YouTube Channel: "Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal"
Video Title: "Lue Elizondo's First Appearance on Theories of Everything"

Lue Elizondo's First Appearance on Theories of Everything
767,814 views  Premiered Jun 23, 2021

Luis Elizondo reveals his thoughts on the June Report, the connection between consciousness / physics and aliens / UAPs.

From: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAmFlLfsZKM

Transcript:

Luis Elizondo is a former US Army counterintelligence special agent who's gained notoriety now for
being the director of the now defunct ATIP program, which was a program initiated by the Defense Intelligence Agency in order to study unidentified aerial phenomenon, also
known as UFOs. For those new to this channel, my name is Curt Jaimungal. I'm a filmmaker with a background in mathematical physics, dedicated to the explication of what
are called theories of everything from a theoretical physics perspective, clearly, but also exploring
the potential connection consciousness has to the fundamental laws of nature, if those fundamental laws exist at all.
The UFO phenomenon may seem tangential, but if you watch the podcast with Kevin Knuth, linked below, you'll see that there seems to be an intimate connection between some
of the deep mysteries of the universe and this phenomenon. Thus, I'm interested, and I don't view this enigma with a stigma.
I'm not averse to it like much of the scientific community is. Lou has revealed more in this podcast than in almost any other interview, and that's
due to the exquisite questions provided to me by you, as this was an ask me anything. In fact, it was a live AMA.
So Lou and I both thank you for that. Each podcast on this channel is punctiliously time stamped, just look at the description,
and you can navigate to whichever question you'd like to directly. There are a couple sponsors of today's podcast.
Algo is an end to end supply chain optimization software company with software that helps business users optimize sales and operations planning to avoid stockouts, reduce returns
and inventory write downs while reducing inventory investment. It's a supply chain AI that drives smart ROI headed by a bright individual by the name
of Amjad Hussain, who's been a huge supporter of this podcast from its early days. In fact, Amjad contributed some questions to today's AMA, and you can visit Algo by
going to algo.com. ALGO. The second sponsor is Brilliant. Brilliant illuminates the soul of math, science and engineering through bite sized interactive
learning experiences. Brilliant's courses explore the laws that shape our world, elevating math and science
from something to be feared to a delightful experience of guided discovery. More on them later.
If you'd like to see more conversations like this, then please do consider visiting patreon.com slash CURTJAIMUNGAL and contributing whatever you can.
Each dollar helps tremendously. There's also a crypto and a PayPal account which has been opened up recently in case
donations there are more in line with what you'd like to use. In a couple weeks, I'm speaking to Chris Langan, who's famous for having the highest recorded
IQ in America on his cognitive theoretic model of the universe, which is a theory of everything tomorrow.
I'm also speaking to Jeremy Corbell. There's plenty more to be announced. And again, if you'd like to support this podcast, if you'd like it to stay at a technical level,
which requires plenty of preparation, then please do consider becoming a patron or donating in some other way, shape or form.
 UFOs have been classified by size and other parameters
Thank you so much and enjoy. So first, I'm going to get to a question that I had, which is, is there a correlation between
any of the characteristics of these UAPs, UFOs, and some other characteristic, for
example, let's say that the tic tac shaped ones are more violent, or the pyramidal shaped
ones are faster? Is there a classification of them? And do they have some other characteristic associated with them?
So the characterizations that we have, we have seen to date really is a result of size,
believe it or not. So and this is by no means comprehensive.
But what we tend to see are the smaller vehicles tend to be, think of a sports car, or your
saucer shaped vehicles. Whereas the larger vehicles, let's say a school bus size, is that of a cylindrical object
or roughly that of a tic tac, or even sometimes described as a telephone pole, and then in
shape, so cylindrical. And then the tend to be the large ones, really large ones tend to be not always but almost
exclusively either triangular shape or boomerang shape. Now there are some, some, some anecdotal, if you will, reports of large saucers as well
and some shapes looking like a dumbbell. But the three primary categories tend to be that we saw in each of them were disc shape,
and then you have the longer cylindrical shape and then finally a large, large triangular shape vehicle.
The triangle vehicles are often described as flying very close to the ground, and very,
very, very quiet, silent, and seem to kind of lumber, if you will, from place to place,
very slow, almost like you would imagine a large dirigible, perhaps, just kind of floating
there silently. The apex of those triangles are often described with lights of some sort or emitting some
sort of radiation in the visible light spectrum, which to a lot of the, if you will, people
who reported this information to include first responders, will often see the lights changing color, and maybe a result of some sort of Doppler shift that's occurring, red-blue Doppler
shift. But that's, in essence, the three primary shapes that we have had reported.
And are these shapes associated with any other characteristics, for example, violence or nonviolence or the shutting down of nuclear missiles?
Yeah, Curt, that's a great question. You know, so there's a difference between when we say something's a potential threat
and hostile intent. And I think people have confused the term potential threat. When we say potential threat, you know, as a physicist, there's a lot of things in nature
that are potential threats, but don't mean to harm you, right? It's just, it's, for example, I've often said, if I go to an airport, and I get on a 737,
there's no real threat there. But if I were to jump off and run along the runway, the tarmac, and I happen to get too
close to one of these jet engines as it's, you know, going down the runway, chances are there's going to be some sort of biological consequence.
If there's an environmental threat, I'm probably going to lose some hearing, I'm probably going to get burned by the jet exhaust.
It's not necessarily an intended consequence of the jet engine to harm me. And so anytime you're dealing with physics, and I think this topic of UAP certainly nests
well within the realm of physics, there's always potential threat.
And that's just the way it works. If you ever go to the CERN, the Large Hadron Collider, you're talking about a massive machine,
the world's largest machine, in fact, ever built. And it's hurtling some of the smallest particles around nearly the speed of light.
And if you look at the shielding that is around the accelerator, it's massive.
You would think for something so, so tiny and infinitesimally small, why do you need such a big machine?
Well, it turns out that there's potential consequences when you're taking a particle
of matter and you're accelerating it to the speed of light, almost the speed of light, correct me, correction.
So I think we need to be careful when we go down that rabbit hole and say something is
threat versus hostile intent. You said, is there any signs that these things are displaying some sort of overt hostility
towards us or violence? I think you said, you know, we in AATIP didn't see any overt signs of, as you say, violence.
But you know, there are individuals who have reported that they've had contact.
Whatever that contact is, it's not always been pleasant, according to some of the eyewitnesses. Now, the question is, have those eyewitnesses really had a close and personal interaction
with this? Is it some sort of psychological manifestation that is occurring?
We simply don't know. For that reason, we were very careful not to stipulate any type of intent behind these
things. And we focused, the only two things we really focused on in AATIP was what is it and how does it work?
We were nowhere near getting to the point where we understood its intentions or who was behind the wheel or the origins of these things.
It was simply just as you can appreciate a scientific approach. What is it and how does it work? And if we could answer those questions, maybe we'd have a better chance of answering some
of the other ones. You also mentioned that the June report may be a whole lot, a quotation, a whole lot of
 The June Report: what's coming out in it?
nothing. Now, why do you say that? And why do you think that is? And have you been briefed as to what's going to come out in the news report?
Yeah, I mean, let me let me turn that question right back around, Curt, and ask you a question. You know, if I were to write a 74-page dissertation about a black hole today, I'd probably, it'd
probably be a lot more comprehensive than if I were to write a 74-page dissertation about a black hole back in 1965.
Because at the time, these were theoretical objects that we weren't even sure if existed. Some scientists believe that they couldn't exist, that these were just some sort of anomaly
within Einstein's calculations. So we don't have a really good, firm understanding of these things.
And so, you know, what, what are we going to provide the Congress? Well, we know that they're not US technology.
Okay, that's, that's, that's a pretty big, big step forward. But other than that, you know, we're still at the point where we don't know if these
things are some sort of foreign adversarial technology, which it looks like they're probably not, or there's something else.
So you know, there's not a whole lot you can say about that. You can say, look, there were, you know, 170 some incidents of these incidents, they performed
in this way, these were the organizations involved, these were the people involved. This is the radar, this is the video, here's photographs, here's the eyewitness testimony
and reports. But at the end of the day, you know, we still don't know what we're dealing with.
So I'm not sure we're going to be able to in a 74-page document, conclusively state
and satisfy what something is and satisfies people, satisfy people's curiosity.
I think as time goes on, and we continue to look at this, this enigma, and perhaps create
a whole of government approach, hopefully those reports each year become increasingly more, more forthcoming, and we'll have additional details and fidelity.
But I think it's just too early right now. Look, we just got to the point where Congress and the American government agree that these
things are real. So how much can you possibly expect an organization in 180 days?
By the way, let's not forget that that the COVID restriction, most of these people couldn't even go to work.
You know, I try to be realistic. Well, to be fair, some of your interviews, what I gleaned from them in an hour is quite
substantial. So I can imagine that if someone's given a team of people are given 180 days, they can come up with what could shock people.
You just said it. If you have a team of people, they didn't have that. The UAP task force was minimally manned.
They had two people and they were only part-time assigned. So that part of the argument hasn't been substantiated.
Then the other part is 180 days. I would submit to you, it takes, as I've said before, longer to remodel a kitchen sometimes
than 180 days. You're asking the entire intelligence community and the Department of Defense to collect the
data, synthesize the data, process the data, and then author the data, and then coordinate
that data through all 18 agencies of the intelligence community, have it reviewed by the lawyers,
have it signed, sealed, and delivered by the Secretary of Defense, then to the Director of National Intelligence, and then finally on to Congress.
And oh, by the way, there's COVID we've got to deal with. So anything classified, which most of this report is classified, you can't do it until
you get to go to work. Right. So I think we're really expecting a lot.
It's almost like expecting Mike Tyson to fight in a boxing ring with both hands tied behind
his back. It's just not, I don't see how that's reasonable.
 Do high-resolution videos / pictures exist of these UAP that would shock people?
He would still defeat me. Okay. Oh, and me too, I'm sure. As for the fidelity, you mentioned fidelity, and a question that's been brought up by quite
a few people, I don't have a single username to single out, is are there videos, pictures
that you've seen that are not so grainy, not so far away, but instead up close, exact,
let's say, such that someone who is on the fence about this issue would no longer be on the fence?
Yeah, and I think you're seeing that with Congress. I mean, there's videos and photographs and reporting that I've been privy to that are
extremely compelling. I've said for the record that the three videos that have come out as interesting as they are, they're probably the least compelling of the ones that we had.
And this is why I'm so concerned about now the recent revelations that the Pentagon has deleted or destroyed my emails and my files, because there were documents in a very comprehensive
shared folder that we had that was pretty incredible.
I mean, there was some very high definition, high fidelity videos in there that when you looked at it, you realize, hey, you know, that's, that's not one of our aircraft.
 Why all these revelations now?
Many in the audience had one more question with regard to this issue, which is why now why all these revelations from the government all of a sudden, because we weren't able to
get to it over the live stream, I emailed him and his assistant got back saying, as for your question, why now?
Why not now? Nothing will ever change. Nothing will change if a few brave men and women don't stand up to speak out about what
they know. Lewis talked about this many times in many interviews. He was trying to raise the alarm about this issue, but it wasn't getting reported up the
chain of command to the Secretary of Defense. In the US defense community, if someone is frustrated with bureaucracy, there is no way
to circumvent the chain of command. So it's typical for those people to resign. And then it's often the resignation letter, which finally makes its way up the chain to
affect change. That's exactly what happened in Lewis case, feel free to reference previous interviews that he's given where he's answered this question.
 Remote viewing and aliens / UAPs
Have there been any investigations as to the connection between remote viewing and UAP? So you can interpret that the way you'd like.
Wow, great question. Historically, yeah, there was there was some effort, particularly in the in the 70s and
the 80s. During a program that one of my colleagues was responsible for the Stargate program.
And before that, it was real flame. And before that a bunch of other names, but Dr. Harold Rudolph can can probably give you
some more information on that during our time in a tip, we didn't really focus on that we were more focused on the nuts and bolts.
But yeah, there was, you know, there was some some interesting information that was put out in the past about about that about the connection between remote viewing and potential
UAP activity. There was one, I think, alleged remote viewing session where they were remote viewing a particular
enemy target. I see Seaborne, the sea based target, I'm not going to go into more detail of that.
I don't know if I can. But apparently there was some sort of UAP activity associated with that.
The problem is when you're talking about remote viewing, it's it's, it's very subjective. And so you have to be very careful when you're dealing with data like that, because it's
at the end of the day, you need more information, you need information to substantiate that's
that may be one piece of the puzzle, but by no means can you put together the entire mosaic
with just one piece of the puzzle, you need you need all the pieces to really, really, understand what you're looking at.
 [Jeremy Rys] Invisible College and Hal Puthoff
You mentioned someone's name, about a minute ago, Harold, what was his last name? Kutov. Okay, yeah, I have a question about that from Jeremy Riss of the channel alien scientist.
He wants to know, have you ever heard of something called the invisible college? And then as a secondary question, was this theoretical physicist who brought you into
the program? You mentioned this before that someone brought you in to a tip? Was it how put off?
I'm very well aware of the term invisible college. I am also very well aware of how how is it is a dear friend of mine, he did not bring
me into this program. But we wound up working as colleagues.
He's an incredible human being him and other individual named Dr. Kit green.
Another fantastic human being an absolute American treasure. And there's a couple others.
Dr. Eric Davis is another one. I really was very fortunate. I had the opportunity to, to truly stand on the shoulders of giants.
It was an incredible honor. And there's many others that I, I will mention right now. But Dr. Colin Keleher, a bunch of others that were, you know, really, really helpful in
the early days of this effort. What is it that you've heard about the invisible college that you can reveal that you feel
like is credible? I just heard the term yesterday. I mean, it's, you know, it's a loose affiliation of individuals.
You know, that's the term invisible college being that these are individuals who obviously have a high academic BTA to their name.
You know, it's it's more of a loose affiliation necessarily than a, you know, a formalized
corporation. You know, it's the you might also hear terms like the aviary, which, you know, there's
there's some truth to that. There are some individuals that belong to an organization and to, to, to remain anonymous.
They had names of birds associated with them. Names of birds, birds, right?
That's the term aviary. And what it did is it gave them an extra degree of anonymity when, when having discussions
you know, especially over open lines or email, unsecured email. You know, that that's, it's just a layer, extra layer of operation, what we call OPSEC.
 [Brian Keating] Tellurian / mundane explanations for UFO phenomenon?
Speaking of academia, this question comes from Professor of Astronomy, Brian Keating,
who runs the into the impossible podcast. Is there any test or data that would convince you that every UAP sighting has a prosaic,
natural or scientific explanation, ie anything that could falsify the narrative that alien technology is visiting the earth?
Now I know, we can put a clause to that and say whether or not they're visiting or whether or not they're from a dimension that is at you may not like the term dimension in the
way that it's used in common parlance, but we can couch whether or not it's visiting. You understand what's meant by the term alien.
So Curt, I'm going to ask you a favor to repeat that question one more time, because there's,
there's a bit of a contradiction in there. And I want to Sure, sure, sure. Great, great, great. This comes from Professor of Astronomy, Brian Keating, who runs the into the impossible
podcast, which I recommend you all check out and subscribe to. Is there any test or data that would convince you that every UAP sighting has a prosaic,
natural or scientific explanation, ie anything that could falsify the narrative that alien
technology is visiting the earth? So interesting, natural or scientific, prosaic explanation, and then turns around and says,
ie disproves some sort of alien visitation. I'm not sure the two are mutually exclusive.
I think, you know, I think you can have a discussion about alien life and still remain
scientific. We're doing it now with NASA looking for microbial life on Mars. They're not exclusive. You can't say in one hand, you know, there's a scientific explanation, but it's not but
it disproves alien life. Scientific explanation may wind up actually proving alien life if there is.
So so I, I think that's I think that with all due respect, I think that's false logic.
I don't, I don't know if it's Mr. Keating at all. I'm sure, you know, you want a thorough answer, which I'm going to try to do my best.
But the very notion that an alien life form can't be scientific, look, this planet is
probably the greatest UFO that we know of, right? This ball called Earth hurtling through deep space around a, you know, obscure star we
call the sun and obscure part of the Milky Way has got life all over the place. In fact, the birth of science was right here.
And it was it was the study of of other living organisms. Look at Darwin. Right.
So so I, I think we need to be careful when we subscribe to the fact that if it's alien,
it can't be scientific or if it's scientific, it can't be alien. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.
I think we realize now with with the understanding of extremophiles that life can defile
a lot of our definitions and continues to defy our definitions. We have to keep reinventing new definitions of what a life form is.
You know, initially we thought all life forms were something that were based on ultimately
on the building blocks of photosynthesis. We now realize that's not true. There are extremophiles that live and survive of chemosynthesis in the deepest parts of
our ocean, a completely different way of obtaining nutrients from its environment. We also realize that the understanding that life form must have DNA, we now realize may
not be true also in the world of virology. We see all the time viruses which can replicate and behave very much like a living thing and
yet have no DNA associated. They have RNA. So I think we have to be careful when we ask questions, especially as scientists.
We have to make sure that we to really embody the essence of science.
We have to be willing to ask the hard questions because that's the only way science really advances. Otherwise, we would be stuck thinking that the four elements of the earth are
earth, wind, fire and water. You know, we've now realized this thing called the periodic table. We now realize this thing called subatomic particles in quantum physics.
Had we have just stuck to that as being science and not challenging the ecosystem of science at the time, we never would be here.
We never would have had Newtonian physics. We never would have had Einstein's relativity. We wouldn't have quantum physics. So again, I caution one more time against the idea that that the science is that
science and a scientific explanation will automatically rule out something alien.
Now, I think what he was trying to say, your friend, Mr. Keating, and forgive me for going this long winded explanation.
Go ahead. And I appreciate how you're taking notes. I appreciate the seriousness to which you're answering these questions.
I think what he's probably saying, asking me is, hey, Lou, is there any examples that
you can say that, A, you have found a prosaic explanation for something that initially
seemed unidentified or perhaps extraordinary? The answer is absolutely yes, we have.
In fact, that was the intent of ATIP to go into something, trying to find is this a drone? Is this some sort of cruise missile?
Is this some sort of new type of aircraft or helicopter or blimp or dirigible, you know, atmospheric anomaly?
 The "checklist" the gov't goes through before citing it as UAP
You name it, fill in the blank. Is there a checklist, by the way, that one goes through? Like, is it a lens flare?
Is it a drone? So there's absolutely. And you have when you have the experts that are experts in those particular fields, such
as photography or video or whatever, they're going through that mental checklist is an artifact, right?
So is it a software glitch? Is it a lens flare? Is it a scratch on the lens that now is being hyper magnified?
So you get this weird scattering of light effect. It looks like you have a real object there when you don't.
Right. And so that's when you compare it to the infrared. That's when you compare it also to the radar, when you compare it to the eyewitnesses.
Right. Because, you know, when you have that amount of information now all verifying
that something is real, then you can start scratching up the fact that it's some sort of artifact or lens flare, et cetera, et cetera.
You know, there were times where we were able to do that. And it's a bit satisfying because you can kind of take that off the list.
What for us was so difficult were the ones that fell so far beyond what we would normally
presume as capable capabilities that we have in our inventory. Again, the instantaneous acceleration, hypersonic velocities, transmedium travel and
seemingly anti-gravity without associated technologies, no wings, control surfaces, no
obvious signs of propulsion, no heat signature. And yet these things are able to defy the natural effects of Earth's gravity.
Those are the ones where you say, OK, now we're not probably dealing with a helicopter. We're not dealing. There's no rotor wash.
There's no heat signature. There's nothing at all that we can look at with the multiple
sensors that we're looking at something and say, yeah, that fits within the paradigm of
our existing aviation technology. So there you have it. I didn't mean to go into a long winded conversation.
I prefer long winded, man. I'm a meticulous person. I also noted that you said mental checklists is what they go through.
And I was curious if due diligence is a physical checklist or a standardized one, a formalized one.
Yes, but those depending on where that expertise resides. So if you're asking, for example, a CIA analyst who is an expert in optics, they're
going to go through their own checklist differently than a radar person who's an expert in radar and telemetry who's going to go through their checklist.
So there's not one single checklist because depending on the expertise that's being used and leveraged, just like consider talking to a cardiologist versus a radiologist.
Right. Right. Right. Medical doctors. But they're not going to go through the same checklist when looking
at someone's heart. One's looking at it from from an X-ray perspective. One's looking at it, you know, maybe from a from a more from a biological and metabolic
process perspective. So those checklists exist, but they're not consistent across the
 Transmedium travel, spoofing or physical?
board. You mentioned transmedium as well. I'm curious if you've seen any footage where a UAP goes from air to water and is there
a splash involved or do they just submerge as if it's an illusion, let's say, or
artifact of light? Not saying that they are artifacts of light. I'm just curious if they displace the water in any formidable fashion.
Yeah. Well, Curt, there seems to be some sort of interaction. I will I will state that there's been plenty of reports that we have where the water
seems to be deterred, that there is a disturbance over the water. And there's several hypotheses that have been proposed for that.
No different than when you have a helicopter hovering over the water, you can see the water being a bit perturbed from the rotor wash.
Yet these all have rotor wash. But the water seems to be perturbed, roiling, if you will.
And we've seen that over and over again, not just with the Nimitz incident. There's some incidents near off the coast of Puerto Rico.
There's been some other incidents as well where where the reporting by government officials has been that there is some sort of disturbance in the water.
The question is, what is causing those disturbances? If you look at biology, for example, look at an alligator.
We just now realized over the last maybe decade or two that there are ultra low
frequencies, acoustic signatures that are emitted by alligators when they are in mating season in the rivers and the lakes.
And you can actually see as they put their head up, you can't hear it. But the water begins to what looks like a dance around around them.
And what's happening is these ultra low frequencies, acoustic frequencies are perturbing the water, disturbing the water and the metrics that the matrix of the
water is is is part of. And so it begins to to to roil.
You know, is this something similar? It could be. We don't we don't know yet because we don't understand the technology fully, you know, but we suspect that this this disturbance in the water could be a.
Well, you know, could be a result of of the technology being being utilized, you
know, no different than a helicopter, perhaps with its rotor wash, perturbing the water. But rather than being a physical or mechanical disturbance, it might be due to
some sort of electromagnetic interference. Right. Lou, I wanted to thank you for how open you are, how frank you are.
I'm not actually I'm not used to that when I when I speak to people about this topic.
So firstly, thank you about that. Well, I look, I don't have all the answers and I'm going to tell you that, you know,
you're asking me direct questions. I'll give you direct answers. I'll do the best that I can. But, you know, I don't have all the answers and I'm not I'm not afraid to say that.
I'm not afraid. And some are classified as well. Yeah. And some details are definitely are, you know, so you can't get out.
Right. And for the people watching in the chat, if I don't get to your question, please, it's because I'm in the moment with Lou. I don't want to keep switching tabs.
I want to listen to Lou's answer and ask pertinent follow up questions. OK, man. For the record, if I can just real short, let me go back.
Your friend, Mr. Keating, I didn't mean any disrespect by that. Please make sure he knows that I just wanted to answer his question to the best of my
ability. I wasn't trying to to this wasn't a slam in any way. I just I just wanted to be as accurate as possible.
For sure. For sure. Manny Ortez asks. Lou once said on a podcast that someone from the Pentagon told him that they knew
that these that this phenomenon are demons, although Lou didn't seem to believe it.
I would love for Lou to expand on that.
Well, Curt, let me ask you this. You know what? What is a demon?
Right. I think most people would would submit to you that a demon is some sort of supernatural being that is based in some sort of religious doctrine and is
usually malevolent to some degree. But, you know, let's look at this from a scientific perspective.
All things, by definition, are supernatural until they're they're explained, until
they're normal. Right. This cellular telephone I'm speaking to you on in this. The Wi-Fi signals a hundred years ago would be completely supernatural.
And yet in some parts of the world, actually, if I show a picture of somebody, then that's still supernatural. I think the soul is is locked in the photograph.
Everything is is is paranormal until it becomes normal. Everything is supernatural until it becomes natural.
And that is that is the definition of it. It just means beyond our understanding of what what's before us.
I can't I can't tell anybody with a straight face that something is or is not demonic because it really depends on what is your definition of a demon.
And at the end of the day, I've seen enough demons in my life, combat and warfare to know that there really is true evil in this world.
A lot of it is man-made. But, you know, I I can't I can't discount that.
I don't personally believe that myself, but, you know, I'm a big firm believer of
know thy enemy. If it turns out that these things are demonic, at least we know, you
know, I'd rather know than than to guess. You know, do I subscribe to that line of thinking that these are demons?
No, not particularly. What about angels? Great question. It's exactly the same thing.
Angels and demons, you know, supernatural beings that that that we can't explain
that that seem to to to fall outside the realm of of what we consider being normal
 [Manny Ortiz] Are they demons? Angels?
human behavior and normal human capabilities. Okay, let me steel man the question.
Let me steel man it. When I say steel man, hopefully you're familiar with the term. What I'm I think what the person is getting at is that let's imagine let's presuppose
in a certain worldview that there's a deity that created the universe with intent. And one of the first creatures they created were powerful beings that have divine
powers. Some of those are angels. Some of those are demons. And then humans were created or let's say the Big Bang was set off and then humans
were created via the process of evolution. So do you see or do you see evidence or do you have friends with an a tip who believe
that those are demons in that sense or angels in that sense, even?
I didn't see that in a tip, but I did see it in DOD leadership.
You know, I certainly am not going to confront someone's spiritual beliefs about
something. You know, the word angel come from the word and Helios of of light of fire.
Think of Helios, the sun, right? Or sun. These are terms that that that have been given to to to.
Explain supernatural beings and occurrences in during our existence.
You know, I am for what I despite being a scientific man, I am I am a very much
spiritual. I don't wear my religion on my sleeve, but I don't think that the topic of
UAPs or even potentially extraterrestrials is necessarily against the idea of organized
religion. When I went to Rome not too long ago, a year and a half ago, maybe, and spoke
to some very senior academics in the Vatican, they they told me that that in the
1600s, had you told people there was no such thing as aliens, that would be considered
heresy, because there is no there is no limit to the dominion of God or the notion of
God. And it's only been in relative recent history that we have put these limitations on
what God can and can't do. You know, there can't be aliens because we have to be the most, you know, the divine,
most divine representation of God. You know, so I find that topic fascinating, especially as it relates to theology and
philosophy and even sociology or a reaction to it as a species.
But I did not come into contact with that. And if it was an ATIP, it was kept hidden from us.
No one no one talked about that. No one seemed to have any type of religious aversion looking into this topic.
 [bisectdox] Have we communicated with UAPs? Have we found their communications?
All right. The next question comes from Bisect Docs. Have we intercepted communication between UAPs and or has there been communication with
UAPs? I'm not aware of any interception of communications with UAPs.
As far as communication with UAPs, you know, once again, I kind of hate to split hairs here. I don't want to upset anybody, but let's let's be specific.
What is communicating? You and I are having a conversation in English and we're communicating. But if I stand behind a wall and I aim an assault rifle at you, am I communicating with
you? Yeah, I am. I'm communicating an intent or a threat, right? If a dog growls and shows its teeth to you as you try to kneel down and pet it, is it
communicating? Yes, it's communicating. It's telling you, hey, you know, I don't want to be pet right now. I don't don't don't don't touch me.
So, you know, if if a UAP is is behaving in a provocative manner, meaning it's it's it's
obviously knows that we're aware that it is there and doesn't seem to mind, doesn't seem
to try to hide itself. In some cases, it's been perhaps hovering over over one of our military equities for a
prolonged period of time. Is that communication? Well, I would submit to you, yes, it's probably communication. It's not verbal communication, but but it's signaling some sort of intent.
Yes, I know you're there. And yes, I know you know that I'm here and I'm OK with that.
And I want you to know that I'm here now. What's the rationale?
What's the reasoning intent behind it? We don't know. But that is communication. If you know, when we when we do a show of force and if we fly an SR-71 at 100000 feet
and we don't want the enemy to see us. But if I take a couple of F-22 Raptors and I fly off the coast of, let's say, disputed
territory in the South China Sea, I'm communicating with with a country. I may not be through dialogue, but make no mistake, I'm communicating very clearly and
very effectively my intent to to another to another party. And so I think therein lies the question, are these things trying to communicate with
us? And if so, do will we be smart enough to recognize it as as as some sort of
communication versus just, you know, two ships passing the night?
I do think that the more brazen that these these incidents become, the more there may
be an attempt to try to communicate. They obviously whatever it is, is aware that we are there and we are aware that they're
there. Are you aware of any more or of any less coarse grained communication?
For example, we can communicate with the cheetah. Like you mentioned, we can point a gun at it or we can show our hostility or our
civility. Is there verbal as far as you know, has there been any verbal or even telepathic
direct communication? I'm sorry, my audio just cut off. Has there been any verbal or telepathic communication?
I know that there's a story about, I think, Zimbabwe, Africa, with aliens communicating
with some children. There are certainly reports of it. Doesn't mean that it's a problem. It's subjective. We don't know for sure.
It's it's the human's interpretation of what's going on. And here is why we have to be so careful, as you know, in a scientific experiment and in
a closed system. The likelihood of human error is increased
significantly. And so we have to be cognizant of that.
Is there some sort of real communication, as you say, telepathic communication occurring, or
is it a similar effect to, let's say, taking a hallucinogenic drug and having some sort
of experience, right? Mental experience. I don't know the answer to that. The answer could be yes or no, for none.
It could be that there is it's just our it's our impression of what's going on.
And it's not real, right? Like your death experience. A lot of people report it being real. A lot of people say, no, it's just parts of the mind that are beginning to shut down and you
start having these experiences. I don't think anybody really knows for sure, other than the people who've actually
experienced it. When you talk to them, they feel very compelled that they've had a real event. And I'm not I don't doubt for one minute.
They actually believe they've had some sort of communication. And by the way, that could be the case.
Right. Again, there's no way to prove it or disprove it. So it's interesting. But we didn't focus on that part of it because it's it's it's too subjective.
You can't quantify and qualify that data like you can with radar data and photographic evidence, et cetera. So it wasn't it wasn't particularly useful.
And I'm saying it's not interesting. It just wasn't useful for our calculus. As to the connection between psychedelics and aliens or psychedelics and UAPs, you're
 Psychedelics and UAPs
unaware of any credible, verifiable, falsifiable data.
Well, look, I mean, now we're getting into the world of consciousness, you know, and I would submit to you is not everything we do a result of a.
Conscious process occurring in our brain, you know, by very definition, everything I do
in life is a result of some sort of willful intent based upon a consciousness process
occurring in my brain, just like you and everybody else. So, you know, we realize that that human consciousness is is an area that we're just now
beginning to explore and we understand even less. Is it possible that human consciousness is part of a universal consciousness and that we
can tap into this? It's not it's not human consciousness is not only for humans.
Possibly. I mean, there's people out there who have pet cats and dogs. I'm one of them where, you know, you have a connection with your pet, not because it's
just a cat or a dog, but because you there's something deeper that you are you are
connecting with something far more intimate, something far more sacred than just a furry
little bag of skin and hairballs. There's there's there's something. And by the way, that life form recognizes you as well as a sentient being.
There's this appreciation that, hey, we're on the same wavelength. I may not look like you. I may not act like you or talk like you, but we're kind of the same thing.
We're both conscious, sentient beings and we recognize that in each other.
You know, and they also may explain human interactions as well. So consciousness may not be something that is that is only, you know, owned and defined
by the human species. Is it possible there's other things if we can communicate with dolphins and cats and
dogs and birds and, you know, gorillas? Maybe human consciousness isn't quite so maybe it's not so special.
Maybe it's indelible. Maybe it's something that's part of part of all of nature. And when I say all of nature, even beyond this planet, perhaps.
 [Mick West] Why not reveal all the information for the good of humanity?
The next question comes from Mick West. I'd like to ask Lou Elisondo, does I'll read this verbatim.
If he really thinks this is non-human technology that can revolutionize the world and maybe include contact with aliens and extra dimensional beings and so on.
Why is he so concerned with NDAs? Surely for the good of humanity, he should release the evidence that he has.
Surely for the good of humanity. And then he can go ahead and pay for my mortgage. He can put my kids through school.
He can come visit me every day and give me soup while I'm behind bars. Spending the next four years of my life, you know, doing a service for for for
somebody else, I've already put my neck on the line. So I'll do respect, Mr. West. You know, if why don't you there's nothing stopping you.
Why don't you do it? You know, I've I've already put my career, my my reputation, credibility on the line. I've already foregone my my retirement and my pension.
How much more else do you expect me to sacrifice? You want me to put myself up on a cross and nail myself to it? Just just because, you know, I think we've come pretty far so far.
I think I think I haven't had to go to jail and we've come pretty damn far in the last three years. You know, so I guess a simple you're welcome is probably, you know,
would be my response. Are there whistleblower protection acts that you could reveal information under?
Well, this is part of the process. This is part of Congress. You know, there are people that I can speak with without violating my
nondisclosure agreement that can further the conversation. You know, and this is what we're trying to exercise.
I mean, I I've tried to be as clear as I can with our roadmap moving forward without jeopardizing it.
But if people notice one thing about me is that, you know, I'm deliberate. I don't do anything haphazard.
So all the stuff that people are now seeing with conversations in Congress and IG, do people honestly think that's just some sort of coincidence?
I mean, guys, if you look at what I've been saying the last three years, you're going to see a pattern.
It's very clear. You're going to everything I've said has come to fruition, lock, stock and barrel.
You know, this is what we're trying to do. This is the right way. And as I said before, there's a difference between doing things right and right now.
And I prefer to do things right. You know, this is a process. I've told people from day one, you know, if you're expecting instant gratification,
then, you know, go, go take up something else or take a finger painting. Don't don't do this because this, this is going to be a long term effort.
And, and, and it's, it's every day, the due diligence of what we're doing, but it's making a difference. Just look at the last three years, how far we've come.
We have an official UAP task force. We have the government admitting that UFOs are real. We have Congress being briefed at the classified level.
They're all coming out saying this is important. We actually have the task force now providing information to Congress in 180
day report. We have other countries like Japan coming out and reaching out and wanting to share their information with us.
I mean, man, how much more do you want in three years? You know? So again, forgive me for being a little bit, you know, testy about this.
I think a lot of people- Questions like that annoy you? Do you get them frequently and you're tired of them? Well, you know what? It's, it's armchair quarterbacking.
It's, it's easy for people to sit back. I see it all the time on social media, just violate your NDA. And it's okay.
You go to jail for us. It's okay. But they're not willing to do, you know, one 10th of that sacrifice for this
effort. If you ask them, Hey, get off your ass and go, go talk to your congressman or, you know, start, start doing research and start going out and, and, and, and
being a force multiplier for this effort. They want, I'm too tired. I got too much go.
I'm too busy. Well, I got my family to take care of. Well, so do I. I'm a little different. Why, why am I being held to a different standard?
Why am I have to be, you know, the person coming out there and just say hell to everybody and wind up having them to go run and hide in some foreign country and
never come back to my country. I love my country. By the way, my non-disclosure agreement I took was a promise I made to the American
people, not my government. And so I think it's really disingenuous to say, well, you can just break your
promise this time for the, for the truth. No, I can't. That's I said, well, you can cheat on your wife.
This only this time, or, or, you know, you can, you can shoot on your family this time.
It won't matter. Yes, it does matter. Every time matters. It's a promise. That's what a promise is. Either, either you're a man of your word or a woman of your word, or you're not.
Otherwise they're called principles and people fight and die for those principles. And, you know, I've seen people fight and die for those principles.
You know, they're not just something that you conveniently throw around. I promise to do this. And then really later on, say, no, I don't really promise.
You know, that's, that's not the way promises work. Those are the kinds of people that don't survive in combat because people have your
back. You know, you, you, you, you swear an oath of an allegiance to do the right thing. That's, that's what this is about.
You know, I don't understand people who can just say, Hey, go ahead and break your promise.
This one time. I mean, what are you talking about? You'd never trust me again.
I can't break this one time because the one time I do, then I could do it a thousand times. And at that point, I might as well throw in the towel.
So anyways, let me, let me push back. I'm like, I'm on your, I'm on your side, man.
So let me just be friendly and push back with, with regard to breaking a promise. To me, that seems like the difference between, as Jesus said, the spirit of a law
versus the text of the law. So do you see an obligation to the spirit of the law rather than the text?
So the text says you have to obey this promise. Well, he also said, follow the law of the land too, didn't he?
And so, you know, the law of the land here is that he took an oath and a promise to the American people. And I'm not going to violate that promise.
It's you can't break a promise to fulfill a promise. It doesn't work that way. Please let me push back gently.
Okay. This is something I've been thinking about. Sometimes trust needs to be broken in order for it to be regained in the longterm
stronger. So for example, you mentioned cheating on a spouse. Sometimes one has to come clean and say, I did cheat in order for the relationship to
eventually be repaired, even though that in the short run is going to be far worse. Wouldn't it be better not to cheat at all and not have to do that?
Yeah, you're right. You need to if you cheat, you need to you need to make you cheated. But but isn't it better just not to cheat and you don't have to worry about that?
I agree. Okay. So in this analogy, in this analogy, the cheating would be let's say let's say you had some piece of information that says that our world is vastly different and
potentially even dangerous or wasteful on behalf of the government. Do you see a sense of duty to the citizens to break your oath?
I know you said that it's the oath with the citizens themselves, but you understand where I'm going with this. But you don't have to there are mechanisms in place that you don't have to break that
oath to fulfill a promise. That's what I'm trying to say here. It's not an either or.
It just takes more time. Either way, it's a lot more. Yeah, it takes more time. But but it's the right way to do it.
That's that's that is the correct way to do it than just going ahead. And and I can't I won't be able to live with myself doing that.
No one will ever take me seriously again. Nobody could ever trust me if I break that promise just that one time.
That's not the way it works. So, you know, I think the proof is in the pudding. And, you know, honestly, I'm like, why is I'm not going to break it so people can
keep asking me all day long and they're wasting their oxygen because I'm not going to break that promise.
I will not violate my non-disclosure agreement. Got it. And by the way, I'll tell you, if it comes to the point where I have to actually
stop doing this to maintain my promise, I will I will disappear. You'll never hear from Lou again.
If the option in between comes down to me having to speak or having to break my promise or being quiet, I will be quiet.
I will not break my promise. And if people can't accept that, then, you know, talk to somebody else.
 [Lonesomespacecowboy] What would the world look like if the public knew what Lue does?
I don't know. Well, I'm grateful that you're not quiet right now. And thank you for speaking with me. Lonesome Space Cowboy asks, I just have one question.
Pretty subjective, but I'd like to hear his take. If the general public knew and saw what Lewis knows and has seen, what would the
world look like for the next week after that? How would the public react? So this is you can surmise.
Wow. What a thoughtful question. Um, boy, I have no idea, Curt.
That that that's, um, I would need to think about that.
Okay. We can get back to that question. Yeah. I mean, that's such a good question. I don't, I don't want to just throw out an answer.
Right. I want to think about that and I might need, I might need even a little bit more time.
I will for sure get back to you on that, but, um, that's going to take some thought.
 [Gentian] Tom Delong calls them “the Others”
Great. Great. I'm going to take a question from the audience. So Jenschen says, Tom DeLong says that the occupants of the UAPs are called the
others in quotation. Do you know anything about this?
That's what he wants to name them. You know, I got it. I, my, my German shepherd is named Hercules, you know, but you can call them
whatever you want. I mean, it's a name, right? I don't, you can, you can, is he calling him the others?
Do the others call themselves others? Or, you know, it, it, it, I would probably ask Tom that question.
 His opinion on Bob Lazar, also that aliens referred to us as "containers"
I, I, I, I came to that. Here's something I heard when I was looking up some interviews with Bob Lazar, that the
aliens refer to us as containers, or at least he read that he can't substantiate it. Have you heard this and what do you make of it?
Not a clue. And I, and who was that? You said Bob, was that Bob Lazar? You said, yeah, I can't speak for Mr.
Lazar. I've never met the man. Don't know that he was not part of the agent effort. And therefore I can't, I can't expound upon that.
I wouldn't even know where to begin with that. I have no idea. Between you and I, this is like a foray for me because my background is in physics and
math. And I had no idea that people were so divisive when it comes to Bob Lazar and just
individuals in this UFO community in general, that if you say you believe them, then you're ostracized.
Or if you say that you don't believe them, you're also ostracized by certain subset. Do you have views on Bob Lazar?
Whether you find him credible? I've never met him. I don't know his background. I don't know his story.
I do know George Knapp. He's very credible. I don't know anything more than, than I guess George Knapp had may have helped break the
story at one point. But I don't know Mr. Lazar. And out of due respect for Mr. Lazar and his family and those friends, colleagues, those in the community, I don't have a
comment. You know, it's, it's that's part of the problem. People, people offer a lot of what they think instead of what they know.
And so when you mention someone like that, people automatically, you know, well, I think
this, I think that, well, okay, I respect that. But the question is, what do we know?
And right now, I don't know a whole lot about Mr. Lazar. So it's not fair for me to really provide any any type of opinion one way or the other.
You're watching this channel because you're interested in theoretical physics, consciousness, and the ostensible connection between the two.
What's required to follow some of these arguments is facility with mathematics as well as discernment of the underlying physical laws.
And you may think that this is beyond you, but that's false. Brilliance provides pellucid explanations of abstruse phenomenon such as quantum computing,
general relativity, and even group theory. When you hear that the standard model is based on U1 cross SU2 cross SU3, that's group
theory, for example. Now, this isn't just for neophytes either. For example, I have a degree in math and physics, and I still found some of the intuitions
given in these lessons to vastly aid my penetration into these subjects. For example, electricity and magnetism.
Sign up today at brilliant.org slash TOE, that is T-O-E, for free.
You'll also get 20% off the annual premium subscription. Try four of the lessons at least. Don't stop before four.
And I think you'll be greatly surprised at the ease at which you comprehend subjects you previously had trouble grokking.
 [PulsatingShadow] How frequently do abductions happen
Links are in the description. Pulsating Shadow asks, how frequently do abductions happen among civilian slash military
personnel? And is there substance to the rumor of human mutilation? I also want to ask you about cattle mutilation at some point, but that's that.
Well, you know, abductions is something we didn't really look at in 18.
Because it's again, too subjective. We're relying on the human being to give us data with without anything else really
substantiating that other like unlike radar data and gun camera footage.
I'm aware of a lot of those reports, but but I don't have a comment either way. I simply don't know.
And as interesting as it may be, it's not it wasn't overly helpful to the perspective of
our efforts native to the specific calculus we were working on. Remember, what is it and how does it work?
That really didn't come into play. How now as far as human mutilation, that's another topic that I'm completely
unqualified to to to discuss because I simply don't know.
Certainly, if that is the case, then then we are dealing with a potential threat, possibly hostile intent, because from where I come from as a former investigator and special
agent, that's a crime. First of all, it's called kidnapping. Second of all, second of all, it's called assault.
You know, and third of all, it may even be in extreme cases could be considered, you know, first degree premeditated murder.
So, you know, I don't know anything about that, really.
I am aware of the cattle mutilations a little bit more because I've spoken to some veterinarians and some doctors.
You know, there's a lot of prosaic explanations. I think it's fascinating. It's interesting. But I'm not a certified medical doctor nor coroner.
So I can't I can't look at a cadaver of a bovine of a cow and say the lips were
removed with surgical precision without any type of heat ablation or cauterization.
And yet, you know, it was it was a perfect clean cut. There's no bleeding. I don't know what can cause that.
I don't know if there's a natural process that can explain that. I haven't seen one, but maybe there is.
Could it be predatory behavior of coyotes eating that part of the meat that is
most rich in nutrients or accessible? I don't I don't know the answer.
Or is it something else? You know, there's a lot of people who say there's there's perhaps something else to
 [Lady Shar Reacts] Any UAPs underwater in the Nimitz case?
it. Again, I don't really know. This one comes from Lady Char reacts.
Mr. Elizondo, do you think there was another craft under the water that was causing the UAP disturbance that Commander Fravor reported?
Great question. That's what we're trying to figure out. There's some other stories that are going to come to light, some other incidents that
are going to be, I think, fairly riveting when people find out, you know, that
what what's occurred in and around some of our military operations.
It's possible there could be something underneath the water. It could also be a like I said, a reaction to the to the technology being employed
by what's ever on top of the water. We don't know yet. I think we're getting a little bit closer to answering that, of course, if we can get
some some sonar data to validate, maybe there's some something in the water at the
same time as we see something in the air that would be very helpful in substantiating that.
 [Amjad Hussain] Does the USA have alien bodies in their procession?
Amjad Hussein, who actually sponsors the podcast with his company, Algo,
asks, are any alien bodies in possession of the US government?
So, Mr. Hussein, again, great question. It's a question a lot of people want to know and it's a question that I can't answer
because I have been privy to that. I do not know if there's any type of biological organisms that that are in the
possession of the US government. I do believe, as I said before, for the record that we are in possession of material.
I won't go elaborate into more than that. But as far as having biological specimens, it's something that I can't answer.
And I don't want to mislead anybody. I want to say I think because it doesn't matter what I think what matters is
 Skinwalker Ranch and Bigfoot
what the facts say. So forgive me. Sorry. No, no problem, man.
I'm having a blast, man. Thank you so much. I've been burning the midnight oil, man. So I do apologize. Well, I know you have a hugely busy schedule.
And so even for a modicum of your time, I'm immensely grateful. And personally, I'm curious if what's going on at Skinwalker.
Did ATIP study that? And I know you don't like to espouse, but what do you what do you think is going on
there? Sub question, let me say before I forget it, and then I wanted to know, is there a
connection between Bigfoot and UFOs? Because there seems to be a confluence of that at Skinwalker, at least.
So I work with colleagues that were focused on the OSAP and the Skinwalker
phenomenon. What I what I can say is that they are very convinced, and I think I am
too, that there are things that probably go bump in the night that probably need further explanation.
But but that is that was not my portfolio. And I don't want to speak to that because I simply don't know.
That was done at a time with with the tremendous effort of Mr. Bigelow and the former director, OSAP director, and a lot of folks from from Bigelow
Aerospace. And the data was very compelling. I'll say that it was absolutely compelling.
And I think Mr. Brandon Fugel now and others have recognized the validity of some of that data.
But that's that's all I'm prepared to say about that. As far as Bigfoot, I'm going to share something with you.
And I hope I hope this doesn't turn anybody off. It's probably going to turn me on.
I had the great honor and privilege of speaking with some people from the First Nations, Saskatchewan, Indigenous people of the Lakota and Dakota bands.
These are individuals who are fiercely proud, have an incredible heritage and have
nearly 10,000 years of oral tradition in this continent.
And they have an incredible connection to the land. And I was asked by by someone there.
And I'm not going to say who it was, but a very senior individual who was associated with the First Nations people.
And he asked me, he says, I want to ask you a question, Lou, have you ever seen Sasquatch?
No, sir. She said, I'm going to ask you one more time. Are you sure you've never seen Sasquatch? I said, sir, I've never seen seen Sasquatch.
And he said, well, that's good, because from my people's perspective, Sasquatch is a
spirit that protects our women and children and a spirit of the forest. That protects our women and children and a spirit of the forest.
And if you see a man see Sasquatch, it means your heart is impure. And I wasn't prepared for that.
I was like, holy smokes, you're glad I haven't seen Sasquatch. Interesting.
But yeah, that was their take. Very, very interesting. But who among us have pure hearts?
Well, that's a whole other question, right? I don't think any of us really do have pure hearts. But the fact that they see it that way, I found very, very interesting.
It's a very unique perspective. And I think if anybody has a right to have a narrative on Sasquatch, it's certainly
Indigenous people. So I found that, again, I can't tell you whether or not that's true.
I can just tell you what was told to me. But, you know, there you have it.
As for Skinwalker in general, you just think your statement is there is something that's going bump in the night or you think there is.
Nothing more can be said about that. I'm hugely interested in Skinwalker.
You know, Curt, at some point. More is to be revealed.
Yeah, you know, I don't want to go down any rabbit holes prematurely.
You know, this is a very complex universe we live in.
And it's a system. And we're learning more and more about the reality of life and the transition of what
birth means and the transition of what death means and, you know, human consciousness and
human spirit and whatnot. And, you know, suffice it to say, we probably really don't have a very good handle right
now on understanding what lies beyond our five senses.
I've said this before. We have five fundamental senses for which we judge our environment. And if you can't touch it, taste it, hear it, smell it or feel it, whatever, it doesn't
exist. And yet the reality is 99.9% of the universe lies well beyond our five senses.
99.9% of the universe lies well beyond our ability to sense these things. We have Wi-Fi signals coursing through your body every moment of every day.
We have cosmic radiation coming from the cosmos. We've got neutrinos that are flooding your body from the sun.
And we've got cellular signals and radar signatures that are coming from the local airport. And all these are real. And I tell people, if you want to know the reality of the universe, look at a night sky
one night and look how pretty it is. Now take a radio telescope and look at that same night sky. Look at it through infrared.
Look at it through ultraviolet. And you're going to see things you've never seen before. And so by definition, 99% of our noble universe, we can't even perceive.
And then when you look at the scale of the universe, and I've said this before, if you look at, I was corrected recently that the visible galaxy, the visible part, the visible
known universe is about 90 some billion light years across, even though it's only been around
13.7 billion light years, we think that the actual, the sea-able universe right now around
us is about 97 billion light years. And as big as that is in terms of us being this little tiny minute thing stuck in the
middle of it, there is equally that amount of space, relative space inside every one
of us. If you look at an atom, which is one times 10 to the minus 26th size of the mole, compare that to the human body, we have that same amount of space inside every one of us.
There's a whole universe inside of us. And so the scale in which we live, unless something is 50 feet in front of our face,
we'll never be able to interact with anything that is an order of magnitude above us or below us.
We can't even see the cells in our bodies without a microscope. So there are these realities all around us that constantly, that exists and that we are
part of, and yet we cannot interact with. And by that definition, 99.9% of the universe falls outside of the realm of our perception.
So who's to say that all of reality needs to fit neatly within the very narrow spectrum
of the electro-optical frequency that we call visible light, when we know that that's not
true? Same thing with acoustics, same thing with electromagnetics, same thing with everything. And I think it's foolhardy for science to presume that everything can be explained through
the fundamental five senses and the scale in which we live, because we know that's not true. Look at dark energy and dark matter.
Most of the universe can't even be seen. Right. Even the fundamental forces. Who knows if there's more? Fundamental forces, right.
Right. Strong force, weak force, electromagnetism, right. So, I think we need to remember, if you are truly a scientist, we must remain open to
the fact that we are judging our environment through a very, very narrow lens.
It's like watching a, sitting up on the bleachers, watching a football game at the very, very
highest part of a bleachers and watching the whole game through a soda straw. You're going to miss most of it.
So that would be my, that'd be my two cents. Emil S. says, thanks.
 Audience members say "thank you" in the live chat
Thank Louis for me. Without him, we wouldn't be where we are today with regard to this matter. And Mr. Roboto also says, thank you, Mr. Elizondo for the service, for your service to this
country. Oh, my pleasure. You know what? Everybody serves in their own way.
If you're a taxpayer, you're serving. If you are a school teacher, you're serving. If you're a nurse, you're serving.
If you're a police officer, you're a person, military uniform. You know, if you're a lawyer and you decide to take a case pro bono, because it's the
right thing to do, guess what? You're serving. So, so thank you for, for all those out there who continue to serve.
Yeah. It's a great honor and privilege to be to be speaking with you here today. Thank you, man.
 [Andres] What questions SHOULD we be asking, as the public, but aren't?
Andreas says, Hey, Lou, are there questions you think that the public hasn't been asking that we ought to be?
What should we be asking? I'm just going to be flipping for a second, but no, go ahead.
Go ahead. Go ahead.
No, I think you're on the right track. I think people are asking the right questions. I do. I think people are, I think, I think people are coming around to, to reality of this new
paradigm. And that's good. That's okay. That's a good thing. You know, otherwise we stagnate as species.
 Lue's predictions have come true
Jen Hageny asks on April 30th, I believe of this year in the basement office interview,
Lou said, watch out for the next 30 days. Now, what was he referencing? All of it.
A lot has happened in the 30 days. Why don't you give a breakdown for the people like myself who are new to this field that
have little clue. Imagine I'm clueless, which I am. Sure. You have very senior level briefings happening to Congress.
You have Congress wanting potentially to do open hearings. You have an IG evaluation underway to look at how the government's been handling this
to look at how the government's been handling this topic over the last three years. You have, you've got quite a bit of things happening right now.
We've got foreign governments that haven't quite come out yet that are beginning to engage the United States.
You have discussions on creating a, a long-term enduring capability to look at the separate
whole of government approach. Okay. Speaking about the world government, not that there is one, but you
being told right now, I've got, I've got just about a couple of few more minutes because my, I have another, unfortunately, one more engagement that I have to do.
 [blindorize] UAP phenomenon and an international effort, rather than USA focused
That's no problem, man. Okay. No, no, no, no problem. I appreciate the time that you've given.
So blind arise asks, all of this recent disclosure and activity has been very us focused. It would be interesting to know if other countries are working on this stuff too, or are cooperating
at some level. The implication is that whoever can reverse engineer this tech at first wins, but isn't
our chance. Isn't it best to give her a chance to all humans? Yes, yes, yes.
And yes, yes. I'm all for parts. Yes.
You know, there are other countries working on this. Yes. There are other governments that are reaching out to work with us.
Yes. That he who, who, who reveals the secret first has the advantage.
And yes, this would be better for humanity if we worked at all together. Mikhail may Hall asks, did a tip look into the USS tripang photos from 1971?
 [Neon Dagger] Lue's personal encounter
Negative, we did not. Neon dagger has Lewis ever had a personal encounter, whether it was close up or at a
distance with intelligence or some kind of or some kind of machine? I assume they were referring to the UAPs.
That will be for another discussion. Okay, and I'll get to just two more quick questions. Okay, Paul suffered asks, I would like his take on the Tic Tac movements at sea level.
Actually, forget that question. Sorry, Paul. There's a better question.
Don't feel bad, Paul, I would have answered it. Okay, race and Carlos asks, could you ask him about the Nimitz case?
 [Raylson Carlos] Nimitz appearing at the "cap point"... How?
David Fravor's said that David Fravor said that the Tic Tac shape UFO after disappearing from his view, it appeared to the radar operator, David Fravor, and he said that the Tic Tac
appeared to the radar operator at his quote unquote, cap point. What does this represent?
How on earth did the UFO know the cap point beforehand? Great question.
We don't know how it knew that or it's one hell of a coincidence. A cap point is a rendezvous point.
That is input into the flight plan of the pilots and the and the avionics systems of
the aircraft. In this case, it was about 60 miles away from their location, where they encountered the
Tic Tac and within five seconds, this thing appeared over their cap point, seemingly anticipating where they were supposed to go and waiting for that.
Great question. Is this some sort of active exploitation of the avionics? Or is this some sort of predetermination understanding where the plane was going to go?
Because somehow it understands space time in a different way that we do. Or was it just a pure coincidence?
 Was Sam Harris contacted by Lue
We simply don't know. And the last question I asked you before, which I'm going to get back to actually hunting
hair says Sam Harris said that he was contacted by the former God slash intelligence officials about some possible form of disclosure.
Was it Lou or melon? I'm sorry, can you repeat that? Okay.
So Sam Harris recently said that he was contacted by someone from the former God intelligence.
And he wants to know and Sam Harris was talking about a possible form of disclosure. Was this person who contacted Sam Harris?
 [Lonesomespacecowboy] What would the world look like if the public knew what Lue does?
I have no idea. Okay. I then I know you got to get going to lonesome space cowboy.
Remember that last question that you couldn't get to which was if the general public knew or saw what you saw?
How would they what would the next week look like? How would the public react?
Somber. I think there would be this big exhale
for about a day. And then this turning inward and trying to reflect on what this means to us and our species
and ourselves. I think somber, sorry, like a sigh of relief.
somber meaning serious. Not not like Hollywood portrays people partying in the streets and silliness with that.
I think you would have some people perhaps turning to religion more so.
You might have some people turning away from those. I think you're going to have at that point, the philosophical and theological
questions will be raised. And people will have some serious soul searching to do no pun intended.
And I don't think that's bad, by the way. I think a lot of folks that have spent their times in this community being charlatans will
have been exposed, and they will be probably unemployed and probably have to change their names because, you know, the rest of society will look at them in an unfavorable light.
I think there are some unsung heroes that will probably come to light.
And the world will appreciate their contributions to this topic. I think the scientific academic communities now I can't do this.
I know what I was gonna say is names that have been announced before when you say the unsung heroes or new names have been announced before.
I think the scientific and academic community is going to have to take a real hard look at itself and see why it repeated the same mistakes it did when Galileo first proposed that the
earth was not the center of the solar system. You know, hubris is a big part of that.
And then I think, you know, maybe we start the international conversation, say, OK, we realize that there's some things out there that are probably well beyond our petty discrepancies
we have with each other. Maybe we really need to start working together on this, realize that we are really a global
family. Doesn't matter where you're from, or doesn't matter what your religion is, or culture,
or your race, or your ethnicity. Color, anything else.
We are all brothers and sisters on this tiny little rock called Earth.
You know, this pale blue dot that's hurtling through space.
It may unify us. Well, I would certainly hope so, unless we allow our poor nature to interfere and we
look at this as opportunities to subjugate each other. I would hope I would hope that's not the case.
 Advice for Curt on the journey into TOEs (and UAPs connection to them)
Lou, thank you so much. Do you have any advice for me as someone investigating this topic somewhat anew and
somewhat keep pushing, keep pushing, keep asking the questions and be fearless. You know, that is the true scientific pioneering spirit, the ability to challenge the status
quo and be able to do so in a courageous way and in a well-meaning way.
And the true enemy of science is stagnation, is acceptance of the norms, because we know
that's not real science changes, our understanding changes because we're human, humans change.
So, you know, we need to continue to pursue the truth, wherever that truth may be, we
need to continue to pursue it. So that'd be my advice. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
What do you have to promote? Where can the audience find out more about you? What's next for you? Curt, I hate self-promoting, man.
I'm not that guy. You know, I hate even tweeting. I do it because I want to keep people engaged, because I really appreciate everybody's perspectives.
 Is Lue a misinformation agent?
But, you know, I just want to promote the truth wherever that truth is. A lot of people don't realize I don't, I don't get paid for these, these type of things.
I'm actually taking off work to do it because I believe in it so much. You're not paid by the government to spread misinformation.
Is that what you're saying? Oh, yeah, every day. Sure. Yeah. I mean, if that's what, what certainly these conspiracy theorists like to believe anyways,
you know, by the way, if that's the case, I'm sure not making a whole lot of money doing it. But, you know, I'll, I'll be aside.
No, I'm not being paid. It's just, I'm not being, I'm not, you know, still wearing my counterintelligence hat.
And I'm trying to deceive the American public. And it's just, that's, that's just nonsense.
That's that same crap that is held that conspiracy theory that's kept the ufology
community behind for 70 years. You know, it's time to grow up, you know, wake up and stop, stop thinking everybody's out to get
you, you know, yeah, there's been some mistakes done in the past, but, you know, people are some people that actually want to see, see the truth come out, you know, and one of those guys, if you
don't like what I have to say, then don't listen, you know, I'm not forcing anybody to tune in and listen. I'm not, you know, forcing you to sit down on a couch. You know, if you don't like what I
have to say, this is a free country, thank God, you know, don't tune into something else. Well, I listened to you. And hopefully once the dust settles, we can have a longer conversation,
perhaps even in person once COVID is over. I would love that, Curt, anytime you want. It would be my honor and privilege.
Thank you, man. You make me feel giddy by, by saying that, even if it's just politeness. Thank you so much, man.
No, I listen, people know me personally. I am that guy. I say what I mean. If I say that we're
going to do coffee, we will get damn sure we're going to do coffee at some point. So I don't say these things lightly. I mean what I say.
Thank you, Vu. Have a great one. I apologize for taking you over time. Thank you. I just say bye to everyone. They're so happy to see you. There's,
let's see how many people... Thank you to your audience. I hope I didn't offend anybody. That wasn't my intent.
There are almost 3000 people watching right now. Wow. That's great, Curt. Well, you know, I've, like I said, I've always told people I'm Latin.
I've got to have my coffee. There's a few things that we come out of the womb having to do it and
strong coffee is one of them. So I apologize if I was a little bit, a little bit ornery today.
That wasn't my intent, but I'm going to go get some coffee. I'll fix myself right now. All right, man. Get to it. Take care.
Yes, sir. Take care, everybody. Thank you so much. And God bless everybody. Okay, thank you all for attending. I'm going to go through some of the chat. I wasn't able
to get to everyone's questions. Again, for those who are new to this channel, this is not a UFO channel, per se, I'm interested in something called the theory of everything, which is,
is an approach in physics that tries to unify all the fundamental forces and find the laws of the
universe what governs us. And I'm broadly interested in that, which means I'm interested in it from a
theoretical physics perspective, as well as from a philosophical perspective, perhaps even a psychological perspective, though, that one has only been explored with someone named john vervicki
on this channel. Thank you all. Thank you all. There's so many names, I can't say thank you to
all of you. And I appreciate it. If you all would like to see more conversations like this on a regular basis, longer conversations like this more intense conversations like this,
I try to keep it technical because partially that's how my mind works. And also, because I
think that to get to some of these truths, as Lewis Alessandro says, a specific exact rigorous
approach is necessary. There's plenty of broad interviews fluff, which I don't demean at all,
because they're great for getting an over arching view. But I like to get down into the weeds.
If you'd like to see more of that, please consider going to patreon.com slash Curt jai mongol. The link is in the description of this. The link is also pinned. Each dollar
genuinely genuinely helps. So for example, right now I'm standing because I was able to afford a standing desk. Sounds like a minor treat, but it's a major one for me.
It also helps me do this full time. As for Chris Langan, someone mentioned Chris Langan.
I am studying Chris Langan's work. He has a cognitive theoretic model of the universe. I have some of his papers right here.
Going through that meticulously, that will take about two or three more weeks.
Okay, as for Eric Weinstein, yes, I will be talking to Eric Weinstein in a about a month or two months when I've had a chance to go through
his theory of everything that's provided that he's able to at that point.
Again, thank you all so much.