All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 16, 2009 - The Unexplained - Howard Hughes
01:13:44
Edition 25 - Beyond Knowledge Conference Part 1

The Unexplained live from Beyond Knowledge 2009, part 1 begins with Steve Bassett from theParadigm Research Group, Nick Pope and Richard C. Hoagland - continues with The Unexplained Edition 26.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Across the UK, across continental North America and around the world on the internet by webcast and podcast.
My name is Howard Hughes and this is The Unexplained.
Very excited, as promised.
This is Edition 25 from the Beyond Knowledge Conference in Liverpool just a few days ago as I speak.
This time round, we have Steve Bassett from the Paradigm Research Group, Nick Pope, UFO investigator who used to work for the British government, and Richard C. Hoagland, that conversation I've had on the front page of my website, www.theunexplained.tv, his first conversation with anybody, anywhere in the world, about his fascinating new research that ties together Saturn, an amazing kind of physics, and the Nazis.
You have to hear this.
It's coming last on this show.
But first up, to say thank you for all of the emails that have come in and continue to flood in about the show.
Thank you so much for your support.
It keeps me going.
Tell your friends about this show.
If you want to link to this website, let me know and we can make that happen.
If you want to partner with me, well, get in touch and let's talk, as they say.
The website address, please register a hit on it and send me some feedback, www.theunexplained.tv.
Thank you to Adam Cornwell for getting the message out there, for putting together the website and getting the shows online to you.
Adam, thank you.
You're doing a great job.
And also, of course, to Martin for the theme tune, the new reworked version of it.
Let's get stuck into it now from the Beyond Knowledge Conference in Liverpool.
First, we talk to Steve Bassett from the Paradigm Research Group.
We're actually here in the grounds of a bombed-out church here that was left as a monument and a lesson to people about war.
It's quite an atmospheric place here.
Yes, Eric.
It's nice to be with you.
My first time to the UK, my first time to Liverpool.
And it's a beautiful Sunday.
Apparently, the local team won the soccer game.
All is good.
Yes, you can't talk to people.
Listen, my dad is a lifelong Liverpool fan.
If they lose, you cannot speak to him.
He wears black armbands.
He's in mourning for a period.
So we have to leave him for a few hours to adjust.
And if they win, or if any of the guys from the local team Liverpool are playing in the national side, which they were a few nights ago, and they score, he's elated and he's over the moon.
What you can hear in the background is some very ethereal music here because they use this Bombedout Church venue as a sort of spiritual venue here.
It's all part of the Liverpool thing.
If you haven't seen it, you've got to see it.
Steve Bassett, I want you in your words to describe what you are and what you do.
I'm a political activist.
I entered the UFOET issue in 1996 and created the Paradigm Research Group solely to pursue the political resolution of the UFOET issue.
And what do I mean by that?
Really quite simple.
The government has known since the 40s that this phenomenon is extraterrestrial in origin, and by extraterrestrial I mean non-human or non-human as we understand it.
Where they're from is not so much as important as that they're here.
The government's known that all this time.
They embargoed the acknowledgement of that from the people for national security reasons.
That embargo is now 62 years old.
And the point at hand is to end it, end that embargo, and get the governments to acknowledge this extraordinary reality.
How are you sure that an embargo exists?
Who's told you that?
Where's your evidence?
The research has been done by hundreds of people for the last 60 years.
Tim Goode is an example in the UK, Stan Freeman, and many, many others.
Bruce McApee, we've gotten documents from the government, through FOIA, confirming that they are, in fact, misrepresenting this, confirming that they've put some plans together to contain the issue.
Witnesses have come forward.
It's virtually not in doubt that the government has a formal program to embargo the issue.
They don't call it an embargo.
I call it an embargo.
They call it maintaining national security.
Fine.
I say that it's a truth embargo because the facts of this are being withheld in a formal, authoritative way.
So the resolution of the issue is not science.
It's not proving it somehow to the government satisfaction.
It is, in fact, changing the policy of the embargo.
It's been proven many times over by the countless research efforts that have been done since 1947.
But we have a political problem here.
They established the truth embargo and they can't figure out how to end it.
So this assumes they want to end it.
The sense is that since in the last 10 years or so, going back to maybe 99, 98, that the consensus within the government at the levels where this issue is dealt with, which is down, deep down, has shifted to moving ahead with disclosure and announcing it to the people.
That doesn't mean that everybody is in favor of it, but the consensus is.
So if they're doing it anyway, and if you say that the process is entrain, it's happening, there's no need for you then, is there?
It's going to happen.
Well, technically, you're right.
Disclosure is inevitable.
But it's kind of like the anti-war movement of the 60s.
Everybody knew the war would eventually end.
The question is, how long would it go on?
And so one of the purposes of the anti-war movement was to end it as soon as possible.
This is more of a positive take on that.
Disclosure is inevitable, but there are things that might happen in the coming months and years that could derail us and put it off for many years.
There are some things that might be avoided if we can get past this significant event, this disclosure event.
So we come back to the point that is often made by a lot of people for very different reasons in every case, that there are people out there who still, even in 2009, 62 years after Roswell, do not want this material getting out.
There are people that don't want the policy to be changed, absolutely.
And I have no doubt that they're trying to exert their influence.
But the reasons for doing it, for ending the truth embargo now, I think surpass the reasons for not doing it.
It's a simple equation.
There are significant benefits to ending the truth embargo regarding ET presence.
And those benefits outweigh now the concerns that are being raised by those that would prefer that it be maintained as a national state secret.
What are the benefits?
Because I can think of a few downsides, And two of the downsides might be: number one, once you realize there is another power, another agency, another intelligence out there, there's no point in carrying on doing anything the way that you've done before.
That's governments, that's your job, that's your life.
Two, organized religion, well, that goes straight out the window.
So there are two reasons there that would militate against this.
Well, this is kind of a part of the myth.
A lot of the thinking that people have, and let's understand that everyone under the age of 63 has lived their entire life under this truth embargo, right?
You've never known anything else.
And a lot of propaganda was put out over the years as part of the maintenance of it, the containment of the issue.
Creating this sense, oh, religion will fall apart and people will have no reason to go to work the next day.
This, in fact, is not reflective of what will happen at all.
Religion will not fall apart.
In fact, religion will probably go stronger and religious affiliations will grow.
People will go about their lives the next day as they have before, but they will have an enormous interest in learning more about this and more information will come out and we will, in short time, be in a world where virtually all of the people on the planet, certainly in the industrialized world, will walk around every day with a full understanding that there's other sentient life in the universe.
They're not the only one.
Well, you know, that's the same thing as knowing that, in America, knowing that, well, we're not the only intelligent, educated people on the planet.
There's also people like that in the UK and France.
So what?
It's a more diverse world.
So I think you need to really step back from a lot of that, how would you say, those views about what might happen and try to look at it as objectively as possible.
And on an objective basis, here's what happens.
One, our sense of our place in the universe will be enhanced.
The size of the universe will be made smaller.
Let me just stop you there.
You say that we'll be enhanced, our place in the universe will be enhanced, but what happens if, as many people seem to think, the intelligence we're talking about here or intelligences are so much further beyond us, doesn't that put us right down the pecking order?
Because we're microscopic organisms compared with them?
Well, not microscopic, but pretty small.
All of the people who adhere to religions in the world, well, most of the religions, not all of them, their sense of the world is that they are these temporal beings and they serve or are responsive to a God that is all-powerful, infinitely intelligent, infinitely wise.
So this idea that there's a greater and higher intelligence is already pretty well established, only there just happens to be ETs in this case.
Look, look, again, it will be disconcerting to know you're not the smartest guy in the classroom.
But on the other hand, like the average guys in the classroom, well, you'll probably want to start cribbing your homework off these smarter dudes.
So we'll be going to the ETs going, you know, tell me, can you give us the answer to that equation?
Well, now this assumes that they're going to want to give us this information.
You know, there's a good argument to be made, isn't there, Steve, that if they had wanted to give us this information before now, then they would have, or maybe they have.
Maybe they have.
The issue right now, though, is not getting what we're going to get from the ETs.
I suspect the ETs, the issue for them is first getting us through this birthing process, getting us on the other side of the disclosure paradigm.
In other words, the planet has to go from a world which has governments and social contracts and so forth, in which people don't really have a strong sense or a clear sense of what is going on to a world where people understand, yes, we're not alone in the universe.
There's other civilizations.
Some are more advanced than us.
Some are not, by the way.
Of course, those ones that aren't more advanced aren't here, but the ones that are are.
And this is a more complex world.
We have to get through that process with a minimum amount of disruption, and I think that's what's going on.
Once we're through that, once we're past that paradigm line, then the likelihood of open contact taking place where there is acknowledged and open exchange of information is more likely.
And it would be less disruptive, more appropriate.
So it's not right now about what can we learn from the ETs.
It's right now about how can we get through this paradigm change, through this window.
And we're very close to doing that.
And the answer is really simple.
There are 200 and some governments on the planet that govern almost over 6 million people.
Every one of them has a social contract with their citizens.
And they must honor that social contract by acknowledging to their citizens that, yes, it is true there are extraterrestrials here.
We don't know where they're from, or maybe they do know where they're from.
And we're going to be able to tell you more about that soon.
Some things we can't tell you for national security reasons.
We have to get past that.
That is what has to happen next.
And we're very close to that.
That sounds to me like a really scary announcement to make, though, Steve.
A government official, maybe somebody in the U.S. being the most powerful nation on earth at the moment, although the Chinese are coming up there, stands up and says, okay, we know this, we can't tell you everything.
Well, you know that in this world of ours, with the internet, with democracy growing everywhere, people are not going to buy what they are told.
If they're told we can only tell you so much for now, they're going to want the rest.
And that could cause civilizations, societies to destabilize, don't you think?
No, no.
What it's going to create is an intense kind of back and forth between the public and what will then be a fully energized media, finally, after 60 years, between the public and the government over getting the info.
And the people are going to want more than the government wants to give, and the government's going to hold back, and the people are going to press, and it'll go back and forth, and there'll be some heated moments, and perhaps it'll get a bit tense, but it'll all be worked out, and we will get information, and eventually we'll probably get all of it.
And that's the way it's supposed to be.
Well, this sounds like a really easy process, and I would love this to happen sooner rather than later, certainly in my lifetime, and obviously you want it to happen in your lifetime.
Problem is that down the years, we know this, don't we, or we think we know this, that a lot of people who've tried to put information out there like this have ended up dying for their sins.
Let's say that the strong active resistance to the process that did operate, I think, certainly between 50 and 1995, is over.
And the sense I have now is the government is not actively preventing the citizen action on this.
Now, why is that?
Do you think that's just because of the amount of water that's pressing against the walls of the dam?
The dam has to burst?
It's no, well, look, this has all been sort of like a race, and the finish line is close.
And they know that, and they know they're going to cross it pretty soon.
And so it's kind of pointless to continue to play out that scenario.
That scenario was no longer appropriate.
As we near the end, everyone is now positioning themselves to be on the right side of the issue.
I call it the disclosure train.
Everybody's slowly jumping up on the disclosure train, various governments and so forth, some agencies.
And this is to be expected.
And so as we near this moment and this event, people are aligning with it.
That is not surprising, and that includes efforts by the internal structures to actively really interfere with this issue.
There is no upside to doing that now, and so they have essentially put that aside, and the truth embargo, in a way, is operating on its own momentum, which had 60 years to build up.
They still have to efficate the event, and it's not a simple thing.
The disclosure event is a big deal.
They want it to go cleanly.
They don't want it to get leaked.
They have other issues on their plate.
There's some resistance inside.
They would prefer it not happen now.
But one thing I do know, you'll not know about it until the day it happens.
There's going to be no leaks.
There's going to be no hints.
They can't do that.
So does this mean that Obama will call a news?
I mean, everybody is, I won't say everybody, but a lot of people have said Obama is going to be the one on who's watch this stuff happen.
It was an expectation.
Remember, Obama ran on the concept of open, transparent government, which is one of the key issues and one of the key backers of him and the Democratic Party, George Soros.
Open, transparent government will be one of the hallmark phrases of the 21st century and where we have to go.
But is he in train and on side with this?
That's what I mean, really.
We don't know, but it doesn't matter.
What matters is that Obama is probably acceptable to the military intelligence committees that run this issue.
We think he is acceptable.
I don't think Clinton was.
We don't think that George W. Bush was.
Do we think that Bush wasn't part of this because people thought he was too stupid?
Let me put it this way.
The military intelligence community was very unhappy with George Bush, not only because they didn't feel he had the skills to deal with extremely complex issues, but also because he broke with his own father with respect to the policy in Iraq, and they were very unhappy.
And then he also tried to scapegoat them on the issue.
He was not going to be a player.
It just wasn't going to happen, unless another nation forced it, which could happen at any time.
Obama is acceptable.
He's quite intelligent.
He has shown that he is willing to play ball with the military intelligence issues and not be too left of center.
Also, the pressure on the issue has grown to great proportions.
Other nations are showing signs they may break with the cover-up.
I'm sorry, not cover-up, truth embargo.
And so they have to act with that in mind.
Because, look, let's face it, you know, if France decides to disclose the ET presence tomorrow, Sarkozy can go in front of the press, bring out a whole bunch of gun camera footage from their chase planes, and that would be that.
And the United States would have to go, well, you got us.
Yeah, it's been true.
Isn't it wonderful that France told the truth finally?
Well, of course, you see the implications of that.
Or it could be in China.
Don't we see, I understand what you're saying, Steve, but we've seen a bit of a drip-drip over this last couple of years of various nations releasing things.
Maverick nations, the Mexicans, for example.
Even the British have been releasing some documents lately.
So, you know, even the Brits, and we're known for our secrecy around the world.
We're possibly less open about stuff than you are in many ways.
But there are mavericks here who've been drip-drip-dripping this stuff.
But has it made a great deal of difference after that?
Absolutely, sure, sure.
Sure it has.
It's like that water scale where each drop drops into the lever until it hits that one drop and the scale drops, you see.
It will drop, this will happen when it happens.
But all of this is driving the process.
By the way, in terms of nations that have been releasing UFO files to the internet, you forgot Sweden, Denmark, Uruguay, and Brazil, and Canada, and Australia.
So, again, country after country is getting on the disclosure train.
But I keep looking for the tipping point.
I keep getting really, really excited about this thing that has intrigued me all my life since I was a little tiny boy reading books about this stuff here in Liverpool.
And I interviewed Paul Hellier, ex-Defense Minister of Canada, who says, well, he can't say that they exist and they're out there, but he can say, I think that there's something that we really want to be aware of.
He has since said that he's quite convinced of this extraterrestrial presence here.
And so is Edgar Mitchell.
He's quite emphatic about it as well.
Here's the thing.
The tipping point will not be in the open.
The governments cannot, some policies are done this way.
They're thinking about going in a certain direction, so they'll run a trial balloon up and see how people respond.
There'll be some leaks.
They can't do that.
If they were to leak any intentions on this, the press would go absolutely crazy.
And so when the tipping point takes place, it will be completely out of sight.
You will not see it.
It will happen.
They will then make the decision, and within a week, they'll move, because every day that they withhold acting, the risk of a leak increases.
But this sounds like a really controlled process that is being determined right now.
So this will be controlled by governments on this earth.
It won't be controlled by something outside here.
We don't know.
I would say that I don't think that the ETs are, in fact, directly involved in this process.
However, I think they are affecting the process.
They're driving the disclosure process by their very presence, by being seen and photographed and reported on.
And then they're not very discreet, is what I'm saying.
So if their intent is to hide from us and help keep a secret, they sure are doing a poor job of that.
But are they formally in dealing with the government as to how to disclose?
I have no idea.
But I do know the government is imposed the truth embargo, and the government has the ability to end it.
And so the decisions are being made internally.
They will make the decision.
Obama will agree to go along with it.
They will call for some bit of time on national television for him.
He will go on and probably announce that there's extremely important information about to be presented to the American people.
There is a problem, though, isn't there?
And my small brain throws this one out every time when I think about this.
What they say when they admit to this stuff is, we've lied to you for years, maybe for your own good, maybe not.
That's up for debate, and we're still debating that now.
We will debate that probably forever.
But effectively, they're saying, you've been lied to up to now.
And that's not what they will say.
See, they will, they're not stupid.
They will conduct this in a way that makes them look as good as possible.
They will say something along the line.
By the way, Obama will not likely actually make the disclosure, the statement.
He will come on television.
He will indicate that there's about to be a press conference in which we will receive very important information and that he has fully authorized this.
And then they will cut to the press conference.
He will not make the announcement if he's smart.
It will be the moderator of the press conference that will make the announcement.
The person who will introduce some high-level people that will make some comments and then take some questions from the press.
It will be that moderator who will be selected as somebody who is non-political, highly respected, and what have you.
If I had to pick the perfect person to moderate the press conference that announces the ET presence of the world, my top pick would now be Michio Kaku.
That's who I would select.
Because he's a scientist who's respected.
People like him.
They love him on the Discovery Channel.
Not politically.
Not politically motivated.
And so I guess if I was them, the way that I would do it is I would say, and this is pure PR, it comes straight out of politics, doesn't it?
They do it in this country all the time.
They would say, we have come into the possession of some new information, and that new information means this.
That gets them off the lying hook.
I think they've figured it out that we would buy that in a second.
We'd rumble that way.
The internet would rip that up.
No, they will say something along the lines of, tonight we are able to inform you that in fact there is an extraterrestrial presence engaging the human race and has been for some time.
This information was withheld from you for national security reasons, but we are now able to present this to you.
And we also would like to further state that we do not believe there is an immediate threat to the American people and you should remain perfectly calm.
That's how they will happen.
And do you think that's going to happen?
I believe that's the way it ought to happen and probably will happen.
You think people will stay calm?
I think the vast majority of people, well, they'll stay calm in terms of worried about No, no.
But they will be excited.
They will immediately want to know more, more, more, more, more, more.
And they will be glued to their television sets and then they'll start being news coverage and it'll go on for weeks and weeks and weeks, sort of like the assassination in Kennedy, sort of like 911, only much more interesting and probably more positive.
And they'll be excited in that way.
And then after a couple of weeks of that, they'll start to get a little bit bored with it.
It'll be the same old, same old.
Well, yeah.
But you know your country more than this country, but it'll happen here too.
The right-wing talk show hosts, once this is announced, they will say, this is a complete lie.
This is a smokescreen.
It's there to divert us from the real issue, and the real issue is whatever they want to say it is.
Not in this case.
And one of the reasons why is that the ET issue is really nonpartisan.
I've had some very good interviews on Fox News.
I've been written up in the Washington Times.
I've strived not to partisanize this.
The ETs are not here for the Democrats or the Americans.
They're engaging the whole planet.
And the Republicans know this.
And the Republicans are aware of the ET presence too.
And so there's no upside for somehow the right to politicize the ET disclosure event.
Now, if the Democrats try to make it their event, if they shut the Republicans out, if they try to make it seem like, well, you know, we are the guiding lights of the United States government.
those other guys you've been electing off and on, they lied to you.
And the ETs are here for us, and they don't want to...
So this is not going to be a politicized issue.
In time, how we deal with it down the line, up into and including perhaps our policies with extraterrestrial civilizations, will certainly be debated, and the right and the left will have different opinions about that.
But in terms of disclosure event, it would be like if you had two parties back in the 1600s and finally the consensus was acknowledged that, by the way, the Earth goes around the Sun and that one of the parties wants to make a political issue out of that.
Well, you know, you can rant and rave all you want.
The Earth's still going around the Sun.
That's the way it is.
Yeah, exactly.
Now, the next thing I would want to...
Oh, first of all, the civilian efforts to research this have already proven the ET presence many times over.
Just go look at the books, the papers.
But I would want that news conference to show me videos.
Oh, oh, oh, a little bit of this.
There's any number of things that they could show as a matter of good faith.
Right.
And probably some of the things they might use would be gun camera footage from the chase planes.
You see, all of the industrialized nations have air forces, and they all have defense forces, and they send planes up all the time to intercept unidentified objects.
And whenever they do that, they have cameras with them.
Most people don't think about that, but they do.
You have to record exactly what's going on, should there be an incident, and you want to know what's there, and you want to have a record of it.
You don't want the pilot come back and give you notes, right?
And so, guess what?
None of that footage has ever been released, because if they release that footage, it would end the embargo right away.
And so they're sitting on God knows how many hours of footage.
And so they'll just show, well, here's one of the saucers that we were chasing in 1952.
As you can see, the pilot is now at Mach 1.5, and it appears to be going away at about 10,000 miles an hour.
And here's one just off the wing of the plane.
As you can see, it's about a 60-foot disk.
You know, we didn't have that then.
I mean, and that's all people are going to need.
Okay, you got us.
That's it.
Of course, that's what they are.
And that's the end of it.
Now, if they want to go further, show a picture of a few alien bodies, they can.
But I can assure you that given all of the awareness of this issue, all the government frankly has to do and say, yes, they're here.
That's all most people are going to need.
Then they will go rush out and start reading the books and looking at the videos that are already out there and find all the evidence they could possibly want.
Okay, what do you do at that point then?
Because your raison d'être, your reason for existence must change.
Show me.
I'll be in the same role that some of the political activists that were pursuing the Civil Rights, for instance, effort were in.
Eventually they got the Civil Rights Act, and that was the major milestone that they had to have in the Voting Rights Act.
Did the issues regarding equality and racial differences go away?
No.
As far as I'm concerned, my work really starts post-disclosure.
When you will do what?
Well, now you have a whole world to be educated to what this means and how to address it, how to deal with it.
You have an enormous amount of work that needs to be done in reforming our institutions so that we don't do this again, no more truth embargoes.
And this is going to take years and years.
There will be the needs for think tanks.
There's going to have to be college curriculum created, teaching courses in this issue, exopolitics.
And so I can't imagine not having plenty to do in the post-disclosure world as part of this.
It's the beginning, that's not the end.
It's really the beginning of the deal.
Now, it's been a long, rather, it's the, let me put it this way.
The run-up to disclosure is really the prologue, all right?
And it just happened to be a damn long prologue.
I mean, for me, it's 13 years.
For some other, it's 30 years.
And of course, the whole truth embargo is 62 years old.
But once we've crossed the paradigm line into the post-disclosure world, well, from that point on, we will be dealing with a whole new set of profound truths that is going to change the course of our society.
And so from that point on, we're engaged in a new world.
I'll be dealing with that new world and hopefully have a reasonable role there in some form or fashion.
It's hard to predict exactly what the role will be.
Ambassador.
Not that high, but possibly a book commentator might run again for Congress, only this time as a serious candidate.
I don't know.
But will all this, Steve, and this is the kicker in a way, will it change our knowledge of the things that we thought were set and fixed, like life and death, for example?
I think you can safely say that in small or even larger respects, virtually every fundamental fact and issue that we have dwelt on is altered.
Everything is altered to a degree.
And we will have to reassess our views of science, religion, sociology.
We'll have to go back and review all of history, factoring in the ET reality, because there's a whole lot of ET reality in our history that is not noticed or has been improperly reported because they didn't understand.
And that is going to be a hell of a task.
In other words, we're going to have to rewrite the history books.
We're going to have to rewrite some of the theological texts and factor this truth in.
That's going to be a hell of a task, and it's going to be fun.
And then we're going to have to, and there's going to be a change of worldview.
One way to think of it is, and if you've ever done this experiment, you sprinkle thousands and thousands of electronic, I'm sorry, little magnetic pieces, metal, on a tabletop.
Iron filings, yeah.
Iron filings, yeah.
Okay, and then if you pass a magnet over the table, you'll notice that they might start to align a little bit with the field, right?
A little bit, not much, just a little bit.
And as you move that magnet across, it alters the position of these filings.
Okay, think of every human being as one of these magnetic filings.
You've got six billion of them on the planet.
This event, this truth, this presence of ETs, is like a magnet that suddenly is brought near the planet.
And it's powerful enough.
The force of this reality is powerful enough to start altering the direction of those filings down below.
And when I say filings, I'm referring to the worldview of each of these people.
And so each of us have a worldview that is going to come under the influence of that magnetic field.
And it's going to alter our worldview a little bit.
And some people it'll be a lot and some people not so much.
And while it won't suddenly change everything, it will shift the worldview.
Now, a small shift in worldview of a single person is one thing.
But when you have a small shift in worldview of billions of people, that has enormous impact.
So that we will start thinking differently as a species, and that opens doors to all kinds of possibilities.
And the two principal worldview changes I think are most important is one that I like to refer as specialization, okay?
In which people will start thinking more of themselves as part of a species than they had before, right?
In other words, yeah, I'm a man, yeah, I'm an American, yeah, I'm a Massachusetts, yeah, I'm an Episcopalian, whatever.
But you know, I'm a Homo sapian.
So it brings us all together, which is what we've been trying to do since man was first able to walk and talk.
It creates an increased cohesiveness amongst the species, which opens the possibility that, well, why do I want to kill another one of my species?
And then the second, I think, most significant change in worldview would be we are on this planet, which is already underway, but it'll speed it up.
We are on a planet with a unique biosphere.
There are thousands, many other planets like this, but there's still not a lot.
And ours is unique.
No other biosphere is like ours.
And we have a responsibility to preserve it, to clean it, to keep it healthy, to not destroy it.
And anything, to do that is insane.
And so this sense of being of a certain husbandry toward the planet, being the planet's protectors and so forth, is going to be enhanced and thus expand dramatically the green revolution.
So quickly what you have is a planet where the people are starting to move away from violence and more toward a group of sensibility, and two, that are really starting to take care of this planet.
And that's a very powerful improvement on our earlier times.
That's a worldview change that the ET reality brings about.
But there are countless others that all have the potential to take us where we want to go.
This is assuming, though, isn't it?
I love your vision of it.
I love your passion that you deliver this with, and I've never quite heard it put this way.
That is assuming that people are committed enough and intelligent enough to leave aside Their daily cares and worries and get on board with the program.
Again, that's why I use that iron filing thing.
It's not like everybody has to have a complete change of life, you know, an epiphany.
It just depends on the moving enough for them.
We're used to seeing a person that has this total epiphany and suddenly becomes an environmental person, and they just, they recycle, they do all kinds of stuff, and they're just, well, you know, one person, that's nothing.
The reason this is so powerful is that it's going to slightly improve or change the worldview of billions of people.
And that little change from some many people would result in dramatic changes in the way we go about our affairs.
And so with that slightly improved worldview with respect to, say, the environment, the ability to develop and maintain environmental programs will be dramatically increased.
You see, a slight change amongst many people.
That's the effect of a paradigm shift.
Anybody can have an epiphany and suddenly wake up one day and go, oh my God, I have to save the world.
But getting two or three or six billion people to just slightly change their views toward a direction that you think is preferable, that's hard.
And this thing is big enough to do that.
And that's not the only thing.
There's also the issue of the new physics, the new science.
I think the equation is quite simple.
End the truth embargo, get the ET physics.
We have had it in our possession for 60 years.
We've had several crash vehicles.
We've been spending hundreds of billions of dollars studying it.
There's evidence that we have made significant progress.
This is the energy physics of these craft and the propulsion physics of these craft.
None of that science is currently available to us as we deal with our plethora of problems.
Because to bring that science out would end the truth embargo and they weren't ready to end it.
End the truth embargo, get that tech.
That tech could change everything.
That is a bit of a worry because that makes our politicians down the years, for whatever good reasons they may think they had, look very, very ruthless, that they had this fantastic technology that could have cured the sick, done wonderful things, maybe run cars on water or whatever, and they have sat on it.
Not run cars on water, but they have, if that physics is as good as we think it is, they can build power plants that are safe.
But those people sat on it for generations, and people have died because they did.
Well, that's happened before.
Again, it comes down to this, national security.
Here is the pat answer.
Look, it's 1947.
We've dropped atom bombs.
We're building hydrogen bombs.
The Soviets are too.
They're building missiles.
We are too.
There's an ideological breach there.
We can't bridge it.
A Cold War is underway.
It could go nuclear.
The world could end.
We got ETs up the yin-yang.
We don't know where they're from, why they're here.
We've got some of their technology.
We don't understand it.
We have got to deal with this as a classified matter until we are out of this soup.
And nobody at the time knew how long the Cold War would last.
It turned out to be 44 years.
But as the years went by, 47, 57, 67, as we remember, the Cold War got worse and worse.
We had the Berlin crisis, the Cuban Missile Crisis.
There was concern we could have a nuclear war at any time.
And so by and large, it became quite clear, I think, to the governing authorities, in the interest of the public, that the ET reality could not come into public acceptance while the Cold War and the threat of nuclear annihilation was a few minutes away.
And that Cold War, as it turned out, didn't end until 91.
And so the road to the truth embargo really does, we don't really start up that road in a formal way until 1991.
So we're actually only 18 years into that road, and that road is about to come to an end.
So this is actually quite predictable.
So forget the communist Koreans, they're a little blip-blot on the landscape, what might happen between China and Taiwan and the other small little local difficulties we've got around the world.
We've got a more stable planet now, and perhaps this is the point to do it.
Well, it's unstable in different ways.
It's certainly, there's a lot of nasty things that could happen.
But what they were dealing with there was essentially civilization annihilation.
As we eventually figured out, a nuclear war would have generated a nuclear winner and might have killed most of the above-ground species on the planet.
Now, that's a big deal, and that's an even bigger deal than, say, North Korea nuking South Korea.
I mean, a tragedy to be sure.
But what we faced in the 50s, 60s, and 70s was the annihilation of human civilization.
So they could not play fast and loose with that.
As it happens, I happen to think that while we have all these hotspots in the world, and we still have some countries that are in the 12th and 15th century, and there's still threats of ridiculous actions that might be incredibly violent, I happen to believe that acknowledgement of the extraterrestrial presence is going to decrease the inclination to this kind of behavior, not increase it.
It'll be more along the lines of, you know, well, I really don't like Pakistan, and they won't just give us Kashmir, and I'm kind of tempted to nuke them, but, you know, my God, I just found out that there's whole civilizations in the galaxy, and they're visiting us, and we might go to the stars here.
So none of that matters anymore anymore.
But it's about cashmere, right?
We've got a whole galaxy to explore here.
So I know I don't think I'll nuke Palette Punk.
I think that's a great thought to park this.
Steve Bassett, what a pleasure to have this conversation with you, especially here on this beautiful, sunny, breezy day here in my home city of Liverpool in this great location with that very, very gentle wafting Chinese music or Japanese music drifting in here.
I think that kind of works.
Lastly, just to wrap this up, punked for me a time scale.
What's your best guess, your best estimate of when this might happen?
Next year?
I believe disclosure was supposed to happen in 2009, early in the administration.
I think it was delayed because of the economic fiasco that exploded in late October, which I don't think was an accident.
I think that was intended.
So the administration was hit with some rather unusual situations.
I think we could still have disclosure in 2009.
That is the primary drive behind the fax on Washington.
The Million Facts on Washington is my organization's principal project now, ParadigmResearchGroup.org.
And since November the 5th, we've been sending thousands of emails, letters, and faxes, first to the transition headquarters of the president, then to the White House.
And now, since June 1st, all that correspondence is going to the White House Press Corps, Care of the White House Correspondents Association.
All of the information behind this is at faxonwashington.org.
Go there, send a letter, send a fax.
I don't care where you live, any country, doesn't matter.
They're coming in from all over the world.
And the message in facts and letters going to the White House Press Corps now is we want you to start asking the questions.
We want you to start asking the hard questions about this issue once and for all of the President, Secretary of State, CIA Director, and so forth, and demand appropriate answers.
Silly giggles or being blown off is not acceptable.
And eventually, they're going to get the message and they're going to start answering those questions.
If a few members of the Press Corps start asking the questions we have, just some of the ones we've outlined at the website, faxinwashington.org, there's about 13 there.
They've all got full support behind them.
You can see the proof and the backing of all these questions on the net.
Even a few start asking those questions, I think the truth embargo will end in about three weeks.
So that's another thing that the truth embargo has to worry about, the press finally stepping up, doing their job.
So we are incredibly, you think, close to this.
And we all have to be ready for it.
And some of us are more ready than others.
And if Obama does not disclose by the end of the year, there's a very good chance another nation will do it instead of us.
And the two leading contenders for that job are China and France.
Right.
Let's watch what happens.
Steve Bassett, a real pleasure to talk with you.
Safe trip back to the United States.
And I hope you enjoy the UK while you're here.
Thank you, Harry.
Appreciate it.
Look forward to coming back.
Steve Bassett, interviewed on a sunny afternoon during the conference in a bombed-out church in the center of Liverpool.
If you're in America or another part of the world where you didn't go through the worst of World War II, well, Liverpool, let me tell you, being a maritime city to do with the convoys and trade between the US and the UK during the war, of course, it was heavily targeted by German bombers.
And one of those bombs, one night, dropped on a church in the center of Liverpool.
And that church has been left there as a kind of reminder of what war can do.
So it was a very atmospheric place to be there amongst the grass and flowers, the gardens around that, and doing that conversation with Steve Bassett.
Let's get to Britain's own UFO man, Nick Pope, used to work for the Ministry of Defence, is now an independent consultant.
He was at the conference too and one of the main speakers.
And I spoke with him.
I'm very much enjoying the opportunity that I've got here to talk about UFOs, to talk about the ongoing process of the Ministry of Defence releasing their UFO files.
And of course, this is an absolutely massive story, not just here in the UK, but literally all around the world.
Okay, well, I did this on the radio about a month or two ago, where these files were released, and apparently there were something like 4,000 pages of information.
I spoke at the time to Timothy Goode, who you will know, another UFO researcher, UFO expert, UFO writer.
And Timothy and I sort of came to the conclusion that one of the ways that you can hide information, you can hide the truth, is by releasing a great deal of raw data.
And then people cannot find, because there's so much of it, the nuggets of truth inside that raw data.
Does that have any mileage?
Well, certainly there's an old saying, isn't there, that the best place to hide a book is in a library.
The best place to hide a tree is in a forest.
And I certainly think, I can see why people would think that, yes, what's happening here is that they're releasing tens of thousands of pages of papers.
And perhaps some conspiracy theorists think, yes, well, you have to wade through thousands and thousands of pages of Mr. Smith out walking his dog, seeing what's obviously just a meteor, before you get to flight Lieutenant Smith flying his tornado F3 and encountering a structured craft performing speeds and maneuvers that we can't match.
I mean, yeah, I don't think it's a, despite what conspiracy theorists say, I don't think that's a deliberate tactic.
I think it is simply a consequence of the true nature of the phenomenon, that statistically 95% of the UFO sightings do turn out to have prosaic explanations.
Therefore, 95% of the documentation about UFOs is going to be extremely mundane.
All right, well, you've had a month, six weeks, whatever it is.
I lose track of time these days to chew over some of this material that's been released.
Is any of it any use to those of us who are trying to find the truth?
All of it is of use, but there isn't what I call a spaceship in a hangar smoking gun.
There is no one single document that is going to make people go, aha.
So the Ministry of Defence really does know that some UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin.
There's no single piece of paper that says that.
There are a number of documents that might make you think, well, there's more to this than just aircraft lights and weather balloons, but for people looking for proof of an extraterrestrial reality, they're not going to find that in the MOD's case files.
All right, so how much further does it take us on?
It takes us further, but it does not take us over what a lot of the people here might regard as over the finishing line.
In other words, even when the MOD in a year or two's time completes this process of declassifying and releasing the entire archive, there will not be this smoking gun.
There will not be, ah, so yes, it's extraterrestrial.
We will still have a mystery, but we will have more information than we've ever had before, and that's a good thing.
Okay, you are a very solid researcher.
You previously worked for the Ministry of Defence.
This information has been released by or through them.
Did you get the fast track to this information?
Has anybody at the MOD given you a steer on which is the good stuff and which isn't?
Well, I, before the first batch of files was released, was asked by the National Archives to come in and review the material for them to help them pick out some cases to highlight in the media.
So I have certainly been involved in the release process, but of course, the other point is that I worked on these files, so I've seen them already, or most of them.
And indeed, the last batch of files to be released actually cover my tour of duty on the UFO project, 91 through 94.
So it's been a real blast from the past seeing not only Documents that I was aware of, but in many cases, documents I wrote.
I'm going to get emails from people after you've said that saying this.
They will say, Well, you were involved in making some of those documents.
You've been involved in releasing and sifting some of those documents because you were asked by the National Archive to spot the good stuff.
If I was a real rabid conspiracy theorist somewhere in this world, I would say that Nick Pope might be part of not the answer, but part of the problem here, because that would be a perfect way to disguise, cloud, hide the truth.
I can understand that, and I've certainly seen people suggest as much.
I mean, if you put a combination of words like Nick Pope and disinfo or disinformation into Google or your favorite search engine, you'll find all sorts of people saying, ah, this guy's still working secretly for the MOD.
This is just a smoke screen.
He's part of a process, either to gradually disclose it or to do some sort of smoke and mirrors job.
Well, tell me that neither of those things is true.
Look at me and tell me that.
Neither of those assertions are correct.
But here's the problem, you see.
If a conspiracy theorist says, I think Nick's still working for the government and this file release, it's a con job and he's in on it.
If I say, no, that's not correct, if you're a conspiracy theorist, you're very unlikely to go, oh, thanks for clearing that up, Nick.
I see the point now.
No, that conspiracy theorist will say, as the classic line goes, he would say that, wouldn't he?
Of the 4,000-odd pages of raw data, some of which you saw around the time of its release or even before when you helped to sift the good stuff from the not-so-good stuff, what's the good stuff?
Tell me a couple of really class UFO-type stories.
One of the really interesting cases was a near-miss between a UFO and a cigar-shaped or missile-shaped object.
This was 21st of April 1991.
It was an Alitalia aircraft coming in over Kent towards Heathrow.
57 people on board, as I recollect.
Suddenly, this object passes so close to the aircraft that the pilot has time to shout, look out, look out, before it flashes past.
Again, whatever you think about UFOs, whether you're a sceptic or a believer, that shows there's a serious issue there.
That was one interesting case.
But another point, it's not just UFO sightings in these files, of course.
There are policy papers, there's correspondence.
One of the other very interesting documents to have emerged is some private correspondence between Lord Hill Norton, who was a former chief of the Defence Staff, and Michael Heseltine, who was then Secretary of State for Defence.
And Lord Hill Norton told the Secretary of State in no uncertain terms, the MOD's public position on UFOs, that this is of no defence significance, is quite simply, in my professional military opinion, he said, wrong.
He said, take the Rendlesham Forest incident, for example.
You have an object seen by numerous military personnel in close proximity to two extremely sensitive and important military bases.
He said either that happened, as the witnesses described, or they were all hallucinating or making it up.
And he said in either of those two possibilities...
It must be, he said, of defense significance.
So he was passing the ball back to the court of Michael Heseltine, who was in charge of things at that time.
The government must have been very, very concerned.
Although, of course, the last people they could let know that they were would be us, the public.
Well, I think the MOD has always had a difficult time with the UFO issue.
They've certainly downplayed it over the years, often as much out of embarrassment as anything more sinister.
But yes, when you have a former chief of the defence staff and a former chairman of NATO's military committee, so in other words, Britain's most senior military officer, and at that level, you never technically retire, by the way, you're still on what the military call the active list.
So when you have him saying to Secretary of State, in my professional military opinion, your policy is wrong, yes, it's a huge problem.
And I think the only issue was how could we defuse that situation and, frankly, just get Lord Hill Norton off our backs.
Yeah, it sounds like the guy was becoming a problem himself and policy, whatever policy there might be, and I don't know if there is a policy, maybe you can tell me, doesn't seem to have changed very much.
There was no great change of direction by the look of it, although we are now talking more about UFOs, so maybe there was a policy and maybe that was the policy.
You tell me.
Well, the policy has always been really to look at these sightings with the single aim of determining whether any represent anything that's a potential threat or anything of any, and it's a horrible phrase because it's a civil service phrase that means very little, anything of any defence significance.
And when people say what does that actually mean?
The answer is what we want it to mean.
But primarily we're looking for unauthorised penetrations of the UK's air defence region.
But frankly, when we get a case that is genuinely unexplained, you hit that curious position of saying, well, now what?
And I remember one case from 1993 when we briefed the Assistant Chief of the Air Staff on a very interesting wave of sightings.
He basically said, I can add nothing further to this debate.
In other words, we'd investigated the phenomenon, we'd come to some conclusion about it, that we couldn't explain what had been seen.
But what else can you do?
Where else can you go?
Well, I presume the only thing you can do is have some kind of policy to streamline the way that the information is reported and then collated afterwards.
Yes, but in a sense, that's just procedural.
It doesn't really take you any further in strategic terms towards coming to any definitive conclusion about that.
That's scary, isn't it, Nick?
Doesn't it scare you?
It certainly scares me because what we're starting to say here is that we're in the hands of something that we have no control of, that will appear periodically in our skies, perhaps.
There will be a lot of missed sightings, most of them are, and we both agree on that.
But there will be some things that are genuinely, to coin a phrase, unexplained.
And we as human beings, with governments and organizations and societies, have absolutely no control over this.
And all we can do is wait and see.
Yes, that's an extremely worrying position, effectively to be in a situation where you are saying some of these UFOs appear to be structured craft capable of speeds and maneuvers that we can't remotely match and yet we have no idea what they are or what they want.
Have your contacts in the MOD, who presumably a lot of them you still know and are still on good terms with, and other high-level contacts, I don't expect you to, it'd be very nice if you did, but have they ever said to you, I'm going to tell you something now, Nick, which you've got to sit on.
You cannot reveal this.
In other words, are you the custodian of some information that perhaps you cannot reveal but has made you swing one way or the other in this argument, in this debate?
There are certainly a number of things that I know and have been told that I'm not at liberty to discuss, but it's, again, with hand on heart, it's not a smoking gun spaceship in a hangar type revelation.
Does it make you more of a believer?
It inclines me towards that end of the spectrum.
The one thing that always impressed me about you is, despite the welter of information that you're presented with all the time, the number of people telling you stories and phoning you up and emailing you and all the rest of it, and that must be more so even now that you're an independent consultant on these matters, that you are very level-headed about it and you are determined to stay an impartial investigator in these things.
I think if you spend as many years as you have spent doing all of this, the temptation to become part of the convinced must be very great.
It may be, but one of the most important things that I learnt in my 21-year career in the MOD, not just on the UFO project, but on other areas too, whether it was briefing senior officers, whether it was a time that I spent in defence security.
One of the critical skills, if you're analyzing information, is that when you then brief somebody, whether it's a minister, senior military officer, whoever, you must be clear to differentiate between what you know and what you think.
And hopefully that's a skill that I've brought to this field because I think sometimes one sees a blurring of that.
We were talking about some of the specific incidents that came out in this 4,000-odd pages of documentation recently released in the UK.
Give me to cap this off one other good one.
Okay, I think another one that sticks out in my mind was a sighting from 1993 where basically there were a wave of sightings over the UK and the witnesses included many police officers and military personnel and the UFO effectively flew over two military bases, RAF Cosford and RAF Shawbury.
And the witnesses at Cosford were RAF police.
At Shawbury it was the Met officer and he described a huge triangular shaped craft flying slowly at low level over the base and he said that this thing was the size of a jumbo jet and that suddenly from a speed of no more than 30 or 40 miles an hour it accelerated away to the horizon many times faster than a military jet and this is a man with eight years experience in the RAF.
Right, so these people are, if ever you're looking for credible witnesses, you've got them there.
Well there's no such thing as an infallible witness, but on again the spectrum of witnesses, you couldn't ask for much better than someone who's in the RAF.
But we remain at the situation that we got to about 10 minutes ago where we said once you've collated the information, once you've come to a sort of a conclusion about it, there isn't much further you can go unless somebody from another dimension or another planet emails you with a confirmation, yeah?
Yes, until one has some sort of artifact that is absolutely verified as authentic and definitively extraterrestrial by the mainstream scientific community.
Yes, you're left with this catch-22 situation that in many of the convincing UFO cases that I've investigated and that I've looked at, you can be absolutely certain what the UFO wasn't, i.e.
aircraft, weather balloon, etc., but you're left with that thing that you're not sure what it was.
You're going to spend the rest of your life trying to find the answers here?
This is too interesting and too important for me to turn my back on.
So yes, I'm going to certainly carry on with my interest in this and I'll continue to do what I can to keep it in the public eye and to show people, again, whether they're sceptics or believers, that whatever you believe about UFOs, there are some important defense, national security and air safety issues here.
And if we ever do get contact with something extraterrestrial or interdimensional or whatever, would you like to be the UK's first ambassador to that force?
I'd love to be involved, but I don't flatter myself by pretending that I would have any official role in this.
My name's Howard Hughes.
This is The Unexplained at www.theunexplained.tv.
Please keep your feedback coming.
Let those emails rip, as they say.
Nick Pope, the UK's own UFO investigator, the most famous one that we have in this country.
Let's get now to Richard C. Hoagland, his first visit to the UK, and I'm so pleased that I had a big part to play in getting him here.
Dave Truman was looking for a keynote speaker.
I suggested Richard, but I said I didn't think Richard would be available, and it just so happened that Richard was.
And Richard picked Liverpool and the Beyond Knowledge Conference to unveil his amazing new research.
And He did the first one-on-one interview conversation chat with me, so it was our first face-to-face meeting in 12 years of knowing each other.
He talks here about his new research, which is hitting the internet now as I speak, but we had the details here first at the Unexplained.
The new research ties together Saturn, an amazing, strange, weird, and mind-bending form of physics, and the Nazis.
Richard C. Hoagland at the Beyond Knowledge Conference.
You promised something that would be absolutely mind-blowing, and I expected something pretty good because it's you.
I didn't quite expect what you delivered here tonight, and I want to try in these minutes that we have available to us face-to-face for once.
Just to explain what it is.
Do you want me to sunrise three hours?
No.
That wouldn't be fair.
And, you know, not even I would do that, although in my career I've done things like that before.
I've ambushed people, but I won't do that.
I'll try and boil it down into a couple of the juicy bits.
And I think that your followers need to go to your website, EnterpriseMission.com, and find out some of the detail behind this.
It's not published yet.
I wanted to do it here.
I wanted to break it in Dave's conference first.
We're going to spend a week running around England doing the measurements at the monuments, which is crucial to continue to confirm this torsion model, which is so important to both the ancient history and what we need to do now technologically.
Okay, so what we have here tonight in Liverpool, and what excited and grabbed me, and I could see everybody in the hall we've just been in, was Saturn.
The man who brought us the face on Mars, the man who brought us those revelations about the moon and NASA, is now talking about Saturn, Saturn having within the rings, the B-ring of Saturn, something that is clearly, well, to my eyes and the pictures that were taken on July 26th, not natural, not normal, shouldn't be there.
I'm glad you agree.
Because any reasonable observer, when they look at those images, which are official NASA images, can only come to one conclusion.
Something artificial was built in the rings of Saturn a long, long time ago.
It probably is the reason that the rings of Saturn are so incredibly splendiferous, a word that's not often used, but in this case is totally appropriate.
And it probably had to do with a technology that some extraordinarily advanced ET culture was attempting to use at Saturn to do something very important.
So we have here in the rings of Saturn a construction of some kind that is geometrically perfect, which shouldn't be there because the shape and the appearance of this thing, pictures of this thing taken by Cassini the probe on the 26th of July.
And I thought, okay, well, that's Richard.
Here we have another face on Mars here, some more artifacts on the moon, you know, more structures on the moon.
This is really interesting, and that'll get him a few headlines, and it's another brick in the wall, really, literally.
But much more than that.
I think it's a breakthrough.
There's no possible way to explain away this geometry in the B-ring.
There's just no way.
Once you posit that that is real, it's ancient, it had a purpose, then you can begin to explore what that purpose might have been.
You begin to explore implications of people that may now know this physics, that have rediscovered it or back-engineered it, whatever you want to call it, and are using it in some kind of enormous political chess game to threaten the major space powers into doing what they will.
And the evidence gathered by Cassini, particularly that tetrahedral, whatever it is at the edge of the rings, that spaceship-looking thing, to me says we're dealing with an ongoing geopolitical drama that is playing itself out and has many real-world implications, which is why we've got to stop lying to ourselves about what's out there and figure out who is behind it and how it's relevant to our current life today.
Then you got to a stage in the talk.
I mean, I'm trying to compress a few fascinating hours into a few minutes here, which is really unfair and really difficult, but let's give it a try.
A technology that can affect time, which is fascinating to all of us.
You know, the person who says they're not interested in time shifting is telling lies, I think, probably.
But also something, and this is where I thought, oh, no, Dick's coming, I'm stuck here a bit, where the Nazis may have had experiments with this or may have done experiments with this.
We know they did.
We have documented proof.
When the wall collapsed, a number of the so-called satellite states opened their files, Czechoslovakia being one.
Farrell has, Dr. Joseph Farrell has excellent sourcing about Nazi history and the engineering and political background through the Kamler projects of something called the Nazi Bell, which when you look at the eyewitness testimony of one general in particular who was charged by the Czechs with shooting 60 scientists and engineers at the end of the war as Germany was collapsing to preserve the secret of these experiments,
it's clear the Nazis were looking at torsion as a technology that ultimately they hoped would help them win the war.
It was called war decisive because it's a technology that kind of follows Arthur C. Clarke's famous maxim.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic?
I mean, whoever is operating with this physics and this engineering now can run rings around us.
And my model says it came from that bifurcation at the end of the war when the Nazis, as opposed to being defeated, took their real toys, went somewhere, and have had 60 years of uninterrupted whatever to develop extraordinarily advanced versions of their primitive experiments at the end of the war.
And they had technology that's absolutely fundamental that you can see there on Saturn, but is fundamental throughout the universe.
And as you say, potentially for 60 years, you believe they have been doing something with it.
And perhaps what we call UFOs or things that appear in our skies or weird blips that appear in pictures from moonshots or from shuttle missions.
This is what these guys are using.
I think that most of them are this.
I think that real aliens are very rare and far between because the pattern of the sightings, the phenomenology of the UFO phenomena, bespeaks of someone intensely interested in terrestrial affairs.
Who would be more interested in directing, controlling, manipulating terrestrial affairs than someone who was a terrestrial who actually wanted to go on and rule the earth like the Nazis tried to do?
And that makes a lot of sense for a very basic reason, to my very small brain dig.
The fact of the matter is that somebody, if there was an alien civilization out there and they wanted to dominate everything, well, maybe we'd be a little small and a little too thick, unclever for them.
You know, maybe they wouldn't be interested in playing those kinds of games with us.
If you have the universe at your disposal, why bother?
The only people who care about what's going on in planet Earth are people from planet Earth.
And I think, I mean, look, in the wildest extrapolations of this model, remember during the 60s there was a spate of movies and television shows.
I'm thinking of the Bond films.
I'm thinking of the man from Uncle.
I'm thinking of similar, you know, get smart even at some level.
And they all talked about a third force that threatened mankind and had to be dealt with by the world governments in collective action.
Even during the height of the Cold War, we had Russian agents and American agents collaborating in, I think, the Bond films, no, it was Man from Uncle, to defeat Thrush.
Was that, as Hollywood is so often, a telegraphed inside message that this in fact is the larger geopolitical reality we're facing, trying to deal with, and not very successfully?
But these people, the Nazis for one, got their hands on this technology.
Where did they find it?
Where was it?
How did they find it?
They developed it.
It turns out that in 1924, a Nobel laureate named Gerlich, who was an expert in magnetic spin and gravity, began a series of experiments that led him, I think, inevitably into the torsion field.
Because it's not that hidden if you know what you're looking at.
I mean, in Einstein's relativity, you have to accelerate mass up to near the speed of light to get relativistic time dilation.
In torsion physics, all you do is spin a mass.
And if you have an appropriate detector next to this spinning mass, it will show you a change in the quantity of time.
Kozarev, the famous Russian astrophysicist I talked about, who basically invented this field and was put in the gulag, by the way, by Stalin for decades.
And when he came out, he'd had all these insights because he had a lot of time to think.
You know, when you're in prison, there's not much else to do but think.
He crafted a completely coherent alternative view of what he called the flow of time, which is basically the torsion field, the ether, and how it affects chemical processes, nuclear processes, geological processes, star processes, how it makes stars shine.
He put it together as a coherent theory.
His papers are on the web.
Just Google Cozarev, torsion field physics.
You will have a ton of careful, documented science to read and to ponder as you look at what we're seeing in these images from NASA.
So what was developed, stumbled on, created, found, whatever by these people is something that is also out there on Saturn.
Much older, much bigger.
Much older, but it's something that is so fundamental that it is the absolute power.
We're talking about the absolute power here.
It is the unified field theory of everything, and you turn it into engineering, and you become God.
And potentially, which is what excited me tonight, and I'm going to let you go because I know you must be very tired after all of this, is that this is perhaps, if the media handle it properly, and I'm not sure if they will, but I hope they do, this is the biggest news story for decades.
It should be.
But remember, there's a cover-up in place.
It's going to be brave souls who look at these pictures and who independently can think a coherent thought without an authority figure telling them what to think and ask really probing questions.
How can you have structured, repeating geometry in an environment, the rings of Saturn, where everything is moving at high velocities?
There's shear effects, there's smearing, there should be no geometry, and we're seeing buildings of a humongous, gargantuan, bromdingian size.
Things that look like massive, gigantic, enormous skyscrapers, and the only reason we were able to see them is because of the conditions at the time the pictures were taken.
The shadowing, the once every 15-year equinox where the rings of Saturn edge onto the sun, so even a slight bump gives you a nice long shadow.
In essence, it was able to magnify Cassini's resolution by a factor of maybe 100.
And that's why we're seeing this geometry at that low incidence grazing sun angle.
Which brings us to British hacker Gary McKinnon, of course, who you guys in the U.S. are very keen to get your hands on.
I think McKinnon's going to get a pardon from the President of the United States.
And that will be another clue as to where Obama's really heading.
But you think that Gary McKinnon, when he did what he did, when he found what he found, found stuff of the kind that you've been talking about here tonight?
I think we found an archive documenting the secret space program reposing in NASA's computers, which of course is where you'd put it.
It doesn't mean that NASA's directly involved.
It means they're keeping track.
They're trying to emulate with dumb, stupid technology, like rockets, like Apollo and steroids, what these guys, whoever these guys are, are able to do with anti-gravity, anti-aging, unlimited energy, et cetera, et cetera.
Torsion field physics.
So these people got themselves the key to everything, really.
They have it.
It's much more powerful than what we know.
And the state of our technology would take a very long time to catch up with that.
So we're in a chess game with them.
I think we're in a political chess game where because...
I was told by an intelligence agent who happens to be a rabid Republican, can I say that?
That they, meaning the Intel agencies, the operative agencies in the U.S. government, Would prefer to lose a major American city to nuclear terrorism rather than let this technology out.
That means acknowledge it exists.
So, we have a problem is that the other side, this third force, don't even have to use the technology.
All they have to do is use the threat of making it public because the name of the game is to destabilize the current world geopolitical power structure and replace it with something else.
So, this is almost like a mother with a naughty kid.
It's just the threat of force, really.
It's the threat of what we've got.
Yeah, particularly during the Apollo anniversaries.
I mean, that is so overwhelmingly blatant.
And it's in a form, you know, when you keep striking major planets with huge things that make big scars, and you do it during the anniversary of humanity's big celebration, oh, look what we did.
We went to the moon, and you're showing people that you did nothing.
We can run rings around you, pun intended.
That's power that communicates to those people.
This conversation, I think, to be continued, Richard, but you know, amazing.
I think you've had a very good night here in Liverpool.
I know that Liverpool will be kind to you, and I hope that we see you and your good lady Robin here again very, very soon.
But a pleasure to meet in person.
Let me shake you by the hand here in this very strange pit that we're recording this thing.
But after 12 years, at last, we meet, Richard.
Thank you very, very much.
My pleasure.
Can't say much after that.
Fascinating stuff, as ever, from Richard C. Hoagland, and I know that he will be explaining this work on his website very soon.
It may even be there now.
His website is enterprisemission.com.
And Richard, if you're heading back to the US now, I hope you enjoyed the UK.
And as I said there when we spoke face to face, I hope Liverpool was as good to you as it was through my life to me.
Right, this has been edition 25 of The Unexplained.
Coming next on this website is edition 26, again from the Beyond Knowledge Conference.
Can only say it again, please keep in touch with me.
Please tell your friends about this show.
It's vital.
You are the gasoline that this show runs on.
Feedback is so important.
So go to the website, www.theunexplained.tv, and send me an email.
Again, thank you to Adam Cornwell for doing all his hard work on the website.
My name is Howard Hughes.
This is The Unexplained Edition 25.
Edition 26 is coming next.
▲
Export Selection