The Unexplained - Howard Hughes - Edition 618 - Jeremy McGowan - UAP Investigator

March 8, 2022 - The Unexplained - Howard Hughes

29:54

Edition 618 - Jeremy McGowan - UAP Investigator

A slightly shorter extra edition - Jeremy McGowan on UAPx - a groundbreaking project that will go out and look for UAP Phenomena and scientifically examine the evidence...

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Across the UK, across continental North America and around the world on the internet, by webcast and by podcast, my name is Howard Hughes and this is The Unexplained.
	I hope that you're getting by one way and another and I hope that life is treating you okay as we get into March now in the Northern Hemisphere.
	It's starting to look a little bit more spring-like, slowly and very surely.
	But within a month or so, life is going to look a lot more different, of course.
	The political situation in the world and all the other situations with which we've been dealing for these last few years, I can't say that they will improve.
	I'm not a psychic.
	I don't think so.
	I think I have some of those abilities.
	I sometimes know things are going to happen, but my ability to predict what is going to happen between me recording these words and you hearing them in this world, I have absolutely no idea.
	I just hope that it's okay for you in your world.
	Now, on this edition, it's going to be a little shorter because it's an extra.
	It is a conversation that I had with a man on my radio show recently.
	Jeremy McGowan.
	I didn't know what to expect from an organization called UAP Expedition.
	And what a remarkable guest and what an amazing conversation.
	So I want you to hear this here.
	It's not the usual length of the podcast.
	This is a little shorter.
	But Jeremy McGowan is a man I'm going to check back in with soon and he's well worth hearing.
	And you're going to hear all the reasons for that in just seconds from now.
	Thank you very much for all of your emails and communications.
	Please keep those coming.
	Go to the website, theunexplained.tv, and that's where 650 hours worth of podcasts reside, going all the way back to 2006 when I started all of this.
	And if you want to connect with me, you can do that by following the link on the website, theunexplained.tv, designed and created by Adam.
	And you can also connect with me through my Facebook page, the official Facebook page of The Unexplained with Howard Hughes.
	It is the one with the logo, the official logo on it, not to be confused with any other Facebook page.
	Okay, let's get to the conversation then.
	This is exactly as it was broadcast on the radio, my conversation with Jeremy McGowan from UAP Expedition.
	All right.
	About two weeks or so ago, I read about something new, new to me anyway, something called UAP Expedition.
	And UAP Expedition is kind of, as the name suggests, a research organization with very serious aims, intent, and intentions.
	The man behind it is Jeremy McGowan.
	He's online to us now.
	Jeremy, I'm sorry to have kept you waiting.
	How are you?
	I am doing well on this very strange day in human history, is it not?
	Well, it is indeed, isn't it?
	And, you know, a lot of things are being swept away from the headlines because of this.
	I'm noticing that our newspapers here, obviously, they have to be preoccupied with what's happening east of where both of us are sitting right now.
	But a lot of the stories that would ordinarily make headlines and sometimes on the tabloid press in the UK, they make the front pages, the UFO stories and those sorts of things, you know, they're not being done quite as much.
	I don't know whether you're finding that in terms of your own media engagements, it's making it more difficult for you.
	Well, you know, over the past, well, few years, I've pretty much turned off the mainstream media and I've dug into alternative news sources, vetted alternative news sources that, you know, come mostly from social media, boots on the ground, folks that are live streaming and things like that.
	And I found that the news, at least here on this side of the pond, is more commentary and opinion than fact.
	I don't know whether it's always been that and we just haven't noticed or whether that's a trend.
	I suspect you're right.
	It is a trend.
	Let's talk about the UFOs and UAPs.
	According to your biography, you observed an unidentified aerial phenomenon, a UAP, while you were serving as a U.S. Air Force reservist in Jordan.
	Talk to me about that.
	Yes, actually.
	Well, first off, I want to set the record straight on one thing.
	I am not the man behind UAPX.
	I am a team member with UAPX.
	UAPX itself was created and founded by senior chief Kevin Day and Gary Voorhees, both who were on the USS Princeton during the now infamous 2004 Tic Tac encounters.
	But I am an active member and the inventor and owner of the OSIRIS, which I'm sure we'll talk about.
	But the incident in Jordan, this was back in 1995.
	And I had been deployed on a mission into the middle of the Jordanian desert.
	And my duties and responsibilities at that time were simply to guard this very large wooden crate that had been placed in the middle of the Jordanian desert.
	And unbeknownst to me, I had no idea what was inside of the crate.
	And over the course of a few days and nights, I was sitting out there with night vision goggles and just looking up at the stars.
	And I saw something that to this day, I still struggle for an explanation.
	It was just a very bright pinpoint of light that traversed from horizon to horizon with a 90-degree turn directly in the middle with no depreciation in speed and no curvature to the turn.
	It was a perfect 90-degree angle, and it would go from one horizon to the other horizon with that turn in the middle in under two seconds.
	Wow.
	And yeah, it was incredible.
	And it repeated over and over and over again.
	And that just kind of burned an indelible mark in my head.
	And, you know, 24, 25 years later, I end up on a TV show on the History Channel discussing it.
	And that kind of thrust me into this entire very strange world of UFO and UAP.
	And it wasn't too long after I appeared on that show that I started researching really heavily into this and came to the conclusion that we are never going to get any answer that we can believe with certainty from our government or any government,
	and that it is my understanding and idea that the only way that we're going to get the answers is to go out and collect the data ourselves, but to do so in a way that meets with scientific rigor.
	Do you believe that your government, my government, other governments are clandestinely and have been for a long time already collecting that data?
	I think maybe yes, but not in a broad scope.
	When we say the government, it's very, very difficult to blame the government when there are so many offices and agencies and departments and undersecretaries and subsections and underlings inside of each and every agency.
	And it would blow my mind to know that the director of central intelligence knows everything that is occurring within his agency.
	So I feel that there are probably some very long-running extra-constitutional departments or offices that, you know, they get funded by the $600 toilet seats and the $2,000 hammers.
	And they've been operating for quite some time.
	So I think it's probably government enabled, but maybe not quite government controlled.
	I love the way you put that, the $6,000 toilet seats and the $2,000 hammers.
	And that's how those things get hidden in the budget.
	What did you make of the unclassified version of that document that was delivered in Washington last year, which was supposed to be a prelude to perhaps an era of discussion, maybe even an era of revelation?
	The document really did not come as much of a surprise to me.
	I've worked, I served in the military for 12 years, and after that, I served as a tech writer for the U.S. defense industry, doing technical writing for an aerospace defense company that builds, maintains, and flies a lot of the drones, both classified and not.
	So I'm aware of a lot of the flight capabilities and things that some of these more clandestine aircraft that we have have.
	And I understand how these documents get written, and I understand the politics behind them.
	And what most people fail to realize is that any non-classified and most classified documentation that is released by this government or probably any government is released with the expectation that at some point in time, our enemies are going to read them.
	So we put information in there, knowing that China or Russia is going to spend an inordinate amount of time analyzing the position of every comma, the emphasis of every word, to try to get intel on what it is that we're doing.
	Right.
	So does that mean that we sanitize reports and documentation of this kind?
	Oh, absolutely.
	I mean, there's going to be at a minimum three different levels of that report.
	There's going to be the unclassified report that you and I saw.
	There's going to be a higher level classification that certain members of the Senate Select Committee for Intelligence were able to read.
	And then because there's only a few members of the Senate Select Committee for Intelligence that have classification access at the TS level, they're going to get a completely separate report.
	Okay.
	So there are various versions of this.
	And the one that your enemy gets to see or your potential adversary gets to see, you hope doesn't contain information that that adversary can find useful.
	If that's what you have to do with the material that you put out, then in terms of getting the truth about whether UFOs, UAPs are extraterrestrial or they're not, that's going to become a very difficult process then if we rely only on that information.
	Yes, absolutely.
	And like I said, I am of the mindset that we're not going to get any answer from this or any government that is going to be definitive and actionable until it reaches the point where the leader or the president of the United Nations or the president of the United States comes out on worldwide television with technology that proves what he's saying is correct.
	it's going to require that for people to take what the government says at face value.
	Anything short of that is, go ahead.
	I was just saying anything short of that is not going to be provable.
	It's not going to be anything that we can understand because let's face it, the government has lied to us about UFOs and UAP and extraterrestrial things and ideas for at least 70 years.
	Why would they change now?
	That report documented, what, 144 instances of contacts.
	When I'm talking about contacts, I mean visules on things.
	And I think 143 of those could not be readily explained.
	I think that was the figure, wasn't it?
	Yes.
	And that comes into play because we don't know how they define readily.
	Was it they couldn't be readily explained by the eyewitnesses?
	They couldn't be readily explained post-analysis or they couldn't be readily explained during the receipt of the data in preparation for the report.
	We don't know what readily means.
	So quite understandably then, and this is where UAP Expedition UAPX comes in, you're a group of people who've essentially thrown up your hands, not in despair, but in perplexity, if that's the word.
	And you've said, okay, we're not going to get the information from them.
	We're going to have to go and get it for ourselves.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	Like I said, Senior Chief Kevin Day, he was the radar operator on the SPY-1 radar on the USS Princeton during the now infamous Tic-Tac event with the Nimitz battle group.
	He was the one that was vectoring in Lieutenant Commander David Fraver with his FA-18 to intercept the Tic-Tac.
	So Kevin Day and Gary Voorhees, Gary Voorhees was the technical operator of the radar and Jason Turner, they came together and they formed UAPX.
	And the idea Was originally the idea was to go back to the Catalina Channel where this occurred with all sorts of scientists and equipment and attempt to catch evidence of the existence of this Tic Tac.
	Since the initial formation of the group, we now have several PhDs.
	We have Dr. Matthew Shadagas.
	We have Dr. Kevin Knuth, both physicists.
	We have Mr. Christopher Altman, who's a NASA-trained astronaut and has worked on multiple different classified type of projects, both with the DOE and the United States Air Force.
	We have the three members that I mentioned, plus myself.
	And we have amassed a wide collection of sensor technology, everything from FLIR cameras to quantum number generators, quantum random number generators to visible and IR cameras to all sorts of different types of equipment and software for the analysis of not only visual imagery, but radiation readings and things like that.
	And together, with the exception of having access to that SPY-1 radar, now we're a decade or more past the Nimitz incident, couple decades past the Nimitz incident.
	Our technology that we possess now is just about on par with what the United States military had when they were recording the data from the Tic Tac incident.
	But without that data, without that primary data, you're only going to be able to make assumptions, aren't you?
	Are you telling me that you have access to some of that primary data?
	Because I understood that some of the Tic Tac stuff was, you know, some of the tapes, as they were, were taken away.
	Well, we make a point not to study historical cases.
	What we do is we look at the historical cases, we look at the observable flight patterns of these objects and things like that, and then we identify equipment that will help us in the field.
	Then we assemble our team and we go to a location, a hotspot, you know, whether it's something like Skinwalker Ranch or back to the coast of California or even offshore of Virginia Coast, and we set up our equipment for days upon days upon days at a time.
	And we record 24-7, and then we come back and we analyze that data over a period of months or years to glean information on what we've got.
	Our first expedition, when we went out to the Catalina Channel back in July of last year, we collected, I think it was over 900 hours of infrared video, several hundred hours of quantum random number generator noise that would be paired with that, terabytes or at least megabytes of data from our radiation detectors, plus all of our visual camera imagery and things like that.
	And of course, we captured birds and moths and mosquitoes and gnats and airplanes and paragliders.
	So now we have to go back and analyze all of this data and filter out all the knowns.
	One of the things that I was doing as recently as about two weeks ago is I was plotting the position of every single transponding vessel on the globe during our expedition to the Catalina Channel,
	and then geographically narrowing down and eliminating all vessels that were outside of the area that we were looking at, and then going back through and removing any vessel that was a pleasure crafter, a fishing vessel, or a cargo vessel, leaving me with just the military vessels.
	Then we would research the type of naval vessels that were out there, find out what the equipment was that they had on board, and file for the FOIA information.
	So we're looking for the deck logs.
	We're looking for the radar information.
	When we find an anomalous event during our post-analysis, we go to NEXRAD radar and get historical radar readings.
	We go to NOAA.
	We look at LIGO and ERNI, which are ERNI is a satellite program that is orbiting the sun looking for solar radiation because our radiation detectors may ping on something.
	And we want to eliminate all known incidents of why our radiation detectors would have gone off at a certain place at a certain time.
	So everything that we're doing is trying to eliminate every single possibility of a known instance that would cause our measurement devices to tick so that we're left with the anomalous.
	And then we can come back in and our physicists can use their custom-built neural nets to go back through and parse the data and find potential explanations that are not domestic or prosaic.
	That sounds astonishingly systematic and a lot of hard work, I think.
	Is what you've just described your OSIS, the off-road scientific investigation and response informatics system.
	Is that essentially it?
	Well, the OSIRIS is a mobile version of what we have for our field deployable equipment.
	The OSIRIS, I had start building, I was starting to build that about two and a half years ago.
	And basically, I had looked at my wife and as a tribute to you folks in the UK, this was built on a 1999 Land Rover Discovery 2, which I think is a brilliant vehicle.
	Oh, there's nothing better.
	As long as the electronics are working, that vehicle is unstoppable.
	So I modified it.
	I started drilling holes in the roof and running Ethernet cables and fitting it with GPS systems and constant on Wi-Fi and then incorporating touchscreen displays with ADS-B systems, magnetometers, frequency spectrum analyzers.
	So this is the UFO UAP equivalent of Helen Hunt in a movie Chasing Storms.
	Yes, yes.
	Wow.
	It's the seriousness of storm chasers with the visual of the ECDO one from Ghostbusters.
	Well, I think, as I said, systematic is not the word for it.
	I mean, it's amazing what you've done.
	How are you raising funds for this?
	Because all of this effort and all of these experts and the support that they will need won't come cheap.
	No, it doesn't.
	And currently, we don't.
	We are an all-volunteer organization.
	Every dime that has been put into this effort has come out of our own personal pockets.
	I raised about $2,000 on a little GoFundMe page that helped refit the OSIRIS vehicle with some new suspension and some off-road gear to make it a little bit more capable.
	But other than that, the equipment has been purchased by our team members.
	We are a nonprofit.
	We're filing for our federal status on our 501c3, which is the U.S. version of a registered nonprofit.
	So we don't have to pay taxes when that's done.
	And once that paperwork is done, then we can go into a full-on fundraising mode.
	But as of right now, everything that we've ever done has been voluntarily done by our members and paid for internally, with the exception of our primary expedition that we did in the Catalina Channel, which was finished in July of last year.
	Which we have to say for our UK listeners is just off California.
	Yes, that is off the coast of California, just south of Los Angeles, about 25 miles west of Los Angeles in the middle of the water.
	What we did with that one is we ended up getting a research partnership with a film production, and they basically said that they would cover the cost of our expedition in exchange for them being able to toss cameras and film crew around to film how we collected the data.
	Now, we did not get paid for that.
	The members of UAPX did not get a dime personally out of that, but our expenses in the equipment and the insurance, the shipping and the transportation and all of that was covered by the production.
	Okay, so that sounds wonderfully organic in the way that you're doing this.
	So you are aiming for the Holy Grail, really.
	I mean, it's the best kind of research of all, because you're going to places where things might happen, you're checking them out, and then at some point you're going to boil down the data, analyze it, and then come out, presumably, with a report that says, okay, we went to the Catalina Channel.
	I don't know whether you're going to go to the source of the Phoenix lights, which apparently are still appearing in some form in that location, but we've been to these locations.
	Look what we found.
	Well, I'm going to do you one better.
	We're not just going to come out with a report.
	Our physicists are actually actively, currently writing publications for peer-reviewed scientific journal articles.
	So our methodology, our abstracts, our math, they're all going to go in front of other PhDs and be reviewed for accuracy and content and then be published in scientific journals.
	And this is groundbreaking in a way because it is extremely difficult to speak about UFO and UAP in the science and academic circles.
	It's almost a death sentence to certain academic careers.
	So for us to be able to boil down our data in such a way to get it published and to get it speaking, we will probably break down our documentation into two, maybe three, maybe four different published articles.
	And that will help lay the groundwork for future expeditions and hopefully allow science and academia to start taking these topics much, much more seriously.
	I'm getting excited just listening to you talk about this.
	Can you give me a clue or a taster of anything that you might have discovered so far?
	No, unfortunately, because we are still under an NDA with the production company.
	The film is supposed to be released this May.
	Once the film is released, then we are absolved of our NDA restrictions.
	It's kind of the devil that we have to dance with.
	We really, truly enjoyed the experience of being able to get out there back to the Catalina Channel and put this together and collect the data.
	And the last six months since we've been back and reviewing the data has been filled with almost daily, oh my gosh, moments.
	And we're extremely excited to be able to present the published papers.
	But until the movie is out, we are under a legal restriction just simply because it was paid for by.
	I understand.
	And you have to obey a non-disclosure agreement.
	I understand these things.
	We have them in the media, I can promise you.
	But you said, oh, my gosh, moments.
	I mean, without giving me specifics, which you're not allowed to do.
	What do you mean?
	Something that's made you go, oh, my God.
	Yes.
	What I can say, and I have to speak in hypotheticals and do a little bit of tap dancing at the same time.
	We are not strictly visually based.
	We're not out there looking for that 8x10 glossy photo that shows an off-world craft.
	That would be great, but everybody knows that those photos can be photoshopped or deep faked or otherwise fabricated, and they don't necessarily constitute proof.
	And indeed, people will debate them for years.
	If you look at the famous Billy Meyer photographs, you know, people have debated their bona fides for decades.
	Exactly.
	So our approach is to have a visual indicator of something.
	You know, it might still be a fuzzy blob that looks like a potato at a distance.
	But when we compare that and we have corroborating evidence and we have corroborating evidence from multiple different angles, and we have corroborating evidence from multiple different sensors, including radiation detection sensors or including third-party radar sensors that have proven a reflectivity in that exact same location.
	Then we take all that data together and paint the picture around what might be still just a fuzzy blob.
	But everything put together will paint a much clearer photo, mental photo of what it is that we're looking at.
	That's not just our goal, but that's what We're working on.
	Very much the stated aim.
	As I say, I'm getting excited listening to you.
	In the field of ufology, in the history of all of this, there have been great investigators who have been sometimes impeded by people who didn't want them to get certain information.
	Are you anticipating, or indeed, has this happened to you?
	To a point.
	Like I said, we don't put a lot of stock in historical cases.
	So we're not out there trying to get data from this or any other government.
	We have our own equipment.
	So our equipment is going to be deployed and measuring what it would have been that the other investigators would have been asking the government for access to.
	So we're creating our own baseline data.
	What we are having an issue with is sometimes, let's say if we've measured an anomalous event on a certain date at a certain location, we want to go back out and ping the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency or the NRO or any of these satellite imagery providers and get access to what we hope is archival footage of that same area at the time and date.
	And we are being not necessarily stonewalled per se, but we're finding it extremely difficult to get straight answers.
	I filed a FOIA to the NRO for a specific time, date, and location.
	That's a freedom of information.
	Yes, the freedom of information active request, exactly.
	And they came back and paraphrasing, they stated that the information that I was looking for is maintained by the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency and is exempt from FOIA.
	So they admitted that the data that we're looking for exists and at the same time says that there's no way that we can get it.
	I wonder why they would exempt it.
	Listen, we're coming to the end of this conversation.
	I would love to speak with you again at greater length.
	Maybe when you come off that non-disclosure agreement, I would love to speak with you again.
	I think you're doing incredible work.
	I haven't heard of anybody quite doing it in this way, so it's something new.
	And I can think in my head, and I'm sure my listener will also be thinking in their heads too, of hundreds of locations that you could go to.
	I'm thinking about maybe going up in a plane and doing observations there or places like here in Europe, the Hesse-Sahlen Lights location in Norway.
	There's a lot of stuff that you can do.
	If people want to check you out online and find out more about your mission and the work that you've done so far, Jeremy, where would they go?
	It's very easy.
	It's uapx.space.
	Well, I wish you well with it.
	And as you say, when do you think the first, I won't say revelations, but the first announcements will come out?
	You're saying May, perhaps?
	The documentary will come out in May.
	The important science and the data will come out approximately two months after the documentary when those are published.
	Well, I wish you all the luck in the world, and I'd love to speak with you again.
	Thank you for giving me time, Jeremy.
	Thank you, Howard.
	It has been a pleasure, and I'd be happy to come back.
	Thank you.
	Jeremy McGowan from UAPX, UAP Expedition, and a very, as I said, systematic way of doing this research.
	Maybe we're going to get somewhere this time.
	Let's see.
	See what I mean, or rather hear what I mean about Jeremy McGowan.
	What a great guest.
	I'm going to follow his work with enormous interest.
	And when that documentary is out in May, then we're going to talk to him again.
	I'm absolutely certain about that.
	Slightly shorter edition, but well worth hearing, I think.
	More great guests in the pipeline here at the Home of the Unexplained.
	So until next, you and I meet, please stay safe.
	Please stay calm.
	And above all, please stay in touch.
	Thank you very much.
	Take care.

▲