can... Right.
If there's anybody left, they can push the final button and that launches from the moon.
Right.
Well, theoretically, this would keep you from launching a first strike, knowing that no matter what, you would get hit by the retaliatory strike.
Now, that seemed to make sense to these guys in around 1959.
Then Admiral Rickover came up with the idea of nuclear subs.
They can hide, and you can't be assured of finding all of them after a first strike.
That's right.
Same effect, less cost.
Same effect, less cost.
And then the military said, well, then we don't have to go there.
Then we had beaten the Russians.
Kennedy was dead.
We were in a tremendously costly war.
In Vietnam, it took everything that we had.
It did.
And the main Russian, who was the father of the Russian space initiative, Korolev, also suddenly died.
Khrushchev was deposed, and the Russian space initiative went dormant.
So there was no real reason to keep beating the Russians.
We'd beaten them, we'd shown the flag, and people Basically lost interest, although NASA went on at $13 billion a year for the last 40 years, trying to come up with some other reasons to exist, which they successfully did, but colonizing the moon and having a base there, a continual base, was seen as too expensive and there was no real reason to do it at that time.
Is Helium-3 the reason?
They hadn't realized about helium-3, but it is... No, no, no, no.
Is it the reason now?
Yes.
Helium-3 and lunar solar power.
Now to... Lunar solar power.
Explain that one.
Well, when we know that getting things to orbit is too costly, then we look at for a stable platform for our solar panels up there.
And the moon is that stable platform.
the moon the surface the moon the regolith again has everything you need to
build solar panels in other words it's forty percent oxygen by weight
it has iron titanium
silicon uh... the noble gases everything you need to do to build
uh... solar panels build microwave repeaters
and you think it would be reasonable to microwave that power back from the moon
to earth uh...
Would it be economically feasible, technically feasible, and then economically feasible?
Yes.
In fact, there's a very intelligent scientist, David Criswell, at the University of Houston, who's been working on the problem for the last 20 years or so, has done all the engineering data and has come up with a very compelling Uh, paper, which is included both in my site and in the DVD.
Alright, and you're, you're making the case, what, that, um, solar power in orbit, solar power in orbit, uh, in the long run is not economically nor scientifically feasible because things would hit it.
The amount of junk after a while that we'd have up there would be overwhelming to the point that it would make it not practical.
Well, it's one concern.
Now, there's ways around it.
You know, a space junkman, space vacuum cleaner, something to keep cleaning it up.
But it would be continually degrading.
But the main problem is, again, the cost to orbit.
At $10,000 a kilo, that's coming down.
But only as private enterprise gets into it, like Elon Musk and his rocket and Rutan and their ways to try to get into orbit.
The Space Elevator may be the answer.
Yes.
Do you want to go ahead and explain that concept?
Okay.
It's like if you spin a ball around your head, it's held taut because of centripetal force.
Right.
Same thing.
A Russian, Tsiolkovsky, came up with this idea in 1885 or so.
And then Arzutinov did.
And then, again, Arthur C. Clarke wrote Fountains of Paradise with this idea in mind.
You need something that's 50 times stronger than steel in linear strength.
That would come from the nano world?
Carbon nanotubes, yes.
Buckyballs expressed as carbon, long carbon tubes put together in a ribbon and then you send a mechanical climber up and down adding more ribbons as you go until you can Now, mechanically, you're sending things into space, so you're not taking a big tank full of fuel, and you're getting power from the ground by hitting it with lasers that are transformed into kinetic energy and drive the mechanical shuttles up and down the elevator.
So, using this, you can bring cost to orbit down to something closer to $100 a kilo to orbit.
Now things start getting doable.
As far as putting a lot of stuff up into space, including people.
Very doable.
I love the idea of a space elevator, or a freight elevator in essence, to take things up at a very inexpensive price, but how realistic is it?
I've interviewed people in the nano world, and they seem to really feel that not only is it possible, but it's in the near term, that we could come up with this substance in the near term.
Yes.
You agree with that?
Yeah.
Brad Edwards is a friend of mine.
He's working on it.
He's raising money for it right now.
He's got a company called Carbon Designs.
They've been doing the work.
I think they have carbon nanotubes, maybe feet long at this point.
The problem is you need 52,000 miles.
But even if they're out to feet, that's from the nano world, a pretty big jump.
This would be an elevator, folks, right from the ground.
I assume, Chip, that it would probably be at the equator.
Would it be?
Yes.
The equator gives you the proper area.
Where they're looking at is right by that earthquake they just had.
They're looking at the sea.
uh... off the west coast of south america
because that's the place with the fewest storms
and has the best weather uh... it would be at
the so they could move it around case of storm
anchored to something akin to a giant uh... oil platform that floats
and moves uh... but this would be uh... true
jack in the beanstalk kind of actual physical elevator all the way through
the atmosphere right to the other side all the way up potentially to geosync
located in and beyond Yeah, and in fact one of the things you could do is not stop and just let it fling you out to the moon or any other body at great speed.
and low-cost. So what it what it you you would send a you'd send first of all rockets
up to geosynchronous and then you would reel it out using a counterweight. Okay so this elevator would be
built from geosynchronous 22,300 miles or so
up and it would be built down to the earth dropping through the atmosphere
dropping through whatever storms might be there and eventually
touching ground. Being anchored and then using lasers to power these mechanical devices
up and down, adding more layers to it to make it stronger and and sending
massive amounts of material up and bringing things back.
In other words, now we spend a lot of money.
Once a satellite runs out of fuel, it's useless.
It's space junk.
We have to send another one up.
Or you could go up, grab them, bring them back down, fix them.
Fill them up with fuel, send them back up again.
It would save a lot of money.
The whole concept is so incredible, and so science fiction-y, and yet, from everything I can discern, talking to the scientists, it really is possible.
It's a total mind-blower, but it's cool to think about, Chip, it really is.
Yeah.
When do you suppose, if you were to just take a guess, As a science fiction guy, a number of years before we might actually begin such a project.
Well, it depends how defined begin, because it has begun.
There are serious people working on it.
Sure, I'll set one up for you.
We have a real crisis.
Since we don't do anything until we have a crisis, we suddenly have a real crisis.
The price of gasoline goes Unbelievably high.
Makes $70 a gallon look like or a barrel look like nothing.
Right.
So then we do something.
That's how we operate.
Right.
So let's say we devoted a Manhattan-style project mentality to this.
How quick could we do it?
The moon or the space elevator?
The space elevator.
It would be just a guess for me.
I would say within 10 years.
Ten years!
Well, they are trying to raise money right now, and they're raising money in strange places.
They're raising money in countries that can't afford a real space program.
They can't afford rockets and the whole infrastructure and so forth, but who would love to have power beamed down.
So, we're approaching countries and saying, would you like to invest in the space elevator?
Yes.
Brad Edwards is.
Really?
Yes.
And how's he being received?
He's being received very seriously.
I've been to one of the conventions.
All the NASA people seem to take him seriously.
They're building An exhibit in Barcelona?
Actually, you know... One in Vegas, actually.
Actually, you know, I think that NASA had the original idea.
If I recall this original story, it was one of those things that came from NASA and you went, oh, come on.
Wasn't it?
Wasn't it their original idea?
Well, actually, it was the Russians who came up with the original idea way back when.
but that was solkovski
was it was a visionary russian came up with a lot of the ideas we now have and
then art suit not in the thirties and forties
brought it into the into the modern age artistry clark wrote a book a fictional book
and then that's it apparently
as happens sometimes in science fiction
takes it seriously and started uh... uh...
developing it and i believe it was uh...
nasa advance uh... concepts
Now, just a very few years ago, it was one of those articles that they use as a tag to a newscast or something for a good laugh at the end.
Ha ha ha, Space Elevator.
Well, that was a very few years ago, and now all of a sudden, we're getting very serious about it.
Right.
Well, Brad Edwards started out at, I think, Sandia Labs, or Uh, and then went to, got a grant from the NASA Special, NIAC Special Projects, developed it there, and now he's taking it into the commercial area.
Hey Chip, if I, uh, got on this elevator and pushed up...
How quick, if it were built, how quickly would I arrive at a totally airless 22,300 mile point?
How long would it take?
It would take a couple days, but the view would be great.
I bet it would.
Boy, talk about a photo op.
Right.
You would have cocktails overlooking the entire section of the earth as the weather passes.
That's amazing.
It would be like the blimps.
Hindenburg, not to bring up a bad subject, but the dirigibles.
I wouldn't have picked the Hindenburg.
Right.
I don't think.
The old days, rather than bouncing around in a choppy plane, you would float.
And this would be the same sort of idea.
You know, a rocket ship is, you know, you have to go under intense training and tremendous G-forces and stuff like this.
This would be, actually, it would feel like an elevator.
You wouldn't feel any of that stuff until you start... Well, there's an interesting question.
So, at a couple of days to get there, that would mean you'd be traveling at a speed of what, roughly?
I don't know.
It would take us 62,000 divided by two or three days.
Well, somebody will do the math for us.
You should have Brad Edwards on and he can give you all the Exotic details.
I'm just a filmmaker here.
I failed chemistry in 10th grade.
I understand.
Somebody will do the math for us.
It would be interesting to know how long it would take you to get from Earth to geosync point.
But you'd be traveling at a pretty good clip, but not one that you couldn't stand.
No, no.
Once it started up, I doubt that you would feel any acceleration at all.
So it would be totally benign.
You wouldn't have to take any astronaut training or anything like that.
And when you get there, there would be the hotel there waiting for you and all the fun that you could have in low-grav.
All the fun you could have, yes.
Well, there is of course that aspect working on cutting down the amount of money to orbit.
There's a lot of private people, some of them are my friends, who are doing work in this area.
How important is that work?
Is it going to happen?
Is it going to come from From somebody like Rutan, is it going to come from these areas rather than our government?
We've learned lately not to necessarily depend on the government for what they ought to do when they ought to do it.
Right.
Well, that's the general feeling, and people are struggling to figure out what type of structure is going to do this.
My feeling is that when people realize how profitable it could be, in other words, you know, Queen Isabella ...may have launched the first ship over, but after that it was the Merchant Adventures, the Hudson Bay Company, people who thought that their, you know, the future was in beaver pelts.
Well, I've got something for you to contemplate.
If we built successfully a space elevator from Earth right into geosync orbit, and it now looks like it might be done, what would happen if some damn fool hit it with an airplane?
It would... the top would fly up, the bottom would float gently down
uh... there would be uh... escape means parachutes or whatever for whatever
mechanical uh... means uh... but it would be wouldn't crash like a spacecraft
the uh... they figure that the the nanotubes would of you know
float down and possibly
uh... disintegrate as they come down really good idea until you said it would take a couple of
days to reach the top Now, let's think about it.
Do we really know the long-term effects of elevator music on the human brain?
Can you imagine two days of muskrat love?
The whole idea of the space elevator is really wonderful in so many ways.
One, because it appears to be actually realistic.
In other words, we're not touting something that can't be.
I've had guest after guest after guest, particularly from the nano world, who claim not only is it possible, but we're almost there.
I know it seems incredible to imagine that.
But we're almost there.
I guess that's a relative term, but we are almost there.
The nanoworld is going to produce what's needed to do this whole space elevator thing.
Literally, from 22,300 miles right down to Earth, anchored on Earth, and then an elevator that would go up, transport people and things to orbit and beyond.
So, you really, you do feel this is realistic, right Chip?
Yes, I do.
Talk to him, I've seen the studies, I've seen the animation, it's in the video, and people are very serious about this.
Okay, it's in the video you did, right?
Yeah, and it's also, Brad Edwards has his own video on it.
Alright, let's promo your video.
Since you did it, and obviously you're here to promote the whole concept, the video takes what?
From A to Z in this area, in colonizing the moon, in putting up perhaps a space elevator, all of this is in that?
Right, and also lunar solar power, helium-3, and it also goes into what it will be like when we have lunar colonies.
And, you know, how we will live, what we can do on the moon, how much fun it'll be, and what a great time it'll be for everybody, both on the moon and on Earth, because it will create tremendous wealth on Earth.
Alright, look, the moon is a pretty inhospitable place.
It doesn't have air.
Right.
It may have water, but that's going to have to be mined, like your helium-3.
So, how do we establish a colony on the moon?
Is it realistic to even try?
Well, NASA has announced that they were going back there for a extended stay.
If you look at the moon, to get into this idea of inhospitable moon, If you look at the moon and you see the dark areas, those are the lunar, the maria, the lunar seas.
It's not water, it's lava.
There were giant impacts that then filled up with molten lava and solidified.
In the molten lava there are lava tubes where the lava runs down and then crusts over and then evacuates as the flow diminishes.
These are called rills.
It's what the Apollo astronauts went and discovered.
Yes?
They find that some of these rills are not collapsed.
In other words, there are complete lava domes and rills which have lava roofs.
You could burrow into them and you have an enclosed environment.
So you're saying that perhaps the shelters already exist on the Moon?
Yes, they do.
And we've seen them and we know where the ones that aren't broken are.
All right, NASA did announce they're going to go back to the moon.
They said something, I think, about a couple of weeks is what I heard.
To stay, yes.
To stay two weeks.
Now what's the point of that?
What could they do, Chip, in two weeks that would be valuable for mankind?
Basically demonstrate a lot of the technologies that we're going to use to stay.
In other words, you know, Columbus didn't stay in America.
He went, he discovered it, came back and said, you know, we think there's gold, we think there's lots of stuff we can use, you know, let's plant a flag and own it.
The same way, you know, they're going to be looking at technologies that we are going to use to have a permanent place.
Now, you know, the interesting thing is where will we have the first Outpost, and a lot of people think it's on Malapert Mountain in the South Pole.
And the reason is that as you go to the poles, you know, you want communication with Earth, so it has to be on this side.
True.
You want constant light, because that's your power.
Right.
So at the poles, since the Moon is not inclined like the Earth is... You've got full-time Sun.
It's constant.
In the South Pole, there are large High peaks.
And the most interesting one is Malapert Mountain.
And to have a base there, you would have sunlight over 90% of the time.
So you would have almost continual solar power.
And that's good.
You would have communication with Earth.
And you would be right next to constant shadow, which is also very useful.
Because that's extremely cold.
And there's also water there, isn't there?
They believe, and they've shown, both Lunar Prospector and the previous mission have shown evidence of water in the craters at the South Pole which never get light.
In other words, the light is going to boil off any water or ice that's there.
It never hits.
The ice may still be there.
Well, water would be a must.
There would have to be reachable water on the moon, wouldn't there?
Yes, and it's also salted in the regolith very thinly, hydrogen and hydrogen radicals.
So, since the moon is 40% oxygen, which is a whole other positive thing, water is good for both breathing, drinking, growing things, And as rocket fuel.
In fact, it's the best chemical rocket fuel known.
So the other thing that the Moon does is if you start collecting the oxygen, then you can, again, refuel all your things in orbit without having to go back down the gravity well of Earth.
Okay, if I'm the President of the United States, Chip, and I'm not, were I, however, and you were trying to talk me, especially when I have domestic expenditures and I have a war going on, I've got a lot of very expensive things going on, actually, Chip, and you're going to come to me and try to talk me into the kind of money it's going to take to go to the moon and perhaps even establish a full-time presence on the moon.
How are you going to convince me?
Because I've got my jaw locked pretty hard right now in terms of the money I've got to spend for all this stuff we've got going wrong around here.
Right.
I would say you're spending the money in the wrong place right now.
We're spending $100 billion a year protecting our oil, shall we say, or grabbing oil from other areas and bringing it back home.
Yes.
We're spending apparently now $200 million and more this year on On building back up with the climate change.
Oh no, that'd be billions.
Billions.
Sorry, billions.
So project that out in the future and see what you're going to be spending.
Look at the going to the moon and bringing back helium-3, projecting back, microwaving back clean solar power everywhere.
Now the problem with the power is you can't store it.
You can't transmit it without a cost, but if you microwave it back from the Moon or from orbit, it's on time, on target.
In other words, you could have a rectenna field in a small village in Africa.
You don't need a grid.
You don't need anything.
You need rectennas.
And it's power right there, when you need it.
And you can bounce it off reflectors and get it to anywhere on Earth at any time.
And you don't have to store it, which is the big problem.
Can we get enough hardware chipped to the moon to do this kind of thing without the space elevator?
Or does the cost to orbit stop us until we get the space elevator or another way to get things to space or the moon cheaply?
No.
The answer is no, because you're not Sending the mass of material, you're sending factories.
In other words, you're sending just the engineering you need to take the in-situ resources, the stuff that's actually on the moon, and build out of that stuff what you need.
In other words, you're not taking silicon or iron up there.
It's there.
You don't need to take it.
Right.
So, you're just taking the fact, and probably, hopefully, my kid will be one of the kids Now training in these video games, these plays night and day, that's going to be running the robotics and building these factories from the earth, because we don't need as many humans as you might think.
So you think all of this can occur without necessarily the presence of human beings?
Well, human beings will be there, but... But?
They don't need to run, you know, we don't need everybody up there running robotics when we can run them right from Earth.
It's two and a quarter seconds delay.
So it's much cheaper to send up robotics.
Have a small force there to fix them, and so forth, until we get enough of an infrastructure there.
Okay, again, let me be clear, Chip.
You're saying that the kind of technology you're talking about, putting on Moon right now, we could do right now, even with the clumsy, expensive rockets we have?
Yes.
Yeah.
In fact, Alan Binder, who is a Principal Investigator of the Lunar Prospector Mission, which was a mission that went for $63 million and returned to profit, which embarrassed NASA, but he suggests that we could have a lunar base in 10 years for $10 billion.
Wow!
Now, Criswell, who is the proponent of lunar solar power, said that to return lunar solar power and make it profitable, to get it up and profitable, And making money would cost in total 300 billion dollars.
That sounds like an enormous amount until you realize we just lost 200 billion dollars in one hurricane.
Yes.
And the Department of Defense budget for a year is 300 billion dollars.
Well, when people are doing things like this, many times they're required to put together a business plan.
In other words, can you show me that for that 300 billion dollars or whatever, we're going to end up with something that's going to be Right.
I would just... Myself, I'm not that smart, but I'll point you to Criswell.
And again, you can Google it.
It's Criswell University of Houston.
He's done a plan.
at the end of the day, got us to show you how it's going to make money.
Right. I would just, myself, I'm not that smart, but I'll point you to Criswell, and again, you can Google it.
It's Criswell University of Houston. He's done a plan. He's done the engineering.
Right.
All I'm asking you is, in his plan, is it profitable?
Yes.
He says not only is it profitable, but it will make a change on the Earth comparable to the change America went through when we got rural electricity.
In other words, all of a sudden, clean solar power will up the gross national product by a tremendous amount.
I'll leave the exact figures to him, but it has tremendous effect on everything we do here, and it will be a new age, a new economic age.
Ben, in your opinion, if all of this is possible and profitable now, and God knows the Earth needs it, why aren't we doing it?
What's holding us back?
That's right.
That's a great question.
That we have an antagonistic view of things now and we're mired in old arguments.
In other words, we have these scientists and space visionaries who are capable of doing all this and want to do it and they're tremendously frustrated because for 40 years they thought they were working towards something and they've been frustrated and we haven't been going back.
On the other hand, we have We have the large corporations and administration who can't see the forest for the trees, particularly.
And we have the ecologists, who you would think would embrace this, but in my experience, do not.
Why not?
All I can tell you is the Sierra Club had a big convention a couple weeks ago.
I offered to go up there and And have my documentary available, and the answer I got back was, no, we don't want you there.
Isn't that interesting?
We have to fix stuff on Earth before we can go to space.
So they're unwilling to even consider the presentation?
Yes.
And I found that... That's odd.
I find it shocking.
I find it so shocking because all we need is for these people to work together.
You know, looking at the large corporations and the administration, doing this is a new frontier.
It means jobs.
It means technology.
It means going forward.
For the ecologists, you don't have to fight people.
We're not fighting.
You don't have to fight.
It's not either or.
It's that we should be doing this because it benefits everybody and I can't see any downside to it.
Chip, they must have some rationalization already built up apparently about why it's a bad idea from their point of view.
What is it?
All I can think of, and this is just my personal opinion, is that it threatens them because they are doing stuff in a microcosm and the problem may be bigger than their solutions.
And that may be a threat to them.
I mean, the study that I keep pointing out to, Marty Hoffert's study, said the problem is much bigger than people are dealing with.
It's so big that passing a law, taking a congressman to lunch, trying to do something political, is not going to have that much effect.
We have to do something technological.
And all I can think of is that the ecological people that have these Sierra clubs and things like that
don't want to look at a larger problem and don't want to look at a macro solution rather than a
micro solution.
All right, well, Bert Rutan showed us a technical feat.
That was a step.
How much more of a technical feat do we need demonstrated to begin to have faith that the private sector will do what
the government apparently is unwilling to do?
That's a question.
I think, you know, I'm trying to get the word out.
I think if people just realize that there is hope and there is a positive thing to do, it's not a question of demonstrating any technology.
I think when we go there and show that we can be on the moon again and get kids more excited about taking science and being scientists rather than being celebrities, That it will happen.
Now that's going to be, they're looking at 2018.
Look, I have no argument with any of that.
We need more people in science, we need to get people excited, but that in itself is not enough reason to do it.
There's only one reason that it'll get done, and private industry will do it, if it's profitable.
If it's profitable.
Everything in the world's bottom line.
So if you can prove that even with today's rocketry hardware, we can get the kind of hardware on the moon we need, With robots or whatever to beam power back to Earth and make a profit, then you're going to be able to sell this idea.
Right.
I think that thing that you're looking at that may get people to notice this would be a Chinese Sputnik.
The Chinese are very aggressive and have announced that they're going to the moon.
It's all true.
They have.
India and... But what you're telling me right now amounts to, look, if we get embarrassed or we find ourselves in a race with somebody, then we'll do it.
But see, then we're doing it because we're in a race with somebody again for a national pride thing, not for profit.
I'm not saying that's optimum.
I'm saying that's what probably we'll have to have.
And I'm saying, look, why isn't profit enough of a motive by itself?
Why do we have to find ourselves in an adversarial position to accomplish, as we did with the Soviet Union?
We went to the moon and we accomplished only because we were in a damn race.
Right.
You're right.
Profit is the motivation.
I'm wondering why the giant energy companies, knowing that they're going to run out of product, aren't the ones leading the charge.
Why isn't Bechtel, why isn't Halliburton, why isn't these people who have such a bad rap now, Exxon and so forth, why aren't they looking for alternate energy and why aren't they going there and doing this?
good question once again chip roser and uh... he certainly has vision
He certainly has an idea for a world that needs one.
And he's also got a video.
And Chip, again, I want to give you a chance to promote this.
The name of your video is a DVD, right?
Yes, DVD.
Gaia Selene.
And it outlines how all of this that you've been talking about tonight could be accomplished.
I guess you use graphics and all kinds of things to illustrate this, is that correct?
Yes, animations, interviews.
Alright, how do people get this?
A lot of people are interested in this chip.
How much and where do you get it and all that?
It's 1995, you can get it on Gaiaseline.com.
G-A-I-A-S-E-L-E-N-E.
In other words, right now, only through your website, is that correct?
And Amazon.
Oh, Amazon, okay.
And library video.
And soon it'll be on VOD, but not right now.
How's it been received so far?
I've gotten a couple of good reviews.
You know, no one has complained so far.
Well, I meant by any critical reviews of it yet from men of science.
How about that?
Men of science?
No.
Well, I mean, in all fairness... The only critical review from one NASA scientist I didn't include.
So he was upset at that, but that'll be for the next DVD.
He was upset by your DVD or what?
That I didn't include.
His area of expertise is using a nuclear spacecraft, nuclear engines.
Oh, I see.
Yes, there are advocates of that, of course.
It was a little out of, you know, you shoot a lot and then you cut it down.
So it didn't quite fit in with the rest of the things.
But other than that, I've been to the, I premiered it at the National Space Society in Washington, and everybody seemed to like it.
Excellent.
All right, let's see what the audience thinks of this.
It's a pretty wide vision to be sure.
First time caller line, you're on the air with Chip Roser.
Hi.
Hi there.
Firstly, I'd like to say that I've been listening to your show since I was about a junior in high school, and that's about 11 years.
Now that you're only on twice a month, I appreciate you more than ever.
Secondly, I'd like to ask your guest, now that, to put it mildly, I'm having a little trouble in trusting the federal government to provide for our best interests, I'd like to ask him what he thinks About any sort of decentralized production, like biodiesel, windmills, anything a municipality could put together.
All right, well, yeah, let's ask that.
It's at a far smaller scale than what you've been envisioning, Chip, but there are other things immediately doable here on Earth.
Biodiesel is one of them.
How do you view these kinds of technologies, these lesser things that people talk about, like bio?
Right, from what I have read and from the scientists that I've talked to, you know, they're all valuable in themselves, but again, it's the size of the problem.
Bio is very low efficiency, 1-2%, you know, 8% maximum.
When, you know, all of these things together right now are less than 15% of the total primary energy, so it's a massive problem.
We're going to need a lot more.
You mean it's that percentage of it right now?
Yeah.
Or it could only ever be that percentage?
As fossil fuel runs out, it'll grow to a greater percentage, but we'll have less primary power unless we do something else.
So, you know, what I'm saying, if you look at things like Hydroelectric.
Well, all the rivers practically that can be dammed have been dammed.
Some of them we're trying to blow up now to get fish back in them.
You know, you talk about making corn into, you know, ethanol and stuff.
You're using fossil fuel to grow the corn, to plant it, to harvest it.
You know, it's not terribly efficient.
And so the studies that they've done, and they've looked at all the efficiencies of these various things, and They aren't efficient, and they can't become.
You know, 85% fossil fuel is a tremendous amount to make up.
Yes, I'm with you there.
So you're saying the solution is going to have to be far grander.
There's nothing wrong with these ideas, and they all help in the short term, but you're saying there's going to have to be something on a far grander scale, and I'm prepared to accept that notion.
Right.
Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Chip Frozer.
Hi.
Yes, good morning, Art, and to your guests.
You're both doing a great service to humanity, and I wanted to say that first of all.
Thank you.
I hope we're doing something.
Making people think is, I think, what our mission is.
Yes, indeed.
But I wanted to address a couple of things that you had mentioned earlier about the energy increase to everyone.
As we all know, the Earth's population is doubling at about, what is it, every 32 years now?
What are we at?
About 6 billion, 7 billion now?
We're in the 6 range.
Okay, so let's say it's 6 billion, and at the same time, all of the people on Earth are actually getting more and more energy at their disposal, and we're starting to see some of the preliminary effects, because energy translates Quite often into heat.
I mean, there's no free lunch.
And with greenhouse effect, we're actually starting to see a rise in global temperature.
Well, you'll get a big fight about that.
You know, I think it doesn't matter whether it is us or whether it's a natural cycle that has come upon us.
You know, the fact is, it's happening.
If we could just get together and agree on that fact, then we could proceed.
Something like Chip's talking about.
Okay, well, the next thing that we're going to, though, is if, say, we're getting cold fusion and each person has their own portable cold fusion generator, or even that we're microwaving it from the moon in huge amounts, and now everybody's got ten, a hundred, a thousand times more energy at their disposal, which is great for personal power.
However, the planet is going to... I think we're going to all see the planet significantly warming up when We have a population of 10 billion and each person has maybe a hundred times more energy.
Okay, alright, right there you've made a wonderful point.
Chip, he has.
No matter how we get the energy, even if it came from the moon, there's going to be some sort of effect on the environment with all of these billions of people doing these billions of things that people love to do, like barbecuing and driving around and going on vacations and flying in jet aircraft and all the things human beings do.
That's his point.
Yeah, I think two things.
One, we've seen as countries develop and as people get richer that their birth rate goes down.
So in all the developed countries the birth rate is essentially flat.
It's the developing countries, the ones that haven't yet started to develop, where there's still that great slope.
So hopefully as people get more uh... rich in terms of energy and everything else there won't we we can stop this massive growth and and and i've heard that the carrying capacity of birth has been exceeded in many times already uh... it may be that we just can't have ten billion people on earth and survive has anybody done uh... a good study on the actual
Carrying capacity, as you put it, of Earth.
How many people reasonably can be here living it up, whooping it up comfortably?
The figure that I've read is two billion.
And what that means is lots of people are hungry, are going to bed hungry.
Lots of people don't have the energy, not personal energy, but primary energy to do anything, to develop.
People live, you know, lots of people live miserable lives because of this.
As we develop and we see in the developing countries, we aren't producing as many human beings, and that's a major thing.
And the other thing is, it might be wise to have an escape route for the masses of people that we are bringing into the world, because What is our future?
Is our future totally tied to this one little planet, or can we go to the moon, to Mars, to other solar systems, and propagate out?
And I believe that that is our destiny if we have the brains and the willpower to do it.
Well, there is a certain sense, Chip, that if really too many people are on the planet, eventually, if we don't do something about it ourselves, Mother Nature will.
Mother Nature seeks out a balance in all things.
Yeah.
And eventually, she will seek out a balance in the Earth's population in self-defense.
It looks like she's doing it already.
That almost implies a consciousness, and I don't mean to say that.
I just mean to say that a natural balance will be sought.
Right.
Well, if you look at the Earth as Gaia, as an organism, you might consider us to be an infection.
And it's not the infection that kills, it's the toxins the infection throws off that finally kills the host.
We are now throwing off toxins at an alarming rate.
Especially those of us in the most developed countries where we are using more energy than people in undeveloped countries.
I just want to get to the other point is as we have energy, you know, the problem with energy is not that it heats up things.
The problem is the atmosphere traps the heat.
In fact, if we had a clean atmosphere, there's many ways to radiate the heat back out into space so that we do have a balance.
And in fact, that's what the Ice caps are doing for us.
We could have clean energy, electric energy, not polluting the atmosphere, not making a cap in the atmosphere that traps everything in.
And we could find easy ways to radiate the excess back into space.
Bottom line, as you make people rich, in quotes, with inexpensive, plentiful energy, they tend to reduce their own numbers, and you come up with zero population growth.
Do you think the six billion we now have, all moving into the modern age, is sustainable, Chip?
That's a good question, and I don't really know.
We know that the population, that since World War II, it's been this tremendous spike, and that matches the spike in pollution, matches the spike in the damage to the environment.
So I suspect that it is too many.
But we certainly don't need people in developed nations with massive families because the kids are going to die.
Because they figure you have ten kids, three will live till you're an old man and take care of you.
Right.
All right.
East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Chip Poser.
Good morning.
Good morning, Art.
Good morning, Chip.
This is Brad calling from the dreary but mysterious right field in Ohio.
And my question is kind of concerning that.
I've been in and out all night.
First of all, Art, you are both a hero and a legend to me, sir.
And second off, I don't know if you may have covered this.
Hopefully you haven't.
Like I said, I've been in and out.
Now, you speak of human life going into space in a more advanced way.
Possibly, you know, gaining life in space.
Now, what would you see As far as extraterrestrials go, if this were the case, do you see that that would be sort of a conflict there?
Alright, well let's go ahead and ask that, what the hay.
If we're talking about an excursion into space, the moon, and then ultimately beyond, Chip, do you ever consider the possibility that there is an awful lot out there, and as the movie said, what a great waste of space it would be if they weren't there.
So likely there is life out there.
And we might encounter it once we begin to venture forth.
Have you thought about that?
I think, yeah, to an extent.
I think that if we are smart enough and evolved enough to get there without destroying ourselves, that maybe we will have graduated from our childhood and be able to meet them on more or less equal terms.
We do know that this next step is uninhabited It's not like we're going to America and displacing the natives.
There's nobody on the moon.
There's nobody on Mars, so we can certainly go that far.
So we're not going to have to drive the Moonies off?
Right.
Plus, we can build our own habitats in space, O'Neill-type space colonies.
There's plenty of room in space, and there are plenty of resources that we can use.
It's our destiny, I hope, to bring life and bring intelligence into dark, dead areas.
That and the Sierra Club coming around, right?
If they ever do, yeah.
West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Chip Proser, hi.
This is West of the Rockies?
That's you, alright.
That's me!
Hey, dear Art and Chip, God bless you both.
I'm calling on the mighty KOH.
Reno, yes.
Nevada, yes, coming through very clear tonight.
I have a question and then a comment.
Question being that the moon ecologically regulates our tides, I mean women's menses, I mean I can't tell you how many things the moon regulates.
What do you think about the general balance that the moon Give us as far as all that, and we start interrupting the moon, wouldn't it have some kind of magnetic imbalance in concern with the planet?
Alright, but that question assumes that we disturb the moon by what we're going to do.
I think Chip would probably argue we're not going to, right Chip?
Right.
You know, the moon is as big as North and South America combined.
You know, we can certainly inhabit it without, you know, we're not going to change the weight of it.
We're not going to, it has no magnetosphere anyway because it's all light material.
It has no iron core.
There's nothing, unless we, you know, we're just as likely to ruin this planet, we're more likely to ruin this planet than the moon because when we get there, we'll have to be very careful.
We'll have to recycle everything.
It's not like here where we can Pollute everything and let her grandchildren worry about it.
When we go to the moon, everything will have to be in balance.
We'll have to recycle everything.
And my comment being, I'm just a mechanic's daughter, I'm not a scientist or anything, but I did learn that combustion engines, when you burn a car for one hour, the air that you consume in one hour burns up uh... the air that have that a man breathe in a lifetime
that they were to combustion
hold that oxygen out of the air and and burned oxygen as well as
and burning the oil to look at what you're going to have a hard-on i've got
it uh... that that in one hour an automobile consumes or destroys as much
a hot oxygen as i would breathe in my whole life that sounds wrong chip
uh...
i don't know whether it's right or wrong but it's you know reciprocate
hating engines are very inefficient very dirty Obviously, we would be better off with either fuel cells or a hydrogen economy if we had a cheap way and good way to make hydrogen.
So, in a hydrogen engine, same reciprocal engine, and with hydrogen, you're making water vapor.
Alright.
By the way, Scott McGee in Anchorage, Alaska reminds us both that to go, say, 22,500 miles into space in two days, you would be traveling at 468.75 miles per hour.
Kind of like, just about the same speed as a typical passenger jet.
How about that?
That sounds good to me.
Doesn't hurt me when I fly in a jet, so...
It would be, you know, comfortable to do that.
No, it sounds utterly doable to me, and the whole concept of the space elevator does sound like a saving grace.
If we could get things into space at a very inexpensive rate per pound, Ladies and gentlemen, there is no question.
We could put hardware in geosync orbit that would return power to Earth and I think would be profitable and the same may well go, though I haven't studied it, for the moon.
So, Chip Frozer may be exactly right.
Chip, you'll find this interesting.
Joseph from Austin, Texas says, I enthusiastically invite Art Bell and Chip Prozer to reduce the number of humans on Earth by two.
Please follow your own sick analysis and commit suicide ASAP.
Do Gaia Earth a favor and commit suicide, you charlatans!
Well, I guess that's a bad review, huh?
I'll mark that down on the bad side, okay?
Well, I guess.
If you examine this a little bit, let's see what he's saying here.
I guess he's saying the number of people on earth and the fact that you're saying perhaps, oh I don't know, we're what, three times what we ought to be, two or three times what's sustainable on earth right now in terms of the number of people.
Is that a sick analysis?
Is he calling from Exxon?
I don't know.
You get his number.
I don't know.
Is it sick?
In other words, he's saying it's sick to even imagine there are too many of us.
Have you been in a crowded subway recently?
I avoid crowded places.
Yeah, me too.
But if you look at the populations, it doesn't seem sustainable now.
In other words, the people we have right now Apparently are doing great damage to the planet and just living.
I mean, no one is going out and saying, I want to be a big polluter and ruin everything.
People are just saying, I want to drive my kids to the soccer game.
Sure.
So, uh, ultimately people around the world want the same things that we have, right?
That's all there is to it.
And they're rapidly getting there.
And when they do, there are going to be certain consequences.
All right, let's, let's continue.
West of the Rockies.
You're on the air with, uh, with Chip Prozer.
Hi, Art.
Hi, Chip.
I want to say first off, Art, I love your show.
I've listened for years, and I think you're doing a great service for the whole planet.
I'm serious.
Chip, I think you have a great idea.
I'd like to take it one step further and combine what you're doing now with what Art has done in the past.
I participated in your consciousness experiment a while back.
I thought it was a great step.
Let's bring that into the real world, to the here and now, and collectively, as the listeners of this great show, all around the world, let's put together the efforts of this and make it a reality.
Chip, I challenge you, put together a small corporation, just a corporate entity, and make an initial public offering available.
And I am sure that you will be amazed at the number of people that will step forward and make this a reality.
Yeah, that's a very interesting question, actually, and a very relevant question.
Is there enough behind this?
If somebody were to study a business plan, this is such an important question, that they would take money and throw it at the project because it would make money.
If you can answer that question affirmatively, then you'll be on your way.
I don't know that I'm the technologist to do this.
I'd love to do it to make more documentaries to get the word out.
David Criswell has somewhat of a business plan on how to do lunar solar power.
There are many business plans out there.
In fact, the interesting thing is many of the rich people from the dot-com era have now gone into space.
I personally know some rich people, as you put it, Chip, who are working on, for example, hotels in space.
Yes, I know the person you're speaking of.
I don't know him personally, but I know he's in Vegas.
Well, as a matter of fact, yes.
There's also Jeff Bezos, Paul Allen, Elon Musk.
And these people are actively working in that direction.
So they think there's money there.
They have experience in startups that go from nothing and become billion dollar companies.
That's right.
And these are the same people looking towards space and saying there is tremendous amount of money there.
In fact, I wanted to mention space tourism as well, because there's a person, Patrick Collins, who teaches in Japan, who feels that that is the engine.
That's going to get everybody into space.
And I think I might agree with that, actually.
Yes.
Because, you know, you realize that you'll be able to fly on the moon.
I weigh 180.
I'll weigh 30 pounds on the moon.
I could support myself on some Nike sport wings.
And as long as I fly in the containment, the atmosphere is... Nike sport rings?
Sport wings.
Wings?
Small wings, like Icarus.
And that'll be the way that people will get around, because it's very efficient.
Wait a minute.
You're talking about inside an atmosphere-domed... Right.
Inside a containment.
But even so, you're saying human beings have enough arm power to put wings on when you weigh nothing more than 30 pounds and fly?
Well, we do it with hang gliders right now.
We glide, we don't fly.
There's a big difference.
Yeah, but imagine that all you have to lift is one-sixth of your body weight.
That'll be a sport on the moon, people believe.
Flying, Olympic flying.
Olympic flying.
International Line, you're on the air with Chip Frozer.
Hello.
Good morning, Chip.
Good morning, Art.
Hi.
Paul calling from Canada.
Long time listener, first time caller.
Yes, sir.
A couple things.
Just what you just said, flying on the moon.
I'd never thought of that, but you know, Art, I think I could flap twice to at least get myself off the ground.
Well, maybe you could.
One thing that concerned me was There's some scientists out there gathered together information for an annual oxygen depletion rate.
Something globally where people have measured the oxygen and say, hey, how much air do we have left?
Yeah, that's a good point.
How much breathable, sustainable air do we have left is probably a better question.
There's a lot of air up there.
So I've been thinking about this for years now, Art, after 10 years of listening pretty much every night.
I see these big cones going from each country, each wealthy country, up into outer space, to their own base, to their own hotels, to their own colonies.
I also see us in the oceans, growing our food on the water, since that's more surface, and putting solar desalination and hydrogen plants around the coastlines of all the continents to pipe in not only hydrogen for fuel, But to get it from solar means out in the ocean and pipe in clean desalinized water for consumption at the same time, and unfortunately, the people in current control of the power, the oil companies and the banks, they'll have to have a large investment in such a project for it to even be.
Well, that's right, and so they've got to see the end of their little fossil fuel empire and begin to invest.
I guess that's when we'll know, Chip, when these large companies begin to invest in these kinds of things, we'll know we're close to the end.
That'll be like the canary.
Right.
Keeling over in its little cage as you go down in the mine, you'll know then that the end is near and hopefully they'll be investing in exactly this kind of thing.
How close are we?
Well, if they don't start now, they may be the companies that fall behind.
It may be the Jeff Bezos and Paul Allen's and start-up companies that, you know, go.
I remember when the Internet came in and everybody was trying, and Hollywood was trying to figure out how to do it, and they had no idea.
And they couldn't do it.
And outsiders and people with new ideas did it.
And one of the big problems people feel is that there's a A treaty, a lunar treaty, which says you can't own anything on the moon.
And that has to be, it was never ratified, but it's still there on paper.
People have to have the ability to own a piece of property on the moon so that they can develop it.
Go up... Maybe we should begin, maybe we can finance it all by selling moon now.
There is a guy, and he's in your neighborhood, It has the Lunar Embassy, and apparently he's sold a lot of... He has a Lunar Embassy?
He has the Lunar Embassy, and he's sold various... he tells me he's sold two million dollars worth of... Moon?
Moon.
But how does he give deed legally to somebody who buys some moon?
He gives... he has a, you know, And I'm not saying to go and do this, but people have apparently done it.
He gives them a certificate.
He's suing the United Nations.
He has precedence, he says, in other land situations, like when they gave the Homestead Act and so forth, and people could go and occupy it and own it.
Selling the moon.
Right.
Selling the moon.
I never thought of that.
It's got to be a good business.
Selling property on the moon.
That's right.
Get your acre now.
Yeah.
No, I'm not saying to go and do this.
I'm just telling you that there's a guy who is selling this and he's in Nevada.
Gives me hope.
Good old American ingenuity.
That's it.
First time caller line.
You're on the air with Chip Poser.
Hi.
Hey, how you doing?
This is Trey Collin from Nikitski, Alaska.
Listening on 650k ENI.
Where the tundra melts as we speak.
Yeah, 50,000 watts.
I've got a couple questions, and you brought up a good point earlier, and that is, you know, why aren't the oil companies investing in this type of thing?
And I guess my first question slash point is, Chip, that, you know, I don't know that I believe that we're actually that close to running out of oil.
I mean, Is it impossible to believe that there's another 500 or maybe 1,000 ANWRs out there?
Alright, hold it.
One thing at a time.
That's a big question.
Chip could there be 1,000 ANWRs out there?
What is an ANWR?
ANWR is a place where there's oil, up in Alaska.
It's the other side of the slope there.
Okay.
From what I've read, there's a guy named Colin Campbell, who used to work for the oil companies and has done a major study, and you can Google him online.
Yes.
They have found, you know, oil companies have been very aggressive in searching out new fields and stuff.
In the last few decades, they have cut back.
In fact, they aren't spending the money right now.
Well, it's true that we haven't had a lot of stories saying, magnificent, incredible, new discovery of more oil than man could use in the next whatever.
We haven't heard that, really, since Saudi Arabia.
Right.
And that's because they haven't found that it's not there.
It took four and a half billion years to make what's there.
And we're reusing it as fast as we can.
Now, Collar, that sounds like it might be a point.
I mean, wouldn't we know?
I think that we are hearing a lot about some of the oil fines that they're making in Russia.
And my analogy to this is, let's use gold as an example.
In Alaska, just Alaska, I mean, we're talking about a resource that is on the surface.
We're opening up new, large gold mines all the time.
Yeah, but I don't know that that necessarily relates or is a good analogy for oil at all.
You know, I hope there is more gold there, and there may be more in Alaska, but I have not heard about many new ANWRs or many new discoveries.
All of you ask yourself the same question.
Do you remember when you were young and you were hearing about all the new discoveries?
We're not hearing about new discoveries at the same rate that we once were, are we?
Mm-mm.
Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Chip Frozer.
Hi.
Hey.
Hi, Eric.
How you doing?
Okay.
Listen, I hate to play devil's advocate.
No, go ahead.
But, Chip, I'm totally on your side.
I think out-of-the-box thinking is great, and we should go to the moon, and we should have bases, and blah, blah, blah.
But there are two reasons why your scenario might fail.
Number one is it's not that we don't have oil.
There's plenty of oil.
There's plenty of oil to take us probably in the next thousand years.
The problem is it's not cheap enough to take it out.
But if nanotubes can make an elevator ribbon that can go from the Earth to 61,000 miles into space, Then, surely, technology can make nano-drills that can drill much deeper than they can right now, and therefore the cost would go down.
I think that's one of the main reasons why oil companies, they know they have an ace in the hole, because if the technology can exist for an elevator, hell, a lot of other stuff could be made to make their drilling even cheaper.
Well, I think we would have heard about that, too.
Well, I can imagine, for example, nano-drills, but that's not the question at all.
The question is whether the resource will continue to be there in abundance to drill for economically.
And I think there's an awful lot of evidence to indicate that the answer is no.
East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Chip Proser.
Hi.
Yes.
Hi, Art.
Hi, Chip.
Anyway, I was wondering, maybe this question has already been answered, but the cost of oxygen, because it would take quite a bit of oxygen, I imagine.
Are you talking about to go to the moon, sir?
Yes, sir.
Alright, to have a base on the moon, Chip, would require ongoing oxygen.
Would that be a problem, or would it be easy for a moon colony?
Luckily, lunar regolith is 40% oxygen by weight.
So again, you collect the lunar regolith, you put it in the solar oven, you boil off the oxygen and collect it.
At the same time, you're collecting helium-3 and any other useful gases that you may need You then put that in the shade and it liquefies, and then you can transport it anywhere you want.
There's plenty of oxygen on the moon.
That's not a problem.
There's more than you need.
All right.
The hydrogen.
Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Chip Foser.
Hi.
How you doing?
Fine.
Hey, you know, you guys were talking about owning property on the moon.
I actually bought a piece of that property.
You bought a piece of the moon?
I did, I did.
Might I ask how much real estate you acquired?
I acquired, what is it, $1,740,000.
Arcade or something like that.
It's the acres spelled backwards.
But it's a sizable chunk.
It's right on the rim of a crater.
Well, wait a minute.
Acres spelled backward.
When you get a document with acres spelled backward on it, doesn't it worry you?
Do you work in the mirror?
The area M3 is quadrant, lot number 187.
Okay, it's approximately 1,777.58 acres.
Yes, I shouldn't laugh.
It's Circa.
seven point five eight acres yes i should have a look at that
circus fpr c a s what what what did you pay for this five-fold like it
was like forty bucks the weirdest thing was with that he was in a real
vista when he was doing this uh... i thought i'm
i was on my way to take my uh... instrument rating and i lost a mag on the end on the plane i was flying
And Rio Vista was, like, right there.
It's like, I guess I'm landing at Rio Vista today.
I see.
All right.
Well, and there you met the salesman and acquired your moon real estate.
Incredible.
East of the Rockies, you're on there with Chip Frozer.
Hi.
Yes.
I'm calling to respond about these people who talk about more oil.
And I think it's a moot question whether or not we have more oil.
If we could pump 25 Thousand times the oil we've already burned out of the center of the Earth.
All we're doing is putting more carbon in the atmosphere.
The real emergency here is that we have to stop poisoning our world.
There is that, isn't there?
Yes.
That's really what needs to be focused on, is really stopping this poisoning from carbon-based fuels.
Whether it's there or not, even if we get it, That's where the Earth has given us the warning.
We've got to look someplace else.
What really surprises me in all of this discussion is that we don't hear on coast-to-coast, and I listen quite regularly, and incidentally, I...
will create because everyone else who gives you such compliments it is a
great great service that you render thank you but uh... i've heard nothing about uranium or almost
nothing about uranium and and yet i was working on the wall for a several numbers
so we'll flee short on time uh... why nothing about uranium uh... very
quickly because we've used a little hanging fruit uranium and that'll
go for another six to thirty years tops in other words we have
the uh... the easy to get your idea Right.
And that's also in the DVD, and that's from a scientist from the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Okay, and this DVD, again, only available at your website, right?
And Amazon.
Amazon.com.
The library video.
And when they go to look for it, they should ask for... Gaia Selene.
G-A-I-A-S-E-L-E-N-E.
Listen, my friend, it has been a pleasure to have you on the air.
We are out of time.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
▲
Export Selection