Bill Ryan and Daniel Liszt dismantle Corey Goode's "Secret Space Program" claims, exposing inconsistencies in his timeline and lack of evidence regarding age regression. They critique how opportunistic figures co-opt serious research on Antarctica to create fantasy narratives involving pre-Adamite giants, while highlighting Goode's alleged ties to InfraGuard as a snitch unit. The hosts argue these psyops degrade the alternative media landscape, diverting attention from legitimate investigations into trillions of dollars diverted for real space infrastructure by experts like Joseph P. Farrell and Catherine Austin Fitts. Ultimately, the episode asserts that cutting through this disinformation is essential to preserve integrity in ufology before a full disclosure occurs. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Part Three Conclusion00:01:56
Hi, this is Dark Journalist.
Today I have the exciting part three conclusion of my interview series with Project Avalon's Bill Ryan.
Now, Ryan has pointed out the inconsistencies of self proclaimed whistleblower Corey Goode and his sometimes fantastical testimony of being a key participant in the secret space program.
Now, we've received an overwhelming response to the first two episodes in this deep interview series, with the strong majority of you suggesting that without evidence, Corey Goode's case has little journalistic value.
In this special episode, we'll look at the possibility of multiple instances of Covert intelligence groups intentionally muddying the waters of UFO and secret space program research.
Are cases like Corey Goods just a small aspect of a much larger psyop?
Let's go ask Project Avalon's Bill Ryan.
The fake stories, the fake people, the trolls, the plants, the fake documents, everything you can think of.
It's all the control rods in this whole thing so that then they are in control.
The Dark Journalist Secret Space Program Special Report Celebrity Whistleblowers, Secret Space Psyops, featuring an in depth three part interview with Project Avalon's Bill Ryan.
Now, let's join Dark Journalist Daniel List.
Bill, it's great to have you back for part three of our deep discussion on whistleblowers and the Secret Space Program.
Now, we've covered a lot of ground in relation to the Corey Good case and the larger question of what constitutes good evidence where extraordinary claims are present.
Now, I'd like to start this episode off by going back to your original article that got this conversation started and really sent shockwaves through the entire independent media.
The article was called The Truth About Corey Good, who, as we know, you've had some personal experience with.
Compiling the Research Article00:04:00
So, my question is why did you write this article?
You know, what is it that you're trying to tell us about this Corey Good case?
And about secret space program research in general?
It's no secret at all to the people who have been longstanding members of the Project Avalon Forum that, I mean, everything which I stated had already been stated literally years before.
It's pretty much common knowledge, and I use the word knowledge, among longstanding members of the Avalon.
It's like every aspect of this is known.
I didn't state a single thing that was new to people who'd been following this for a while.
But it was all in different places, it was all in different fragments, it was all in different posts and threads and articles all over the place.
And what actually caused me to compile this, because what you read there in what you're referring to in my article was a compilation, was one person.
Who joined the Project Avalon Forum anew and who was a proponent of the Corey Goods story and was questioning me rather fiercely about why I seemed to have what they called my personal agenda.
And so that generated a whole conversation that I felt because of the sensitivities involved, because I was naming names.
I thought, you know what, I'd just better be discreet about this.
And I made it private, accessible to members only.
Right.
So that non members, I mean, it just didn't exist because they couldn't get behind, you know, because it wasn't there.
It was a private corner of the forum, it wasn't searchable on the internet or anything.
And that was like a month ago when I wrote that.
And I worked quite hard for a few hours and I compiled all this and I put all the links and the references and the historical sequence.
And I just laid out the whole story from beginning to end with all the references, almost like a sort of summary research article.
And I treated it like a research article.
It's like I've got to be careful what I'm stating that I know, what I can infer, how I know, what I think I know, what the sequences were, what the causes and effects were.
And I kind of did it like that as best I could.
After that, some people said, wow, you know what?
You really should share this publicly because this is a.
This is.
It's like.
I wish this document had been available for me to see and read and study and think about long before now.
Exactly.
Because people knew little bits of it, but very few people knew the whole thing.
Well, what kind of an impact did you think doing this, writing this, and letting it out to the public would have?
I had no idea it would go.
It would.
It would go viral.
I didn't ask it to be copied anywhere.
I didn't know that it would come to your attention.
I'm flattered that it did.
I'm grateful that it did.
I appreciate that it did.
But I mean, you can be the one to confirm that I never asked for this.
You know, it's like, oh my God, people want to know about this.
Well, I guess I better say something, you know?
Absolutely.
Yeah.
No, it was like a breath of fresh air.
There's no question.
Well, thank you so much.
And if it is a bit of fresh air or a glimmer of light or Another tool in the toolbox, or another jigsaw piece on the table, or whatever analogies people want to use, then I mean, that's my job is to do that.
Drawing Complex Conclusions00:14:57
And I'm not kind of beating people around the head, urging people to believe anything.
I'm just sort of pointing in the way that I've tried to do in our combo.
I'm saying, look at this, And now I should say something that I haven't said in this conversation so far, which I think you'd agree with.
Draw your own conclusions, but make sure they are your own conclusions and you're not just sort of swooping around like a flock of birds following some meme because you've got a bunch of friends who seem to have the same view, so you'd better agree with them.
That's not research either.
You've got to be smart, you've got to know how to think.
If you know, and I use that word advisedly, there are thinking tools that some people don't have the experience yet.
To have, and it's not their fault.
How to evaluate data, how to make comparisons, how to search for things to figure out that there are anomalies, there are inconsistencies, there are things that don't add up, there are things that don't make sense, how to check with real science, how to know what science can be counted upon, what science can't be counted upon.
This is a complex area, it's not simple, and it's a vulnerability that people have if they think that it is simple.
It takes work to draw conclusions in a complex area.
You can ask any investigative journalist, you can ask any research scientist, you can ask anyone who works for any of the police agencies in a detective capacity.
It's like you're really being Sherlock Holmes about all of this stuff.
You've got to be smart, you can't take things at face value.
You've got to do your due diligence.
You've got to check things every which way, up and down and backwards, before you dare come to a conclusion.
I think there's no question.
That's absolutely essential.
And it's so crucial when we're looking at areas of unknown experience, you know, the supernatural, the UFO phenomena.
It's the balance of being level headed without being cynical.
And it is more about discerning something rather than judging it.
There's no doubt about that.
Now, this is particularly true, I would say, in relation to whistleblowers.
And you've dealt with hundreds of them.
And your work, you know, you have to have some criteria for establishing their authenticity, right?
I'd like to loop back again to Richard Dolan.
He has recently stated very strongly in various presentations that he's made.
For instance, here's one quote that I also transcribed He said, When it comes to defending the integrity of this field of study, I have no choice, I have to say what I need to say.
And I think that there's something desperately wrong with some of these individuals who come out as so called whistleblowers.
There's something not right about them.
That's what Richard said.
It's on the mind.
That's the closest that Richard will ever come to saying something damning about anybody.
But what's in there, you see, is I mean, I kind of feel for the guy because what he's expressing is he's expressing, I mean, in those words that he's sharing, he's expressing his disappointment.
His dismay and his frustration at the fact that I am certain that he feels, with a relatively small number of others, and I would certainly count yourself and many of your own colleagues and friends among them, as standing in a minority in a field that is kind of being flooded with everything that we've been talking about.
And here's this sort of Weird paradox again that you're all too familiar with is that the internet has simultaneously made our work easier and also made it more difficult.
Yes.
It's made it much easier for us to disseminate good information and it's made it much easier for those who want to, who are careless enough to, to disseminate bad information.
And so, as before, we were talking about.
The early days of Project Camelot over 10 years ago now, it's like things were kind of much simpler back then.
No question.
And you could get the nub of the most important information pretty quickly.
Now it's a wash.
Yeah.
A huge amount of noise in the middle of which the key signals, I believe, are being, are in danger of being lost.
And that's.
That's why, if I may genuinely say, you're doing such a good job, and many of the people who you count as colleagues are doing such a good job as well.
But oh my God, I mean, they're not that many people who I think are doing a really high quality job.
They're not nearly enough.
There's too much noise, and I only see it going in one direction at the moment.
And I mean, it's like I always try and be optimistic if I can, but I don't know what the solution is to this.
So for you, you were kind of seeing the Whistleblower space and a lot of elements in alternative media just becoming degraded.
And that was kind of a major motivation to get the article out.
Because I thought, well, you know, maybe this might help in some way.
I don't know.
I've got to try.
It was a Hail Mary pass in some ways.
And it hit the nail right on the head.
And I also felt it was asking for some kind of a standard to be applied.
It was a reminder, really, of how important research into areas like the secret space program can be co opted by people.
Who have completely different motives than education or expanding our awareness or knowledge base.
And coming from you in your many years of research, you know, you've dealt with powerful whistleblowers and some compromised individuals, too.
There's no question about it.
And you have that reputation.
So when I sent that article around, the response that I got from former HUD Secretary Fitz, Dr. Joseph Farrell, was exactly what I was thinking.
Really?
Yeah.
Oh, my God.
Okay.
They saw the important push for transparency in your statement, and others did too.
And that's what I think we're seeing now in the response to this interview series, where people are really starting to latch on to this idea of wow, we need transparency when we deal with.
With these fantastic accounts.
And I think you spoke for a lot of people by saying, you know, we're not doing anyone any favors by accepting these stories of people being in the secret space program without any evidence, you know, or being a time traveling astronaut.
The only people that are probably being helped are some television network somewhere.
So I think you really, you know, put it together.
You spoke something that people were thinking, and you were in a unique position to do that.
Well, thank you so much.
And I mean, I had no idea that Joseph Farrell even.
Knew that I'd written it.
I had a really nice note from Catherine, bless her, which I need to reply to.
And that meant a great deal to me.
I'd never spoken to her personally.
But you see, this is not about a witch hunt on one person.
This is, it's a case study.
I kind of like to again present it that way.
It's looking at a particular situation that we're in, which necessarily and unavoidably involves people who we have to name because we're talking about.
Human beings and human personalities, and things that have happened, and things that people have observed in the public domain.
And so, we have to have some labels for the components of this case study that we're looking at.
But the most important thing here is how it informs our ability to discriminate, to differentiate, to evaluate the information coming not just from this one situation, but from many other situations in many other fields.
I mean, Here's something that we haven't even mentioned in this whole long conversation we've been having.
We haven't talked about 9 11 research.
I mean, oh my God.
What an infighting rat's nest that has become.
Absolutely.
And we won't even go there.
But what I'm really saying here is that some of these generalities that I've been trying to extract from this case study and present also apply to other fields of research.
Well, we can see that the stakes are high in research like that for groups who would be exposed.
So they're highly motivated to fracture research that's being done.
Dr. Judy Wood, of course, has presented some excellent but controversial work on 9 11.
And so you see these engineered fractures that happen in alternative research.
And I see it also in independent financial reporting.
Bitcoin gets a tremendous split going.
And I made a documentary a couple years ago that's up on darkjournalist.com called Agent Oswald.
And I saw that entire research community have divisions.
You know, if you go into that, you can see the JFK assassination.
The CIA has spent tremendous resources to obfuscate the answers there for over 50 years.
So interference is the name of the game, and I would say especially in UFO research.
It's the intentions and agenda and the motivations of anyone who has the ability to interfere.
That's what makes the difference.
Isn't that curious?
It is, and that's an excellent point because a lot of great people have been involved in getting at the truth.
And you've mentioned some of them here.
And that's because sometimes going outside of the official reality can have repercussions and can put strains on personal lives.
And I'll bring this up that, you know, as we're in this fluid situation of getting answers and getting responses while we're doing this series, Christine Anderson, who is your former wife and who, as we stated in the previous episodes, was the first person to interview Corey Good about his story, came out and gave an interview on Off Planet Radio.
And she discussed her thoughts on Corey Good and you.
And I thought I'd give you a chance here to respond to what she had to say.
Well, there was quite a lot of information missing there.
All right.
In all kinds of ways.
But I do salute Christine for coming forward.
I applaud that.
And more people should be encouraged to come forward as well.
I mean, I really do hope that other people will come forward and say things because I know that a lot of other people know stuff.
I mean, they really do.
Not just about Corey, but about other false whistleblowers also, because.
This is a growing problem.
This is the whole point.
And he's far from the only one on the circuit at the moment.
And it's an increasing issue for the entire community that we're part of here.
It's a serious one as well.
And as I said to Kerry Castley a short while ago, we're not just messengers here with no responsibility.
We're whistleblowers too on those who have infiltrated our mission or have been.
Have been infiltrated into our mission.
Yeah, right.
To tell what we believe is the truth to the world as best we can.
Well, I could appreciate that.
And I thought she gave us some insight into Corey Goode before his association with Gaia TV, David Wilcock, and the whole Blue Avian Messenger stuff.
So she was clear it was a different kind of person that she knew before.
And it seemed to me that she found it odd that they had used the somewhat traumatized guy on disability to run the psyop.
Yes.
Well, I guess the really the thrust of the, you know, what we're learning as we go through here, which is that information is available now, which would help us draw conclusions and bring us into a greater awareness of the state of the power structure on planet Earth and beyond.
And that information, they've decided okay, we can't put the genie back in the bottle, but they figured out how to make the genie look a little bit different.
They figured out how to co opt the message that the genie has.
And I think what we see happening is we really are looking at a situation where it is easy to manipulate the alternative community against itself and do that whole division thing.
But then again, suggesting that anytime somebody brings up an objection to a particular approach or to a particular set of information, that that's somehow.
You know, unsportsmanlike or that doesn't really give to a community is wrong because the idea is we want the best possible information for everyone concerned.
If someone like Good is, with the help of David Wilcock and Gaia TV, going to take the narrative of the secret space program and the missing trillions that's been worked on by researchers like Catherine Fitts, like Joseph Farrell, the Honorable Paul Hillier, and turn it into a fantasy adventure series and provide the spectacle of turning it.
Into a comic book, ultimately, then it calls them all into question.
I mean, one of Cory Good's responses to your objections about no vetting on his story was well, David Wilcox's inside guys had backed him up.
You know, let's be serious.
His quote inside guys have told him that Obama would come forward with UFO disclosure, that there'd be cabal arrests, tribunals.
You know, these inside guys sound like TV producers at Gaia TV.
So let's be realistic about that.
And his terrible track record speaks for itself.
You know, if I were Cory Good, I wouldn't use that as a source of credibility.
Strategic Delays and Control00:04:16
One way to summarize sort of this whole thing, this whole thing that's happening here, any and all of these influences that are on our community is I mean, it's like I have this kind of hilarious image of not just two people in a three legged race with two of their legs tied together.
But about 100 people with their legs tied together who are all trying to go in a certain direction.
And they keep on falling over and tripping each other up and getting angry with each other and getting in each other's way and basically stumbling and staggering around very slowly.
Right.
But gradually, despite all the swearing and the tripping up and the lack of coordination and everything else that happens in a 100 person strong three legged race.
They're kind of gradually going in this direction, which is sort of inevitable.
And this whole research effort, this massive global research effort ever since 1947 or soon after, in trying to disclose what's really happening and bring this to the attention of the world, it is inevitable that it will all get there.
But what the controllers are doing is they're trying to slow it down.
You see, this is a control rod thing.
And the way they slow it down, Is by introducing these factors, and the analogy is this kind of multiple hundred three legged race thing, you know, because we're tripping each other up and we're disagreeing with each other and we're trying to go in different directions and we're not coordinated and we're getting angry with each other, but we're still staggering in one general direction, but it's not going very fast.
And so, what that all may mean is that those who have strategically decided, maybe long ago, they strategically decided that this was the action to take, this was the course to take.
Is their buying time?
They know that the truth will out.
They actually want the truth to be out in some ways so the whole world doesn't go into traumatic shock when the ETs do land wherever they land, you know, or whatever happens.
And of course, Rich Dolan has analyzed this and deconstructed this in a whole bunch of different fascinating ways.
But if this is.
Regarded by whoever's in control of all of this as inevitable, whether it's at their hands or whether their hands are forced, what is in their interests is to buy time.
And this is basically what they're doing, it seems to me, with this introduction of all of these different factors, which they're highly skilled at the fake stories, the fake people, the engineered conflict between people, the The trolls, the plants, the fake documents, everything you can think of, every tool that they've got.
It's all the control rods in this whole thing to slow it all down to buy time so that then they are in control of the information that reaches the general public and not anybody else.
I see.
I think something like that is what is happening.
Oh, this is fascinating.
Here's where we're headed with this the secret space program, the breakaway civilization, those topics, you know, if you get a little from the Gary McKinnon material, you're leaning into it.
The off world officers list idea, somebody hacked in and looked at it, that leans you, that gets you closer, in my opinion, to an actual secret space program.
It's evidence based on testimony.
But I would say that the fact that they grabbed him and wanted to haul him back to the United States to prosecute him as a hacker proves to us that he did, in fact, hack into those machines and he saw something he wasn't supposed to see.
Evaluating Michael's Story00:15:07
Well, they were upset about something.
Yeah.
Okay.
70 years worth of upset.
Yeah, right.
But I have here's a big snowball of questions that I'm going to roll at you.
I'm going to roll them all out together.
Okay.
You, one of the things that you've pointed out, and I think this is really important, has to do with why some apparently reputable researchers.
Will seize on these stories without doing due diligence on them.
Oh my goodness, yes.
And this is absolutely crucial.
Now we see this, and I do feel that on some level they understand that the appeal of these stories is a kind of emotional satisfaction.
So they're starting to move away from evidence and they're going into emotional satisfaction.
But I'm going to use an example here only because I actually respect his work, previous.
To the work that he's doing now, which is Michael Sala.
Yes.
Now, Michael Sala bought Corey Good's line, Hook, Line, and Sinker, and went into a very interesting pattern.
You know, he had written some very interesting books about JFK and the Secret Space Program.
And I thought that his information, you know, he was doing research, trying to find different angles.
Then all of a sudden, he started writing all about Blue Avians and Corey Good and all the rest of it.
But now, He'd put something together recently which was about pre Adamite giants that supposedly Corey Goode has given him information about stasis chambers.
And the reason that we use the mother of all bombs in Afghanistan was actually to bomb these giants.
And this is all the next phase of the funny conversation that's going on here.
So they're moving from the secret space program into these giants.
And I want to catch it at this point of incubation here.
Now, Included with this is the fact that I noticed that in a good deal of this type of material, let's say it's almost like a secondary weird version of the secret space program, that they borrow themes very often from people who are out there doing research on this, and even if it's not their main subject, like Joseph Farrell.
So last year, Joseph Farrell reported on the oddity of the fact that in Antarctica, a number of high profile people were going there, but the person that caught his attention, since he's so tuned into Russian politics, Was basically the Russian Pope went to Antarctica.
And then the story came up about Buzz Aldrin and all the rest of it.
And Farrell tracked the story in a series of blogs and didn't make a big deal about it.
He was doing his research on it, and there it was on his site.
I noticed instantly that all the Cory Good Gaia stuff started to move towards Antarctica.
It was just they were moving out of whatever they were doing and right headed for Antarctica.
But all of a sudden, Cory Good had all this stuff about, well, the cone heads, you know, and the civilizations there, the bloodlines, they're awakening the ancient Atlanteans.
That's what that's all about.
And my friends in the secret alliance are telling me all this, and I'm You know, inspecting these stasis chambers of giants.
And now Michael Sella is doing presentations on these giants.
So we see here now we have a new kind of adult fairy tale taking place.
And this is the next one.
You were talking about material and people coming up with material like a comedian needs a new routine.
So here we're going into this one.
Now, before this one gets into full gear, you know, I'm just sort of commenting on it as I see it rise.
So.
Basically, let's go into the support system around this.
So, you've talked about intelligence agencies not necessarily coming up with the material, but helping it along or not trying to squash it because they felt like it was filling the vacuum in that area and taking people off the track of real investigation.
And then we also have people who are authors in this field.
Having difficulties, struggling, and needing material and needing the new, the latest thing to put out.
So, the support system around a story like this, what are the main factors that we can identify here?
And how do you, if you're looking at this information, how do you identify, well, this looks like something, you know, that is genuine versus this looks like somebody going into the fantasy stage of their science fiction novel, comic book?
Right.
Okay.
Well, What has sort of happened there, which I think you sort of spelled out, but perhaps I can distill it to the salient points, is you've got, for instance, Joseph Farrell, who's just pointing out apparently anomalous and interesting pieces of information in the public domain, you know, and saying, okay, you know, don't know what this means,
but this is curious and it's kind of anomalous, and let's just note this for the record.
And that's what researchers do.
And then, if this now becomes what one could call trending in the alternative media, it's like, okay, everyone's kind of starting to look at Antarctica.
Then it becomes opportunistic for somebody else to start talking about Antarctica.
And because, as I said before, and it's like, permit the glib sort of.
Summary here, like these wide eyed, enthusiastic, maybe inexperienced people in the audience are interested in Antarctica and why shouldn't they be interested in Antarctica and have picked up some of these basic anomalies.
Now they're interested in Antarctica, and then a whole bunch, a whole slew more of stuff comes along about Antarctica.
And then what they do is they swallow it all because it's all about Antarctica because they don't have any filters to say, well, this is documented.
This is hearsay.
This is inference from other strange things that have happened in the past, like, for instance, Linda Howe's testimony from insiders who she interviewed over 10 years ago, and so on and so forth.
It's like you put all this together, and then somehow this other stuff sneaks in through the back door and becomes part of that whole pot of soup, you know, and no one is differentiating it out.
And that's the way these stories.
Um, grow arms and legs as it were, and suddenly it becomes even more confusing because, without the research skills and the research tools to get the scalpel out and look at who said what and when and in what context and who was the first person to say it as opposed to who's copied it and so on and so forth,
it's like all of this stuff needs to be kind of separated out and spread out over this big table.
A lot of people don't know how to do that.
Yes.
These research tools are extremely useful and they can help us to dissect all this by seeing what are the opportunistic add ons and where a story first started.
And I think that's the comment I would make on that.
And the responsibility of, in my view, the responsibility of.
Of researchers and sort of, or researcher presenters who, what I mean by that is that then they publicly present their research.
They don't just sit in a corner for a year or two and ultimately sort of write and publish some thick book.
Right, they've done the serious investigative legwork.
And at the same time, there are other researchers, or let me say, people who present themselves as researchers who do not.
Do this.
Well, they've been getting some serious play lately because of their kind of National Enquirer sensationalist headlines.
You know, time traveling astronaut is one of them.
That stands in contrast, though, to, let's say, the reliable details of a Joseph Farrell investigating the subject or careful explorations on UFOs by, say, Richard Dolan.
And I put them on the record in the last episode.
And, you know, they've seen this wave coming and they don't find any value in it from a research perspective.
And in Dolan's case, he specifically cited Corey Goode when talking about this.
I can't remember a time when he's spoken explicitly about David Wilcock.
He very rarely mentions names.
My suspicion, and I'm not trying to get Richard into trouble here, but my suspicion is that he doesn't consider David Wilcock to be a researcher as Richard Dolan.
Understands a researcher to be.
And in that context, it was you who mentioned Michael Saller.
And I want to say something about Michael Saller, if I may.
Sure.
And I want to preface this by saying that I like Michael Saller.
He's a decent man.
I like him.
If he was my neighbor, I'd be delighted.
I spent time with him.
He's a good guy.
It's extremely hard to dislike him and to disrespect him.
I would like to count him as a friend.
And when he started to pick up the Corey Goods story to promote it, and before that, he was promoting the story of another whistleblower whose name we haven't mentioned yet on this show, which is Captain K or Randy Kramer.
Yes.
Who's, I mean, that's the whole thing.
We won't even, it's like we don't have time to dissect any of that.
It's actually just as dubious, and that's saying a lot.
It's extremely dubious.
And I have profound reasons for doubting every word of what Randy Kramer is saying.
And I wrote to Michael.
I wrote to Michael as a friend off record.
And I said to him, look, Michael, I write to you with respect and I write to you as a friend, and I know you're picking up this Corey Good story, but I have some information that may help you in evaluating this whole story that you are now picking up and carrying.
And what I meant by that, I was talking about a lot of the stuff which I've already recounted to you and even more.
And what I was doing there was.
As all, I mean, my intention as one researcher to another, so to speak, I was saying, Look, I've got this pile of data here.
Let me share what I've got with you because it may help you.
Michael Salas said, and this is my paraphrase, and I'll represent it in the best way.
He said, I don't want to hear your information.
I am already committed.
And I thought, Wow.
That's the nature of the problem.
He's got a position.
And once somebody has a position, then they have to bolster it, they have to defend it, they have to support it, and they can't afford to change it without eating a lot of crow.
Yes.
If somebody who says they're a researcher is holding on to a position and defending it and selecting and filtering their evidence in order to support their position because they're publicly committed.
Then that's no longer research.
I agree.
You see, this is really important.
And once somebody's got a platform, once somebody's got a TV show, once somebody's got a following, once somebody's apparently being paid or rewarded for doing something, you know, like a TV show or anything of that nature, it becomes increasingly difficult for them just by the laws of human nature.
I mean, I'm not saying someone's a bad person for doing it.
I'm just pointing out what human nature does to people.
It's really hard for them to say, hey, you know what?
I was just wrong about that.
I take it back.
I made an error of judgment.
I shouldn't have said this.
I apologize.
It's like, when was the last time you heard anybody say anything like that in the field which we're in?
You know, it's like that.
Rarely happens.
And immense kudos to anyone who is willing to demonstrate their commitment to the truth by amending their position publicly when new information comes to light.
But oh my God, you know, we don't stick by a story because we're committed.
We don't do that.
And now, as best I know, David Wilcock has not said this.
It was Michael Salah who said this.
He used those words.
But It sure looks to me like David Wilcock is committed.
It sure looks to me, and I think it's okay for me to say this as my own opinion Gaia TV is committed.
It doesn't look good for them.
It doesn't look good for the producers of that show.
It doesn't look good for Jay Widener, who is a producer of that show, who I secretly suspect has got doubts about the whole thing and is trying to steer a.
The Thin Line of Credibility00:03:11
A little bit of a thin line about the whole thing.
Well, a guy like that who's been around must know there's a small shelf life to a case like this.
And I'm not sure how they determine programming like this over at Gaia TV, but compared with their other offerings, this one has nothing even approaching evidence and an increasingly bizarre storyline.
So it looks more like pure entertainment.
Yep.
And not very good entertainment at that.
But as you mentioned with Salah, and although I don't find any value in Wilcox's work, this is a step down even for him.
So, it's like this weird Corey Good effect has degenerated the ideals of these other researchers because they want to get some kind of traction.
But there are excellent cases out there dealing with the UFO reality.
There are real whistleblowers to be found.
Instead, we have this kind of schizophrenic reaction going on.
Now, does this feel like a sellout?
It does.
And you know, I think of great people in the field who came out and brought deep research forward on UFOs when it was really difficult and the media tried very hard to make them look bad at the time.
Some of them, like Stanton Friedman, are still around.
These people, like John Mack, like Linda Moulton Howe, and others, had great credentials and knew it was incumbent on them to dot the I's and cross the T's because they were upholding a high standard.
And, you know, astronaut Edgar Mitchell, former Defense Minister Hellyer, these people put a lot on the line to move the dialogue and the culture around the UFO phenomena.
You know, they brought abductees forward.
They were careful.
They wanted the truth.
This stuff, you know, Corey Goode is inspecting bases in Antarctica and giving updates to David Wilcox saying, you know, well, it was cold there and I'm glad I got the ice off my boots.
I mean, come on, you know, you didn't go there physically a few weeks ago and then swoop back with your secret pals just in time for episode 200 of Cosmic Disclosure.
You know, it didn't happen.
You're not even in the military.
You were in a state guard.
They don't send Texas state guard recruits to Antarctica.
If you wanted to go as a private citizen, you need tons of permits and everything else.
Do you have those?
I mean, it's not even a logical fantasy at this point.
So let's contrast that with researchers working with abductees, applying methods, employing back channels, developing whistleblower contacts.
I mean, these are two completely different worlds.
So, with all that in mind, since we're heading into the final round here with Project Avalon's Bill Ryan, Bill, with all of your experience in dealing with whistleblowers in Project Camelot, Avalon, the hundreds of hours of conversation,
Working through documents and details, what kind of advice can you impart to someone who's looking deeper than the official story on UFOs and the secret space program, but doesn't want to fall into the pitfalls of a fantasy driven entertainment narrative and that kind of presentation, or even worse, cult like activity?
Wow.
Okay.
Context for New Information00:05:07
I think one way to respond to that is to say that in order to evaluate a new piece of information that comes in, or a new book that you just read, or a new article that you just noticed, or a new claim that you just heard, you have to have some context in which to evaluate it.
The core mechanism of evaluation is comparison.
Contrast.
This, for instance, like that little made up example I gave about, you know, if you'd never heard anyone talk about the Roswell crash victims before and they were talking about how these guys had eight fingers, you might take it super seriously.
But if you know the context that literally scores, maybe hundreds, Of witnesses have attested to four fingered aliens and a few with six, but none with eight, then everything changes because you've got, you've already got a collection of data to compare and contrast the new information with.
And this is the problem with people who are new to the audience.
They've just walked into the auditorium and they're hearing their first presentation.
If they don't know anything, which is not their fault if they haven't read a book, if it's not their fault that they don't know the history, if you're 17 years old, maybe this is the first time they've heard any of this.
But the thing to do, I would suggest, which is easy to say and it's not easy to do, is to counsel that person.
If I was talking to a young person who was asking me that question personally, and they were saying, Look, I've just heard this astonishing story about giant spheres and blue aliens and the inner earth and every other extraordinary thing, and I'm so excited about it, and I'm going to start my own website and I'm going to start promoting this guy.
I would say to them, if they were a friend, I would say, Hold on.
Don't discard any information.
Park it, collect it, but read a lot more, watch a lot more, listen to a lot more, and then compare it all.
Because, I mean, this is like a time faded analogy in many ways, but we're all collecting jigsaw puzzle pieces.
And we can't throw away any of the pieces at all.
Absolutely none.
Not unless we have a really good idea.
What the picture is starting to look like.
Once we have a really good idea what the picture is starting to look like, then we can say, you know what, this is clearly a seascape and a skyscape, and it's all blue and gray, and I've got this thing here that's bright red.
It must belong to a different puzzle, or maybe it doesn't belong at all, or maybe it's not a jigsaw puzzle piece.
But if something doesn't fit, then I think I would actually still counsel people never to throw anything away, but you've got to collect a lot of information so you can start the comparison process.
And that means you do a lot of reading.
And this, again, is a complaint that you must have heard before, and which many of our listeners may be acquainted with.
It's like, who reads books anymore?
You know?
Who has read Timothy Good's Above Top Secret?
I read that from cover to cover in 1991, I think four times, you know, way back as soon as it came out.
It is packed full of information, which is pretty good information because Timothy Good is an extremely good researcher, an extremely good presenter, and like Richard Dolan and quite a few others, he is.
He's cautious, careful, and he differentiates between something which he asserts is true, which something might be true, and which something, well, we have no idea whether this is true or not, but let's not forget it.
Okay.
Combating Psychological Operations00:12:57
But the audience these days, it's like they don't seem to have that knowledge base.
Well, there's a lot being thrown at them, and there's a kind of astroturfing going on because people are looking outside of the official story.
On everything from the financial system, the deep state of political control, and advanced UFO technology, and so many issues.
And a lot of the official channels and the forces behind them are coming into the independent space and masquerading as alternative info to either co opt or discredit what they view as their competition.
And we're all caught in the middle on that.
Bill, in fantastic work, I think you've separated the wheat from the chaff in this fascinating three part interview series.
And I want to mention here, as we say goodbye to Bill, dark journalist viewers, stay with us because I'm going to have a wrap up report of this entire subject of the secret space program and where we stand as soon as we're done here.
So, Bill, before you go, I want you to tell everyone where they can find more info on you and Project Avalon.
I also want to give a shout out to the Project Avalon forum members, including Kalista and Running Deer.
Just very interesting stuff from everyone.
So, Bill, how do people find you?
Okay.
Oh, boy.
Well, My home base is the Project Avalon forum.
If people look at Project Avalon on the internet, there's only one of it projectavalon.net.
You can, um, people can apply to join the forum.
We welcome people to be part of this ongoing conversation.
Many people have said that it's the highest quality internet discussion platform that they know of, which I take as a high compliment.
That is the focus of most of my work.
I'm there.
Every day, we discuss a large number of issues, including all the issues and more that we've been discussing today.
There are a large number as well of highly intelligent, highly educated.
We've got researchers, we've got insiders, we've got scientists, we've got philosophers, we've got healers, and we've got people of an age, I think our youngest is 14 and the eldest is something like 92 or something.
I mean, we From every country in the world.
You've got people in Greenland, in Russia, in Africa.
It's a very remarkable community, and I'm very, very proud of all of those people for keeping it going strong.
And that's where I live on the internet, and anyone is welcome to come and visit.
And I, or even if they don't knock on the door and come in, they can look through the big windows there and they can read anything that I write, and they're more than welcome to do so.
Thank you.
I highly recommend the conversation at projectavalon.net.
And of course, our three part interview series can be found.
At darkjournalist.com.
Bill, it's just great to have you with us.
Thanks so much for coming on.
It's been a genuine pleasure, and I really look forward to continuing this conversation.
I'm sure we will.
Thank you for joining me for this fascinating episode on whistleblowers and the secret space program with Project Avalon's Bill Ryan.
You can find more special reports, deep interviews, and documentaries at www.darkjournalist.com.
You can also subscribe to our YouTube channel to receive the latest videos.
See you soon.
Go to darkjournalist.com to sign up for our newsletter so you don't miss a single episode.
Coming up, be sure to stay with us for a comprehensive summary on the secret space program controversy.
You don't want to miss it.
Dark Journalist.
Go for Truth in 2017.
The deepest questions.
The biggest secrets.
The darkest mysteries.
Dark Journalist.
Go for Truth.
With top guests like Graham Hancock.
Graham, how do we as a society escape the grip of a deep state in the 21st century?
Rather than spending trillions of dollars every year on building up our armies and our weapons of mass destruction and creating a climate of hatred and fear and suspicion, we should be uniting as a human race.
Catherine Austin Fitz.
Catherine, what is the issue that's holding us?
Back and destroying prosperity.
We have a system which has got a negative return on investment, it's killing human productivity, and where it's going is inhuman.
Dark Journalist.
Go for truth.
Visit darkjournalist.com and subscribe now for a special spring discount available for just $39 for one full year.
You'll receive exclusive member benefits, including access to the complete high quality audio archives to stream or download at your convenience, and subscriber only content, including bonus show material.
Sign up for our Free newsletter to stay updated on the latest shows.
Dark Journalist.
This is the year.
Now is the time.
You know, we need dark journalists, so just keep doing what you're doing.
Join us now and go for truth.
And we're back.
You're watching Dark Journalist.
And coming up is our secret space program update.
We hope you enjoy it.
Hi, this is Dark Journalist.
Today I want to give everyone just a brief update on the emerging story of how the secret space program narrative. Is being contaminated by what looks like a psychological operation meant to discredit this worthy research.
When Project Avalon's Bill Ryan came out with his riveting article called The Truth About Corey Goode, it sent a number of shockwaves through the independent media.
Goode had been touted by Gaia TV host David Wilcock and others as a real life time traveling astronaut who was in the secret program for decades.
What Ryan revealed in his article and in his interviews here at Dark Journalist is that Goode's story, when he originally presented it to Ryan, was not the wild science fiction adventure story that it.
Ryan also displayed evidence that Goode was not being truthful about a number of things.
Goode, for his part, has shown absolutely no evidence for his assertion of being in the secret space program.
His original claim of being in the program for 20 years has dramatically doubled now to 40 years.
Since Goode is 47 years old, the timeline doesn't quite add up.
When Goode was questioned by a radio caller about being a milk carton kid, since he must have been reported as missing as a child, Goode's response was, and I quote, I was not a milk carton kid, and I get this question a lot.
And what happened is that this 20, if this is what was called the 20 and back program, you were taken away for 20 years, you served for 20 years, sometimes more, and then you were age regressed and brought back within a certain amount of minutes from the time you left.
So you would not have been reported missing, your parents would not have noticed you missing, so that should fully answer the question.
My parents would, unless they happened to come in at that time and check the room and see that I was not in the room, and then panic, and then come back six minutes later, and then find me in my room.
Then that's The only way anything odd would have popped up during that time.
So there we have it, in real time.
If there were surveillance footage taping his experience, he would have been gone for only six minutes.
But for him, it was 20 years.
And as we know now, 40 years.
Good has no actual evidence for any of this, except his own assertion that he was gone in real time for six minutes.
This case is easily one of the most bizarre, which is why I think Project Avalon's Bill Ryan stepped forward.
Having dealt with whistleblowers for over a decade, the case at a closer look had no signs of being legitimate.
Ryan's conclusion after several years of observation, Goode was a pathological liar.
My own investigation has turned up the fact that Goode was a longtime member of InfraGuard, a shadowy partnership between the FBI and private companies that is basically a low level snitch unit designed to give participants points for giving info on their fellow citizens, all in the name of homeland defense.
The ACLU has raised serious concerns about InfraGuard in terms of violating privacy rights and the Constitution.
Doesn't sound like the kind of activity his Zen Blue Avian spiritual beings would be favorable towards.
Goode's announcement of a comic book series in development to tell his story.
Made a strange case even more bizarre.
Bill Ryan said, In all my years of dealing with whistleblowers, I've never seen anything like this.
Ryan is referring to the fact that the prepackaged nature of the entire story seems more like the work of a marketing team or a low level intel operation meant to muddy the waters of serious black budget UFO research.
In Gaia TV's show Cosmic Disclosure with host David Wilcock, Good waxes on about his ongoing adventures and secret programs, while his material heavily borrows from pre existing memes in the alternative media.
But Goode provides no actual evidence for any of it.
Goode has brushed aside any suggestion he take a polygraph exam to prove his claims and calls hypnotic regression invasive.
Without at least this evidence, the story can only be looked at as a science fiction novel in development, like Goode's comic book.
The secret space program, on the other hand, is very real.
My own research with top experts like Oxford scholar Joseph P. Farrell, former U.S. Assistant HUD Secretary Catherine Austin Fitz, former Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer, and UFO author Richard Dolan has demonstrated a massive program exists of transferring trillions.
Output transcript Out of the federal budget into a clandestine development of infrastructure in space that began under President Reagan and has greatly accelerated in the last five years.
Now, when I hosted the Secret Space Program Conference in 2015 in Texas with Linda Moulton Howe and Catherine Austin Fitz, we had no idea the serious issues of missing money and UFO technology would be deflected into a TV narrative about a man being a messenger for blue avian aliens.
That's two very different meanings to a secret space program.
Whatever Good's motivation for attention, to validate a dream experience, Or for his science fiction ideas to be taken seriously, by refusing to substantiate his story to the public in any way, such as by hypnotic regression or by taking a polygraph exam, his whole case leaves the impression of a man who thinks his fantasies are real and whose delusions are being portrayed as the real thing by unscrupulous marketing teams.
His narratives of adventures on Mars and in Antarctica help to divert serious research into the missing trillions that may be fueling a real secret space program.
In my opinion, the subject is too important to fall into fantasy and obfuscation.
I don't think Project Avalon's Bill Ryan has anything against Corey Good, and as a journalist, my only objective is the truth.
Corey Good's story has no actual evidence.
That is a fact.
He occasionally tries to use the story of whistleblower William Tompkins to support his claims, but Tompkins' story, which takes place in the 1940s, has no relation to good, and Tompkins has never said anything about good being in the secret space program, period.
The group of researchers I've mentioned here, who are looking for a visible trail of finances and manufacturing, Involved in this breakaway program have nothing to do with the spectacle of Cory Good's story and its support by David Wilcock and Gaia TV.
It is quite literally two completely different things.
The secret space program is a vital research subject and is the core of many of my interviews and reports here at Dark Journalist.
Whether it's covert activities, UFO technology, missing trillions, or transhumanist policies, this subject is at the core of my research.
Along with this wave of disinformation on the secret space program, We're witnessing a crisis of professional integrity around the field of ufology, also.
This field was once known for the deep research of Harvard professor John Mack, the diligent investigations of Bud Hopkins, and the meticulous efforts of former Apollo astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell.
The deaths of these paragons of quality and integrity have created a huge void of serious inquiry, and that void is being filled by a contamination of unhinged claims, vapid sensationalism, cartoonish narratives, and unscrupulous marketing.
The secret space program and UFO coverage has become a plaything for psychological operations orchestrated by.
Covert intelligence agencies.
I'm going to take this opportunity to announce early the secret space program summer here at Dark Journalist.
I'm going to spend the time, do the investigations, and talk with the real experts to address the contamination of disinformation being poured into this crucial field of research that not only involves advanced UFO technology, but our own awareness of the power structure here on Earth and in space.
Injecting Real Transparency00:01:04
I hope you'll join me, and together we'll inject the transparency needed to get a real picture of what's happening.
Thank you for watching.
See you soon.
Subscribe to our newsletter at darkjournalist.com to stay updated on the latest shows.