“We Have Been WARNED” Neil deGrasse Tyson On UFO Files, Trump & Alien Existence
Despite some cynicism over the UFO files, we could be about to see real evidence of aerial phenomena which even the brightest minds in government have been unable to explain. The US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, spoke earlier this year about UFOs performing implausible maneuvers above sensitive government sites, conjuring excitable talk about both a serious threat to national security and a vast new frontier for science. Meanwhile, Elon Musk is talking about building AI data centers in space - and that’s before he colonizes Mars. Are we truly entering a new era of unprecedented discovery and exploration? Or are we getting a bit carried away? Piers Morgan asks Neil deGrasse Tyson, who joins Uncensored to discuss whether aliens are real and his new book Take Me To Your Leader. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Big Questions About Aliens00:02:42
It seems extraordinary that we haven't been back to the moon in so many decades.
Everybody'd like to hate Trump when you're on the left, unless we're going back into space to show the world who and what we are relative to everybody else.
He brings in Artemis, which is a really woke name for the space program.
There's a no end train of people talking about aliens.
If they're talking about it and they're insiders and they're whistleblowers, then who cares what the president says?
They're the ones who I'm going to listen to.
The president, if there is a cover-up, is going to be in on the cover ground.
More than 90% of Earth's existence, it has had life.
No one who's done the math is in denial of there being some kind of alien life in the universe.
So what's the answer?
Well, many cynical people have pointed out that the imminent release of the UFO files is a very convenient distraction for a president who's fighting many fires.
With some justification, the same people are concerned that given recent precedent, the UFO files might end up looking something like this.
But all politics aside, the prospect is tantalizing.
We could be about to see real evidence of aerial phenomena, which even the brightest minds in government have been unable to explain.
And it's not only about flying saucers and little green men.
The U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke earlier this year about UFOs performing implausible maneuvers above sensitive government sites.
We're talking about rapid acceleration, extreme speeds, trans-medium travel, things which defy the laws of physics as we know them.
All of this conjures excitable talk about both the serious threat to national security and a vast new frontier for science.
And it comes at a time when space is firmly back in our hearts and minds.
Man and a woman is about to return to the moon.
Elon Musk is talking about building AI data centers in space.
That's before he colonizes Mars.
Jeff Bezos has a plan to move toxic pollutants into space.
And no, it's nothing to do with Katie Perry.
The question is, are we truly entering a new era of unprecedented discovery and exploration?
Or are we all getting a bit carried away?
Well, I can't think of anyone better to talk to about this to answer the big questions with some big answers than the astrophysicist and author of the impeccab forthcoming book, Take Me to Your Leader, Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Neil, great to have you back on Uncensored.
Yeah, Piers, it's always good to chat with you.
So look, let's just cut to the quick.
Understanding God Gaps00:05:08
Do aliens exist?
Have you ever seen one?
Do you think we're going to be shown evidence of them?
Well, let's separate that question into two parts.
One of them is, might there be extraterrestrial life elsewhere in the universe?
And if you run the numbers, how old is the universe?
What are the ingredients of life as we know it?
Turns out those ingredients are the most common chemically active ingredients in the universe.
And the universe is old.
It's vast.
Our galaxy has several hundred billion stars.
And there may be as many as a trillion galaxies.
And life got underway on Earth almost as quickly as it possibly could have, within about 100 million years.
So more than 90% of Earth's time, 90% of Earth's existence, it has had life.
So you just add all that up and you say no one who's done the math is in denial of there being some kind of alien life somewhere or perhaps everywhere in the universe.
That's a different question from asking, have intelligent aliens come and visited us here on Earth?
Right.
So what's the answer?
Do you think they have?
You got to earn the answer, okay?
So it comes down to, let's back up just a moment.
There was a day before we understood much about the physical universe, and it was very easy to ascribe nature and the goings on in nature to gods, God or gods.
So a storm would whip up in the ocean, and that was Poseidon wreaking havoc on your town.
Maybe somebody did something bad.
The lightning bolt would strike.
Well, that was Zeus.
So often things we didn't understand, the power of a deity was ascribed to it.
And philosophers have called that the God of the gaps.
And it persists even to this day in many people's thinking.
Like if you get ill and you did something wrong, then you have a guilt complex and God is punishing you.
Okay.
It's God of the gaps because you don't know why you're sick or you don't know how you got sick.
All right.
Today, what I find is many people see things they don't understand.
A light in the sky that moves in a way they can't predict or foresee.
And they credit aliens.
So for me, crediting things we don't understand to aliens is the continuation of the God of the gaps.
But alien of the gaps doesn't have a resonance to it.
So in my book, I just introduced a new term, aliens of our ignorance.
So there's something you don't quite understand, aliens.
There it is.
And it becomes a very convenient way to account for mysteries.
And in science, we love mysteries.
We live on the frontier, on the boundary between what is known and unknown in the universe.
So if at every time we had an unknown, we said aliens, we wouldn't have gotten anywhere in our research programs.
Right.
So that's a very, very sophisticated, highly intelligent, incredibly well-informed response without actually answering the question.
So my more direct question, Neil deGrasse-Tyson, is, have you seen anything yourself in your entire life where you thought that to me looks like evidence of extraterrestrial stroke, genuine alien life?
It's a great question.
And I've been looking up to the night sky since I was nine years old.
By the time I was 11, if you asked me that annoying question that adults always ask kids, what do you want to be when you grow up?
My answer was astrophysicist.
So looking up that long, that frequently, for so much of my life, you end up seeing things that you've never seen before.
And then you look it up and you find out, oh, there's a weather phenomenon.
It's lightning.
It's the clouds.
It's a different kind of cloud.
And so you become highly fluent at all the things that might otherwise trick someone without that background into thinking it's extraterrestrial.
There's a case where, for example, the planet Venus, which is white cloud shrouded, very near, it's the nearest planet to Earth.
So it's bright, not only because it's near, but because it's white, reflects sunlight.
And it's near the sun on each side in the morning or in the evening.
If you ever hear of the evening star or the morning star, they're referring to Venus.
So there was a time when there was a police car that was tracking a UFO, calling it in.
And they were saying the UFO is darting left and right, and we're tracking it.
Secrets of Area 5100:16:11
Okay.
And it turns out they were tracking Venus on a road that itself was curving.
And they were not conscious of the fact that they were the one swerving.
They were thinking the UFO Venus to them, because it's UFO to them.
They don't know what they were looking at, that that's what it was doing.
So there are these reports of things people see where if you knew better, you would be able to explain it, and then you wouldn't call the police department.
That still leaves behind cases that are not explained by natural causes or known phenomena.
So it could be phenomena yet to be discovered.
Frontier.
I'm good with that.
A new sky phenomenon.
Let's investigate it.
Let's get more data.
Go for it.
But just because you don't know what it is, and it's doing things that are mysterious to you, and you use the U for unidentified flying object, or as you know, the United States rebranded that as UAP, unidentified anomalous phenomenon.
Who are they kidding?
They're talking about the same thing, of course.
So you rebrand it, but you can't look at something that's anomalous, say you don't know what it is, and then declare that you know what it is.
That doesn't comport.
You just say, I don't know what it is.
Let's investigate it further, which I'm all for.
A lot of the speculation, I guess, in the last hundred years was fueled by Roswell in the 50s, by this fabled Area 51 at the U.S. Air Force facility in southern Nevada and so on.
I presume, I mean, I imagine you've either been there or know people who have, you've looked at all this.
What is the truth about Roswell Area 51?
I'm not authorized to comment for just kidding.
You're pleading the extraterrestrial fifth.
So what I, just to just to back up for a moment, so what I explore in Take Me to Your Leader is all the ways aliens might visit us, could visit us, may have visited us, and just unpack what might be alien science, alien technology, even alien powers, powers they might wield that we don't biologically.
And so you can approach that question with this kind of guardrails on the conclusions you might jump to.
And the guardrails, because the laws of physics, as we experience them here on Earth, it turns out, apply across the universe and across time.
It's not an assumption.
It's a measurement that we have made.
So we get to constrain what's going on here.
And so now getting more directly to your question, I've been to Roswell, never been to Area 51.
I can say that if the government is stock, so let's assume the government is stockpiling aliens.
Let's ask a whole other set of questions.
Let's just do this.
You ready?
Come with me on this.
If they're doing that, let's say at Area 51 or anywhere, no one is leaking that information.
So many people who are sure that the U.S. government is a big, bloated, inefficient bureaucracy simultaneously will declare that it's masterminding a major cover-up when thousands of people are in on it and keeping a secret.
And all I can think of is Benjamin Franklin's edict from his almanac, where he said back in the early 1800s, he wrote, Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead.
This is just a blunt understanding of human nature.
And by the way, the kinds of secrets they're talking about are the tasty secrets, the really juicy secrets.
The government, of course, keeps secrets that no one even cares about, right?
So it's the ones that you really care about.
And how about the janitor that could have just slipped an iPhone photo of the alien and then immediately posted it?
Yes, the janitor would lose his job the next day, but it would be the most famous, richest janitor there ever was, because that would go viral.
Faster than cat videos go viral.
So we can ask the question, because every one of us has a smartphone on our hip capable of high-resolution photos and videos, high resolution, and we upload four or five billion photos a day to the internet, plus a million hours of video a day to the internet.
None of them have detailed images of aliens.
So either the aliens are only coming to Earth to visit our military installations and the U.S. government, or did not really hear.
I mean, maybe they just care about our military.
That's possible, I suppose.
But if we were under alien invasion, it seems to me that would get crowdsourced because everybody would take pictures.
It wouldn't be hearing.
No one would have to swear they're telling the truth because you just bring forth the alien.
Well, there are two things I would say to that, which are, I think, interesting.
So Marco Rubio and others implied in the Age of Disclosure documentary that some information is hidden from even the President of the United States, which I suspect may be true.
But then we had the extraordinary situation of President Obama, who was president for eight years, just casually asked at the end of an interview last week with Brian Tyler Cohen about whether aliens are real.
And he says this.
Are aliens real?
They're real, but I haven't seen them.
And they're not being kept in Area 51.
There's no underground facility unless there's this enormous conspiracy and they hid it from the president of the United States.
And Obama replied, yeah, he thinks they're real.
Now, when the president of the United States, who's been in that job for eight years, when one of those guys says he thinks aliens are real, notwithstanding he backtracked a bit afterwards, but then that moment, everyone goes, whoa, whoa, what?
Obama thinks aliens are real?
What's he seeing?
Yeah, I don't see why people credit politicians with having deep insights into scientific discoveries of the universe.
That's odd to me as a scientist, because anyone is going to discover an alien.
It's going to be a scientist looking up with our thousands of telescopes that we have around the Earth.
Way more television.
Wouldn't they tell?
But wouldn't you?
Okay, but on that point, though, Neil, wouldn't you then feel compelled as a scientist to immediately inform the president?
So that's the whole point.
The title of my book is Take Me to Your Leader.
So the alien comes down and says, take me to your leader.
Who do you take it to?
Do you take it to the elected official who doesn't know science?
Or do you take it to a science agency where you have cryptographers and biologists and chemists?
And so, or the alien having eavesdropped on our signals might think the actual leaders are Taylor Swift or some other pop culture figure.
And so the point, it's an interesting dilemma you might have.
I would simply say that if alien came up to me and told me to take me to its leader, I would take it to the nearest science conference and we would engage in conversation and later on inform the government.
That's totally how I would do that.
And Could it be that aliens are in that interview with Obama?
He says, yeah, aliens are real.
I didn't interpret that as we are stockpiling aliens.
He's scientifically literate enough to know that in the universe, there are likely aliens.
And that's how I interpreted that first sentence.
I didn't view that as him leaking secrets or anything.
That was just...
Yeah, but hang on, hang on, hang on.
You are a super brain.
You know the difference.
And he's a lawyer, by the way, who even more knows the difference between how you phrase things.
The difference between saying, look, it's likely in the whole universe, there's other stuff, right?
And him actually responding directly to are aliens real with a yes.
Okay, since no one in government has presented an alien, I did not immediately think the government has aliens.
By the way, by the way, the notion that there's some kind of a cover-up, how can you continue to think that when in the film, in the documentary, disclosure, I don't want to confuse the documentary with the Steven Spielberg movie that's about to come out.
The Spielberg movie is called Disclosure Day.
And so Age of Disclosure.
In that documentary, there's a no end train of people talking about aliens in the lock box in the shed.
And so if they're talking about it and they're insiders and they're whistleblowers, then who cares what the president says?
These people are on the inside.
So they're the ones who I'm going to listen to, not the president, especially since the president, if there is a cover-up, is going to be in on the cover-up.
And someone who's sneaking information out is not.
And so the fact that people listen to what presidents say as though it is the truth, I've never understood that at all.
They're just someone we allow.
Could it be that aliens...
Could it be that aliens are coming to our planet and identifying as humans?
I mean, could Elon Musk, who joked about being an alien, could he actually be an alien?
It's double bluffing us.
He's got a super brain.
He does extraordinary things.
In many ways, he doesn't come across as particularly human.
Could it be that if you were a superior alien force, would you send a bunch of Elon Musks along and just blend in and then slowly take over?
Okay, there's a way to test for that.
And that is you line up everybody who's a little suspicious looking.
Okay.
This is kind of what the film Men in Blackwater in their headquarters.
They were tracking all of the aliens on Earth.
And there were people who were in pop culture and we said, and they look a little different from like Michael Jackson was one of them.
I remember in one of the frames.
And so the way to do that is get the most alien-likely imposter you can find.
Let it be Elon Musk.
Just bring him into the lab and take a blood sample.
If the heart is in the wrong place, if he's got green blood instead of, that would mean it's based on copper instead of iron.
Not a weird exotic thought there.
And so you could do that.
So now, if they're human physiologically and the alien is just duping us, then you just kind of, there's no way to tell.
If the alien made a perfect human, then as far as we're concerned, they're human of alien manufacture, but there's no way for you to know because you constructed the example to be such that there's no way to know so that you can continue to believe that aliens are among us.
This is conspiracy thinking 101, where you invent an account that allows you to continue to think what you'd like, even if the direct evidence isn't there or if there's a gap in the evidence.
You gap it yourself so that you can continue to believe.
So I came to conclude that it's almost a belief system because no one has, like I said, if you bring forth the alien, I don't need your testimony.
We got the alien.
I would argue that given we know nothing about aliens from what you're saying, then all theories about them potentially are conspiracy theories, right?
I mean, we can say, as you've done, and Obama stated when the Fuori blew up about his comments, well, it makes sense that there would be other stuff out there.
That in itself is a conspiracy theory.
It may not be.
You're just supposing that it's highly unlikely.
And I would agree with you.
I would buy into this theory that it's just very unlikely that in the universe we're the only living entities, right?
But everything by definition would be a conspiracy theory until there's any factual evidence.
No, no, not really, because the difference is, okay, so what you're asking, I think you're asking, is whether the fact that scientists who have done the calculation have pretty high confidence that there are aliens out there.
So, okay, that's one thing.
And by the way, we are looking.
We have major observing programs helped in large measure by the James Webb Space Telescope to look for evidence of aliens.
And by the way, to the scientist, an alien is any kind of biota, right?
It could be microbial.
So we'd be happy if he found anything, not just, you know, the kind that would come here in a spaceship.
So I have a hard time accepting that looking at the statistics on that, and now we're motivated to search, that somehow that's a conspiracy theory because we're testing our conclusions.
Okay.
The conclusions are not a given.
We're presuming there's life out there.
Now let's go find it.
The UFO people are declaring there's like if we've been visited.
That's a declaration.
But they don't have the evidence or it's hidden or it's a conspiracy or it's covered up.
And so they arrive at their conclusion gapping the absence of evidence.
And so that's, to me, different.
You talk in the book, which is a fascinating read, but you talk about the etiquette we should consider if we ever do meet an alien.
Just give me a little bit of that.
Yeah, I mean, we have so many assumptions that we just take for granted that we, because one of the chapters, the first chapter is called Alien to Us.
And I explore all the ways we've imagined aliens in our pop culture, in our films, in our books.
And so this gives us a range of our creativity.
And then we can then ask, well, what would we look like to the animal?
And how much thought have we put into that?
For example, the alien comes down and wants to hang out with you and you say, excuse me, I need to spend the next one third of Earth's rotation in a semi-comatose state.
I'll be back to you in eight hours.
That's across kind of.
And then the whole world is just semi-comatose.
Not even sort of awake.
They're just, you can poke them and nothing happens.
Things.
You're urged to want to shake their hand.
Like that's, not all humans do that.
In China, it's more of a bow with you hold your own hand.
So that's not even all around the Earth.
But if they happen to have some appendage sticking forward, you don't just grab it and shake it.
You don't know what part of that alien you just grabbed.
And so just leave your assumptions at home and go there with no assumptions at all.
AI Self-Design Risks00:11:43
And the alien, making this up, of course, suppose the alien had a little bit of dog in it.
Just however that, all right, it probably doesn't have DNA, but if it had some dog behavior and it lands, the first thing it might do is go around and want to...
And we see dogs do that.
That's just normal for dogs.
All right.
If an alien did that, you say, wait, what, what?
But maybe that's normal for aliens.
So I spent a whole chapter exploring how we are alien to aliens, because I don't think people gave that enough thought.
No, I gave it no thought until I read that.
It's fascinating.
Actually, it made perfect sense.
Perfect.
You know what else I would do?
I would leave behind everyone who thinks Earth is flat or does not recognize that science is a path to objective truth because we want to leave a good impression on the aliens.
And if they think, if they see members of your species that are totally out of it, that could leave a bad impression.
Because I don't want the alien to phone home and say, there is no sign of intelligent life on Earth.
I want to give him the best chance that they can say nice things about us in the report.
Are we building our own alien force through AI and robots?
And do you fear that?
I mean, a lot of very bright people are getting very concerned that AI will ultimately learn to self-design and that when it does, it may well take a view that humans are pretty useless.
They spend eight hours a day in comatose conditions, for example.
We drink, we fornicate, we take drugs, we fight, and so on.
And they might, if they get smart, which they're getting very smart very quickly, just go, well, let's get rid of them.
But I mean, on a serious point, do you worry about that?
I get it.
I get it.
So let me take one step back and then two steps forward to that question.
So one step back is, we measure how great AI is by how well it imitates our intelligence and artificial intelligence.
And by the way, who said humans are intelligent?
Humans did.
Okay.
So is that the measure of intelligence?
Because we call ourselves intelligent.
If an alien came, would it judge us to be intelligent?
If it built a spaceship and crossed the galaxy, chances are we got nothing on these aliens.
And they'll look at our attempts to make a computer program that can imitate us or be a little smarter than us, and they'll just laugh because human intelligence is a low bar.
If you have a computer beating human intelligence and an alien is looking at that, it's like, what?
You know, we can program that in an afternoon.
Little, little, like an alien junior in our basement is programming that.
So I don't necessarily see human intelligence as the measure of things, just for those reasons.
Just step back and ask.
A quick example here is we are our closest genetic relative is the chimp, and we're like 2% different in DNA.
And the smartest chimps there ever were can stack boxes and reach a banana.
And it might do some rudimentary sign language.
They're only 2% different from us.
Well, then we're prone to say, what a difference that is.
We have philosophy and art and civilization and the James Webb telescope.
And all they can do is stack boxes.
Well, imagine a life form that same 2% vector beyond us, that we are beyond the chimp.
What would we look like to them?
The smartest among us would match their toddlers.
Stephen Hawking to them would, oh, that's cute.
He knows astrophysics.
He can do it in his head like little alien Timmy Zork Jr. over here, just home from preschool.
So I don't view AI with humans as the metric, as something that is cosmically significant.
Now, more directly to answer you, yeah, AI, once it has its own agency, that's the scary part, then what would it think of humans?
Might it make us their pet, for example?
And then I thought about that.
We kind of don't want that, of course, but look at how we treat our pets.
You will step, I won't say you specifically, but we know humans will step over homeless other humans in the street to go home and cuddle with their pet, their pet dog, their pet cat.
So maybe being the pet of an alien is not so bad if our behavior towards pets is any indication of this.
If they otherwise see us the way the Smith sauce in the Matrix, that we're virus on Earth that we need to get rid of, that could be bad.
So maybe we should start behaving better in anticipation of that day.
But do you think it's capable, AI, of self-designing?
Do you think it can get to that stage?
I've seen opinions split on that.
Yeah, yeah.
I don't, in my life, I've written maybe 50,000 lines of code, but that was long ago.
But I was in it and I felt it.
And the computer is this thing.
You're talking to it and you design it to talk back to you and help you and give you data that you couldn't have calculated.
And so its powers are only growing exponentially.
If it could design itself, that's a game changer right there.
But here's what I would ask.
AI is like in a computer.
Yes, there's all these robots that people are designing.
By the way, the human form is the last thing you want to imitate.
You know, it's the human form, really?
Okay.
With two feet, we can just easily get knocked over.
You need at least three.
Okay.
Insects know this.
Insects have six legs.
Three feet are on the three legs or on the ground at any given moment.
And so it's stable the whole way.
That's why they can scurry so quickly.
And why most mammals can outrun us.
Okay.
So our form is not a thing that should be emulated.
But regardless, The AI is in a computer sitting there on a shelf.
Okay.
I, as a human, still get to go to the beach, go to a party, meet people I've never met before, find a shell, a mollusk on the shore that maybe it's a new mollusk that's not catalogued yet.
I can make discoveries because I am mobile and I can get around.
A piece of silicon is now, maybe you just make mobile AI.
Okay.
Is it going to go hang out at the beach and watch a sunset and compose a poem on that?
I don't see that in the in the, I don't see that in line as what's going to come.
And so we'd have to train it to have that bit of sort of humanity and humility about its own knowledge and its own place in our world.
You know, it's interesting you mentioned Stephen Hawking.
I've said this many times, but I did, as you did, one of the last interviews with him before he sadly died.
He was an amazing guy.
But I did ask him, what's the biggest threat to mankind?
And he said, when AI learns to self-design, that's it.
So I just hope.
So he didn't give a caveat as to whether it was going to self-design.
He just said, that would be the moment.
Yeah, one of my favorite quotes is from this sci-fi writer, Ray Bradbury.
And I met him only once and I confirmed with him that it's a legit quote.
Apparently, a woman once came up to him and said, Mr. Bradbury, why do you write these stories about apocalyptic futures?
Is that where you see humanity headed?
And he says, No, I write those stories so you know to avoid them.
And when you look at the number of alien movies we have drawn from the creativity of our most creative storytellers, so many of them have bad endings that take Terminator early out of the box on that one, 1984.
I think that the first one was.
It's 1985.
So we have been warned by our own media, our own movies.
We have been warned.
So we're in a position to say we know what to look for.
Here are the guardrails to prevent that from happening.
And even Isaac Asimov, with his famous three laws of robotics, the first law is: if you're designing a robot, the robot must never harm humans.
The second law is the robot must never allow harm to happen to humans if their intervention could prevent it.
The third law is the robot must look after its own existence, provided doing so does not violate the first or second laws.
I'm reciting these for you only to tell you that Isaac Asimov, as early as the 1950s, knew that you have to put guardrails on your creation.
And to the extent that there are no guardrails, I love the title of this book that came out recently.
It said, If anyone builds it, everyone dies.
That kind of checks.
Okay.
That's kind of there.
And so we just, we, the guardrail part is what's important.
Yeah, it's fascinating to see where it all goes.
I want to talk just quickly.
Let's just think about briefly, geopolitically.
So, so think we're old enough, we're about the same age.
We remember the Cold War and the tensions surrounding the buildup of nuclear weaponry that could destroy each other and the world multiple times over.
Once the realization that there are no winners in an all-out nuclear exchange, then people came to the table and started reducing the stockpiles.
So if we tell the world, if anyone builds this super intelligent AI, this AGI, advanced general intelligence AI, if anyone builds it, that's the end of us all.
Then maybe we can come together with world wisdom, the wisdom of the ages that tells us no one should have in their hands something that can destroy the world.
So who knows?
Maybe the prospect of inventing that will bring peace to the world.
Have you thought of that?
It could.
I mean, I would say that the thing I'd be wary about would be a nefarious person or group who managed to get the most brilliant AI scientists in the world and get them into a dungeon somewhere and have genuinely malicious, nefarious intent on ending the world.
Why We Stopped Going to the Moon00:05:50
That's a problem.
Could the rest of the world stop them?
That's a problem.
So it's not just a malicious intent.
If you get someone who doesn't care if they die, then there's nothing they're protecting, right?
And that's, you're right.
These such people exist among us in our species.
So I don't have a good answer for that.
No, I was hoping you did.
Sorry.
Maybe.
I just want to end the alien will have.
That would be ironic.
I love talking to you.
I could talk to you for hours, but we're running a bit out of time.
I just want to talk to you quickly about NASA and Artemis 2.
So my understanding of this is they've got this mission going up, I think, in a couple of weeks.
It's a 10-day crewed test flight around the moon scheduled for 6th of March.
It will take astronauts further into space than anyone's been before, and it aims to set the stage for an eventual human landing again on the lunar surface for the first time since the 60s and 70s.
What do you feel about this?
I mean, it seems extraordinary that we haven't been back to the moon in so many decades.
Is it important that we do get back to the moon?
Is Artemis, do you think, going to be the way that we do that?
Well, let's remember why we went to the moon in the first place.
It wasn't because, oh, we're Americans, it's in our DNA, it's the next thing.
We were scared witless by the godless communists who had already put up a satellite, Sputnik, who put up, sorry, right.
So they put up Sputnik and they put up the first non-human animal.
Remember that was Laika, the dog.
They were beating us in access to space, yet we were supposed to be what we wanted the world to emulate.
And if we're lagging behind our adversary, that doesn't bode well geopolitically.
So Kennedy speaks in front of Congress in a joint session of Congress, six weeks after Yuri Gagarin came out of orbit and says, if the events of recent weeks are any indication of this impact of this adventure on the minds of men everywhere, we need to show the world the path of freedom over the path of tyranny.
It was a battle cry against communism.
So when we finally got to the moon, so we leapfrogged the Russians, got to the moon, looked over our shoulder, the Russians weren't there.
They weren't even planning to go to the moon.
So we say, we win, but then the kind of the race is over.
And that's why the program stopped.
It's not because Nixon lacked charisma, even if he did lack charisma.
That's not why we stopped going to the moon.
The geopolitical forcing of that decision evaporated.
So why did we stay on the moon?
No reason to geopolitically.
Science was never the driver.
You know how many scientists went to the moon?
One.
Do you know which moon mission that was?
The last.
Okay, enough said.
So let's keep going.
So why didn't we go back to the moon 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010?
No geopolitical forcing to enable it.
Let's go middle 20 teens.
China says they're going to put Tychonauts, their version of an astronaut, on the moon.
Then all of a sudden we say, oh, why don't we go back to the moon?
That sounds like the right thing to do.
And we don't mention the geopolitical forcing because that looks crass.
We just paint it as we're explorers.
And so in Trump 1, okay, 2016 to 2007, he brings in Artemis, which, by the way, is a really woke name for the space program.
Because Artemis was the female sister, twin sister, of Apollo.
Now that's good.
That's good.
Okay.
So Artemis begins.
And because NASA transcends politics in the sense that there are 10 NASA centers scattered into eight states, and you go general election to general election, they go four red, four blue in how they vote.
Three red, five blue, five red, three blue.
It's a mixture of the political spectrum.
So if someone says, I don't want to go into space, you cannot deduce whether they're Republican or Democrat with that answer.
So what that means is NASA's presence in the American culture actually transcends politics.
So Trump says, we're going to go back to the moon.
And then Biden comes in and says, we're keeping this Trump program.
Okay?
Everybody'd like to hate Trump when you're on the left, unless we're going back into space to show the world who and what we are relative to everybody else.
So that program has been in place since the 20 teens, and we're continuing it back into Trump's second term.
So there it is.
That's why we do it.
No, no one will admit that, but part the curtains and you read history, there you have it.
So and where are we going to the South Pole?
Oh, wait, wait.
So why is it the farthest?
Because the moon's orbit is not a perfect circle around the Earth.
So if you go to the moon while it's a little farther than average and you make a big loop orbit around it, when you're on the other side of that figure eight, then you're the farthest.
It's an incremental record that's being set.
Okay.
Okay, that's fine.
I like the fact that we're going back to the moon more than I care that they're setting a distance record, personally.
But they're going to the South Pole because that's where there might be water left over from comet impacts.
Traveling Through Wormholes00:02:56
And you go there, you have to surface mine it.
Then you have water.
You can drink it.
You can make rocket fuel.
You can pitch tent.
And so it's the beginnings of a colony on the moon so that other countries don't do that before we do.
Fascinating.
Just finally, if I had the unlimited power to let you do any exploration anywhere in the universe, but you can only have one trip.
What would you do?
One trip?
One trip?
Anywhere in the universe?
Well, I'll limit it power to give you one trip.
Okay.
I'd like to move through time and be witness to the formation of the moon when a Mars-sized protoplanet slammed into Earth, creating a ring system around Earth, like Saturn, that would coalesce and forth.
I want to be able to move through time.
That would just be an amazing thing to watch.
It would be popcorn right on the front row.
But if in terms of inventions, if I had unlimited resources, I'd want to invent wormholes.
That would be a game changer.
We know how to make wormholes, by the way.
We're just missing the substance that would allow it.
We need a substance that has negative gravity, because gravity brings things together into one place.
A wormhole has to pry it apart.
So you need a negative gravity substance.
We don't know if it exists in this universe or any other.
If it did, we can make wormholes, pry open the fabric of space and time, step through, unlike what they show in the movies where it's like a water slide ride.
That's not it.
You would just step through.
Like Rick and Morty, you step through.
Or who's the guy with the movie that does this?
Doctor Strange.
You just step through and get to another destination.
That would be a game changer.
And if you have wormholes, you don't need roads.
Right.
You just step through.
And you can connect the back of your refrigerator to the grocery.
And the grocery can peek and say, oh, you need some more eggs.
They just pop it in, close back the wormhole.
And so for me, if I had unlimited resources and unlimited access to unlimited laws of physics, the wormhole would be at the top of my list.
Fascinating.
Neil, brilliant to talk to you.
It's a great book.
I encourage everyone to go and give it one last plug.
Oh, I'm uncomfortable doing it.
But, okay, if you really want to know how to think about aliens, it's a primer for that first alien encounter.
So you won't be taken by surprise.
Just visiting this.
Take me to your leader out in May, I believe.
It's a cracking read.
Neil, thank you very much.
Thank you very much, too.
Supporting Independent Podcasts00:00:25
Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent.
The only boss around here is me.
To enjoy our show, we offer only one simple thing.
Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow PiersMorgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.
And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate, and entertain.
And we'll do it all for free.
independent on censored media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it Without you.