All Episodes
Previous Next
May 11, 2010 - Project Camelot
01:12:05
Project Camelot interviews Andy LLoyd - Dark Star
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you.
Thank you.
I'm Carrie Cassidy from Project Camelot and we're here with Andy Lloyd.
And he's a writer, an artist, and a healthcare professional, I understand.
And we're going to sort of drill down into his theories About the Dark Star, as he calls it.
My name's Andy Lloyd, and I'm a researcher into the subject of Planet X. I've been looking at this subject for between 10 and 15 years.
I got serious big time about it around about 1999 when I started writing articles on the subject.
And I'm very interested in the subject of what I call the dark star, which is a potential binary companion for the sun in the solar system.
My background is scientific.
I did a degree in chemistry and I did a partial part of a PhD at the University of California and since then I've been working as a healthcare professional in Britain where I live.
I'm also an artist.
I paint portraits and various other pictures and I've got a bit of a local following with that.
I organise exhibitions in Gloucestershire and so on and sell internationally.
So I have lots of varied interests, but I very much enjoy looking into the Planet X because I think there really is something to it.
And it is a subject that, you know, keeps on bringing me back, keeps on drawing me back to it time and time again.
How many books would you say you have at this point?
I've written four books It was my second book, and it was called Dark Star, and it built on the first one.
It was essentially presenting the whole Dark Star theory in a book format with all the evidence that I could collect at the time, and it was published in 2005.
And it was quite scientific in nature.
I wanted to produce a watertight presentation of the evidence.
I wanted to produce something that scientists would pick up and say, okay, I may agree with him, I may not agree with him, but This person has put together a lot of evidence and I certainly can't fault him for the information I've presented because a lot of the information I presented in that book was from the field of astronomy.
It was information that was taken directly from astrophysical papers and from astronomers and therefore that information is watertight and I use that to present a case for a binary companion to the Sun.
Since then, I've been quite interested in looking into the subject of Zechariah Sitchin's ideas about the Anunnaki.
And because that is necessarily a fairly speculative realm, I've used fiction as a format to present some of those ideas.
So it's a slight move in a slightly different direction.
I've included information about the Dark Star, but the first book, Ezekiel I, was a conspiracy theory One called The Followers of Horus is more or less science fiction.
And the idea is to present the dark star to people who wouldn't necessarily want to sit down and read a science book, but are very interested in the potential for alien life elsewhere in the solar system and the repercussions of that and how that might be plausible.
Okay, well, I had no idea that you had branched off into this other direction.
And I guess that's because I was so aware of the Dark Star.
And, you know, we have studied to some degree some of your work earlier.
But I'd love to hear...
Both ideas talked about here, if possible.
So if you don't mind starting with The Dark Star and some of the premises that you cover in your book and then your conclusion, okay?
And then from there, I'd love to branch off into this other area because there is a correlation between the two.
They're not necessarily independent of each other.
Isn't that right?
Well, I think that there's a very, very strong correlation.
I think that I'm fairly confident that the discovery The discovery of the Dark Star is imminent.
It's something that's going to be found within the next year or two.
I'm very confident that it exists out there and there are a number of space telescopes that have gone up, particularly the WISE project, that theoretically at least should find it within the next 12 months.
So on the scientific level I think it's there.
What interests me, Instead of just being thought of as, oh, that's just another planet, oh, that's just another planet way, way out, it's irrelevant, it's just something for the textbooks for school,
the idea that there may be life out there And the idea that that life may be potentially intelligent, capable of visiting us, it would throw open the whole debate about extraterrestrial life and how that would be able to visit us and interact with us on this planet.
Up until the 70s, people considered it likely that life was on Venus and on Mars and everywhere, and people We've thought long and hard about the idea of extraterrestrial contact from planets near to us.
But since Voyager and other space missions have determined that most of the solar system appears to be barren, that idea has been lost, and this great scepticism has moved in to replace it.
My feeling about the Dark Star is that if such a body exists and is discovered, which I'm confident that it is, that that would regenerate interest in the idea of alien life within our solar system.
Okay, but what is it you're thinking that is the composition of this dark star?
Is this a second sun, or is this an actual planetary body that may be hollow inside, carrying life?
I'm not sure where you're going with that.
The idea of the Dark Star is that it is a sub-brand dwarf.
Brand dwarfs are crosses between a planet and a star.
Now, the Dark Star, as I envisage it, would be rather similar to Jupiter, the planet Jupiter.
We're talking about a massive, massive planetary body.
And the idea of this body was actually put forward in the mid-80s by some scientists who were looking at the prospect of a body out there causing mass extinctions in a cyclical fashion.
So they looked at extinction cycles on the Earth, and they thought that they discovered it.
It's still something that's argued about, that every 30 million years or so, the world takes a big impact or some other celestial event occurs that wipes out much of life on the planet, and particularly the dinosaurs 67 million years ago.
So they termed this body Nemesis.
And the idea of Nemesis was that it revolved around the Sun in a more or less elliptical orbit, in an orbit that took about 30 million years, and every so often it would pass through a comet cloud and the comets would come in and that would be the end of life on Earth for a period of time.
So, I was interested in Nemesis, but I was also interested in Zechariah Sitchin's ideas, and I thought those two things correlated very well.
And my problem with Zechariah Sitchin at the time was that his idea of Nibiru...
A planet that harbored life would be very very difficult without a heat source.
So for me the Nemesis idea, the Dark Star, produces the possibility of a habitable area very very far away from the Sun.
And that works because the brown dwarf, the sub-brown dwarf, heats up planets in its proximity.
So it has its own moons and planets revolving around it.
They are warmed by the proximity, like Europa is next to Jupiter, and that creates an area of habitable life.
So my considered opinion on this would be that life would exist on planets revolving around the Dark Star.
Okay, and you're suggesting that Nibiru is one of those planets?
Or no?
Nibiru may actually be the name for the dark star.
It's not particularly clear, because the texts that discuss Nibiru don't spell it out wonderfully well.
Zechariah Sitchin's put forward the idea that Nibiru is a planet X body, but that is a contentious idea.
Sumerologists consider it likely that it's Jupiter, even though it's supposed to be red.
Now, the actual amount of textual basis that you can point at and say this definitively discusses another sun...
It's tricky because sometimes Nibiru is described as a planet, sometimes it's described as a star.
That in itself fits very, very well with the brown dwarf idea because the brown dwarf is a bit of both.
So that sits well with his idea.
So Nibiru may well be the star, the red star that may appear at some point in the sky, or it may well be discussing the homeworld that's going around the dark star, because Nibiru was also sometimes called Marduk.
And there are various different names that are put on this body, but for me the main body is this A substantial planet that's about Jupiter-sized that lurks around about probably about 10 to 15 times further away than Neptune.
It's a very long way out.
Okay, but you're saying it is on an orbit, this planet, right?
You could argue that it is the sort of binary companion of the Sun, that it is a...
Okay, but are you positing that it's on its way in, in this time, as part of this orbit?
That is something that a lot of people have put forward and have been putting forward for about ten years for various different dates.
The thought behind that is that if you take Sitchin's 3600 year orbital period and you work backwards, one of the ideas that people have is that it appeared last during the Exodus.
And that timeline produces a present date for the return.
So a lot of people say, well, because it appeared during the Exodus as chronicled by people like Immanuel Velikovsky, that that will come back now.
Theoretically, I don't have a huge problem with that.
The timing of the Exodus is very, very difficult to actually pin down.
It may be out by several hundred years.
One might even ask you whether there really was even an exodus.
That would be a very contentious statement, but some people do argue this.
But the problem with thinking that it's going to return imminently is that it would be very obvious right now to astronomers.
So, if it was on its way in, say, for two or three years' time, it would actually be in their face already, and they would be able to say, that's there, something's coming, look, here it is, it's too obvious.
So, I would suggest that it's actually still quite a long way out, and that if it is going to have an effect that relates to 2012, and I don't rule that out, but if it is going to have an effect It would be in an indirect way.
For instance, it could potentially be connected with comet showers.
It could potentially be connected in its orbital cycle, where the dark star may be at one point, Okay.
So there are people who allude to that as a possibility that would be a dangerous possibility.
And there are other possible effects that it may be having as well, particularly upon our sun.
When you have two bodies interacting in the way these two do, they're very, very powerful.
The Sun is obviously immensely powerful, and its field of influence is huge.
The dark star, although it's very, very distant, is still a substantial body, and its fields and the Sun's fields may interact, cause certain cycles within the Sun, and those cycles within the Sun may be something that the mains were alluding to.
Okay, but are you saying that this body would be larger than our Sun?
No, it's about the size of Jupiter, so it's about a thousandth the size of the Sun.
Okay, so it can't have as much of an impact on our solar system as our Sun.
No, it can't, but because the two are able...
It's like having two magnets on a table.
You could have a very, very powerful magnet and you could have a not particularly powerful magnet, but the two fields are going to still coalesce and the smaller magnet can still have a substantial effect on the Sun.
Our Sun is a very mysterious body to scientists still.
And the work of, I would be interested to mention the work of Maurice Cotterell in this regard, who wrote a book about May and Sun cycles, and he alluded to a great cycle of the Sun that was lasting something like 3,650 years or thereabouts.
And that is fairly close to the idea of a Nibiru orbit, if such a thing could be proven.
And it may well be that this greater solar cycle is in some way related to these orbital movements.
Okay, but are you noticing evidence that this body may be moving in closer, that it is indeed impacting our Sun?
Are you seeing evidence?
Are you watching, for example, the evidence of possible, you know, asteroid impacts on the Earth, like that there's more asteroids coming, you know, entering our solar system?
Are you looking at that at all?
I keep an eye on things like that.
I think one of the things that's interested me the most in recent years to do with that side of things would be the supposition that all of the planets in our solar system have all been warming, and it's not just ours.
Right.
And for me, if there is something afoot, and it's possible that there is, that that particular effect is quite interesting.
Mm-hmm.
The thing about space is that it is a very, very vast place.
And comets and asteroids, although they appear to be...
See, when we look at textbooks and we see the planets laid out in a line in a textbook, it gives us all an impression that things are a lot more compact than they are.
But indeed, in space, So even if you had comets piling in with a great density, it wouldn't necessarily mean that they were going to strike the Earth.
And I think this is important.
But when you're talking about effects of the Sun, it doesn't matter at all about the statistical probability of being struck by a comet and so on.
The Sun has an effect on our world.
Meteorologists, I think, have a problem with that.
They tend to ignore, in our weather patterns and in what's going on in this planet, they tend to ignore the significant effects of the sun.
The sun's sometimes hotter, sometimes colder, it has sunspots, it doesn't have sunspots.
Personally, I think this has a much greater impact on our climate in the world than is supposed.
So if the sun starts to behave erratically and unusually, then I think Our planet could have repercussions.
For instance, when our planet moves in and out of ice ages, those events occur quickly.
They're catastrophic.
They aren't a gradual transition Right, we've heard that.
And so do you believe that the Sun is in what you would call an erratic period, where an ice age could be imminent?
We simply don't know enough about the Sun.
The amount of data we've got about the Sun, I mean, there is hundreds of years of information going back about how many sunspots the Sun might have, but our understanding of the Sun is an incredibly complex thing.
It has sort of eight magnetic poles.
I mean, it's a bizarre, bizarre object.
And NASA keep on sending up more and more probes to study the Sun.
I think one went up yesterday.
They keep on looking at the Sun.
They don't know that much about it.
I personally think there may be...
What I'm saying is, if there is something to the prophecy, if there is something to what the Mayans are saying, that they have got a sort of 5,000 year cycle of strangeness going on, and that there is something to be concerned about, that is where I point my finger to be worried about.
Okay, so you'd look at our Sun.
But what about, you're actually saying that you think this body is out there.
How far out there are we talking?
Outside our solar system?
The Sun has an effect on objects orbiting it, which go out to about half a light year.
So it depends what you call about the solar system.
Most people think about the solar system as being an area that is taken in by the main planets.
That is the tiniest fraction of the extent of the Sun's influence.
Very, very, very small.
So beyond that, we know practically nothing.
From about...
Well, astronomers measure distances in that kind of scale in astronomical units, and the distance between the Earth and the Sun, which is very considerable, is one astronomical unit.
And so you go out to Mars at two astronomical units, you go out to Jupiter at five, and all the way out to Neptune at 30.
Beyond Neptune, there is another sort of asteroid belt, called the Kuiper belt, which goes out to about 50, and then that stops.
And then there is nothing there until the theoretical comet cloud, called the Awart cloud.
I think somewhere in that zone, between 50 and, say, about 2,000 astronomical units, is the Dark Star.
It's still actually part of our solar system, is in essence what you're saying.
Yeah, because the comets in the outer warp cloud go out to about 50,000 astronomical units.
I mean, it's a tremendous distance, even possibly 100,000 astronomical units.
Incredible distance.
Now, astronomers say that brown dwarfs may be as...
The population of brown dwarfs in the galaxy may be as many as the stars, but you can't see them because they're dark.
So...
They're putting up things to try and find these brown dwarfs, and even from a scientific viewpoint, there is a 50-50 chance that we're going to find one within a reasonable distance of the Sun, between here and the next star.
So, from a scientific point of view, there is a good statistical likelihood.
It's a very, very strange thing for our star to be on its own.
Most stars are binary.
Okay.
And it's very, very probable that when the sun was born, it was born in conjunction with one of these objects that's just dark.
So this is a good thing.
But one of the things, well, the main thing I focus on in the book Dark Star is the evidence, which you can put forward to say this thing really is out there.
Okay.
And is there a way that you could maybe run down that evidence quickly, like in a superficial way at least, to give people a guiding, you know, some, especially if we have scientists viewing this, such that they're going to be very skeptical.
And also, and this is a corollary question that I have, are you saying that there could be more than one brown dwarf in that span of Yes, absolutely right.
And there is an interesting possibility there could be more than one.
It's almost like if you were able to turn all the brown dwarfs on and make them shine, it's almost like if you looked up at the sky and someone flipped a switch, then twice as many stars would appear in the sky.
I mean, they're very, very popular.
The population of these in the sky is going to be very, very large.
And is that scientifically accepted?
Yes.
Okay.
The reason...
There are a number of things that...
I've already discussed the nemesis idea.
So people can go and look up the scientific papers, people can go and look up the books that were written by people like Richard Muller and so on, that put forward the idea of them causing extinction cycles.
But what's interesting to me...
Because I think that their idea about Nemesis is that it's too far away.
I think it's closer to us.
What's interesting to me is the anomalies within the solar system that point to something very, very huge out there that are causing these effects.
And I mentioned before about something called the Kuiper Belt.
That's got a lot of objects in it that are moving around in very strange anomalous ways.
And a number of the scientific papers that have been written to try and determine what might be happening with those discuss the possibility of there having been at some point a brown dwarf in the solar system.
So that's astrophysicists writing about that.
Okay, you're basing that on how they've moved in the past or how they've continued to move.
In other words, you're saying they move in kind of anomalous directions in the Kuiper Belt.
But is there evidence that they're moving in...
Even more anomalous, for example, directions since a certain time.
We can't judge that because when we look at a body and its movement, you can't judge whether that's been flung into a particular path recently or a long time ago.
And the models that astrophysicists put together to describe what's going on in the outer solar system would have all of these bodies moving around in a fairly predictable way.
And what they find is some of these bodies, some of them, are moving around in a way that does not fit the models at all.
So they've obviously been disturbed.
I see.
The way that they were set up at the beginning of the solar system, some things caused them to change.
They posit a couple of different ideas.
One of them is that a passing star has moved into the area that's moved them around.
And one of them is this brown dwarf idea.
Okay, so the body of the brown dwarf, is there a way you can talk about the consistency of it?
I mean, what is it?
You say it's dark, but it's not a black hole, is it?
No.
It's like Jupiter, only what happens is, if you take the planet Jupiter, which is a gas giant, it's made almost entirely of hydrogen and some helium.
If you take this massive planetary body, And you add another Jupiter, and then you add another Jupiter.
One would expect in one's mind that the planet would simply get double in size, triple in size, as you're adding the mass.
But in actual fact, around about the size of Jupiter, something rather strange happens.
Instead of getting bigger, it actually starts to contract and becomes denser.
It's almost like adding immigration.
You're not changing the size of the country, you're just changing the density of the population.
Does it change what the planet consists of?
The planet would still consist of hydrogen and helium, but it would also...
Take on other properties.
It gets hotter.
And it starts, because everything's much denser.
And at the beginning of its life, a brown dwarf sparks into life and flares up like a sun.
And it burns some of the thermonuclear fuels and creates a star.
And then after a while it uses up all that energy and it sort of cools down and becomes more like a planet.
And it becomes like this sort of, I imagine it would be like...
It's like comparing an electric light bulb to the embers in a fire.
Initially you get the electric light bulb but it simmers down and eventually you just kind of get this hot dark embers in a fire.
And I think the brown dwarf is like the hot dark embers in the fire.
So it's a planet that looks slightly smaller than Jupiter but it is warmer and gravitationally stronger because it's heavier.
Okay, so how does this relate to your theory about this revealing something about extraterrestrial life?
Well, this is a very good question.
And Jupiter itself, some people have said, well, Jupiter, you could potentially get some life in Jupiter up in the clouds, but there's no surface on Jupiter that anyone knows about, so you couldn't have people walking around, and the density of the planet is so heavy that nothing could live there, the pressures are so great.
But what you could have would be, say...
There are four Galilean moons, I'll discuss this as a sort of an analogy, going around Jupiter and Io and Europa, Callisto and Ganymede.
And all of them are warmed by tidal forces from Jupiter's very, very strong gravitational influence and from its massive magnetic field.
And these tidal forces create internal heating in those planets, and it warms them.
So Europa's a particularly good example of this, because Europa sustains what is considered to be a liquid water ocean underneath a spherical cap of ice.
And it's thought that Europa could potentially have life within the ocean, but there's no surface for the kind of life that we understand.
It would just be like underneath the ice cap in the Arctic.
You know, you would have sheets of ice and underneath there's aqueous life swimming around in the oceans underneath.
So that's quite possible in Europa.
Now, if you take that idea and you put it to a dark star so that Jupiter is that much stronger in its influence, and you have a bigger planet orbiting it that's perhaps Earth-sized, then that internal warming creates on the Earth-sized planet a habitable environment where you could sustain an atmosphere, where you could have liquid oceans, you could have a surface for people to live on.
And this is my vision of how it is, that you have this terrestrial world It's rather like Earth that is orbiting very, very close to the Dark Star and is warmed by it in a number of different ways and is a habitable, possibly more habitable environment than our own world.
Wow, okay.
So, how are scientists receiving this information from you?
I mean, are you getting, you know, does mainstream science even acknowledge what you're talking about?
Sometimes you come across the odd little piece of speculative scientific wisdom that will appear in the scientific press, where they talk about round dwarfs, and they'll say, oh, well, I suppose it's possible that there could be life in an inhabitable zone around a round dwarf, and it's very theoretical.
But generally speaking, astronomers are stuck with the idea that life, or at least complex life, would need to necessarily be living on a planet moving around a star very much like our Sun.
And this is simply cultural.
You know, our star creates life on Earth, therefore, if you're looking for Earth, you're going to look for it around stars that are similar to our own.
To move out of that box and to start to say actual fact, you can get these very, very tiny dim stars that aren't really even stars, but you could still have that habitable zone.
It's moving outside the box.
It's why you move into sort of the more alternative way of thinking.
Okay, so I'm curious now, our telescopes, I mean, what you know of it, and I don't know whether you sort of get into the whole, you know, black projects and so on, secret space program and all of that, but in terms of what you know of our telescopes and how far they can see, and the satellites that are also going out there, are they able to see the area of space where this brown dwarf could, in theory, be inhabiting?
And are they able to look like, you know, Scan that area to see if there's anything out there.
It's been done once so far, and it was called IRIS in the mid-80s.
And the IRIS was an infrared survey across what was thought to be, by most people, the entire sky, but actually that wasn't the entire sky.
And it was supposed to pick up points of light, of heat, in the sky that you can't see with a visible telescope.
Now, the problem with infrared is that in order to be able to see in the infrared, you have to use a telescope that's literally freezing cold.
It has to be very, very close to sort of absolute zero in temperature, because otherwise the telescope itself is warmer than the thing you're trying to look at.
So you can only...
Either use these things in Arctic locations, and sometimes they go up in high mountains or into the Antarctic to use these kind of things, or more properly, to launch a telescope into space where it's very, very, very cold.
Okay.
So IRAS did a sky survey that covered 95% of the sky, and they came back with some anomalies, and most scientists consider that to have been, basically, if there was something like this out there, they would have seen it on IRAS. But the problem with IRIS is that, as with all things scientific, it's never quite as clear cut as that.
5% of the sky wasn't surveyed.
They ran out of money in terms of all of the analysis of the results.
They did come back.
And some of the anomalies were fought over by different aspects of the iris team as to whether they were important to look at or not look at.
And one particular thing that appeared in New Scientist in the mid-80s, I think, was actually the Dark Star.
And the American team didn't want to look at it, the European team, the British, and I think it was the Dutch, wanted to look at it, and they had a public argument about it, and in the end they didn't look at it.
When you say look at it, what would be the procedure of looking at it?
In other words, if iris is out there, it's already out there, right?
Well, it worked for a short period of time and then stopped.
I see.
So they collected a vast amount of data for a short period of time and then the thing just sort of stopped working, I suppose, because you have to keep it cool for a long period of time and it only has a certain shelf life.
So they collect all the data and then they analyse the data and some of it was anomalies.
There was one particular famous report that appeared in the Washington Post that was of an object In Orion, and that received a lot of publicity because some of the scientists involved at the time said, oh, we think this is a Jupiter-sized planet revolving around the Sun.
And then they quickly dismissed it and said, no, in actual fact, it's not.
And that's very famous.
But that's not actually the one I think was the dark star.
I think it was actually a quieter report that created this argument that was in Sagittarius.
Now, for 25 years after that, there have been no infrared size searches.
So they did this, and they effectively said, look, we did IRAS. We would have found it.
We didn't find it.
There's nothing to it.
And science was very, very skeptical about the possibility of finding Nemesis or finding Nibiru or Planet X or whatever we want to call it.
And in the last ten years, because of all the extra evidence that's come forward about the outer solar system, about the way that something called the heliopause is corrupted, about the way that the pioneer spacecrafts Aren't behaving the way they should be behaving, about the way that the Kuiper Belt objects behave strangely.
These things have made people in the scientific community re-evaluate that situation and look at it again, and their opinion is more positive towards Planet X. And I think that, combined with a tremendous interest in these brown walls, is why they've just sent up a new infrared sky search, which only went up a couple of months ago, and has just started work.
Okay, and what was this called?
WISE. WISE. So if WISE looks throughout the entire sky, it's going to be doing it, I think, I don't know the exact statistic, but its sensitivity is something like 10,000 times better than IRAS. Okay.
If my object is out there, then WISE should find it.
I mean, no doubt about that, and I don't think anyone else should be in that.
Well, where does this object go to?
Like, where does WISE fly out to?
Does it go beyond Jupiter?
No, no, it orbits locally, and it doesn't need to go out anywhere.
It's like a telescope.
It's in space, and it kind of turns around and just views the entire sky.
But, like, we have a witness who's mentioned that there could be a body on the other side of the sun that we can never see because of the position of our Earth relative to it.
That would only work if the other object was orbiting around the Sun in exactly the same way that our planet is.
So they always stayed precisely the opposite side as we went around.
I mean, there hasn't been discussion of that, but...
At some point, though, it would have to be captured on a telescope, is what you're saying.
One would assume, especially if it was a sizable body.
But this iris, will it look...
In other words, will it look in a 360-degree circle?
Mm-hmm.
Yeah, because as the Earth moves around the Sun, different parts of the sky that would otherwise be blotted out by the Sun become visible.
So as it makes its survey over the duration of the full year, it's quite capable of seeing the entire sky.
The only thing that it wouldn't be able to see, as you rightly say, is if it's in the vicinity of the Earth, it wouldn't be able to spot something that's immediately the other side of the Earth that is rotating around the Sun in the same way.
But the object I'm looking for is at a particular point in the sky.
So as the relative motions of all the planets go on, it's always in the same spot in the sky.
So if you start off at Earth, and it's in December, and it's in Sagittarius, and it's on the other side of the Sun, and you can't see it, as you wouldn't in December, as the Earth moves around, then you would be able to see it later on in the year.
But how slowly?
Do you have a theory on that?
In other words, does it make an orbit every...
I don't know.
Are you saying 26,000 years?
Or 100 years?
In all honesty, I'm relatively open-minded about this.
I think that the idea that it's 3,600 years is simply built upon the numerical system of the Sumerians.
And Zechariah Sitchin, I'm a great admirer of everything he's written, What he's done with the 3600 years is called a SAR. It's effectively a numerical It's to do with the way that they established their numbering system around the base 12 and the base 16.
It's very, very strange, but it's sort of a theoretical point rather than then saying this thing goes round the sun every 3,600 years.
And he's used that particular piece of theoretical underpinning, but it needn't be 3,600 years.
It could be a lot more.
I'm personally thinking it's probably in the tens of thousands of years.
The Nemesis guys think it's in the millions of years.
So, different people have different ideas, and I'm open-minded about it.
I think, at the moment, we can't know.
Okay, but the evidence that shows that there have been extinction-level events...
That was fitting in the Nemesis guys, but you see...
That extinction event cycle, that's contentious.
A lot of people look at it and say, yeah, there may be something to that.
And a lot of scientists say there isn't.
I mean, it's open season.
Okay, and what is your position about the Secret Space Program and Black Ops and all of that?
Well, I think that, certainly in terms of the Dark Star, I... I cannot offer you evidence that there is a cover-up going on, but I do think that because I think it is so very, very likely that this object is out there, based on the evidence that has been emerging, I think it's likely that when IRS went up 25 years ago, if they found it, that could easily have been covered up.
It was one...
One space mission, one telescope, one set of people, they had an internal wrangle between them, the data, you know, there are loose ends involved with it, enough to be able to think that could easily have been hushed up.
Why?
I don't know.
Whether that could be or not, I don't know.
I personally think, if it's found, it should be out there.
But, when you're looking at things like...
NASA going to Mars and photographing the planet and the photographs come back and instead of just being immediately released to the public they go through Malin Space Scientist in San Diego and they go through all the photographs and they change this and they change that and You have to wonder whether the data coming back to us is truly authentic.
And it makes me wonder.
Clementine was another great example of this.
The probe that went around the moon and photographed the surface of the moon about ten years ago.
Well, Clementine was half Department of Defense and half NASA. And the photographs that came back at the surface of the Moon aren't anywhere near as good as what we had before from Apollo.
And you think 30 years have gone by and it's more difficult to see So when you start to accumulate those kind of enigmatic anomalies with the data that's coming back to us, it appears on the face of it to be, you know, authentic.
But some of it may be questionable.
And I do think it is very easy to see some of it.
I mean, that information is moving through a conduit of only a small band of people.
Okay, but do you have any interaction, for example, with NASA scientists?
I don't think they'd be very interested in what I have to say.
Okay, so you haven't had any show of interest in that area.
How about scientists that we might recognise or know their names, or is there anyone out there that is paying any attention to your work, for example?
Well, I'm one researcher amongst many, and...
The people in the scientific community who are interested in this subject, who do their own research, of course, have a greater level of kudos than I do, personally.
And if they talk about...
Probably half a dozen astrophysicists who see this as one of their main items of research and are interested in a body that's circling the sun of the kind that I've been talking about.
Okay.
But obviously when they put their ideas across, they are doing it within a sceptical scientific community.
They catch their words carefully.
They say...
They're not sensationalists in how they present their information.
But because they work in a university and because they are part of the establishment, of course, they will obtain a lot more interest.
And they're not going to be interested in me as a sort of more or less maverick researcher.
They're not particularly interested in what I have to say.
Okay.
What about your scientific sort of background?
Can you talk about...
Because you're really talking about...
Astronomy, astrophysics, but in a sense, that's not really your background, right?
So isn't it...
I mean, it's interesting, you know, did you have parents in NASA? I mean, how did you get into this field?
It's really hard to say, really.
I've always been interested in astronomy, and I've always read about it, and the thing about science is that the scientific method is such that if you If you get involved in one particular speciality, your education goes from a general to a specialist.
It's like an apex of a pyramid.
And you have to move through this area first, the broad area, and take a broad sweep of scientific knowledge about mathematics and physics and chemistry and so on.
And then as you move further and further into science, you get closer to the apex, which is your task, but you end up at a point, really, where you're so specialist that you lose sight of some of the other things.
I kind of go off around about the middle.
So I've still got this broad expanse of scientific information without having become specialised.
That can be a good thing and that can be a bad thing.
The good thing is that I am able to jump around between disciplines.
I can read scientific papers in astronomy and astrophysics and understand what they have to say.
I can appreciate a lot of what's discussed in scientific books.
But I can also jump into all kinds of things like climatology and earth sciences and planetary science and the other disciplines and then also move into mythology and you start reading the textual material from ancient religions that discusses things to do with this dark star.
And it's a multi-disciplinary subject.
So, in a sense, that's actually your strength, is the fact that you didn't specialize.
You're able to cover a wide gamut.
Were you self-taught, or did you have a mentor?
No, I'm self-taught.
In the same way I myself taught painter, I taught myself how to paint but I can paint to a high level and with astrophysics it's the same.
I look at it, I can read it, I can understand it, I can come up with some new ideas and I can write in a way that the man on the street can pick a book up and read it and say okay I understand where he's coming from whereas if he picked up other scientific papers he'd be too blind into it and he'd put it back down again.
Okay, so you've got the scientific basis, you went deeply into the dark star, and you must have made some kind of intellectual decision that To change from writing science to writing fiction, like, why did you make that choice?
Was it because, you know, because, I mean, we're Project Hamlet, so I might think, oh, you know, he was being bothered by some diabolical, you know, influences, or, you know, he was threatened, or whatever, or you just decided that that was the best way to deliver the material that you then wanted to go into.
I wanted to explore the idea of how easy it would be to cover up something of this magnitude.
And that idea is not easy to put across in a non-fiction format because essentially you need to make allegations that you can't substantiate.
So on a theoretical level, I was considering for a long time, if they found this thing, if they know that there are intelligent beings out in the outer solar system that have a tremendous influence on our world and on our history, that impact that that would have on our society, the discovery of that, is potentially colossal.
And I've thought long and hard about stakeholders in that kind of situation and how they would act and what they would do.
So it's theoretical.
It's not something I can produce as evidence in a scientific way, but I wanted to present those ideas in a way that People reading my books would say, yeah, I can see how that would work.
I can see how that would make sense of this, or that would make sense of that.
And to be able to see the way the world works.
So did you stumble on this sort of aspect of things?
Because you were reading Sitchin's work, and he talked about the Anunnaki and the evidence for the Anunnaki.
Was that what led you to this, or was it something else?
I've always had a deep-seated interest in conspiracy theory.
I've always found it fascinating, the way that information is controlled, and the way spin is put on things, and the way that we as...
People in any country in the West and probably throughout the world as well, our cultural worldview is informed by our governments and the way we are told to think.
That's always been of tremendous interest to me.
And I was very, very interested in how this particular subject would be impacted by such thought control, in effect.
UFOs, that kind of subject, comes into it as well, because I've always had an interest in ufology.
And, you know, I'm one of the people who looks at ufology and thinks there's something to it, that there is a real phenomenon underlying the accounts that have come forward, and that I think that the government has a controlling interest in that, in whatever form it is.
So my interest in writing Ezekiel 1 was to present the idea that someone looking into this subject stumbles upon what is an absolutely immense conspiracy.
And the conspiracy is held together largely through the fact that the idea behind it is so fundamentally ridiculous that no one would believe it anyway.
It's allowed to continue effectively through the fact that people would find it difficult to believe.
Okay, and so you started writing fiction, and you started this one book, and again, because you're using specifically the term Anunnaki, and were you running down that particular name, again, through your exposure to Sitchin, or are you using it as those from heaven to earth came?
In other words, that definition of it.
I'm definitely interested in what's going on with the Anunnaki from Zechariah Sitchin's point of view, and much of my writings does stem from his earlier works, no doubt about it, and I am very interested in his concepts of God-like beings who formed humankind and moved us in a certain direction.
At any rate, you're in good company with Arthur C. Clarke and Carl Sagan and others to present ideas that people don't want to consider necessarily or wouldn't take seriously and so you're going down a road which is a really interesting road.
So let's talk about that because you're talking about the Anunnaki and I'm wondering are you inspired not only by Sitchin but are you inspired by any anomalous events in your own life?
Well, I certainly am inspired by what Sitchin's written down the years.
I don't accept all of what he has to say, but I think the general thrust of his ideas is correct.
And I've always admired him.
I think he lives a fantastic life now.
He's in his late 80s and he's living in New York and they had a little item about him in the New York Times recently and it's fantastic.
He's a real inspiration to me.
I've always been interested in the paranormal.
I've always been interested in To be honest, I think true science is like that.
As a scientist, you want to grapple with the unexplained, and sometimes the inexplicable, and you want to get your head round something that has got no seeming rational explanation, because all science is built on trying to rationalise something that is hitherto irrational.
And the only thing that makes the paranormal or the supernatural or something within ufology different is the fact that there isn't an explanation that has actually been found for that that actually yet works.
So that's always interested me.
But, you know, when I start writing about the Anunnaki, I can try and explain or try to understand how it is that they could allegedly have such long lifespans, how it is that they could have created humans out of apes and to look at that from a slightly scientific point of view but in such a way that it is interesting and that it comes across and like yeah I can see how that would work and that's a fascinating idea
and to also try to understand how if they were still here moving amongst us what would be their motivation how would they act What would they try to achieve?
And my tremendous interest is to think that if you had a few Anunnaki still stranded on Earth, and the rest of their civilization is in the far-flung reaches of the solar system, they would be sort of almost like trapped rats on a ship full of people that they wouldn't understand who they were or what they were doing.
And the motivation for them to To move us in certain directions, to control us, to use exceptional power within our society to get what they want.
These ideas interest me because they would be so ancient that their wisdom and their ideas about how to control and manipulate humans would be a fascinating thing to consider.
So have you taken into account the possibility that the Anunnaki might indeed As you say, be here.
I mean, literally, maybe there are some that are still here.
And then at the same time, if you think they might be in positions of power, Meaning they might be among what we call the Illuminati.
For example, are they as tall as they're talked about being still?
Did you think perhaps their size is not that tall anymore so they can blend in?
Or do you think that they would be hidden from view, for example?
For the purposes of the fiction, I have considered them to be just simply looking like very tall humans.
Just simply because...
It works better in the form of trying to make a story out of it, because they can move amongst us without being ten feet tall, and also there's no particular reason why they need to be ten feet tall.
The Mesopotamians and the Arkadians and the Sumerians, they would have depicted the gods amongst men as being massive compared to the humans, but they could also have just been alluding to power.
The bigger person in the picture, like the pharaoh.
The pharaoh wouldn't necessarily need to be ten feet tall, but he would be depicted as bigger than normal humans just to show that he was a powerful being.
Meaning a metaphorical type of thing.
Yeah, so there's no reason to suppose that they couldn't be very similar to us.
But in the way that we are trying to discover immortal life, and in the way that science at the moment is considering the possibility that we could tame our genetics and not age.
That idea is interesting in terms of the alanarchy, because if their science had got to such a point where they had developed a medical technique for preventing ageing, They pop a pill every day that stops it.
And they just live essentially for as long as they want to live.
We, as humans, need to consider what that might be like if in the next 20, 30, 40 years such a development was to happen.
And it's not beyond the realms of possibility.
There are a number of leading scientific researchers who take that possibility very seriously and are very excited, particularly in terms of the amount of money they might make from that.
So we'd have to look at ourselves and wonder, how would we shape our civilisation if we all lived 10,000 years?
How would we shape our civilization if some of us could live that period that long, but most of us couldn't?
What would happen?
How would the people who could live 10,000 years Amalgamate themselves within our society knowing that everyone around them consider them to be immortal and in some way raised above them or were jealous of them and so on.
And these ideas pertain not just to us, they are not just ideas that we need to consider now as science fiction but possibly something that's going to happen, but they relate directly to Sitchin's ideas as well.
Okay, now what about the occult and, you know, Marduk and all of this and the idea that there were two...
In other words, Sitchin talks about, you know, Enlil and Enki and that one group stayed behind, in theory, Enlil, and that Enki...
You know, that there may be somebody coming back, and that the fact that they were at war, different groups of Anunnaki, the fact that they may have offspring, the fact that they may have different philosophical views on how to run life on Earth, so to speak.
Well, Karius is exactly what I'm writing about.
Wonderful.
And my interest is...
The two protagonists, particularly in the new book, The Followers of Horus, the two protagonists are Endel and Enki.
Okay.
And Enki, as historically was the case, is the guardian of humans.
He's trying to help us.
He's trying to be the person who saves us.
His brother is far more interested in his own power and is a generous god, effectively, And the juxtaposition between them, the way the story moves forward is built upon the conflict between them of two brothers.
Okay.
And is this published?
It will be.
It will be.
And how long from now?
It's with the publisher.
Wonderful.
So this is great timing then for us to talk about this.
Absolutely.
And the name of that book is?
The Followers of Horus.
The Followers of Horus.
The occult view is that Horus is coming into his own at this time.
That's interesting.
Oh, you're not aware of that?
No.
Oh, okay.
Well, this is, it's also, it's built into the Crowley, Tarot, and some of the philosophy that was early 19th century, and, you know, all of that.
So, are you investigating?
I mean, there are people out there talking about, sort of in a diabolical way, and has this sort of gotten into your plot, or is this something that you just kind of landed on on your own?
I landed on my own, but it's in keeping with what you're talking about.
Interesting.
So, the idea is that the Anunnaki are generally not here for our They're not here to look after us.
They're potentially, as protagonists, they have their own agenda.
And the way our society is swept along by that could potentially be quite a negative thing.
Which ties in with what you're saying.
The Followers of Horus, the title of the story alludes to a group of an ancient cult who protect the secret of the Anunnaki.
And all the way through to a huge NASA cover-up.
And a very, very powerful people behind the scene.
And those people sort of move through the story in a fairly dark way.
Okay.
And have you looked at the work, for example, of Richard Hoagland?
Because he talks about the magicians.
I've obviously seen a lot of Richard Hoagland's work down the years.
But the specifics of what you're talking about now, I mean...
One of the things I haven't done with this story is to, in my fiction, I haven't, I've made almost a point not to read up around these ideas because I want what's coming through me effectively to be just what's coming out of my head.
Wonderful.
Well, okay, so I would encourage you, even if you decide to write, well, you've obviously written it, but now to go back and actually you might find threads of what you've landed on seemingly on your own to be actual truths that other people are following.
And then I also think the work of Jordan Maxwell.
Okay.
Because he's talking about exactly that.
And our interviews with Jordan Maxwell and Richard Hoagland will be of great interest to you along these lines.
Has anyone bothered you, for example?
You know, do you have your phones tapped?
Do you have evidence of any surveillance on your life?
I don't have any evidence of surveillance in my life.
And I've good reason to believe that it could easily happen if it was going to happen.
So that isn't something that worries me particularly, no.
I think that my work is sufficiently non-mainstream to not create too much trouble for anybody who would be worried about what I have to say.
Whether that changes in the future I don't know, but I don't consider myself to be a threat to anybody.
Okay.
So, but what is your conclusion in your new book?
If you don't mind my asking, I don't mean, I don't want you to give away the plot completely, but if you could, like, in general terms, maybe...
To spell it out.
The two books, the novels I've written, are back-to-back.
Ezekiel 1 and The Followers of Horus.
Ezekiel 1 discusses the conspiracy as it's going, as it sort of unfolds on Earth.
And the followers of Horus, essentially, because the Zeke one's already out so I can describe a little bit about it, essentially the idea is that NASA build a very considerable size spacecraft in orbit around the Earth, massive.
And the protagonist in the story, who's a journalist, discovers about it and tries to find out why.
And people along the way get killed.
And he really can't get to the bottom of what's happening.
He enlists the help of an astronomer who helps him to prove that this thing is in existence and is orbiting the planet.
And then they realise, as they do further research and further leads come along, that it's built to take humans to the Dark Star as an exploratory mission.
But nobody knows about it.
It's a secret mission.
From what I've said before, the work of Nasa in this regard is moved along by the Amenaki, who want to create a link between Earth and their homeworld.
So The Followers of Horus takes that sort of unfolding conspiracy, which doesn't ever really break in the first book.
It is alluded to, it's discovered, but it doesn't explode into the public arena for various reasons in the book.
And it follows the space mission, which involves a crew who have amongst them the followers of Horus, and the crew have to endure with people amongst them who are controlling what's going on and a dark secret involved with that and the whole thing gets very paranoid and gets very very difficult and eventually they
make it there but it's a bit of a mess getting there and in the meantime on earth the conspiracy sort of reaches ahead and stuff happens Okay, well this is, you know, it's beginning to sound like a great Hollywood movie.
Are you interested?
Well, I've had some interest already.
Have you?
Yes.
Fascinating.
I've had some interest in the first book.
But the first book on its own needs the second book.
And I left it in a very precarious position at the end of the book, knowing that I needed to write the next one.
Okay.
So the second one.
So the person who's already shown interest as a film hasn't even got the second one.
But do they know of its existence?
I think so.
Yeah, well, they do know that it's been written.
I see.
But they haven't read it.
They haven't read it.
They haven't had the opportunity to see that.
I know the two back-to-back would be something of a blockbuster.
There's no doubt about it.
Okay, yeah, because the one thing that always sort of triggers Hollywood is something that is plausible, has scientific basis, and yet it's pretty outlandish, you know, and so that the plot potentiality is fascinating, and what you've got here is the makings of that kind of a sci-fi blockbuster type thing.
Great!
I'm glad to hear you're doing something like that, because it's lovely to have someone with science, a basis in science, writing this kind of thing.
Because the most exasperating thing, I don't know if you consider yourself a sci-fi buff, but if you are a sci-fi buff and you do watch those movies, it can be really exasperating if they miss out on the science, if the science is really off.
This is really interesting.
So you made a leap from the Dark Star to fiction writing, and then are you going to go back to science at some point, or do you consider that you're constantly investigating, or did you really reach a point where you couldn't go beyond a certain point with your investigations?
I think you're very right about that, Carrie.
I mean, I've been looking at this for ten years.
I've dragged out huge amounts of information.
And it really is, in the terms of pure science, it really is at the point now where that discovery could and should be made.
If Wise doesn't find it in the next 12 months, there's two possibilities.
One of them is, it simply isn't there.
The second possibility is, it is there, but...
The repercussions of it are such that it cannot be announced and the whole thing gets covered up.
Those are the two possibilities.
But WISE has a really, really good opportunity to find this thing.
So, in a way, speculating further about where it is, how big it is, what distance it is, it's a moot point in a way because we effectively stand on the threshold of its discovery.
And so my interest now lies in What happens when people realise this thing could be a reality?
And how is that impacted?
And how does the other ideas, how would that impact upon society should this thing be discovered?
Okay, well that makes sense.
But at the same time, I should add that I continue to update my website with all the things that come to me that sound interested to people who are looking at this subject, and I still debate the subject widely as well.
So I am interested in the science.
I just think that, as you say, I've reached the point with that where, you know, my case has been made, and I'm either right or I'm wrong.
And, you know, for me, I can start to look at other avenues of interest.
Okay, so let's say you're right, and let's say you're even right about a mission out there, okay, and you're talking about A second Earth, for all intents and purposes, are you not?
Yes.
Okay, and because that in and of itself then goes off on another tangent, because of the state of our planet, because of where we're at with this planet, and if their planet is not in such a bad state,
in theory, or if it's the reverse, if their planet's in the worst state, and they're aiming to take over our planet, or, you know, in other words, there's issues with, The truth of what you're talking about and the implications going on, you know, into the future, right?
It's not just that, it's also obviously, you know, coming into our solar system again and the cataclysmic, I guess, you know.
My third book would be, it is involved around, I mean, towards the end of this second book, Followers of Horus, I give a very, very, very detailed description of my vision of what their world would be like.
Okay.
And how it works and, you know, how that is even possible.
And so I bring the science into that and create it into that, paint that picture from using the science as a basis.
And the story ends at a reasonable point where the next section of the third book would be them coming here again.
Because that would be the natural position.
We discover them.
We send out contact.
They realise that we're at that level, they come back, and then what would happen?
And that is the thing that interests me for the next instalment, as it were, to try and consider the impact that that would have on us, which would be absolutely immense.
Right.
Okay, well, I mean, I don't know, you know, are you familiar with Jordan Maxwell's work at all?
I'm afraid not.
I'm sorry, Jordan.
Oh my, okay, so that's stunning because in essence he's talking about the return of the Anunnaki.
So in a sense he's kind of like at the level of your third book with his theories and he has evidence, symbolically and otherwise, and the fact that there are huge implications right now for this and what it actually may portend for this world.
Well, I'm pleased to hear that someone else is thinking about these ideas.
Okay, yeah, fascinating.
You know, it's potentially fundamental for us.
In Britain...
I think it's fair to say that the alternative knowledge community is on a rearguard action.
I think it's always been held within society as a rather sort of cute little club of people who everyone else can take the mick out of, to put it that way.
But really speaking, there isn't anything left of it.
It's lost its way a little bit.
And because I'm British and I live here, I lose contact, which I normally have, because we don't seem to have the international conferences that we did, and we don't have the ability to network and discuss ideas.
That seems to be lost.
It goes on, but in very, very small little groups, very, very niche-look groups.
And I do feel here somewhat cut off in Britain, researching these particular ideas.
On the positive side, of course, we've got the internet.
So I'm sorry, Jordan, I haven't come across that, and it's just largely because of time.
Sure.
Well, I mean, there's actually nothing wrong with you developing into these ideas on your own.
I mean, in some ways, at least from the point of view of Camelot, which we're always trying to paint the big picture.
And so if we get individuals that are coming to the same conclusions from completely different directions...
That actually tends to substantiate at least some of the theories.
Obviously you're on the same track, and I think that that indicates there's something really substantial going on.
So there is a great deal of movement, a great deal of curiosity, a great deal of anticipation, even moving into 2012.
But we're also looking at if what you're saying has potential, if it could be true, whatever has brought them back.
And where their heads are at, so to speak, is a whole other ballgame.
And what they intend, and so on and so forth.
See, I entirely agree with you.
And what interests me is the fact that they should be more advanced than us as beings.
And as a writer, trying to put yourself into the mind of...
A non-human who actually has sort of superhuman intellectual abilities isn't easy.
Because it's rather like if you could imagine a dog novelist trying to write a novel about his owner.
You know, the dog, in order to get completely into the owner's mind, needs to think like a human.
So in order to write that kind of novel, you need to start thinking about superhuman sort of intellectual abilities, and that is not an easy thing to portray.
and what is clear though is if that's the case that they are immensely complex beings that their agenda would be complex that they might seem really complicated to us because they might be trying to do things at the same time that mutually don't even work together and we were discussing the sort of conflict between ender and enki that's a case in point the anunnaki wouldn't necessarily work as a unit
The conflicts that go on between them, the complexity of that is fascinating in itself, but their reaction to us is likely to be varied, and the politics of that is fascinating to think about.
Right, and then how it plays out.
Quite.
I'm pleased that you've explored this particular subject matter so vigorously, because it is something that really, really interests me, and I'm really pleased that this interests you as well.
It's good stuff.
To be on the trail of the Anunnaki is a fascinating place to be, I would say.
And it seems that we're both on the same trail at this time.
If it's true, or has elements of truth, I think your life might become more complicated in the future.
But I hope you remain safe regardless.
Thank you.
I'm pleased to hear that.
I live a fairly sort of simple existence with my family and so on and I'm not somebody who's looking for life becoming more complicated.
Sure.
So I don't know how that would impact on our lives but at the end of the day what interests me is to present ideas that resonate with people and to get them to think about things that are outside the box that they wouldn't normally think about and You know, if I have that impact, I'm pleased.
Okay.
▲
Export Selection