All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 4, 2015 - Art Bell
02:37:00
Art Bell MITD - Jay Weidner Stanton Friedman
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The End.
Thank you for watching.
If you enjoyed this video, please subscribe for more like it.
Also, I would appreciate it if you could leave a comment and let me know what you think
of this video.
Also, I would appreciate it if you could leave a comment and let me know what you think
of this video.
Also, I would appreciate it if you could leave a comment and let me know what you think of
this video.
Also, I would appreciate it if you could leave a comment and let me know what you think of
good afternoon wherever you are in the world.
Every square inch of it covered by this program.
Midnight in the desert.
I'm Art Bell.
And it is a strange looking night in the desert tonight.
All right.
For the program, there are only two rules.
And I think I'll do it backwards.
One caller per show and no bad language for many of you.
That's it.
Our rules are simple.
No bad language.
Don't need it.
Only one call per show.
I want to thank everybody as usual.
Telos, the incredible sound we've got.
Thank you, Joe Talbot, Telos.
I'm telling you guys, if you haven't tried earbuds yet.
I keep getting these messages from people who say, you know, I finally took your advice, Art, and tried earbuds, and oh my God.
It's that good, really.
Honestly.
Keith Rowland, my webmaster forever.
My new producer, Heather Wade.
All of you who live in the Bell Gap website.
People who love Art Bell.
Midnight in Desert.
These are all sites that sort of chat about the show.
To one degree or with some language or another.
The Streamguys, who get it to you.
LV.net, who gets it to Streamguys.
I can't think of a better way to put it.
And, of course, our sales guide, Peter Everhart.
Alright, a couple of items and then off to our show tonight, which should be something With the Honorable Jay Widener, and of course our sales guide, Peter Eberhardt.
Alright, a couple of items, and then off to our show tonight, which should be something.
With the Honorable Jay Widener, and Dr. Friedman.
We're going to be talking about the moon.
Jay believes that all the photography taken of, you know, what we Well, easily said, the greatest accomplishment of mankind to date.
Walking on the moon, right?
He thinks all of it was photographed.
And it's all false.
And so, we'll talk about that and other things, but that for sure.
A toxic, this should be at the head of the news, it's at the end of the news, a toxic algae bloom in warm water from California to Alaska.
That's a big blob, folks.
A vast bloom of toxic, very toxic algae off the West Coast is denser, more widespread and deeper than scientists feared even, folks.
A vast bloom of toxic, very toxic algae off the West Coast is denser, More widespread and deeper than scientists feared even weeks ago, according to surveyors aboard a National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration research vessel, this coastal ribbon of microscopic algae up to 40 miles wide, and get this, 650 feet deep in coastal areas, is flourishing amid unusually warm Pacific Ocean temperatures.
Now stretches from California to Alaska.
It shut down lucrative fisheries.
No more shell fishing.
This is serious stuff, and it's part of our changing planet.
While the debate field is set for Thursday, Trump and Bush are in, Santorin and Pirena out.
Donald Trump has scored the top spot for Thursday night's lead-off debate of the 2016 presidential race, joined by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, and seven other Republican contenders.
And for those of you who think that I played coming to America and actually was dedicating it in Some loving way last night.
Well, you're all wet.
That was tongue-in-cheek, folks, all the way.
Only one more item and then off to our guests.
And this one you better pay attention to.
I want you to go to Artbell.com.
I know you're going to think I'm kidding.
I'm not.
The fabled Bishopville, South Carolina swamp creature known as Sorry, Lizard Man appears to have surfaced once again.
Sunday afternoon.
We've got pictures.
Sarah, a Sumter woman, who says she went to church with a friend Sunday morning, stepped out of the sanctuary to see
lizard afternoon.
We've got pictures.
Sarah, a Sumter woman, who says she went to church with a friend Sunday morning, stepped out of the sanctuary to see
lizard man running along the tree line.
So, she did what anybody else would do, if you weren't in shock, took a picture with her phone.
She claims, quote, my hand to God, I'm not making this up, unquote.
Wrote in an email to the ABC News 4 newsroom, very excited.
Says they were about a mile or so from Scrape, Oregon, Washington Swamp.
Scrape, Oregon, Washington, yeah, not Washington, Scrape, Oregon Swamp.
The site, or oarswamp, the site of a similar spotting of what also may have been a lizard man back in May.
A man who has not to be identified submitted a short video, get this, of what he thought was the lizard man on Monday morning.
Said he took the video in May while coon hunting but kept its existence quiet until he saw reports of lizard man outside of a church.
He said, I saw your lizard man story That gave me the courage to send you the video.
It's quiet until he saw reports of Lizard Man outside of a church.
He said, I saw your Lizard Man story.
That gave me the courage to send you the video.
The man wrote, though my wife believes me that it's real, she said she'd be embarrassed that everybody's going to think I'm a loon, so I kept it secret.
The man said he took the video and escaped Or swamp just off Camden Highway in Bishopville, wherever that is.
In the 20 minute video, 22nd video, the photographer ducks behind a tree and you can see a dark figure with what appears to be a long tail walking about 30 or 40 yards away.
The video stops as the figure appears to turn toward the camera, and I might add that the cameraman does what I would have done.
He gets behind the tree and then ducks down, still trying to get as, you know, what he can.
And then there's a still photograph, which is quite good, of the lizard guy.
Now maybe this is a guy in a suit, but we were talking about this last night, and it seems to me the last thing you would want to do is put on a giant lizard suit.
And go walking around the woods.
You know, where there are hunters, right?
You just wouldn't do that.
You're gonna get shot.
That's what's gonna happen.
So this may be the real thing.
Make sure you see the still photograph, because it is quite graphic.
Okay, so once again, just so that you listen to the words, and know that I wasn't actually dedicating this to Donald Trump, it was tongue-in-cheek.
It was actually about Everybody coming to America!
If you listen to the words, it's rather plain, actually.
I say, nevertheless, Thursday's debate is going to be worth the watch.
Worth the price, if you listen to the words, it's rather plain, actually.
I say, nevertheless, Thursday's debate is going to be worth the watch.
Worth the price of admission.
I have no idea what's going to happen.
Anyway, listen a little bit if you would to the words and understand that I was trying to imply
That the Donald or no Donald Baby, we're America and they're coming
That's it keep Let it roll.
We've been traveling far.
Without a home.
Not without a star.
Free.
Only want to be free.
To hover close.
Hang on to a dream.
All the sins on the plain Coming to America
Never looking back again They're coming to America
Oh, the sea's gonna swallow me We're chatting in the light today
In the eye of the storm Oh, to a new and better place
The Sea of Sorrow In the eye of the storm
The way you're moving through Get my letters through
Cause you're the way of the lonely moon Wanna take a ride? From the high deserts and the great
American Southwest.
This is Midnight in the Desert, exclusively on the Dark Matter Digital Network.
To call the show, dial 1-952-CALL-ART.
That's 1-952-225-5278.
Call Art, that's 1-952-225-5278.
It's a beautiful night, and a strange but beautiful in the desert.
Hi everybody!
Away we go.
Here we go.
Stanton Friedman, Dr. Friedman, received his B.Sc.
and M.Sc.
degrees in physics from the University of Chicago in 1955 and 1956.
He was employed for 14 years as a nuclear physicist by GE.
GM, Westinghouse, GRW Systems, Aerojet General Nucleonics, wow, and McDonnell Douglas, working in highly advanced, classified, eventually cancelled programs, like nuclear aircraft fission and fusion rockets, and various compact nuclear power plants for space and terrestrial applications.
Now he is joined by Jay Widener.
Widener is a writer, he's a filmmaker, called by Wired Magazine an authority on the Hermetic and Alchemic traditions.
Widener has authored two books and produced over 25 documentaries.
He is currently producing and programming for GuillaumeTV.
I think that's the way it's said, GuillaumeTV.
He just received his second feature film, or just released it rather, The Last Avatar, cool name, on Vimeo for a bunch of glowing reviews.
He's done very well.
So, let's bring them both on together and say, I guess, first, Stanton, welcome to the program.
My God, it's been forever.
It's been a long time, and please don't call me doctor, because I don't have a doctorate, and somebody will give me a hard time.
All right.
Well, when you're a nuclear physicist, it just sort of seems like you ought to be doctor.
All right.
That would be nice.
Stanton.
Stanton it is.
Anyway, it's great to have you back.
It's been really a long time, hasn't it?
It has been a long time, yeah.
All right.
Too long.
Too long is right.
Now, Jay Widener, and Stan, you're of course up in, I don't know, up north somewhere, right?
Well, east.
Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada, 73 miles east of beautiful downtown Holton, Maine, at the end of I-95 is Holton.
All right, well that's east and north.
All right, Jay Widener, welcome to the program.
Hey, thanks for inviting me.
I've never had you on, so this is a first, and we're happy to have you.
Where are you located?
Boulder, Colorado.
Boulder, Colorado.
Okay, so we're all separated pretty widely here, actually.
Alright, so let's get right to this.
To me, Our going to the moon is America's crowning achievement.
It's the crowning achievement of the world so far, really, in my opinion.
Would either one of you disagree with that?
No.
No.
All right, so see, we start with agreement.
Now let's bust it up.
Jay, I know you believe that we may have gone to the moon.
You're not sure, I guess, right?
Well, I can't say, but I mean, I have sources who have told me that we've been to the moon many times.
Okay.
Many times.
Yeah, my premise is that the space program is much further advanced than they were letting us in on, and that Kennedy knew That Kennedy was shown in 1961 some of the very advanced technologies that they had gotten from the Germans, and we know this from an FBI document where Marilyn Monroe told Dorothy Kilgallen that she had seen the alien stuff.
And I believe that John made his speech about going to the moon, John F. Kennedy, it was in order to force, he knew that standard rocket technology would not do the job, at least not in the time period that he put forth, and he knew that they had very advanced technologies, and I believe he made that speech right after he saw the technology in order to force that technology out into the open But they had other plans.
So what they did was, and this is a newly released document just in the last couple
months, in June 1965, the U.S.
Information Agency began looking at film directors, the top six film directors in the world, for some reason.
One of them was Stanley Kubrick.
He was not a big director in June of 1965.
He'd just done Doctor Strangelove, which did alright, but he'd never really had a breakout film until 2001 Space Odyssey.
I believe, and also I'll say this, of all the filmmakers in his time period, the only
one that actually understood the technical aspects of filmmaking was Stanley Kubrick.
He knew how to shoot, he knew how to edit, he knew how to light, he knew how to do everything.
Whereas somebody like Billy Wilder was more of a theater director and didn't really understand
the technical mechanics involved in making films.
He had other people that did that.
Stanley Kubrick in his time was the consummate filmmaker and understood all aspects of filmmaking.
And he would be the guy you would choose if you were going to fake this.
Now, why would you fake it?
And the answer is, well, one, national security reasons.
You don't want the Soviet Union to see what you got.
Two, what if something goes wrong?
Do you really want the whole world watching two astronauts dying on the surface of the moon?
All they would have had to do is clip a rock, and that thing would have tumbled and broke, and it could never have been repaired.
So, and also, they didn't want people to see some of the artifacts that are all over the moon.
And so, they hired Stanley Kubrick.
He used 2001 Space Odyssey as a cover, and also as research and development, and how to do the faking.
They hired Stanley Kubrick.
He used 2001 Space Odyssey as a cover, and also as research and development.
Can I stop you for a second, please?
If I was listening carefully, you're suggesting that the rocketry that we had at that time, the President knew, Kennedy knew, would not do the job.
You did say that, right?
Yes, I did.
So that would mean, then, that the Saturn V that we saw lift off, that took men to the moon, that was wrong.
I mean, just a few years before the Saturn V was finished, Wernher von Braun told CBS, I believe it was, that the rocket would have to be the size of the Empire State Building.
Well, it was pretty big.
Well, it wasn't the size of the Empire State Building.
No, but all I'm asking is a straight-out question.
The Saturn V that we saw lifting man ultimately to the moon, that was fake?
It was a real rocket and it really went off and everything but...
Where'd it go?
...five that we saw lifting men ultimately to the moon.
That was fake.
It was a real rocket and it really went off and everything but...
Where'd it go?
Uh, well, I don't know where they went.
I'm not going to speculate where they went.
All I can speculate on, all I can do is not speculate and tell you about the filming techniques and also Stan Lee's confession in The Shining.
Alright, I don't know about that, but let's get right to it.
Well, you'll like it.
Alright, well I'll have to like it in a bit.
The stuff we took on the moon, the photography on the moon, that was all fake?
Yep, it was all fake.
The stuff we took on the moon, the photography on the moon, that was all fake?
Yep, it was all fake.
It was all done in a studio using a technique called front screen projection, which hardly anybody today understands what front screen projection is.
Fortunately, I worked with it 30 years ago when I lived in Yeah, I think I'm certainly in disagreement with a good chunk of that.
that front screen projection leaves behind, and every single Apollo image has the telltale fingerprints
of front screen projection.
All right, Stanton, feel free to jump in anywhere here.
Well, yeah, I think I'm certainly in disagreement with a good chunk of that.
I am not a filmmaker, and I am not going to pretend to be one,
but there are several different questions involved, a good chunk of that.
I am not a filmmaker, and I am not going to pretend to be one.
But there are several different questions involved here.
One is technology.
There's no question, my mantra is, progress comes from doing things differently in an unpredictable way.
And certainly when Kennedy made that speech, We hadn't yet built a big enough rocket.
We hadn't spent the money.
And one of the key things here is that there are a lot of stories going around about German technology, some of which I think are straight baloney.
Partly because Hitler wasn't a nice guy.
If he had figured out all this... Look, I'm saying Planck's Laws are real.
I've been saying that for a long time.
But if Hitler had Hitler's people had figured out how to make stuff like that.
He would have used it.
He wasn't a nice guy who said, well, we don't want to give a hard time to these nice guys over across the water.
Not at all.
He'd have used it.
And so it's very hard to separate out the mythology.
And I think there's a key point here that I didn't really find out until yesterday.
And that is that I have a friend who had Business dealings with the people at NASA Houston.
And he was admiring some of the pictures that were around the waiting room, so to speak.
And they made clear to him that, well, most of that talent isn't from what we got on the moon.
It's what we did to it after we got the information back.
And then it struck me that, you know, I'm old enough to know how much technology has improved in our working lifespan.
You know, compare today's computers with what we had in the 60s and early 70s.
So you're saying they did touch up?
You're saying what?
Touch up?
Well, yeah.
Enhancement, what do you want to call it?
Compressing and all the technological stuff that we do today is very much fancier, if you want to put it that way.
Of course.
You know, and we take it for granted.
The kids don't understand when I tell them, hey, I wasn't allowed to touch a computer when I was working in the industry.
What do you mean?
Well, you filled out an input data sheet, somebody key-punched cards, and a girl went with a big reel of tape and a deck of cards up to the computer facility that you weren't allowed anywhere near, which used a tremendous amount of air conditioning equipment because it was vacuum tubes and stuff like that.
And the next day or two, you got back.
Output.
But you didn't touch the computer?
Come on!
That's specialists!
So, what I'm saying is, that whole world has changed enormously.
Call it Moore's Law, whatever you want to call it.
But the capability of straight photography, if you will, funny way to put it, has changed drastically.
And remember, the last Apollo flight was, what, 1972?
Can you imagine how much things have changed since then?
I can, but there's a basic thing that we're working with here.
One of you is saying these pictures are all fake, and Stanton, you seem to be saying, well, maybe they're touched up a little bit, but they're the real thing taken on the moon.
Well, even a lot, it's a pretty damn big deal in my opinion.
Either those are real photographs of what we did that changed the world, or they're not.
They're not.
They are.
If you look at any Apollo site where they have all the photographs, go to the photographs
and begin looking and you will see a telltale break in the horizon behind the astronauts.
It's in every shot.
The grain on the ground changes.
It's a direct straight line right behind it and you can see the granularity of the surface
of the ground changes in every shot.
That is a telltale fingerprint of the use of front screen projection.
He perfected it in the eight scenes in 2001, a space odyssey, which were all shot in a
studio.
Everybody in Hollywood agrees that nobody could do front screen projection like Stanley
Kubrick.
Jay, I'm not a photographic expert, but what about what Stanton said?
What if that is an indication of somebody who has enhanced or done a little something with the photographs?
It doesn't mean they're totally fake, it means perhaps they've been upgraded.
That's a good word, I like that.
The way that front screen projection works is You have a stage and then you have a screen that's behind
the actors or the astronauts.
And then you project an image that is front screen, not rear screen.
Rear screen is what they used to use in movies when they're driving the car and you'd see
the streets going by in the window.
It always looked a little fake and a little off.
Right.
And Kubrick hated it.
He just hated rear screen projection.
And he perfected front screen projection because you don't get that loss of about a half an f-stop in the background.
Everything stays the same luminescence.
And so he perfected it.
And the thing is, is that every single scene in 2001 that uses front screen projection has this telltale line between the stage and the screen.
And every single Apollo photograph Also has the tell-tale line between the stage and the screen.
So to you that means it's all fake?
Yeah, it is all fake.
If you take the astronauts bouncing around on the moon and you just put them in a video editing thing and you speed them up by about 40%, they're walking around regular.
They're obviously being shot in slow motion.
Now, here's the thing.
Kubrick could not fake, in 2001, he could not figure out how to fake slow motion very well, so he shot all the slow motion scenes, I mean all the low gravity scenes, in slow motion.
Because he couldn't really figure out what zero-g would look like.
Okay, can you answer this for me?
Why?
Would they fake it?
If we actually, and you admit we might have gone to the moon, if we did go to the moon, then why fake the photography?
Because of several reasons.
One, we didn't want the Soviets to see anything that we have or had.
Two, if something went wrong, It would, and we had two astronauts dying in front of the entire world on the moon from exposure.
That would be very, very, very bad.
Nixon was president.
He would never allow that to happen.
And, you know, they just didn't, they were putting all of the money, I believe they were putting all of those billions of dollars, 30, 40 billion dollars, into a secret space program, black op projects, Everybody that was working at NASA was really working.
They were really building things that were being used.
Everything was real, but they decided that they would just show the fake, and that way they wouldn't have to show the real equipment that they really had.
And this is not rash speculation.
I mean, we have not gone anywhere, hardly at all, you know, in all these years.
We're still driving around in automobiles that use a combustion engine from 100 years ago.
There is a glass ceiling.
Ben Rich of Skunk Works, right before he died, he told everybody at this meeting that they were 50 to 70 years ahead of conventional technologies.
This was 10 years ago.
All right, hold tight.
We're at a break point.
Stanton, you get it when we come back.
I guess you've heard what he's got to say, and I've got more questions.
This is Midnight in the Desert.
I'm Art Bell.
Rocking the night away.
We walked into the room, there was voodoo in the glass.
I was captured by your stare, but I could not get you back.
Now I stand here helplessly.
For Dark Matter News, I'm Leo Ashcraft.
In the densely populated areas of New York City, one would never expect to find a tranquil, albeit creepy, sanctuary with a population of zero.
Once populated, complete with a hospital, tennis courts, utilities, every modern comfort, this area is now completely abandoned.
How could there be anything, especially an island, that is completely abandoned in New York City?
The island is called North Brother Island and is located between Queens and the Bronx.
One Reddit user came across the island in 2012 while kayaking with a friend from Connecticut to New York.
The pictures he took of the abandoned island there in New York City are absolutely amazing.
The island was developed in 1885.
It was originally used to build a hospital to quarantine and treat people suffering from smallpox and typhoid fever.
In the 1950s, it was turned into a rehabilitation center for patients who were addicted to drugs such as heroin.
The entire island has been abandoned since 1963.
After the city closed down the hospitals, they tried to sell the island to private investors in the 70s, but the cost of construction, transportation to the island, installing a sewage system, and the noise from LaGuardia Airport discouraged anyone from buying it.
In the 80s, they tried to build a prison on the island.
But scrapped the plan because it was cheaper to build in upstate New York.
Would you be willing to wander this abandoned island?
You can do it safely by viewing the many images at darkmatternews.com The head of Iran's cultural heritage and tourism organization believes that in addition to economic sanctions, the West is launching another kind of soft war on the Islamic Republic.
Speaking at a ceremony to introduce the nation's new meteorological department chief, Hassan Mousavi, he said that he was suspicious about the drought in the southern part of the country.
He went on to accuse the West of using technology to influence the nation's climate, saying sandstorms, droughts and other extreme weather were the result of an unspecified method of war.
Last year, Iranian President Mohammad Ahmadinejad accused Western countries of devising plans to cause drought in Iran.
And Hassan Mousavi said, European countries are using special equipment to force clouds to dump water on their own continents.
Last night on Dark Matter News we reported the sad news of the savage murder of the traveling robot known as Hitchbot.
Hitchbot was traveling in Philadelphia after safely touring Canada, Germany and the Netherlands.
Today footage of what is claimed to be the final moments of the traveling robot Hitchbot has been released.
But there are suspicions of a cruel prank.
Popular local vlogger Jesse Wellens, who was among the last people to see Hitchbot alive on Saturday, together with another vlogger, Ed Bassmaster, claimed Monday that he had acquired footage of the attack.
Hitchbot, which was designed as a social experiment project to see if humans can empathize with a helpless, child-sized machine that needed their help to get around, was found decapitated last Saturday after a brutal attack in Philadelphia.
The video uploaded to Snapchat shows a man in a backwards hat and a Philadelphia Eagles jersey, identifying him as number 12, Randall Cunningham, a quarterback for the NFL team in the 1980s and early 90s.
The video shows someone having ripped off the robot's arm and stomping on something obstructed from the view twice.
No motive for the attack was apparent from the footage.
There is speculation that the video may have been made by Wellens himself as a prank.
Bassmaster, who was with Wellens during the encounter, often wears an oversized number 12 Philadelphia Eagles jersey while acting as an alter-ego character.
Hitchbot was created by Canadian researchers Professor Frock Zeller from Ryerson University.
It relied on its goofy appearance and limited means of communications powered by a special computer program to steal rides from humans.
He sold plenty of hearts too along the way.
Check out darkmatternews.com for a look at the videos in question and decide for yourself, fake or prank.
I'm Lee Lashcraft for Dark Matter News.
I'm going to be talking about the news of the day.
Wanna take a ride?
Your conductor, Art Bell, will punch your ticket.
When you call 1952, call Art.
That's 192-225-5278.
I'll punch your ticket.
Alright, don't call yet.
We have a ton of debate underway.
Jay Widener.
192-225-5278.
I'll punch your ticket.
Alright, don't call yet.
We have a ton of debate underway.
Jay Widener, 192.225.5278.
I'll punch your ticket, alright? Don't call yet.
We have a ton of debate underway.
Jay Widener, who's a film expert, says that everything we saw on the moon, everything was faked.
And we've got Stanton Friedman, a nuclear physicist and a science guy for a long, long time.
And there was much said, Stanton, about why we did it.
And Jay Widener believes we did it because we were afraid of what failure would look like.
I think that's a fair, that sums it up.
Jay, right?
Yeah, that's exactly it.
Stanton?
I think, remember, we lost three guys on the pad.
Three guys died, Grissom and White, and I forget the name of the third one.
Should do better, but it's late at night here.
I think that we're leaving... I do have a question that maybe Jay can answer that's relevant here.
The footage that you see on all these websites is supposedly from the Apollo missions.
Is that from film brought back by the astronauts or was it radio transmission of images?
Well the video which is very crappy quality is broadcast from the moon. There's a four second
delay and they, NASA then recorded over those two inch videotapes so that footage is all missing and
gone now. They didn't have enough money so they reused the two inch videotape reels and
And shot other stuff over it, so we have none of the original footages available.
You know, I actually heard that.
I actually heard that, and it's unbelievable to me.
It is unbelievable.
How could we possibly do that?
Have you heard that, Stanton?
Yes, I have, and people change, and there have been a lot of dumb things done in the world, you know?
On one of the space missions, somebody used metric, or not metric.
You know, things like, mistakes happen.
I'm not saying that's good.
Let me point out something that's very important here that I haven't really said in public
before.
If you take a long term film production like say Lord of the Rings, you'll notice if you're
a stoop film watcher, you'll notice that the production values get better with each film.
By the time the third film is out, everybody who's been working together for like three or four years is all humming together, the well-oiled machine, and the production values are, by the third film, skyrocketed, actually, over the first film.
Okay.
In every way.
Okay.
You can see the same exact thing in the Apollo footage.
First you have Apollo 11, which is they're just shot against a black background.
There's no mountains, there's nothing.
Then Apollo 12, they conveniently point the camera at the sun in the first few seconds that they land on the moon, destroying the camera so we have no footage.
Apollo 13, again, it goes awry and we have no footage from that because they never landed.
Apollo 14, now the production values have drastically improved in the two years between 11 and 14.
Fifteen, again, a huge leap in production value.
Sixteen again, and seventeen is just spectacular.
I mean, the production values in seventeen are just amazing.
Each mission, the mountains are getting more complicated.
Everything is getting more complicated because the crew is learning how to do things.
They're learning how to work together, how to make the thing work and function better.
And by crew, you mean the crew on the ground faking all this, right?
Yeah, they're learning how to do it.
Well, I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about the moon.
Well, I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about the moon.
Hold on, let Stanton speak.
Go ahead, Stanton.
Well, I'm just trying to sort out signals back.
Well, I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about the moon.
Hold on, let Stanton speak.
Go ahead, Stanton.
Well, I'm just trying to sort out...
I started off by saying that technology has incredibly advanced over the years.
All right.
You're saying they didn't get any better at transmitting the signals, and better systems, better equipment, and all the rest of that?
Not really, that's not what I'm talking about.
I'm talking about the lighting, I'm talking about the photography, I'm talking about the sets, I'm talking about the general production values.
But you're also saying, I think you're saying, aren't you, that All of the astronauts who were supposedly on the moon cavorting for the cameras, uh, are lying.
Well, you know, that's a really good point.
I will bring up two points which are very important in response to that.
First off, Buzz Aldrin wrote a book when he got back called Return from the Moon, and in that book, he reports, and you can read the book, you can get it on Amazon, he says that on the one year anniversary, on July 20, 1970, he was in Vegas at a big celebration for the one year anniversary.
And he stood up in front of a crowd for really the first time and a reporter said to him, Hey Buzz, tell us what it was like, what it was really like to be on the moon.
And I'll paraphrase what Buzz says.
He says, My stomach began to become nauseated.
I got a gigantic headache.
I could not speak.
I started shaking uncontrollably.
My wife had to take me into the alley where I shook for a half hour.
I simply could not answer the question.
Now, I will redirect you all to a Stanley Kubrick film called A Clockwork Orange, in which people were put in front of movies, given drugs, and every time that they would have a thought about something, they would get sick.
Okay?
That's the plot of Stanley Kubrick's movie after 2001.
Second point.
One of my friends, my good friends, was Dr. Robert Masters.
He's a hypnotherapist.
He's now deceased.
He's a very famous hypnotherapist in his time.
Edgar Mitchell came to Bob Masters.
Bob Masters told me this.
Edgar Mitchell came to him after he landed and came back from the moon and said, Bob, you have to hypnotize me.
I cannot remember anything about the moon.
And Bob Masters put him into regression hypnotherapy and he never, ever remembered anything.
You know, I've got to verify that.
I actually had him on the air.
Yep.
I remember the show.
Oh, you do?
Yep.
This is true.
And I asked him to please, if he could, close his eyes and think about what it felt like to be on the moon with any words that he could put together to get us to understand that.
And there was this long pause.
Yep.
And he said, you know Art, it's a funny thing.
I don't remember much of it.
It stopped me cold.
So that much I can verify.
Stanton, had you heard that?
I hadn't heard that.
As a matter of fact, Edgar wrote the foreword to my book, Flying Saucers in Science.
And certainly I don't consider him a liar.
Now, you're not calling him a liar.
No.
I'm not calling anybody a liar.
Nor am I calling him a liar.
Yes, I know he's spoken about many things like that, Stanton, but in terms of his memory of walking on the moon, Uh-uh.
He doesn't.
And another point I would put forth is on YouTube is the press conference for the Apollo 11 astronauts.
Yes.
I think everybody should watch that.
The body language of these three guys is not, you know, high five and we did it dudes, let's celebrate this very sober, sombering press conference.
There's no joy in any of their eyes.
Neil Armstrong will not even look up, he just looks down at the desk the whole time.
It's very disconcerting.
Stanton, any comment on all this?
I think it's certainly unusual.
Hang on folks, I'll try to get Art back.
What I'm suggesting is that the Russians were certainly watching that footage and looking for any signs that this was fraudulent.
Don't you think?
I do, but again, front screen projection is a very esoteric art.
Maybe five people in the 1960s even knew how to do it.
They were all working on 2001 A Space Odyssey.
In other words, Kubrick had all of the front screen projection experts in the world working with him.
Let's point out some other things.
Well, 2001 A Space Odyssey begins production in 1964 and ends in 1968.
Apollo begins in 1964, culminates in the landing in 1969.
Fred Ordway is running the Apollo program, but somehow can find time to fly to London and be Stanley Kubrick's top scientific advisor on 2001 A Space Odyssey.
At the end of 2001 A Space Odyssey, in its original projection, which has now been removed, We're credit after credit thanking McDonnell Douglas and all of these high tech aircraft companies.
I have the whole credits and I saved them and I have them and they've been since removed and you look at the internecine thing going on between the film 2001 Space Odyssey and NASA and it becomes fantastic.
I mean never in the history of filmmaking has Has anybody cooperated like this?
And I'll end it with this.
The head of MGM is quoted as saying, I kid you not, in 1968, at the beginning of 1968, he is quoted saying, I have no idea what the budget for 2001 A Space Odyssey is, and I don't care.
Does that sound like the head of a studio would say that?
I don't know the heads of any studios.
We're not giving enough substance to whether or not You know, the film on the moon was actually real.
I mean, if the whole thing was faked, that would be a scandal of scandals.
It would, I don't know what I'm going to say, it just would be, it would blow everything else away if it suddenly came out that all that was faked.
Now, I've got a question for you, Jay.
Remember, we did leave stuff, there is stuff on the moon that was left by astronauts.
Are you sure?
The President of Denmark was given a moon rock and now he's told that it wasn't even real.
I mean the president of Denmark, he was given a moon rock and now he's told that it wasn't
even real.
I mean over and over this is happening.
How do we know they're really moon rocks?
How do you think we went?
I think they went to the moon, so that is really not indicative of what we're talking
about.
So Jay, you think we went to the moon.
How do you think we went?
I think we have very high advanced, and we have had for a while, very advanced ships
that can get there rather quickly.
And NASA just, I've talked to...
What are they using for propulsion?
Yeah, what are they using?
It's electromagnetic.
That's what I was told almost 20 years ago.
What a jump!
Yeah, and furthermore, NASA... I used to work with Richard Hoagland a lot back in the early 90s, and because he alienated everybody at NASA, I could actually get people to talk to me.
I could actually get people to talk to me that were higher ups, and they told me that they had electromagnetic drives back in 94.
I was told that.
Okay, Stanton, Stanton, you're a nuclear physicist.
If something like this was going on, wouldn't you have channels to know it to?
Well, you know, it's kind of funny.
In my congressional testimony at the hearings about UFOs in 1968, a written testimony, six testimonies, I hear on the radio that the program was canceled.
So, you know, you walk in, they say, you realize we just laid off 5,000 people.
That's not a good way to start a new job.
No.
And one of the things I did in the three months that they were kind enough to keep me there, uh... was a survey on government documents of
collection of information of bibliography if you will using one key
word magneto aerodynamics and much to my amazement i got nine hundred references and
about ninety percent of them were classified
does that collection of information of bibliography if you
No, it doesn't.
one keyword magneto aerodynamics and much to my amazement i got nine hundred references and
about ninety percent of them were classified
does that stretch does that propulsion get us from here to the moon
no it doesn't uh... that that's that's what i was because it creates an
ionized air plasma meteors do it all the time right now
and so uh... there was even a study showing if you went to mars when you
came back if he used magneto aerodynamic control instead of uh... retro rockets
uh... you'd save weight uh... of course we haven't gone to mars well maybe somebody
says we have well i guess some people are saying we have
let's not take on mars yet uh... but jay is saying uh... we may have gone to the moon
but we did it with electromagnetic
uh...
and and i would have no technology
there's a difference between an artist concept and a real photograph and i can't say
In some ways, I guess that's what we're talking about, although I hadn't thought of it that way.
All kinds of proposals have been made for big money, and that's what they're looking at is artist's concept, which is not the same as a photograph.
And I feel that way about a lot of the so-called Nazi technology.
They were looking at it, they were thinking about it, that doesn't mean they built it or were able to.
There's a little thing called money in between in time.
Maybe I should mention here that when I worked a long time ago at General Electric Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion Department in Cincinnati, in 1958, We spent $100 million dollars, and that was a budget that year, and that was a lot of money in 1958.
We employed 3,500 people, of whom 1,100 were engineers and scientists.
Now, we're not talking six professors and 20 grad students, so there are a lot of, I'll call them huge, programs that have gone on.
The stealth aircraft, we spent $10 billion over 10 years in secret, mind you.
The ANP program, the data was secret, but the existence of the program wasn't.
So, there have been some huge programs out there, and as I say, there's a difference between what you're talking about, and I can show you beautiful pictures of an aircraft propulsion system, but it's not real!
What's your reaction then to Ben Rich's statement after 70 years ahead of conventional technologies?
Why would he lie like that?
All right, guys.
Hold tight.
Hold tight.
We'll get to that.
We'll be right back.
This is Midnight.
And for the loser, who is he? I surrender.
Oh yeah!
And I have met my destiny in quite a similar way.
The mystery book on the shelf.
This all was repeating itself.
What is true?
I was defeated, you are the one.
What is real?
I'm not looking for anyone.
I could love you forever more...
I'm not looking for anyone.
The End.
Now, amidst the cross, the window hides the light, But nothing hides the color of the lights that shine.
Electricity, so refined, blows the dry around.
in the desert spans the world.
To call us from outside the U.S.
and Canada only, use Skype with a headset mic, if on a computer, and call MITD55.
That's MITD55.
Alright, uh, we had a little audio glitch.
Uh, sorry about that, everybody.
I think everybody heard it.
Uh, but it, uh, quickly got back, so... Anyway, we're rockin' and rollin', and once again, back to Jay Widener and Stanton Friedman.
Stanton, I believe, Whatever you want to say, go right ahead.
The point was made that Ben Rich said something, and I've heard different versions of what he supposedly said, how many years ahead we are, and also that he said we could send E.T.
home.
And again, I would make the distinction between what I think we can do if we continue on this path, and what we are able to do tomorrow.
And having worked for major corporations, I know that we like to talk about, you know, just give us the dough and away we will go, if you'll pardon terrible poetry.
And I think we don't pay enough attention to that distinction.
Did Ben mean that if we decided to open the money faucet that we could do this, that, or the other thing?
Or did he mean that if you want a ticket, you can buy one tomorrow?
All kinds of projects that start and don't finish.
You know, a Cold War mentality was part of this.
Oh yes.
And then, actually, if you don't mind, Stan, that brings up another question.
If we faked all the footage from the moon, Jay, I'd be very interested to know, the Soviets, now the Russians, really have some pretty good technology that rivals a lot of what we do.
They would know it.
Why wouldn't they blow that wide open?
Well, they did, actually.
Pravda was constantly saying that the moon landings were fake.
Just nobody here was picking it up.
I have the issues.
Also, what people don't realize is that the Russians actually landed on the moon first, not us.
Luna 4, I think it was.
And it left behind reflectors for lasers and a bunch of equipment.
And it wasn't manned, but it was there first, proving, of course, that you can go and land stuff without ever putting a human on the moon and get stuff and have it be, have it work.
So, but, but, you know, the Russians were, you know, in some ways kind of, I don't know, they were impressed by what we were doing, but they didn't quite know how we were faking it.
In fact, it was secretly completely hidden until... No, no, no, wait.
Do you mean they were impressed with our film capability, or they were impressed that we landed on the moon?
They were impressed.
They thought it was faked, but they were impressed, and they weren't sure how we did it.
None of the articles ever say how they faked it.
They just say, oh, look at the shadows.
They're uneven.
They point out all these other things.
But nobody knew about the front screen projection until I uncovered it, only because I'm an expert in front screen projection.
And that's when I found the tool that was used to create the fakery.
And the lines are undoubtedly, there's no doubt, are unmistakable.
There's a line where the granularity of the ground actually changes along a straight line.
And that is the telltale signal of front screen projection.
This is a little unfair to Stanton, because he's not a film expert.
If it gets right down to the technical aspects of the film, then we should have somebody on who could dispute that, if you're wrong.
But certainly I can't, and I don't think Stanton can.
Even the idea that you can take 70mm ektachrome film through the Van Allen belts and be on the moon, when you can't even take it through an airport detector without it getting fogged, the whole idea is just kind of absurd.
Stan, is that really true?
I mean, could you carry film?
Well, no, because radiation shielding was what I worked on for a number of years.
The role of the Van Allen belts here gets to be a sticky one.
You know, it depends on how long you're in and what you're inside of and all the rest of that.
It's complicated.
It's like some people, not tonight, but some people have made it sound to me as if they thought, gee, if you get exposed to radiation, you're going to die.
You're going to get cancer right away and all this kind of stuff.
And people have a deathly fear of radiation.
You can see that, incidentally.
On the recent flyby past Pluto, I watched a lot of coverage, read a lot, didn't see anybody talking about the fact that the energy source was a radioisotope thermoelectric generator, a little small nuclear device using plutonium, no less.
And it'll run for another 20 years, it's already run for 10 years.
And that's a remarkable accomplishment, think about that.
And I heard nobody saying, hey, the energy for this whole Pluto business is coming from a radioisotope thermoelectric generator, and we've used dozens of them in our deep space mission.
For people who are wondering, why can't you use solar energy?
Well, because the further away you get from the sun, the lower the energy intensity is.
And, you know, Pluto's a heck of a lot farther than the Earth is from the sun.
I totally agree with you, Stan, that people overestimate the effects of radiation.
I totally think you're right on that.
Their fear drives them.
Going through the bell is going to kill you.
I don't mean that.
What I'm saying is that sitting on the surface of the moon with your camera, with film rolled
into your camera, and it's 250 degrees in the sun above zero and 250 degrees below zero
in the shade, how in the heck is that film going to maintain its stability?
You can't put film into an oven at 200 degrees and it's just going to melt.
And the whole idea is just, I don't know, as a photographer... Wait a minute, I thought you said they sent back television signals.
Television may be the wrong word in this case, but... No, that's not television.
Okay, so they were sent back, radio waves were sent back, and what happened with the film?
Supposedly, I don't know.
Oh, the film, there's two different things we're talking about.
One is the Ektachrome film that's in the still cameras that they have on their press plate.
And then the video is sent back via, it's a video camera that sends the signal back to Houston, or actually to Australia.
So they're two different mediums, is what I'm saying.
Okay, but the motion picture footage that you're talking about is basically the TV stuff, right?
The Kubrick stuff, if you will.
Yeah, the very low quality video stuff, yeah.
Yeah, so we agree it was low quality.
I mean, after all, it was in the 60s and early 70s.
And could we do better now, for example?
Oh, yeah, that's right.
That's the thing is, that's why it's so irritating that they erased the original tapes,
because what we're looking at is secondary...
I agree with that!
And if I could get my hands on the first generation, then I can maybe prove that they did go even, but I don't have that proof now.
In my mind, I cannot picture anybody, you know, who's got their hands on the moon landing film going, you know, We don't need this anymore.
We need the tape.
Yeah.
Toss this one and toss this one.
We need to clean this place out and toss that one.
Mankind's greatest achievement, and they throw it away?
Yep.
I agree that that is suspicious, and, you know, there's no way around that.
Or stupid.
I mean, maybe they go together.
Or maybe you agree a little bit that it is suspicious?
If they've got me, I agree that it's suspicious.
If I had that access to the first-generation videotape, I would be able to, without any doubt, be able to tell you whether it was fake or real.
Okay, well now maybe you're talking about motivation for throwing it away.
Exactly.
I really hate jumping over on your side, Jay, but I mean, why else?
It's such a stupid thing to do.
There's got to be a motivation.
Well, it is.
And I had a friend, he was a rocket scientist named Bill Wood.
I think he's still alive.
I don't know if you're out there, Bill.
Hey, long time no see.
And he told me that he was at a conference of rocket engineers and they were putting forth this rocket that was going to soft land here on Earth.
And they said, hey, this is the first time that we've ever done a soft landing.
And Bill Woods, you know, raises, Dr. Wood raises his hand and says, that's not true.
We've done six soft landings already.
What are you talking about?
And they, you know, they didn't even consider that the Apollo landings were, you know, credible, even, in this group.
I don't know what to say about that.
And certainly, I will try, I mean, I've met several astronauts, and I do have difficulty with saying that basically, remember, because part of your story now is that they had to be going through No, no.
Because of the gold visor conveniently being used, we don't know who those people are in those suits.
I mean, we don't know who they are.
You can't see them.
You can't see their faces.
We don't know who they are.
And again, why are they using the gold visor?
What's the point of that?
Except maybe to hide their faces, you know?
Well, gold is a good reflecting material and all that sort of stuff.
Could be true.
Stanton, it sounds like he's beginning to talk you into it.
Well, you know, there's an old, not enough data.
I have a big gray basket, a very large gray basket.
Everybody wants, I get a lot of calls, they want a yes or a no on everything.
Right.
And not a maybe.
And I often have to say, look, I don't know enough to be able to come down on one side or the other.
It's up in the air.
I remember your gray basket.
Indeed.
So you're almost ready to put this into that basket?
Well, yes, because I have a lot of questions.
I don't know how to get answers to many of them.
And as Jay just said, it would be a difference if we had the original footage.
And, you know, if you talk about bonehead plays, certainly, you know, having that footage gone seems to be one of the worst that I'm aware of.
Well, then there was the... We don't know about that.
Then, remember, there was the destruction of all the Roswell records, too, right?
Yeah, somehow they got destroyed.
Hold on, hold on, you two.
So we're having a general discussion about what happens and didn't happen.
It's not active prone, but we've got a little coach prone for you.
This is Midnight in the Dead.
When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school.
It's a wonder I can't think at all.
And my lack of education hasn't hurt enough.
I can read the writings on the wall.
I'm on the wall, for the throne.
uh... stanton friedman here.
I keep wanting to call him Doctor, sorry about that.
So, let's see where we agree and where we disagree.
We seem to be... There's a point I'd like to make... Fire away!
...to go back to Ben Rich and nuclear.
When you talk about how far advanced technology is, I find that Many people, a typical example is that we have nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.
These exist now.
They're operating out on the high seas there that can operate for 18 years without refueling.
And people look at me like, what are you talking about?
I say they're nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and they operate without refueling.
This makes an enormous difference on your Tactics on the ocean if you don't need to worry about how much fuel you're using.
That's an enormous impact.
So, that's part of what I meant about maybe it's technology that we are thinking about versus what we already have.
In this case, many people are shocked.
It's like people don't even appreciate the fact that nuclear-powered submarines You know, we heard an awful lot about German U-boats during the war, what a threat they were to the convoys in the oceans and so forth and so on.
But they could stay underwater for maybe a day, because you need air for the diesel engines.
Taking care of the people is easy, air for the engines is not.
Now we have submarines that can go around the world underwater!
And when they go past a beautiful island, they take periscope leave.
You know, which is a clever remark, but it's true.
That's an enormous advance, you know, over the past.
And a lot of people simply aren't aware of it.
Yeah, what we're talking about here, Jay said we have jumped, even back then, we have jumped ahead to some sort of, you know, electromagnetic drive, some sort of something that would get us from here to the moon, and we had it back then.
Well, I saw the recent article and it really wasn't saying we have it.
This is a study being done about a possible means of doing that.
I understand, Stan, but he's talking about having had that back when we did the moon landings that he says were fake photographs.
Yeah, and I don't think we did, to tell you the truth.
And again, there's such a A fine line, if there is any, between truth and half-truth and no-truth when it comes to technology.
I mean, I've seen all kinds of claims.
You know, I'm a flying saucer guy, and I hear all kinds of stories, which turn out to be baloney.
So, Stanton, let me ask you a question.
You don't believe that we back-engineered anything from Roswell or anything like that, right?
No, I didn't say that.
Again, let me give you an example of something I think we did learn from Roswell.
I'm the original civilian investigator of the Roswell incident, and my view about what you would do when you got all the pieces of wreckage, you'd send them out to your best classified labs, and you'd say, what is this stuff?
This fine, foil-like material, very strong, very lightweight, etc.
The guy comes back and said, it's a combination of samarium and cobalt.
Why would you put those two things together?
Not your problem.
You send it out to somebody else.
What are the electromagnetic, thermal, nuclear properties of this stuff?
And the guy comes.
You don't tell him where you got it.
He doesn't have a need to know for that.
Maybe he thinks it came from a spy.
I see.
And he comes back and says, the highest magnetic moment I've ever measured, what a wonderful permanent magnet material this would be.
And pretty soon you're building ghetto blasters with samarium-cobalt magnets in the speakers.
That's real, incidentally.
And I, for a while, several years, did a weekly science commentary for CBC Radio here in Fredericton.
And I read a lot, it was fun.
And I did one on new and better permanent magnet materials, neodymium, boron, and iron.
I'm not making these up, they're real.
At the end of the article it said the original work on samarium cobalt was done in Wright Air Development Center, Frank Patterson Air Force Base, and I just laughed my head off.
In other words, I think that the basic idea came from somebody saying, hey, what is this stuff?
A second in my book, There's a picture of me with my hand on the Apollo 12 command module.
I spoke to the NASA people there in Southern California, and they took me on a tour and took my picture with the command module and stuff.
Strangely enough, they didn't want the North American Rockwell people to come to the presentation, only the NASA people.
Don't ask me to explain that because I don't have an explanation for it, but the point was that uh... they were very interested on the one hand
and on the other hand who knew what the real stuff going on was
uh... and i didn't well alright again we're we're we're closer to that but
we're agreeing to be more agreement than disagreement Do you both believe it is possible, this is a straight out question, that from the crash at Roswell, we built something that could take us to the moon and back real quick?
No, I don't believe that.
No?
I believe that in combination with what else we had, yes.
Not that alone, though.
But in combination with the other technologies that we had discovered, Don't forget, Hitler was not just financing these guys to
create exotic technologies, he was also sending expeditions into Tibet, into northern
Africa, into Peru, looking for ancient advanced technologies.
He admitted it, and these expeditions were run by the SS, the occult division of the
SS.
So he was making a major plan to try to recover as much of the past as possible and apply
it.
And when you take that and then you add the Roswell stuff, 1947, hey, by 1955 you could
be really far advanced, especially with the backing of the United States, which was the
richest country on earth.
One of the problems here is that if you gave the smartest people on the planet a cheap,
digital wristwatch, say a $25 wristwatch, back in the 30s, He would know it was a watch, and he'd know there's a battery there, but he had no way to examine the chip, and certainly no way to duplicate it.
And so, you know, it's like Christopher Columbus, I need a nuclear-powered submarine, and I've got unlimited money, can you build one for me?
And the answer would have been no.
There's too big a gap between where we are and where we would have to be, and that's the point I was trying to make earlier about the difference between Having good ideas, and being in a position to build, create, duplicate, whatever you want to call it, that technology, ideas aren't enough.
Okay, so you're saying we weren't, we were not in that position, so we could not have had such craft.
So then, that's what I'm saying.
and also if we had such craft why wouldn't we be using it instead of some of our airplanes
that are currently, you know, how expensive they are.
What I'm trying to say is I don't think that if we had advanced technology that would be
useful in the building of, call them bombers, as a generic class of craft able to put destruction
all over the place.
I don't think that we would not do it.
You know, what bothers me is that the military budget on this planet this year is approximately a trillion dollars.
That's an awful lot of dough.
That tells you something about the people on this planet.
And I think if we had the kind of technology that would enable you to build a bunch of fancy vehicles, aircraft in particular, I think we would.
And so, you know, there's a disconnect, in other words, between the idea of, well, we've got all this technology, but we're not using it, or we're hiding it.
I don't understand, because the military for sure has advanced technologies, aircraft and things, and the two maxims of the military to win a battle is, take the high ground and keep everything secret.
And so perfecting this kind of technology would thoroughly satisfy those two things that you need to have to win a war.
Why would you keep building the old stuff?
Because you want your enemies to all think that that's what you've got, so that when the time comes and you can strike, and you can strike quickly, a surprise in the high ground are the two most valued things in military operations.
And this kind of weaponry gives you both of those advantages, but you have to keep it a secret.
Otherwise, you lose your advantage.
And maybe it's mythological, too.
Maybe you want the other guy to think you've got this technology even though you don't
Remember Star Wars except that I've actually seen some of this technology with my own eyes
I was out near Vandenberg Air Force Base ten years ago and I saw, you know, a craft flying right over Vandenberg Air Force Base.
There was nobody scrambling their jets.
There was nobody going up to look at the craft.
They had to have seen it.
It was right over the base.
I'm sure it was military.
Well, now you're off into different territory.
You're off into ufology, and I think we're all with you here.
That could have been.
Why they didn't scramble something, I don't know.
Well, the only thing is that it's in the military's advantage to keep these things a secret.
I think we can all agree on that.
How advanced they are, I don't know.
Well, I've had a criminal record for 14 years, and there are some limits on what secrets you can keep, even though there are plenty of secrets that have been kept.
One of them is to cover up the mistakes you make.
Well, isn't that true?
You don't want people to know because, whoops, look how he did.
Sorry about that, folks.
I certainly am saying that Corso is not correct.
I've written about Corso.
is your saying that philip course so is it is not correct and
and we didn't have a really i'm saying that course so is not correct i've i've
written about course so uh...
i've got an article well i sent to people uh...
fraud in euphology and i focus on uh... court well let me get give you let me
be specific i I don't want to just cast dispersion.
All right, gentlemen, before you get specific, we're out of break, so I don't want to start this and not be able to finish it.
when we come back uh... the subject is going to be philip course of
so stay right there and i'll see you next time.
you and
and and
and and
and Millions of locusts have descended on farmlands in southern Russia, devouring entire fields of crops and causing officials to declare a state of emergency in the region.
A vast area of at least 800 hectares is currently being affected as the swarms of insects, each measuring about 8 centimeters long, annihilate fields of corn and other crops.
It's been more than 30 years since this part of southern Russia suffered such a dense plague of locusts.
Officials say at least 10% of crops have already been destroyed, and the locust-feeding frenzy is far from over, threatening to devastate the livelihoods of local farmers.
On state television, Russian news broadcasts are linking the plague to climate change, connecting the phenomenon to recent flooding and higher-than-average temperatures.
Officials from the Russian Ministry of Agriculture have declared a state of emergency, but appear helpless to prevent the destruction.
Post-NASA Chief Scientist Ellen Stofan openly admitted that alien life is imminent and just last Tuesday Dr. John Grunsfeld of NASA's Science Mission Directorate announced the agency was on the verge of discovering life on planets other than Earth.
Some say that Stofan and Grunsfeld hide the fact that NASA has been lying to the public about known extraterrestrial life for decades now and that ETs have likely been visiting Earth for centuries.
Grunsfeld told a House committee Are we alone?
Many, many people on the planet want to know.
We're on the cusp of being able to answer that question.
And Stefan's recent comments were even more bold, saying, I think we're going to have strong indications of life beyond Earth within a decade.
We're on the verge of things that people have wondered about for millennia.
Within all of our lifetimes, we're going to understand that there is life on other bodies in the solar system.
We're going to understand the implications of that for life here on Earth.
Her declaration is synchronized with the agency's recent discovery of water of five of Jupiter's and Saturn's moons.
We were also told by NASA recently that their Kepler mission found another Earth in the habitable zone in our universe circulating around a star that resembles our Sun.
NASA defines habitable based on the ability of a planet to pool water ostensibly to support life as we know it.
Dark Matter News!
A massive sinkhole has swallowed up an intersection in Brooklyn, New York, stalling up traffic and causing waters and gas outages to nearby buildings.
Local residents are already joking about turning it into a rent-controlled apartment.
Dramatic images show the gaping hole in the corner of 64th Street and 5th Avenue, located just a short block away from the I-278.
The crater appeared shortly after seven on Tuesday morning.
There were no injuries.
Witnesses say there were cars on it just moments before, and rooftop surveillance cameras captured the cave-in.
The fabled Bishopville, South Carolina swamp creature, known as Lizardman, appears to have surfaced again Sunday afternoon.
Sarah, a Sumter woman who says she went to church with a friend Sunday morning, stepped out of the sanctuary to see the Lizardman running along the tree line.
So she did what anyone else would do.
She took a picture with her phone.
She says they were just a mile or so from Scape or Swamp, the site of a similar spotting of what may also be the Lizardman in May.
A man who asked not to be identified submitted a short video of what he thought was the Lizardman Monday morning.
He said he took the video in May while coon hunting but kept its existence quiet until he saw the reports of Lizardman outside a church.
Skapor Swamp is the area where most of the Lizardman sightings over the last 30 years have been focused.
Yes, there's quite a lot of local lore surrounding the reptilian humanoid, including the first sighting in the summer of 1988.
There have been searches by Destination Truth and Mysteries at the museum as recently as 2013.
In a 2014 episode of Ancient Aliens, the Lizardman was mentioned.
The tales have been documented in a cryptology book titled Lizardman, the story of the Bishopville Monster.
But the creature has not been seen in more than a decade.
Until now, possibly creating yet another ripple in the swampy waters around Bishopville.
I'm Leo Ashcraft for Dark Matter News.
I'm going to be talking about the effects of dark matter on the human body.
From the Kingdom of Nigh, this is Midnight in the Desert with Art.
Please call the show at 1-952-225-5278.
That's 1-952-CALL-ART.
Well, it is digital.
Stan Friedman, nuclear physicist, is here.
Jay Widener, film expert.
And the subject would appear to be Philip Corso, and I'm good with that.
I interviewed Philip Corso, actually in a series of interviews, and boiled down his contention was, we took the information from the crash at Roswell and parceled it out to American industrial giants To build many of the things that we now enjoy.
Do both of you agree with that premise?
I do.
That's what he claimed, yes.
Okay, so that's not agreement.
You think that's exactly what he did.
You believed Philip Corso Jay, correct?
Yeah, I listened to your interviews all those years ago.
Okay, alright.
Well, Philip was pretty convincing.
Stanton, what do you have to say about him?
Well, I did meet him more than once, but I checked on him.
And let me tell you some of the things I found.
For one thing, he claimed in the book the day after Roswell that he had been a member of the National Security Council under Eisenhower.
That's pretty high as far as advising to the President.
You know, you don't get any higher than the NSC.
Well, I checked with the Eisenhower Library.
I've been there many times.
And they know me, so I told them what he had claimed, and they checked, and I got a letter back saying that he not only was never a member of the NSC, but he never attended a meeting.
They keep track of that sort of stuff.
And I sent a copy of the letter to the lawyer, Peter Gersten, for whom Philip had signed a sworn statement about his background.
And the lawyer showed it to Phil.
Don't you think we should take that out?
That claim?
No.
He didn't think so.
A second example was that one of the things, remember that he wasn't saying that this was going on right after Roswell.
Roswell happened in 47, early July.
All right.
He was saying that this happened after he started to work for General Trudeau, the Army Foreign Technology Division at the Pentagon.
This is after 1960.
So first of all, you have to think that, gee, what they left that wreckage lying around.
He said he got a filing cabinet of A couple of things that he took credit for.
There are no references in the book, which I find very frustrating of course.
One, the guy got a Nobel Prize for work done years before Corso came along.
That was clearly a lie, to put it bluntly.
There were other things.
We know the sequence of how those new technologies came into being, lasers and other things.
And Corso wasn't part of it.
Remember, he was not an engineer or a scientist.
And remember that Strom Thurmond, who served, I still think he has the record for serving more years in the Senate than anybody, or close to it, if he's not still the record holder.
He withdrew the forward that was used in the book, because he thought it was for a different book, about intelligence agency work kind of stuff.
And when his people found out what the book was about, he withdrew it.
So, also, he claimed that he, in July 6th, on July 6th, in Fort Riley, Kansas, His bowling buddy let him look into this crate, which there was a blue liquid in which there was an alien body.
Now, I've heard some egregious violations of security, but that outdoes them all.
There is no way that's going to happen.
It's like saying you're driving around with nuclear weapons in the truck and you park outside a McDonald's and leave the truck open.
Okay, but you cannot prove that did not happen.
The other stuff Well, hang on, the dates are wrong.
The dates are wrong.
We know the date when Rancher Brazel came into Roswell, and that was the 6th.
And we also know that if there's one thing the 509th had at Roswell, the 509th bomb group, the guys who dropped the atomic bombs, you know, if there's one thing they had was airplanes, why would they put stuff on a truck?
I mean, they put nuclear weapons on airplanes.
They certainly crested them enough to be confident.
Right.
I'm just trying to make a distinction between what you have proven are lies and what you speculate just couldn't be.
But if you can prove one lie or two lies, then you can call it all into question.
That I agree with.
I know when I was transferred there, it turns out that was in March or April.
there and they hosted someplace else, just like now.
And I asked how he knew the date of July 6th.
I asked, did you have a diary or a notebook?
I was hoping he had something like that, because that would be great.
Well, I know when I was transferred there, it turns out that was in March or April.
The date makes no sense, and like I said, I worked under security for 14 years, and
the idea of a bowling buddy in the military letting you look in a crate that has an alien
body in it, that is sitting around unguarded, just doesn't make any sense to me.
At all.
But in terms of flat-out lies, his work with the government that you documented, that one does seem to be simply untrue.
Jay, any comments?
Well, no, actually it doesn't surprise me that he's caught fibbing a couple times.
I read the book and I wondered sometimes when I was reading it whether it was all the truth or not.
But I just want to get one thing clear here.
You're saying that there's not really been much back engineering of anything.
That all those statements are wrong.
No, no, no.
He was saying Philip Corso didn't tell the truth.
Now look, if somebody lies, I'm sorry, but if I was an attorney and I was in court, I would have the whole damn thing thrown out successfully if I proved he lied.
Yep.
Well, there's another part of this too.
I started to say before about when I spoke to the NASA people, what I wanted to get at and didn't, my problem, Uh, was that the shape of the command module, and like, it came home to me when I got my hand on it.
It's a round, blunt body.
I always thought, most people thought, that a high-speed aircraft has to have a plane, no sharp wings, highly streamlined.
You know, like the X-15 or something like that.
And we wind up with a round, blunt body coming back at 25,000 miles an hour.
And then, of course, I checked and found that we did do wind tunnel tests in 1947 of round blunt bodies.
So I think some smart person said, hey, if these guys are able to go this fast with something that looks like that, maybe we ought to look into it.
So I think, and there may be other subtle things, maybe not so subtle, that have been done in the course of the Cold War that we learned from And remember, as it happens, I'm giving a paper Saturday in Liverpool, Nova Scotia, in which I talk about crash saucers from Roswell to Shag Harbor, which is also in Nova Scotia.
I talk about five different events, and who knows how many more there were.
They got better at covering things up.
So I'm not saying we haven't been stimulated to look at new directions, that we haven't directly learned specific things that could be of interest.
I certainly hope we did.
If you got that much wreckage, there ought to be people.
I mean, I think that was one of the functions of Operation Majestic 12, is to coordinate the efforts.
How do we find out useful stuff here?
You know, you don't parcel that out to 20 different places.
So, and I've got a book, Top Secret Magic, that goes into that.
And, you know, I don't know if we, certainly you and I never talked about this, I don't think, about General Carol Bolander?
No.
It's an incredible tale.
He was an Air Force General, an engineer on the Lunar Excursion Module.
Jay, bear with me, I've said Lunar Excursion Module.
He was asked in 1969, after the Condon Committee people had recommended in early 69, that Project Blue Book be closed.
He was asked, had no previous connection with Blue Book, Air Force Project Blue Book, what should we do about Project Blue Book?
And he wrote a memo, which we didn't see until ten years later, and I think then it was inadvertently released on the surface.
It didn't look spectacular until you looked at what it said inside.
In the memo, he said, and his memo resulted in the closure of Project Blue Book at the end of the year, he said, reports of UFOs which could affect national security are made in accordance with JNAP, Joint Army Navy Air Force Publication 146, or Air Force Manual 55-11, and are not part of the Blue Book system.
That's an extraordinary statement.
It is.
It is.
And two paragraphs later, he says, if we close Project Blue Book, the public won't have a place to report UFO sightings.
However, as previously noted, reports which could affect national security will continue to be investigated using the procedures established for that purpose.
And yet the Air Force, for umpteen years, has been saying, Blue Book was it, that's it, no national security.
I decided I'd call, I'd try to talk to him.
So I located him.
It's easier to find generals with unusual names than John Smith, for example.
And I talked to General Bollender, retired by this time, and I said, it sounds to me like you're saying that there are two separate communication channels here.
One for reports that could affect national security, and I just heard one, I told them, about a saucer going down the runway at a strategic air command base where nuclear weapons are stored.
By definition, that's a problem for national security.
And the other problem, if my wife and I are walking down the street and see a saucer go by, big deal, happens all the time.
He agreed with me.
Two separate communication channels.
And so, that's extraordinary, and most people are totally unaware of Bollender's statement.
Alright, you brought up the... The New York Times.
Yeah.
You brought up the LEM, right?
Lunar Excursion Module.
Yes, yes, yes.
A main argument of those who believe we never went to the moon is made that the astronauts in their suits could not fit into the limb.
Have either one of you heard that?
Oh yeah.
Oh yeah?
As in you believe that, Jay?
Well, I mean, I've looked at the limits at the Smithsonian, and what the conspiracy theorists on that front are saying is that with the backpack and the suit and everything, they can't get through the small opening.
And I don't know if that's true or not.
I'm trying to imagine two astronauts putting on those suits inside the LEM,
because they have to be on before they open the hat.
I bent inside and looked inside that.
I can't imagine two six-foot men with backpacks in that room.
It's so small, I can't even hardly imagine one guy, let alone two.
Yet they're telling us that they had two.
There's another thing about the Apollo missions which needs to be brought up, besides the
improving production values and all that.
That is the fact that...
Stan, you're going to appreciate this one, I know.
I'm a former computer programmer.
Besides being a filmmaker, I've always wanted to learn how to program computers.
I learned COBOL and assembly and all this.
I've heard that word in a long time.
I know one thing about technical things.
They never go right the first time.
I don't care what anyone says.
They never go right the first time.
The only incident that I can ever think of where everything sailed perfectly the first time is Apollo 11.
We have over 500,000 technical things that had to be done between launch and the set down in the ocean, and all of them functioned perfectly.
They all functioned perfectly on Apollo 12.
They functioned perfectly on 14, 15, 16, and 17.
No glitches, nothing.
The only glitch in the entire thing was Apollo 13.
And I just don't buy it.
I just don't buy it.
I work with technology all day long.
I know it is prone to every kind of glitch possible.
So you're saying what?
Just too amazing?
Too amazing?
Wait a minute.
Too amazing.
Too amazing.
The first atomic bomb worked.
That was very complicated, too.
Never been done before.
Not as complicated as getting, launching into Earth orbit, going from the Earth to the Moon, then going down from, and never tested, taking a soft landing.
The only soft landing test that was ever tried was by Neil Armstrong in New Mexico, and he almost killed himself.
And yet, the next time they do the soft landing on a planet they've never been to, it goes absolutely perfect.
It's unbelievable.
I'm sorry.
I just don't buy it.
Not at all.
Well, as I say, the atom bomb worked.
Admittedly, to some people's surprise.
Well, you know, he is making a fair point.
There's a lot more moving parts and things that had to go right once they figured out the atomic bomb.
It was probably physically simple compared to going to the moon, setting down, walking around, getting back in and coming home.
Yeah, yeah.
The number of technical issues that face you trying to just get to the moon and not miss by 500 miles, it's astounding what you have to go through.
And they did it.
They did it perfectly.
Absolutely perfectly.
No glitches at all.
I can't buy it.
Remember there was a fire that killed three astronauts too.
In 1964, yeah, in 1964 there was a fire and five years later they got to the moon.
But even the fire itself is like, you talk about stupid.
They've got open electrical circuits inside a pure oxygen environment and no one can figure out that this may not be a good idea?
I mean, that fire that killed those three astronauts is absolutely one of the most stupid things I've ever seen in my life.
I cannot believe it's as stupid as taping over the tapes.
And these are the guys that got us to the moon?
I don't know.
I don't see a whole lot of intelligence going on.
We don't live in a perfect world, that's for sure.
No, I think there are a number of remarkable things that we're talking about here.
And I'm convinced we did go to the moon.
And I've met several of the astronauts, and I'm convinced they weren't off on a soundstage someplace else.
Because remember, it isn't enough to say that what the public was shown was fraudulent, but the astronauts had to be involved in that.
You're saying we don't know who was in the suits?
No, we don't.
So they... Well, even that means that it was a lie as well.
I mean... It's bigger than that, Stanton.
It's deeper than that.
That's why I brought up the incidences with Edgar Mitchell and Buzz Aldrin.
There's some kind of psychological operation going on where these guys, there's no way in the world that I'm going to go to the moon and not remember it.
Period.
I don't care what you say.
I'm going to remember every second.
I'm going to relive those moments my entire life.
And neither Buzz Aldrin Or Edgar Mitchell can even say it.
They can't even talk about what happened to them on the moon.
They just can't say it.
Neil Armstrong never did an interview.
He stayed on his ranch in Ohio and never went out, never did anything.
It's over and over again you find these odd reactions by the astronauts.
And again, I don't think they're lying.
I think it's much more complicated than that.
I don't know.
Brainwashing, if you will.
Well, I was at a party with a bunch of NASA people, and this is in 94, in Cody, Wyoming, and if Richard Hogan's listening, he knows what I'm talking about.
Got to be a quick story here.
Yeah, and I met the psychiatrist that debriefed the astronauts, and I was so happy to meet her, and I said, so what was the debriefing like?
And she looked at me with this puzzled face, and she said, you know what?
I can't really remember what they were like.
That's a great line.
You know, there is a lot of this.
There is a lot of unusual behavior on the part of the astronauts.
And then there's this clown running around holding Bibles up in front of them.
I think he's been clocked by astronauts a few times.
Buzz Aldrin clocked him, yeah.
He knocked his clock down.
Buzz did, yes.
All right, you two.
Buzz has quite a temper, so you don't want to... Hold tight, you two.
We'll come back and we'll start to take questions from listeners, okay?
I need another yup.
Stanton, that all right?
Yes, thank you.
Okay, all right.
This is, uh, Midnight in the Desert. I'm Art Bell.
I'm a fan of the game.
That's 1952.
Call Art.
Well, okay.
There it is.
That's the public number.
Let me read it to you again.
We're going to open up the lines now.
We have two very distinguished people here.
Stan Friedman, a nuclear physicist, and Jay Widener.
Actually, anything you want to ask is fair game.
Obviously, we've been concentrating on the moonshots.
What an amazing story that is, huh?
If you want to call in by Skype, we are in North America, MITD 5-1.
Just put that in.
MITD 5-1, you can call us.
Outside the U.S., anywhere else in the world, you can call us at MITD 5-5.
MITD, that's Midnight in the Desert.
Gentlemen, we're back on again.
There is just one thing before we begin taking the calls that I want to ask about.
And this goes to you, Jay.
You think that NASA has found out something about our sun.
Now, that's something that I would think Stanton would be familiar with, since he deals with things nuclear.
It's nothing but a big nuclear fission reaction, I believe.
Fusion.
Fusion, I'm sorry.
So, what is it that we've found out?
Well, this is actually how I got started on my whole journey years ago.
I discovered a monument in the south of France, which I proceeded to decipher, which is actually in my first two books.
It appears to be a 400-year-old monument in which a secret society or some group of men has inscribed a series of symbols which no doubt, after you
see my interpretation say, that there was a gigantic CME, or coronal mass ejection, at
some point in the past which killed a lot of people. They're warning about it in the
future. In fact, I believe it's a group of Freemasons and that this may be one of the tenets
of Freemasonry is to keep this memory of this outburst from the sun alive and also
pass it down to the people When my first book came out in 1999, I was actually criticized by NASA for being a fear monger.
I actually got into some debates with NASA.
All of a sudden NASA changed their mind and they began warning that there was this chance that we could be thrown into the 6th century BC, you know, in the flash of an instant by a coronal mass ejection frying everything up, which I had not really talked about.
I was talking about the human part of it.
And so now NASA's in full tilt boogie about coronal mass ejections and protecting nuclear power plants because If they get fried, the radiation is going to go crazy,
which I'm gratified to hear and see but at the same time I think it's really a big concern
that we should have and we're not doing enough to protect ourselves from this.
It's going to happen.
It happened in 1859, and it's going to happen again.
And we're a wired society, and we're going to pay deeply when this happens.
I think we should take care of it.
All right.
Here's somebody I think might agree with you from Cleveland, Ohio.
Something about Freemasons.
Hello?
Yes.
Hi.
Hi.
I've heard various thoughts and conspiracy about Freemason being involved with the Buzz Aldrin thing and the flag being brought to the moon.
I wonder what your guests thought about that?
Well, I don't know of any connection between Buzz and Freemasons.
I've met Buzz, but I don't know whether there's a Freemason attribute or connection at all.
Do you, Jay?
Well, actually, yeah.
Again, this is Buzz's words, not mine.
Buzz has admitted that he performed a Freemasonic operation when he was on the moon.
Now, I don't believe he went to the moon, so I don't believe the story, but why would he be performing a Freemasonic operation if he wasn't already a Freemason?
Why is he saying this?
I'm just telling you, this is widely reported.
It's not some speculation or something.
Yeah, I'm a Freemason, and I'm so thankful for you guys' thoughts on that.
Thank you.
Right, thank you very much for the call, and let's go to Jason on Skype.
Hello.
Hello, Art.
So, I had a question about how the flags and the disturbance on the moon got there, if we never landed there, and the fact that several countries also tracked The Apollo missions via radar to the moon.
So if we never went, how would they be able to track that?
And India's probe, China's probe and Japan's probe all spotted the disturbance on the moon.
I never said we didn't go to the moon.
I said that we didn't, what we were shown is fake.
Right.
So it's a big difference.
All right.
Yeah.
All right.
I don't think we're going to get a big argument on that.
There should be an argument, though, about whether we went to the moon as you suggest we did, Jay, or whether we went to the moon as we were told we went to the moon.
I mean, were we lied to, Stanton?
Do you think we were lied to?
About all that?
I mean, about... The whole damn thing!
I don't think we had a different...
No, I guess the simplest answer is no.
I don't think we went there in a fancy electromagnetic propulsion system, or an unspoken-about system.
There are several different questions here.
I do think we went there.
I don't think the astronauts worked on a soundstage somewhere.
Well, okay, somebody impersonating astronauts, which makes it sound even worse, I guess.
It does.
You know, so there's a whole gray area here, if you'll pardon the expression.
Speaking of grey, Stanton, I'd like to point something out.
I'm glad you brought that up.
When the Chinese sent the jade rabbit to the moon a year ago or whatever, they took pictures of the moon's surface.
You agree that's probably true, right?
But the surface of the moon is brown in those pictures, not slate grey like it is in all the Apollo photographs.
And I haven't heard anybody explain why is there such a huge difference in the colour of the moon between the two operations.
Especially when you consider that the astronauts were shooting ektachrome, which is far superior to digital.
So, I don't know.
I'm glad to hear you say that last thing.
I get people telling me, we live in a digital world and everything's more advanced than it was before, and I say, hey, I used to use slides.
They got better resolution than my PowerPoint does.
Film is so much better than digital.
There's no way you can compare the two, ever.
All right, very quickly, outside the country, Lee L. Hello.
Hello?
Lee L. Hi, or whatever your name is.
You're on the air, or you're not.
Hello.
Yes, hello.
Can you hear me?
Yeah, I hear you.
So go ahead.
Hi.
Pleasure to speak to you.
Good to speak to you.
Where are you?
I'm actually in Coventry in the UK.
It's actually my 40th birthday today, so it's really good to get through to you guys.
Okay.
Okay, so how about if I play for the Devil's Advocate with what Richard C. Hoagland would probably say afterwards?
Sure.
Obviously, we've got two problems here.
We've got a lot of the pictures and video, they really look fake and it's really difficult to say that the whole moon landing could have been faked, you know, from the whole operation with NASA and such.
So, how about when they landed, there was some talk of a conversation that they saw things following them around and, you know, it was cut at that point.
That's exactly right.
where they could to Stanley Kubrick's pre-film just in case something happened.
Well that's exactly right.
They pre-filmed it in the mid-60s and they pre-filmed it to ensure that if anything went
wrong they had this film and then slowly, especially when I believe Nixon came in to
the picture, he's like, I've just become president.
I'm one year into my presidency.
I'm damn well not going to have this kind of disgrace happen in front of me if these guys die on camera and I have to get up and do their eulogy.
I'm not going to have that.
So you can't assure me that this is going to go 100%.
So we'll go with the film.
And if it goes 100%, then we're fine.
If it doesn't, then no one will ever know.
And, you know, this is the guy that did Watergate.
Come on.
We've got a double cosmic Watergate here.
All right.
Thank you, Collar.
I appreciate it.
All the way from Great Britain.
Well, you know, if you two are going to sit here and agree that all this possibly could have been faked, then who's to say that some of the other things that people like Richard Hoagland have said About things that are on the moon, he believes, might not be true.
Well, they are true.
There's stuff all over the moon.
And anybody who sits and examines the aerial photography of the moon, which is where Hoagland is right, when Hoagland is sticking with the lunar orbiter stuff, with the Apollo stuff from the air, wherever it was taken, with the stuff taken in orbit, that stuff is real.
And what he's finding is, you know, it's jaw-dropping.
There's domes, there's square-shaped buildings, there's looks like even highways
in some cases.
So I mean I don't know where it's from, I'm not gonna speculate,
you know I think he's right, it's ancient and it's been there for
maybe millions of years. Stanton, are you ready to agree with that?
Well I'm ready to say that the lunar orbiters, the reason ones, have shown footprints on the moon implying
that we had been there, somebody had been there.
Somebody was shooting.
And so forth.
Well, yeah.
I totally agree that people, we went to the moon, so I'm not going to argue that point.
Okay.
Yeah, but how we got there is a big difference between you two.
Yeah.
I'm impressed with the Apollo, with the Saturn V. It's a big old monster.
Yes, it sure is.
Do you know that they actually got rid of all the blueprints to the Saturn V and none exist at all to this day?
You know that?
No, I didn't know that.
I didn't know it.
The lunar orbiter, all of the videotape of the lunar orbiters Beautiful imagery of the moon.
All that tape is rotting in a McDonald's in Pasadena, California.
An old McDonald's closed down.
It's just rotting in there.
There's no air conditioning.
This magnetic tape is all falling apart.
NASA doesn't care about these images.
It's a crime.
I'm sorry.
I'm probably giving cans of it out to people ordering Quarter Pounders.
On Skype, you're on the air with these two.
Hello.
Hello, Art, and those two.
Clarification, or actually a correction, the Apollo 1 fire was in January of 67, not 64.
Okay, get good and close to the mic on your computer, please.
Okay, the other thing, now let me understand it.
We landed on the moon, but what we saw on Earth was fake.
Is that the premise?
That's Jay's premise, yes.
Okay.
Earlier, I think it was Jay who mentioned something about Kubrick.
Uh, supposedly faking the footage.
That's right.
I sent you an email about a film called Room 237, which explores that, and it's on Netflix and Amazon if you want to check it out.
Jay, you know about that?
I'm the star of the film, so yeah, I know all of it.
Yeah, I guess you do.
OK, well, check that out, Art.
I think you'll be kind of fascinated by the questions that it raises and also the explanations that it offers.
All right.
So that's my three cents worth for tonight.
Yeah.
All right.
Thank you.
He's got a great point because we never touched on it.
And I don't think we should on this show, but maybe some other show.
But in 237, what they do is they cover all of these people's opinions of the movie The Shining.
And my opinion of the movie The Shining, which I believe it closes the case, is that every time that Stanley Kubrick deviates from the Stephen King book, he's telling you the story about him having to fake the Apollo moon landings.
And the case I make is deadly.
And even Christiana Kubrick wrote me and told me how impressed she was by my case.
So there you go.
Johnnie on the International Skype you're on.
Vivian won't talk to me and Vivian is a Scientologist living in Texas and she won't talk to me.
This is Stanley Kubrick's daughter and she won't talk to me.
Sorry.
I haven't talked to her either.
Johnny on the International Skype you're on.
Hello Johnny.
Johnny Webb it says.
Are you there?
Yes or no?
Hello?
Yes, I'm here.
Can you hear me?
Yes, I've got you now.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
The question to your panel is, it's the Van Allen radiation belt.
I understand, along with Gus Grisham, that Van Allen was killed in a car crash with his wife.
Can they explain how, today, we still get through the Van Allen radiation belt?
I don't think Van Allen was killed in a car crash.
Was he, Stanton?
I don't think... I don't think... I don't know, but...
Again, the radiation levels, as long as you don't stay in the wrong place for too long, unshielded, etc., etc., are not deadly.
In other words, it's something you have to take into account.
I've worked around radiation for a lot of years, and you can tolerate a good amount of it.
Look, if you sleep in the same bed with somebody for a year, you get a measurable dose of radiation from them.
Well, they used suits in Fukushima, for instance.
Why are these spacesuits so good for the Van Allen, but not for Fukushima?
Entirely different situation.
The kind of radiation, the energy levels of the radiation, and the duration of staying there, living there, I was going to say.
But Fukushima, it's an entirely different kind of situation.
High energy gamma rays from That was a mess.
Even then at Fukushima there's a farmer that only lives two miles away.
He's still there because he wanted to take care of his animals and the animals are all still alive and he's still alive.
Just saying.
He's only two miles away.
You're right.
It's not totally deadly because there's an accident and a large release of radiation doesn't mean everybody kills over.
This is not Hiroshima.
Or Nagasaki, an entirely different situation.
I agree with you on the Van Allen belts, and I don't usually ever use it in any arguments that I make.
Good.
Okay.
Alright, you two, hold tight.
We're at a break point.
Stan Friedman, Jay Widener, my guests, we're discussing now all kinds of things.
At the moment, it seems, radiation levels.
I'm Art Bell, and this is Midnight in the Desert.
City lights, painted blue. In the day, something matters.
It's the night, time is flashing. In the night, no control.
Through the wall, something's breaking. Wearing white, as you're walking.
Down the street, of us all.
Engage myself, engage myself.
It's the night, time is flashing. In the night, no control.
Engage myself, engage myself.
And if it's bad, the way it gets you down.
You can take it!
you Call Midnight in the Desert at 1-952-CALL-ART.
What's set in the dark stays in the dark. Call Midnight in the Desert at 1-952-CALL-ART.
That's 1-952-235-5278.
Nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman and film guy and a lot more, Jay Widener, are my guests.
If you have questions for them, you can come in by phone, you can come in by Skype, and I want to drop this on you.
If you're on Skype, and we answer, and you hear audio, that means you have gotten through.
Wait!
Do not hang up.
Wait.
And your turn will come.
So I just want to let you know that if you suddenly start hearing audio, as in, you know, you're hearing the program, bingo!
You have made it through.
So do not, at that point, hang up.
All right, back to our two distinguished guests.
And I must say, you've both done a very, very good job this night.
I've got a call for you from, I think, All the way on the other side of the world in Bangkok.
Hello.
This is Charlie in Bangkok, and I've got a delay on one of the signals.
That's quite all right, Charlie.
Proceed.
I'm with you.
Real quickly.
Two comments.
Gus Grissom, the lemon man, was murdered.
And two things that Art knows about, many things Art knows, that he's smarter than his guests.
A lot of the time.
No, I'm not.
He keeps asking, why do the astronauts who went to the moon keep saying they have no memories?
Last thing, question.
Are you two gentlemen exasperated with people who will not just build a door the same size as the ship, put on the suit and try to get through it?
All right, one at a time.
You want to answer?
Yeah, well, I've actually asked myself that question.
The problem is that you can't find a suit.
I mean, there's one at the Smithsonian, but they won't let you use it, so you can't do a proper measurement on it.
And, you know, it's amazing.
All the suits have just disappeared.
You can't find any of them, just like the blueprints to Saturn V. You can't find them.
They're gone.
This is very frustrating, I must admit, Stanton.
Well, I feel the same frustration.
My first thought is I want to talk to a bunch of astronauts and they're going by the wayside, too.
And, you know, where do you get a straight answer?
And it's hard to tell.
Guys can do all kinds of strange things.
There's some very crowded airplanes where you say, how the heck did the pilot get in there?
You know, single seater kind of things.
And I don't know.
People will work hard to get certain things done.
And what we are dealing with here also is a failure of NASA to look at things from the public's viewpoint.
I've felt that NASA has lacked leadership for a very long time.
What they needed was an Admiral Rickover, the nuclear submarine, nuclear aircraft carrier, etc., who said, that's where we're going, folks.
You don't want to go there.
Get off the ship.
You know, Richard's coming up next, and I can see him smiling right now.
I would like to address that, actually, what he just brought up.
Go ahead.
James Olberg was incensed by the 2004 documentary on Fox called We Never Went to the Moon.
He was totally incensed.
I think you guys know who James Olberg is.
He's a science writer, a really good science writer.
And a huge man, too, by the way, like 6'8".
six foot eight.
But he went to NASA and he got a $25,000 advance to write a book proving that they went to
the moon.
He became exasperated because he kept asking NASA for this file and that file and this
picture and that picture and this video and that video and they would never help him.
Finally, he returned the advance and gave up writing the book.
Not because he didn't want to write the book, but because NASA wouldn't cooperate with him.
Think about that.
I'm not surprised.
As I say, I've worked on the space program, and everybody I worked with thought we'd have a base on the moon before the end of the last century.
Boy, no kidding.
And it sure as heck hasn't happened.
And so that's what I mean by leadership guts, if you want to put it that way.
All right.
Well, Jacob, hold on, guys.
We're in calls.
Jacob, on Skype, you're on the air.
Good evening.
I had a question for Jay.
If you believe that we have been to the moon, but what we were shown on video was not in fact what happened, then what would have happened with all the astronauts who actually went up there?
Were they the same people, but under different circumstances?
Or did they just kind of disappear out of history and never get heard from again?
You know, I don't know.
I'm not really much of a speculator, but all I have to do is look at that press conference on YouTube with Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong, and Michael Collins to know.
I can read body language.
I'm a former investigative journalist also.
I can tell when somebody's lying, and these guys look like their dog just died.
I mean, they don't look happy or elated or feel like they look successful.
They look like they're kind of ashamed.
And watch it.
Make up your own mind.
Don't let me influence you.
All right.
Columbus, Ohio.
You're on the air.
Hi, Art.
Awesome show and funny, wildly entertaining.
The two things I called about, one, you guys keep calling the alternative propulsion electromagnetic.
It's actually electro-gravitic.
Yes, it is.
Okay.
Well, there is even argument about whether it exists.
So, whatever we call it.
If you go read any of Townsend Brown's work, uh, it's all children's toys, basically.
I mean, we've pretty much just been kept.
But, uh, I'm a professional photographer, and my question, um, I saw a while back they sold one of the Hasselblads, and they claim went to the moon, and there was no shielding on that camera whatsoever.
If you shoot a lot of film, you know that radiation is a problem because of airports
and x-rays, but heat also plays a big role.
Unfiltered sun on a camera like that full of film would just nuke it.
Did they have any kind of...I haven't seen any, but did they shield those cameras in
any way when they took them up there?
No way.
No.
If you go to the Hasselblad site, Hasselblad provided the cameras, they actually show you
the cameras.
Regular Hasselblads and unshielded, and you're right, unshielded cameras in 250 degree heat,
actually that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard as a photographer.
I know, there's no way that this can happen.
But you bring up another point which I really want to talk about, which I haven't yet, and that is the composition of the photography on the moon.
Now, the astronauts had the camera on their chest.
They could not look through the viewfinder.
They were just clicking away, clicking away.
But if you look, and I have, and I've been to Houston, I've gone through the entire photo archives of NASA's Apollo missions, and you look, and it's one stunning photograph after another.
It's just, you know, and then you think about, oh, Stanley Kubrick got hired by Look Magazine to be their top photographer when he was 19 years old.
And you look at these photographs and there's no way.
These are amateur shots by guys who aren't looking through the lens.
These are carefully composed and lit shots.
And as a photographer, they're just very well done.
That's all I can say.
I always wondered who set up the cameras to, you know, initially, you know, to show them getting out and, you know, the thing tilted, you know, to watch them go away.
I always kind of wondered how they did that stuff.
But like, even now, there's a... You're bringing up a great point because There's a four-second delay between the video camera on the moon and Houston, because of the miles between.
And yet, when the rocket takes off, the camera follows it perfectly.
All right, on that note, we've got to break.
It's about to destroy the entire American space program by now.
It's only one segment left.
Perhaps save it.
Never turn you down When all the others turn you away they'll run
It's my private pleasure Midnight fantasy
For Dark Matter News, I'm Leo Ashcraft A drone dropped a package of drugs into a prison yard while inmates were outside, sparking a fight.
It contained almost a quarter of an ounce of heroin.
Over 2 ounces of marijuana and more than 5 ounces of tobacco.
Smith said there had been instances of drones breaching security and the agency is taking steps to increase awareness and improve drone detection.
Video footage showed the drone over recreation yards immediately before a fight began.
An investigation determined the drone dropped a package intended for an inmate on the North Recreation Yard and it was then thrown over a fence to the South Recreation Yard.
Last year, the Mansfield Post of the Ohio Highway Patrol increased efforts to watch and catch criminals who throw contraband over prison fences.
Pitcher, Oklahoma.
It's a ghost town and former city in Ottawa County, Oklahoma.
Formerly a major national center of lead and zinc mining at the heart of the Tri-State Mining District, over a century of unrestricted subsurface excavation dangerously undermined most of Pitcher's town buildings and left giant piles of toxic metal contaminated mine tailings heaped throughout the area.
The discovery of the cave-in risks, groundwater contamination, and health effects associated with the cat piles and subsurface shafts, particularly an alarming 1996 study which showed lead poisoning in 34% of the children in Pitcher.
This eventually prompted a mandatory evacuation and buyout of the entire township by the state of Oklahoma and the incorporation of the town, along with these similarly contaminated satellite towns of Treece and Cardin.
An F4 tornado, which destroyed or damaged 150 homes in May 2008, accelerated the exodus.
The town ceased official operations on September 1st, 2009.
A new comet is currently making its inaugural trip to the inner solar system from the Oort cloud, where it likely originated.
New images show a tremendous amount of dust streaming away from it, along with strange blobs that have attracted the attention of astronomers.
The comet, in addition to being unusually dusty, appears to be jetsoning weird clumps.
Their explanation is that since the clumps are moving directly away from the sun, it appears they are being driven by the solar wind.
The fact that the clumps do not change in size as they blow away suggests they are being held together by a magnetic field of the solar wind.
This means they are likely charged particles or ionized gas, which are sensitive to magnetic fields.
Likely candidates are ionized potassium and sodium that have been roasted out of the rocks on the comet as it passes close to the sun.
Another possibility is the clumps are dust in the process of exploding.
If true, this could explain why comet tails have lines that make them appear as if they're combs.
Surgeons in Manchester have performed the first bionic eye implant in a patient with the most common cause of sight loss in the developed world.
Ray Flynn, age 80, has dry-aged related macular degeneration, which has led to the total loss of his central vision.
He is using a retinal implant, which converts video images from a miniature video camera worn on his glasses.
He can now make out the direction of white lines on a computer screen using the retinal implant.
Mr. Flynn said he was delighted with the implant and hoped in time it would improve his vision sufficiently to help him with day-to-day tasks like gardening and shopping.
The images from his glasses are converted into electrical pulses and transmitted wirelessly to an array of electrodes attached to the retina.
The electrodes stimulate the retina's remaining cells, which send the information to the brain.
In a test two weeks after surgery, Mr. Flynn was able to detect the pattern of horizontal, vertical, and diagonal lines on a computer screen using the implant.
With his eyelids closed, macular degeneration can be a devastating condition, and many people are now affected as we live longer.
These are early trials, but in time, this research may lead to a really useful device for people who lose their central vision.
I'm Leo Ashcraft for Dark Matter News.
Thanks for watching.
Please subscribe to my channel.
Thanks for watching.
Please subscribe to my channel.
Thanks for watching.
Please subscribe to my channel.
Thanks for watching.
Please subscribe to my channel.
Thanks for watching.
Please subscribe to my channel.
Thanks for watching.
Please subscribe to my channel.
Thanks for watching.
Please subscribe to my channel.
Thanks for watching.
Please subscribe to my channel.
Wanna take a ride?
Your conductor, Art Bell, will punch your ticket.
When you call 1952, call Art.
That's 1952-225-5278.
You're on a ride, alright.
I have these wormhole messages, and Jay, somebody named Loneboy, says, What Jay said about not being able to find the Saturn V blueprints just simply isn't true.
They're in Huntsville, Alabama.
Oh, really?
That's what he says.
I went there and I asked, and they wouldn't give them to me, or show me copies.
Okay, that doesn't mean they don't exist, does it?
Well, I guess it could mean that, not sure.
I know this, Bill Wood, the rocket scientist, told me that a guy was told, he was working at NASA, and he was told to destroy all the blueprints for the Saturn V, And he was really upset by the order, and he did destroy all of the blueprints of the Saturn V, but one.
And he kept it, and he took it home with him to keep it, and about two weeks later, he got knocked at the door, and it was the FBI telling him to give up that set of blueprints.
Good Lord.
As I mentioned, we pretty well destroyed the space program tonight.
Well, but think about it, Stanton.
The Russians are launching our guys into space.
We don't even have a launch pad.
I am very well aware of that, and it bothers the heck out of me.
Me, too.
I'm just sick.
Let me give you another example.
I worked on nuclear rockets, and people think, oh, that's science fiction stuff.
Well, Westinghouse Astronuclear Lab, Aerojet General, and Los Alamos each ...operated a fission nuclear rocket reactor propulsion system on the ground back in the 60s, mind you.
The Los Alamos one operated at a power level of 4,000 megawatts.
That's twice the power of Hoover Dam, incidentally.
And we had our great test.
It was my high point in my career, and they canceled the damn program!
In other words, if you want to go to... Well, that's a good question.
Yeah, that's what I'm contending.
I don't know.
Well, the picture here is... I'm contending that they're taking... You're contending what?
One at a time.
Well, you know, Paul LaViolette, a good friend of mine, and he worked in the patent office for a few years, and he kept noticing that he would approve a patent, and then people above him would stop it.
And then he would notice that the patent would go dark.
And I'm contending to you that every time one of these inventions comes up, it makes
a brief flurry in the news and then it goes dark.
Everything seems to be happening like this, and I'm contending to you that that's exactly
what's going on.
They're going dark and they're contributing to this overall mission of creating this kind
of breakaway civilization, as Richard Dolan puts it, where they're 60, 70 years ahead
of us.
And that means a lot.
You had technology 70 years ago and now, and you can, you know, there's no transistors,
no computers.
And so if they are that far ahead, and the reports I get from my insiders are, is that
this is the correct view, that they are that far ahead and that they're really advanced
and they have all sorts of incredible gizmos, including a box the size of a shoebox that
apparently can create energy out of nothing and run, you know, huge machines.
And they have free energy and they have all these things and they're hiding it.
I think it's time for this stuff to be released.
I think the Earth, we don't need any more Fukushimas, we don't need any more oil burning.
If they really have this technology, I think we have to really start kind of forcing the issue.
And that's one of the reasons I'm doing this whole thing about the moon and Stanley Kubrick, is I'm trying to get these issues forced out into the open, because my insiders tell me they have amazing technology.
All right, we're supposed to be at the phones.
Kokomo, Indiana, hello.
Hi, it's Steve from Indiana.
Yes.
And Art, it's a pleasure talking to you.
And Mr. Friedman, I've followed your career for years, and I'm entitled to agree with you.
And the reason I say that is, how would you explain, if we had such advanced technology at the time and we were using it, how would you explain the Apollo 13 that Tom Hanks brought to light?
What do I have to explain?
You've got some smart astronauts doing clever things.
Okay.
I didn't say that wasn't real.
I didn't either.
Yeah.
All right, there you go.
Green again.
Let's see.
Let's go to Tim on Skype.
Hello, Tim.
Hey, how's it going?
It's going okay.
Awesome, good to talk to you.
Unless you're at NASA, they're probably ticked.
An asset, yeah, I am an asset.
Okay, so this question's for Jay.
Jay, I know you're a filmmaker and I'm aware of Uh, your stance in the world, which is amazing.
We need that, actually.
People need to hear what Jay has to say.
He's got a lot of great things to say, and it's not just him.
It's information that's on this planet that he has in him, and many people have in them, but they're keeping quiet.
Okay, do you have a question?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
How do we see your new film, Jay?
The last Avatar.
Oh, the last Avatar.
Yeah, last Avatar opened yesterday on Vimeo, and, um, Hey, just go to thelastavatar.movie.com, or if you want to watch it, you know, just watch.thelastavatarmovie.com.
Hey, this is a story of what?
It's a story of a guy who is pretty much a failure in life, who realizes that he's actually a dynamic, special human being, and he tries to change the world, which is what I think all of us should be trying to do right now, because the world's in pretty bad shape.
That it is.
Yeah.
All right.
It's a good movie.
I think people would like it.
I think you'd like it, Art.
All right.
I'll send you a free link, and you can watch it in your spare time.
All right.
Montreal, Quebec, you're on the air.
Yes, hello.
I'm looking at a Freemasonry page for British Columbia and Yukon, and they've got Buzz Aldrin belonging to the Clear Lake Lodge in Seabrook, Texas, and they also have Grissom, who died in 67, as belonging to the Mitchell Lodge of Indiana.
Mitchell, Indiana.
And what does that mean?
What do you think that means?
They were all Freemasons.
Just like all the people that worked on Trinity were Freemasons.
Okay, now my question was, what does that mean?
Well, it means that you'll keep a secret.
That's really what it means.
You take an oath as a Freemason to protect your brothers, and if you make everybody on the project a Freemason, then everybody has to be quiet.
Then you keep the secret.
Yes, that's how they do it.
Stanton, do you have any argument with any of that?
Well, there have been people keeping secrets for a very long time.
Look, I don't know if you've had anybody on from NSA, but They have released 156 top secret Umbra UFO documents, pages of documents.
The only trouble is you can only read one sentence per page.
It hasn't had any impact anywhere.
Are they lying to us?
I mean, are they keeping secrets from us?
No question about it.
So it's not just Freemasons who keep secrets.
It's NSA types and CIA types blacked out documents.
Where you can read three words a page, you know.
And the media ignores it.
Redacted.
All right, here's somebody on Skype.
It says Truth up there.
Let's see what he's got.
Good morning, Art.
To your guests as well.
Roswell's from Virginia.
Thank you.
Michael.
All right, this has been an interesting, if disjointed, program.
I'm not entirely sure what Mr. Widener is getting at.
So far as I can tell, he claims that NASA did, in fact, go to the moon, but the footage we were all shown was a fakery produced by, I guess, Stanley Kubrick?
Yeah, you got it.
That's right.
Okay.
All right, so I've got that covered.
What I'm struggling to understand, then, is for what purpose did NASA produce this cover-up?
What was it they were trying to hide?
Thanks, Art.
Shout-out to Belgab, and I'll take the answer off the air.
Oh, you do.
They were trying to hide many things.
One, they were trying to hide their real technology, I believe, from anybody and everybody.
Two, it was too chancy to take the photographs on the ground where they may actually get
alien artifacts, which are all over the place up there.
And three, they wanted to make sure that the news was always good and it was never bad.
They faked it also to make sure that everybody in the space program looked good.
Believe me, they do those kinds of things.
Edgar Mitchell told James Fox, the filmmaker, who's a friend of mine, he confronted Edgar, he's friends with Edgar, and he said, hey Edgar, do you think there's any possibility that, you know, some of the stuff was faked like Widener is saying?
And Edgar said, with a twinkle in his eye, I quote, he said, oh, you know, we might have faked a few things.
Oh, did he really say that?
Yeah, that's what he just told me.
Do you have, I don't suppose you have that on tape?
No, but he'll say it.
I bet.
James Fox will say it.
I mean, he said it just matter-of-factly to him.
We might have faked a few things.
Yep.
With a twinkle in his eye.
Twinkle.
Fort Smith, Arkansas.
You're on air.
Hello.
Yes, this is Mike from Fort Smith.
Right.
A couple things here.
I just want to make a comment about the moon.
Why isn't it that none of these other nations have landed any of their astronauts or cosmonauts on the moon?
And then I've got a short story here of something I've seen in 2011.
Okay, well I'm sorry, I don't have time for the short story, but I do have time for the question, and it's a good one.
It is a good one.
Yeah, why haven't some of the other technologically advanced and advancing Well, China expects to.
It's difficult.
India too, I think.
landed somebody on the moon or will they?
Well, China expects to. I know China's working at it.
It's difficult. India too, I think.
And Japan.
Probably, but again it's very difficult.
The radiation problems, the solar radiation, the synchrotron radiation, there's a lot of problems being on the surface of the moon that no one is actually talking about.
NASA has put out many papers recently warning about how dangerous it is out in outer space and on the moon and going to Mars without actually ever considering that they actually went there and everybody was fine.
So, there's a great contradiction within NASA about the whole thing.
Okay.
Let's go to Ken on Skype.
Ken, hello.
Hi, Jimmy.
Hi, Stan.
I talked to you last call last night.
I hope I'm not the last caller tonight.
I'm a retired aerospace engineer.
I'm also a mason.
Well, and you obviously can't talk to us, right?
I can.
And I'm also certified in metallurgy and aluminum non-ferrous alloys and optical emission spectroscopy.
What I wanted to tell you is there's a connection.
You mentioned about the 400-year CME warning that was on, Jay.
Yeah.
And I've come up with a premise I think that is really shocking.
It's about the valve vortices.
There's 12 of them on this earth.
And they're made up of aluminum alloy that is isotope 26.
And they're placed around the globe at north and south hemispheres in an even pattern, almost like a stator on a motor.
And I've been trying to correlate that with what we're seeing with the Sun CME, the noises in the atmosphere and the grinding noises that Linda was talking about last week.
Yeah.
I don't get it.
Everybody's talking about the sun.
The sun is now going quiet.
We're coming out of the sun cycle.
You have to look really hard to see any sunspots at all, much less major eruptions.
Well, the point is, what we're looking at here with this reduction in the magnetic fields of the earth is a potential for a magnetic flip.
And I think that those Bal Horses were placed there intentionally, and it had to be created from a high-intensity gamma proton ray beam directed from space to coordinate that kind of pattern.
So I believe that there was a civilization here before, and maybe still here, that were dealing with the secret societies that we're talking about, that are really directing humanity and They may have actually placed them there to prevent a pole flip.
I'd like to get some comments, Mr. Friedman, from you on that.
Okay, for a pole flip.
I'm sure he's about to be killed for what he just said, but go ahead.
I worry about things like that, like CMEs and so forth, and also the fact that we've had a planet here for over four billion years, and our Recorded history is really very short, and I don't see that we're any smarter than the Greeks were.
We know some things they didn't know, but no more intelligent Greek literature is not children's literature, for example.
So I think we are living in a world in which we are quite ignorant about the past, and I think there may very well have been advanced civilizations here.
Now, we may be somebody's colony, too.
It's a penal colony.
They dumped all the bad boys and girls here, and that's why we're so nasty to each other.
I can't find another good reason for us to be so nasty.
So I think we've got a lot to learn, and you know, many of the things that we accept today were rejected for a long time, not because they were wrong, but because people thought, well, I'm so smart, if that were true, I would know about it, and I don't.
Kathleen Martin and I did a book on Science Was Wrong, 14 chapters, each one stimulated by some smart guy saying something stupid.
Like, man will never fly, said a great astronomer that was two months before the Wright Brothers' first flight.
The English astronomer, Royal, said space travel is utter bilge a year before Sputnik.
The vaccination would never do anything about smallpox.
You know, there are a whole bunch of these.
The original title was supposed to be, it's impossible, isn't it?
Well, tonight's show's been more like man didn't lie.
Well, not really, because I'm saying that they did.
I know.
I know.
It's just, I don't know, it's very frustrating because you two have agreed at least to the point that I'm a little depressed.
Not depressed that you agree, depressed what it means.
With what it means, you know, it means It means they lie to us.
well they do like to be the first time yet and look at the air force report on rosswell
and all the way up to a centennial and none of which were launched until six years after
rosswell but they put a big fat report saying that explains the talk about
bodies associated with rosswell may have a way with it may or not i'm still
Stanton, you two, I've got to go.
Thank you both very much.
The show just ended way, way, way before I wanted it to.
Stanton, I'll have you back.
Jay Widener, I'll definitely have you back, too.
So, thank you both, and goodnight.
Thank you.
Goodnight.
Thank you.
Goodnight, all.
Wow.
You know, when you do a program like this, You never know what to expect and trust me when I tell you, I didn't expect any of this.
But then again, that's live radio for you.
From the high desert to the world, all of you thank you and good night.
To our last moment.
Midnight in the desert and there's wisdom in the air.
I've been looking for the answers all night.
All my life I felt you there As the world we live in presents Are we meeting all the signs?
Have we lost our intuition?
Are we running out of time?
Midnight in the desert I want to listen.
▲
Export Selection