This podcast episode features a discussion between Dave Rossi and Ashton Forbes (with a late appearance by Salvador Pais) exploring advanced physics, unconventional technologies, and their potential implications for national security and humanity's future, touching upon topics from UFOs and time travel to fusion energy and consciousness.
Mind Map
クリックして展開
クリックしてインタラクティブなマインドマップを確認
Hello everybody and welcome to another
episode of the hard truths podcast.
Guys, today's episode is with Salvador
Pais, US Navy Engineer and Dave Rossi,
who is a defense contractor engineer
himself as well. Sal's having some
technical difficulties right at the
moment. Uh so we're going to just get
started with Dave and I right off the
bat. Dave, welcome to the live stream.
How you doing today, brother?
>> Good. Thank you so much for having me. I
appreciate it and I've been watching
your stuff and it's uh always a pleasure
to to be back on. And I know it's been I
think about a year at this point, so
it's it's about time to come back. So,
thank you for having me.
>> People keep saying you got to have Dave
back on. We got to chat. Especially
because, man, you've had some crazy
interviews. So, right before we jump
into that, I can see S down in the in
the bottom. He's got some technical
difficulties with his camera, guys. I
apologize. Uh he's going to try to get
it figured out. Um but if we can't, then
we may cut it short and we may
reschedule the S portion. But I've got a
lot of great questions for Dave. Um,
starting right off the bat with what I
really wanted to ask you about is Eric
Davis. Like you
>> and nobody can get an interview with
Eric Davis except for the the infamous
salad interview now which is one of my
favorites where they like ambushed him
like Jesse Michael's crew or something
ambushed him and did an interview with
him with a salad. Like how is it that
you're able to get these interviews with
Eric Davis? Do you have like a personal
relationship with him?
>> Um, I will say yeah we're we're friends.
Yeah. Uh person on a personal level. Um,
I again out of respect for for his
privacy and whatnot, um, I I promise
that with further questions, I won't be
uh, you know, playing footsy, so to
speak. But yeah, no, he's a he's I can
tell you, and I'll come full circle with
this answer. He is certainly without
question, one of the smartest people
I've ever met in my life. Um, the guy is
literally, as you've seen from my
interviews, right? The guy's literally
like a library. You can ask him
something no matter the time of day and
and he'll pluck it out and he'll tell
you. Um, personally, yeah. No, we're
we're we're personal friends. Um, and
he's, uh, I consider him in certain
aspects or regards, you know, like, uh,
much like S, like a, you know, mentor. I
look up to a lot of Eric's papers and
work and and whatnot. Um, I guess we've
just had a bit more of a personal
relationship where, you know, when I've
asked him sometimes, would you want to
come on the show? He he says yes and
he's happy to do it. And, uh, to be
fair, there were other times, you know,
when I asked and and he was busy and so
on and so we had to wait. But yeah, no,
that's um um don't I'm reading between
the lines. I believe me, you and your
audience, I know you guys are getting
that and I and yes, I will say he's a
he's a personal friend. Um uh very very
uh very nice guy. He's always been very
nice to me and everything. And uh I've
um I am always blown away by his uh by
his physics work just like uh just like
S. [clears throat]
>> Um so let me ask so so he's your mentor.
Is that is that true? Uh I I don't want
to go around and you know boastfully say
oh this person's my mentor this or that
or whatever. Um he's someone that I
would say I sure I look up to I go to
for you know uh advice in in scientific
realms and whatnot. And you know I've
presented some things to him that are
considered you know sort of on the out
there of of physics. And I will tell you
that one of the things I really
appreciate about him is that he doesn't
dismiss any concepts or any proposals
off offhand. um he's always very much
investigating into what is actually
being proposed and he really does take
the time to listen to uh to the
technological possibilities of what
you're trying to present. Um so I I will
say that yeah he's he's very attentive
in that in that regard. I remember he
did a radio interview I think about six
or seven years ago where uh the
interviewer had said you know what's it
like working in fringe physics and he
said well it's not really fringe physics
we don't like to call it that it's more
just outside of the box physics and so
that's that that's what I would say and
you you could say yeah I look uh
definitely look up to him in that regard
>> so and I want to talk about the outside
the box thing in a second but before we
do that and I hope this isn't too
personal is that I think I don't
remember who it is but somebody said
that Eric Davis isn't capable of lying
and I will say From my own impression,
watching interviews, he seems very
forthcoming with information, but at the
same time, he's kind of guarded. Like, I
think he even implied that he was
trained by the CIA to avoid questions or
he said something along those lines in
your interview. So, where's your do you
think that he is lying to protect
national security with respect to like
technology and advancements? I mean,
specifically, I'm talking about his
wormhole teleportation physics science
because there's a big disconnect in my
mind between him bragging to uh I think
it was George Knap or something like or
on Coast to Coast or whatever, bragging
about General Lonnie holding up his
teleportation physics study going, "This
is the type of research I want done in
my Air Force research labs, right?" I'm
going and then but then you ask him
like, "Oh, well, does anybody have
this?" And he's like, "Nope, nobody has
this. Nobody's had." It's like, "How do
I connect?"
>> How do you how do you reconcile? Sure.
And believe me, my mind has gone to the
notion that of course are there
facilities out there in which are not
connected with the air force or are
connected to the air force or the
military in non non-official capacities
per se or an indirect direct I call
direct indirect ways that may in fact be
working on that. I I think it's it's
very possible. I mean, I don't rule it
out. Now the in terms of the the
progress that's been made probably pro
possibly far more than than we may
think. Um in terms of in terms of that
but uh I guess you could say officially
I mean for sure he was definitely uh uh
as he said trained uh I believe I don't
want to speak for him but uh by CIA in
certain aspects and areas and do I think
that uh certain things have to be uh
have to be watched carefully for the
protection of national security? Yes.
Um, do I think that um, how can I put
it? Um,
it's it's not it's it's like it's like a
it's not a it's not a binary one or zero
type answer. There are things that are
very uh fringe so to speak that that he
will speak on and see possibilities in.
Um but then if taken to a certain next
level uh sometimes again there's a no
comment response or there is a uh you
know nothing nothing's there response
and sometimes you have to wonder maybe
if that is indicative of something else.
Um, yeah.
>> So, here's another side question related
to that is he brought up the peds,
presidential emergency action documents,
which I had never heard of before. And
he brought them up in the context of
like this is where they're hiding the
UFO stuff. What do you think is in those
peeds that would be connected to UFOs
that is at that level where the
president and who do you think
>> or let me just this is the other part
I'll say is that so first of all what do
you think the peeds are like if you had
to list an example of what a pied might
be for people it can even be a
hypothetical one and then do you think
people like Hal Pudof for example might
be somebody who the CIA calls upon to
determine when they enact those peds.
Could that be a thing?
>> Sure. So, one thing I'll say is that I'm
just to clarify for your audience, of
course, I'm not wellversed in the whole
notion of, you know, government uh
government acronyms and documents and
what certain documents may entail over
others or whatnot. I'm, as you know,
more of the engineering, you know,
interest in science and all that
approach. But um I would say that if
again my opinion those pets probably are
comprised of some type of cohesive
overall breakdown of what a presidential
um executive authority enacted many
decades ago and what has since led to
that. Or maybe simply just the
description of what that executive
action entails is enough to just that
the by definition that that entire
description on those pages would be
enough to force a um classification to
the point where it would be above top
secret per I would imagine that in my
mind I would envision the peds as being
some type of uh certainly a quote
unquote juicy document if you will but
something that gives a breakdown uh an a
matter-of-act established breakdown of
why the executive order was signed, what
the executive order entails, and dare I
say go as far as, you know, you know,
potential crash retrieval, um potential
uh you know, recovery of certain
materials and and and whatnot. And I
think that ultimately that would be it
would not be something that an engineer
could look at and say, "Okay, I could
make something from the what I see in
these documents." I I think it would be
more of a an overall breakdown for
someone like the president who is not um
scientifically uh inept enough to
understand equations if he looked at
them and so on and so forth. Nor is that
his job. So I think we'd be looking at
more of a um an overarching breakdown of
a set of events that the executive
orders um authorized. Uh and that would
of course still be damning if ever
leaked or released obviously. So, you
know what I think about? I mean, you're
implying that there could be crash
retrieval type stuff. And honestly, I
don't know what's in the pizza. I think
nobody really does know what's in them.
Uh I I think we do know that they have a
branch that's like an administrative
branch that's parallel to the presidency
that has some level of control over them.
them. >> Um
>> Um
>> Oh, and I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You had
asked if if people like Dr. Pudof and
others would be part of that decision.
Let me just say if I could parallel
that. Um, you mentioned a parallel
branch, which I appreciate you saying
very much because I think we we have to
reconcile the notion that a lot of these
not just programs, but a lot a lot of
these um a lot of these actions and and
uh movements that have been taken uh for
better or worse and efforts that have
been made often report to an unofficial
body, if you will, that is purely based
on uh credibility and trust and you
could say handshake agreements in which
nothing is ever put on paper. that does
have an influential say in the parallel
branch, which would be the official
government, uh, if you will, because
it's been speculated by others in the
past and by others that have been inside
some of these programs allegedly, that
the these programs are and the people
who over the groups that oversee these
programs are a mixture of both quasi
government and non-government entities,
right? So I think that something like
that would probably be in parallel with
um a an official government uh uh
structure. Now whether you want to call
that a shadow government or what have
you, that's that's up for debate and you
know we can discuss that at a later
time. But I think there would be
parallel groups um unofficially having
large influences in fact in areas,
departments and compartments of
government that they they would wield
power that is um how can I put it uh
stronger than the official government.
So you mentioned that you you gave an
example of like okay maybe there's crash
retrieval stuff and there's a thing that
says okay if the aliens crash and this
is how we're going to capture it. I that
seems more low like that doesn't seem
like the kind of thing that would have
to go to that high a level for me. When
I think about it, you know what I think
about is what would be the plan for when
Russia shoots a hundred nukes at us and
then how do we respond? Sure. We can't
wait for congressional approval when you
have nuclear winter about to happen. To
me, the peds definitely have nuclear
absolutely responses in them. Right.
>> I think you're absolutely correct more
so than myself. Absolutely. I think also
the P's pro very likely entail
breakthrough technologies that are
considered so sensitive that uh as we
saw with forgive me I forgot his name
Matthew Borland I think he said when he
talked about the value of of these craft
is not the structure of the craft itself
or whatnot it's the power source and
>> I think of course that's where um a lot
of this lies right the and we also have
to consider multiple ways of building
that power source.
Yeah, I think that that's exactly what
they're doing. I spoke to Dr. Greer a
few weeks back, maybe about a month ago
now. And I think that when I think Eric
Davis implied that they were using the
peds to cover up this advanced
technology, this UFO technology, what
have you. And that would make sense that
they would add to it. It's like you come
to you get some major breakthrough from
reverse engineering or even just if it's
doesn't even require reverse engineering
is that you would add it to those Ps and
you would hide it at that level that
that level of classification that's kind
of just above everything else. Um,
>> right. And if I so if I could say very
quickly, we also know that there are
certain things within government that
parallel with this unofficial set of
entities or factions of groups in which
certain information is deemed so
classified that it doesn't even go
through official classification
processes because the the the the
processes it would have to go through
too many hands would be touching and
seeing that information. So in some
cases sounds crazy but in some cases
it's a literal handshake you know wink
and a nod old you know like in the the
old days type kind of agreement.
>> No that makes sense. Although I do think
a lot of it's classified. I mean if you
look at even nuclear codes and nuclear
secrets like it's all very it's all
organized classified. That's how the
government works in that respect and
then you just have to have a very high
level of classification to even be able
to see it on reports and things like that.
that.
>> Absolutely. Absolutely. I think that one
thing that's concerned me that I've
learned and I want to get your opinion
on this um is that there feels like
there's a little bit of like I mean this
is going to be obvious but like a good
old boys club or like a cult of actual
secrecy around
>> oh sure
>> technology this let's call it UFO
technology for now
>> um and that's the reason how it hasn't
come out is that people are generally
shunned if they did it and my personal
view is that it's it's connected to
nuclear weapons that's why I was kind of
implying the peds and
So, actually before we get into all that
and the good old boys club thing, I
guess what I want to ask is one more
question on on Eric Davis. Um, and this
is a a question that came from JK Philly
fan, but I wanted to know too is that
Eugene Potclanov has
>> been pretty popular for basically
pushing this idea that we can get
gravitational manipulation with spinning
superconductors and we can produce
thrust. um depending on the design and
engineering of it.
>> Um I watched an interview with George uh
Hathaway actually on Charles I think it
was on Charles Chase's onlab videos >> right
>> right
>> where they go deep into it and George
Hathaway pretty much says like we tried
to build it but like you know um Popov
didn't give us everything. He didn't
tell us all of it so we had to do our
best to do it and then we tried to do it
and it didn't work. So, you know, we
wanted it to work, but it didn't. And, right,
right,
>> I got kind of sketchy vibes from
listening to him where it's the same
thing that people tell me about like the
MH370 videos is people be like, "I
wanted it to be real, but you know what?
It's just not. So, just stop talking
about it, you know?" So, and and when
Eric Davis gets asked about it, which is
he he kind of poo poos it as well, like,
"No, it didn't really work. It's not
really legit." And I'm kind of like,
huh, if you're the kind of person that
believes in like, you know, wormhole
physics, science, and and gravitational
manipulation and waves, like you should
be pretty much cheerleading that, I
would think. So, like, what is your take
on these guys? And like what's going on
with it? Does the Panov stuff work and
they're just, you know, doing
disinformation on it or does it really
not work? And are those guys right? Did
they have something wrong? Like,
>> sure. Well, you you make an interesting
point cuz one thing I wanted to point
out before I answer your question as
well is that I know from a podcast that
was done or hosted by um I believe an
miss uh Mrs. Anna Brady Estz of the National
National
>> Yes. of the National Science Foundation.
I know that um uh Lou Darro, a highly
respected naval engineer, was on that
that podcast panel and he brought up Pod
Kletnoff as well. And I find it
interesting that no one on that panel
objected. Now maybe it was out of
respect because it was on a podcast but
hard to say. Now I will tell you that I
I know from my personal experience there
were attempts at replicating the the
potent experiment in which uh did not
work by groups I know and others.
However, I want to emphasize the notion
of giving up too easily and and not
trying to go down that path. I believe
in my humble view I do believe that
there was a there there to some extent
whether it is with the setup that pod
Kletenoff had established or with other
setups that for example were more
pulsebased like Claude Per's example of
a super pulsed superconductors and so
on. Um I will say though that it is and
I really mean this in the sincerest way
there were attempts at replications and
they were not successful because certain
conditions were not met. Now I do
believe in my humble view there are much
better approaches to take than the
podenoff spinning disc. But if those
results were able to be replicated, they
would certainly indicate that there is a
there there and I can say for certain
that in my humble view there is most
certainly a connection with rotation
uh torsion. Um there was something a
long time ago I saw on the internet that
the Soviets called gravitational
rotation. They had deemed that, you
know, Einstein's general relativity
model was considered a static model at
best and that u you know the ether or
the quantum vacuum should be viewed more
as a fluid-like substance and should be
treated as a real physical um entity if
you will. And so I think that Pod
Kletenoff spurred a lot of uh he's his
experiment or at least the claims of his
experiment springboarded a lot of people
like Ning Lee. And I I personally
believe that Ning Lee had a significant
amount of success, which is why her
stuff went classified. Um, and that'll
be that could be for a different
conversation. But I think that Pod
Kletnoff's uh initial experiments were
conceptually appropriate to motivate
people. But just because they didn't
work in replication doesn't mean that
people shouldn't be looking at torsion
and superconductors in my opinion. Now,
there have been rumors that some people
have successfully replicated his
results. Um, but I've yet to interact
with any of those people on a direct level.
level.
>> You know what I always think about when
I think about the spinning
superconductor thing is I think about
Eric Laith White and I think about
>> the Veritassium recreation. Veritassium,
very popular YouTuber. I think it's got
like 20 million subscribers physics
>> and he did like the the fact check or
the the mythbusters thing on it and
basically took this spinning 40 lb
weight I think on a on the end of a
stick 40 pound weight at the end of a
stick. So you can't lift that up right
with one hand unless you're like really
well you know fit and you just spin it
around and I don't know exactly the RPM
but all of a sudden now you can just
lift it over your head with one hand. as
long as you're like moving it in the
direction of the motion of the spin, you
can do it really easily. And I always
think about that because I remember his
answer is, well, yes, it's real, but
it's just normal physics, right? It's
normal physics. And I always laugh at
that because I go, yeah, everything is
normal physics. So, anti gravity
manipulation is also normal physics,
right? It's just like we, you know, it's
all in the math that's already there.
It's like there's just a little recipe
missing. You know, a little thing. And I
would say if we add what like S his
whole thing is charged matter, right?
The movement of charged matter.
>> Well, manipulation, gravity. Go ahead.
>> Well, I was going to say yes. As a
matter of fact, Eric Laithweight, I
think throughout the mid to late 70s and
certainly throughout the 80s, he was
going around giving speaking engagements
in which he was emphasizing the notion
of anomalous effects with rotating
gyroscopes without question. Um, it's
unfortunate that a lot of his work was
suppressed. I think that that guy should
have been put in way more uh many more,
you could say scientific halls of fame,
if you will. But I believe that without
question, there is something mysterious
with regards to uh gyroscopic rotation.
There have been um people in the past
that have tried to conflate or uh
deliberately uh confuse people, although
the people I'm referring to now have
since passed away. They're they were
trying to say, well, there was
investigation into gyroscopic rotation,
but that has nothing to do with
anti-gravity. And I would uh very
respectfully uh push back on that and
say that the two are very much
interconnected uh very much so,
especially when you consider the notion
that yes, it's it was a rudimentary
experiment, but it was a proof of
concept nonetheless. that when he spun
that gyroscope around him, he was able
to um [clears throat]
he was in fact able to uh make the the
gyroscope was much lighter. He was able
to lift it above his head very easily.
>> Yeah. So I I just I don't know. I think
that's interesting. I think that the
lesson that people need to learn is that
there like a lot of physicists and
scientists and engineers have been out
there working on this stuff and they've
been doing it since I mean even the 40s,
50s, 60s. And that's the main topic I
wanted to get to tonight or today. So if
just in case people are just tuning in
right now, uh Salvatore Pis is having
technical difficulties with his audio
and his video on both of his computers
today. So I think he's trying to restart
right now. If that doesn't work out,
I'll reschedule with S and potentially
bring Dave back to do some questions
together. But um without him, I'm going
to keep going and I want to talk about
because I want to ask you the same
questions I want to ask uh S about. I
mean, I think that you guys have been
watching some of my live streams, so you
can kind of predict what some of these
questions are going to be. Sure. But I
want to ask them in a little bit more
fun way. Uh, let's go back to UFOs. Um,
in the UFO community, in the lore, there
is this big connection between nuclear
weapons and UFOs, right?
>> There's this idea that uh I think it was
um crap, his name's uh Bob Robert uh
what's his last name? Forgetting it.
Crap. I met him in person, too. But uh
so like this idea that UFOs are turning
off nukes. What do you think the
connection is between UFOs and nukes?
>> Sure. So um I'll get right into
explaining and this may [clears throat]
take a few minutes to explain but I'll
come full circle on it. We know that
there's been discussion over the decades
and again it's been considered fringe.
Some will call it seinal depends on who
you're asking. Uh with regards to um Oh
yes, even Robert I think Salas. Yes. The
>> right right. And so I would say that
when it comes to that aspect, it's
interesting because in engineering we
know that there are certain phenomena
that exist where if you were to take the
electric and magnetic fields and sum
those fields to zero, classically we're
told that nothing occurs. But in certain
when certain conditions are met under
those uh parameters, you actually get
this other type of force in which is um
it they're like electromagnetic sound
waves but they're not electromagnetic
when you measure them. It's a little par
it's a little uh counterintuitive. Now
the reason I bring all of this up is
because it's been proposed that th that
leads to the generation of what's been
called uh longitudinal scalar waves. And
there have been some papers published
that have shown uh proof of concept that
you know these alleged scalar waves do
actually have a physical force even
though they can't be measured uh
classically. It's possible that when
nukes are released the nukes release a
significant amount of longitudinal
scalar waves that um for sure at this
point we know about as humans but many
decades ago uh you know World War II
likely didn't or had vague um
understanding of it. And it's possible
that those waves interfere with other
aspects of our uh reality that we've yet
to technologically uncover. And it's
possible that maybe some if there are
nonhumans, it's possible that they are
pretty ticked off with those with us
using weapons that basically release
certain type of wave functions and wave
uh waves that we don't and fields that
we we can't even pick up yet because to
us it does these things don't exist
because they can't be measured. Well,
we're only as good as the measuring
devices that we build. And so I think
that there's a connection there that and
I believe of course the radiation is
terrible, too. And everything that we do
know about the, you know, nuclear bombs
and weapons is absolutely the the the
power is terrifying. But I do think
there are additional forces that are
generated every time a a bomb goes off.
um more so with hydrogen thermonuclear
bombs than anything else. That really
upsets um potential nonhumans or maybe
even humans in hiding that know about
this type of this these type of energy
fields uh that simply we haven't at the
time decades ago were not measuring when
we were when we tested the bombs.
>> Yeah. You see that's the that's the I
think the popular perspective. The
perspective is we're interfering with
the aliens and their you know their mode
of transportation could be one thing
right if if and first of all let me just
say are scalar waves gravitational waves
are those synonymous
>> you can you can say that there's a conf
there's an overlap because you could say
that these waves are um all all these
longitudinal scalar waves vector and
scalar potential waves they are
resistant to um excuse me they have no
resistance to inertia and if you were to
amplify by those fields using resonance.
You may realize that the the power
coming from it is actually cold and not
hot and then that overlaps into room
temperature superconductivity and so on
and so forth. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Yeah.
>> So my view is that I have a different
perspective which that that's probably I
think that's correct. I think there's
just more than one reason. I'd love to
hear what you aliens came down and were
like, "Hey, chill out guys." like that
would make sense is like oh the nukes
are messing with spaceime the same way
that the alien ships are flying around
>> but then I take that to the next level
and I go wait a minute
>> that means nukes are UFOs to some degree
they're using the same type of you know
maybe it's different a crude
approximation it's like okay we're
figuring out transportation we're
starting with the horse and now we're
moving on to our car now we're building
a Ferrari
>> right and that's like what we're doing
with nukes Right.
>> And before I let you opine on that,
here's the thing that seems obvious to
me now is of course nukes are
manipulating spaceime. Like I don't know
how this hasn't been more obvious in
retrospect. If you ask Grock or if you
ask the physicists, they'll say no, it's
not it's not getting to the energy
levels that are high enough. Like we
have so many orders of magnitude higher
that they have to get. But if you look
at the concept of a thermonuclear device,
device,
we are detonating a fusion implosion in
our thermonuclear. You could say, yes,
in the conventional a bomb, which is a
release of energy, >> right?
>> right?
>> You're never going to have significant
space-time manipulation because your
energy is always becoming more and more diffuse,
diffuse, >> right?
>> right?
>> So, if your original thing wasn't
manipulating spaceime, then converting
it to energy also won't manipulate spaceime,
spaceime,
>> right? But
space-time manipulation is all about
energy density, right? It's all about
energy density. So if I take, let's just
say my phone right here, right? The
amount of energy I've got in this phone
and I want to convert this to energy
from mass. Well, if I want to increase
the energy density, then I compress it
down, right? The more I compress this
down, the more the energy density goes
up. Like that's
right. So then when I think about, okay,
well, what were they trying to do with
the hydrogen bomb? It's like, oh, they
were trying to create an implosive type
of fusion bomb detonation. So now I'm
going, okay, well, now this is all that
we need is instead of doing the A bomb,
we just needed the H bomb and we need
the compression. And if you start with
enough or you compress your your atoms
down enough, then theoretically you
should be able to get to whatever energy
densities you need presumably get to a
black hole.
>> That I would say that I agree with most
of it. The one thing that I would humbly
Oh my gosh, there he is. Yes.
>> Oh, brother
Ashton brush brother Ashton had the
right solution. Sorry, man. I now I'll
do exactly what you say. I'm so happy
you're here, S. Thank you so much,
>> bro. Bro, uh, your discussion is
extremely interesting. Just give me 10
minutes. Uh, even at the end of the
podcast, I got to give you, and this is
no joke, a formula for time, for time
travel, and something that has to do
with breaking the Schwinger limit. You
see breaking the Schwinga limit is not
only important for thermonuclear
devices of fourth generation as brother
Ashton has been incred your your
research into this area and your
knowledge by the way the ripple effect
you have to bring Dr. Joseph Farrell on.
>> He has some exquisite ideas regarding
the ripple effect and exactly what was done.
done.
>> Well, I got blocked by uh by dark
journalist, so we might be stepping
towards that direction. We'll see. But
so let's jump in. Let's I'm glad you
jumped in. Let me have Dave answer what
I just mentioned. And I wanted to get
your opinion on this too, S. So, just as
a quick recap, essentially what I'm
saying is that
>> people that worked on the fusion bomb
would have figured out space-time
manipulation because spacetime
manipulation is all about energy density
and they're working in the highest
energy physics that exists and they are compressing
compressing
you know their fusion payload imploding
their fusion payload to increase energy
density. Do you first of all so Dave do
you agree with that assessment or what
is your thoughts on that?
>> Well, I'm going to say first off it's a
blast. I'm so happy that S was able to
make it brother. Thank you for coming
on. And I do want to say now that he now
that he is here, I do want to say that
what I'm about to answer with does not
reflect anything that the cell does or
does not reflect anything of any
government. It's my personal opinion.
When you asked about the nuclear fusion
aspect with regards to amplifying the
density, I would agree with you.
However, I would add one thing to what
you said, which is that in my humble
opinion, there needs to be an aspect of
that process in which there is a
reversal of the entropy in which in in
which that system behaves within. And
then when that pinching effect occurs,
you then may get very cold nuclear
radiation instead of hot. And then you
with with that bal that offset of cold
and hot in a vortex-like manner, then
maybe you can you can break that limit.
So yes, I'll I'll leave it there.
>> I'll take it one step further. Brother
Ash, sorry to interrupt your train of
thought. I know you're thinking some
genial thoughts, but this is important.
Breaking the Schwinger limit does
something something astonishing.
It destroys the arrow of time. And
that's how time manipulation, especially
reverse temporal excursion, can take
place. I will I will try to convince you
brother Ash because I know you do not
believe in travel to the past. But under
this when you break the Schwinger limit
brother everything goes because you
destroy the arrow of time. Number one.
Number two remember Stephen Hawking he
takes in his chronology
uh protection conjecture. He allows for
the hour of time not to be disturbed.
That's why those things are once you
break the schwinger limit, forget about
it. Anything goes.
>> Travel to the past is feasible. But you
must first break the Schwinger limit.
Give me 10 minutes at the end of this
podcast. Whenever you have time, I will
give you the mathematical formalism of
time travel to the past. A time machine,
gentlemen. A time machine to the past.
And by the way,
>> [ __ ] causality. Excuse my language, but
this idea of cause and effect has always
bothered me. This [ __ ] grandfather
paradox. Ah, [ __ ] your grandfather. No,
it's not. You know what? Anything goes
the moment you break the arrow of time, brother.
brother.
>> So, you think you're creating new
universes then? I mean, that's the only
interpretation, right? Or do you have
another interpretation? Many univer
you could argue superimposed timelines
within it's a it's it gets comp. I would
say in my humble opinion that um if you
look for example at the the the notion
of if you if you read very very
carefully what Elia Priosin had written
which was that when you have entropy in
a system as it fills up if you can in an
engineering way which this has been
shown if you can find a way to prevent
the entropy within that system from
growing what happens is it's been
observed that there's actually more
organization in the system the lower the
entropy is um And I would say that would
speak to the the rever the the the
breaking of the time arrow. And also I
would mention as well that if you look
specifically at the um oh jeez I sorry I
just got a a brain fart but the uh oh oh
yes the grandfather paradox. There are a
couple professors in the past 20 years
that I believe and I I would agree with
them seem to have solved the issue of
that paradox which is that you could go
back in time to certain particular
points and then you can super what you
do in that previous event will
superimpose over the the the present
event and so on and so forth. But
anyways, um,
>> so I think what you're saying there is
more of the like whatever you did
already h always happened like that, you
know. So you could go back and because
there's two ways you could do it, right?
Is that one you can go back in time and
you create a new timeline. Therefore, we
don't have to worry about how you messed
with the first timeline or have you. The
other way, which is, spoiler alert, the
show's been out there long enough, but
the show Dark, right? the show Dark as
it German show they have this closed
loop time process where you can go back
in time and in fact they now this is
really getting spoilery um you can
create your own universe right you can
create your own self-contained universe
loop as long and and I think even John
Kramer talks about this is like time
travel's allowed so as long as the loops
are closed so
>> I right closed loop tempor
um temporal manipulation right I I would
say personally Yeah, John Kramer is a
genius, brother. John Kramer is a
genius. The transactional interpretation
of quantum mechanics will one day not
only prove extremely viable, but
remember he used he really uses bow
mechanics. He truly is a great student
of bone. Bow would be incredibly proud
of this man. I would love to meet him.
We should all try to meet him one day.
>> And Aaron Hoff Aaron Hoff agreed too.
Aaron Hoff recently did an interview
with um what's his face? Kurt Jungle and
said straight up he thinks that like
time is moving in two directions and
then it's median. I'm going well that's
the you know transactional
interpretation right there.
>> Well, think of the think of the um the
one electron theory with Fineman and the
the notion of of fractals, right? If you
can maybe it's possible you can make a
little universe because it's a fractal
of a larger one.
>> Just a thought.
>> And that speaks to what I think you've
said and Dr. Hal Pudaf has said about if
you go inside of a UFO it could be the
different different size on the inside
than it appears to be on the outside,
right? Is that that would be kind of an
idea of how that would work. So just to
give people an example of how a closed
time loop might work. Closed time loop
would be a situation where like I give
myself the Nobel I give myself a pri
award-winning book, right, that makes me
famous. I go I'm in the future. I go
give younger Ashton an award-winning
book or future Ashton comes back and
gives younger Ashton the MH370 videos,
right? And then I get older and who gave
Ashton the younger Ashton the videos? I
did. So I have to invent time travel, go
back in time and hand myself the other
book. And as long as I do that, well
then the question is who who wrote the
book? Who made the videos? Nobody did.
Nobody get made them. But that's a
closed time loop and that works as long
as the loop just keeps continuing like
that. So I hope that's not the case. But
the reason why that scares me a little
bit is that any form of that time travel
being real would absolutely justify.
justify.
>> He who controls time controls everything else.
else.
>> It's possible it's like the Schroinger's
cat where you gave yourself the award
but you also didn't at the same time.
>> Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. or like I I wrote
the book but who wrote the book right
that I gave back to I never wrote it so
who gave me that book like
>> and if I can mention to what brother Sal
said um the like the ruling of time I
I'm paraphrasing here but the very
famous quote that Oppenheimer liked to
quote which was I am death the destroyer
of worlds I've come across some research
recently that suggests the original
translation was actually I am time the
destroyer of worlds
>> oh my god oh my god there's a great
American poet that says time is The fire
in which we burn.
>> I Yes. Yes.
>> And this is a old hermetic idea. >> Yes.
>> Yes.
>> Very important. We do not brother Ash,
brother Rossi, we do not understand the
nature of time. I truly believe time is
a type of energy field which prevents
everything from happening at once.
>> I agree. It is not your idea for example
of just a physical interpretation of the
the ruling of clocks
>> and since we are on the topic of time I
know I said at the end of the pod but
I'm I'm rolling here and the juices are
flowing just let me give you this okay
we already discussed part of it but I
will recap
>> for your followers and your subscribers
both of you guys are great by the way
and you Ash Both brother and Rossi and I
agree. You are formidable.
I would hate to piss you off ever. So
disregard that ever from happening.
That's a solemn promise. Brother, you're
my brother. Just like brother Rossi. You
you two are my blood brothers. Anybody
that goes against the trio, the triarchy
of greatness, [ __ ] them. Now, okay, let
me go back to uh this is reverse
temporal excursion. the idea of the
possibility of going back in time and
not just sending communication back.
Now, we're talking about physically
physically affecting the temporal
structure. It it involves the breaking
of the Schwinglement. Why? That is the
only way you could circumvent the great
Stephven Hawking. His chronology
uh protection uh conjecture is based on
yellow time. The only thing that can
destroy the arrow of time is the
breaking of the swinging limit.
>> This formalism is based on it. The whole
idea starts simple. Again, Arkins razor
simplicity and minimalism. Time is on
the order of one divided by frequency.
Again, the great Nicholas Tesla said
everything is energy, frequency, and
vibration. And by the way, brother Ash
said this like two parts ago. I'm I'm
I'm I'm I'm plagiarizing a bit. Sorry.
No, what I'm about to say time is on the
order of one divided by frequency. It
could be frequency of spin or frequency
of of vibration against the mathematics
is similar. With one my well I wouldn't
say minor um um exception but remember
in um in spin you you deal with a radius
of spin and in vibration you deal with
the amplitude of vibration. That's the main
main
other than that the mathematics seems to
be very similar between spin and
vibration up to a point. Now the what is
important is again time is on the order
of one divided by frequency. Take the
chain rule. You do the chain rule on
this simple again you differentiate with
respect let's call it a quantum of time
for you know a ddt of some sort. that
ddt is really a a delta towo if you'd
like to think of it as a quantum of
time. I I just like this idea that
matter may be confined energy frozen
within a quantum of time
>> bound within fluctuating fields of
>> maybe all of reality is is a room
temperature superconducting state to
some extent.
>> Microscopic quantum coherence it's a
microscopic quantum phenomena but again
time is on the order of one divided by
frequency. You take the chain rule of
that based on a a DDT simple um this is
simple differential calculus we're
talking about first year of undergrad
>> you take uh the chain rule based on that
will give you a a constant most likely
it's going to be dimensionist so let's
call it to subs
times the delta of frequency divided by
frequency squared. You see how it's
dimensionally inconsistent. Again, time
being on the order of one divided by
frequency. Check the dimensions. Always
check the dimensions. The first thing
you do, that's the first thing they
teach us in engineering. If a formula
does not give correct units, no good.
Start all over again. Now,
so again, minus delta t. So out of the
chain rule comes this minus delta t. So
the whole idea is that is it part of the
mathematical formalism is it again the
great dra believed in the beauty of true
mathematics. He believed in mathematical
physics that the ability of mathematics
to influence physics but physics must
also influence the mathematics. Hence
the second step. So the first step you
get from the chain rule of the simple um
um time is on the order of one divided
by frequency. From the chain rule you
get minus delta t equals
equals
um a dimensionist constant say to subs
times delta frequency divided by
frequency squared
dimensionally consistent. Check it for
yourselves also your followers. Now what
I'm about to say about tal of s will
require your followers to do a little
mathematics and again use your ability
to think engineering here. How would you
make this happen? How would you break
the shoing limit
and affect this quote unquote miraculous
phenomena of reverse temporal excursion?
And again this minus delta t speaks to
the reverse template of the excursion.
This house of s is equal to 10 to the 25 times
times epsilon0
epsilon0
divided by sigma subs^ squar close
parenthesis open parenthesis
one ratio
r subs
divided by r sub omega. It's as simple
as that, gentlemen. Now, your followers
and your subscribers should look into
what is this ratio. I'll leave it up to
them. What is this ratio? Based on
everything we've talked about and we've
talked about about this uh time is on
the order of one divided by frequency
several occasions. But this is the
equation. This is the mathematical formalism
formalism
of reverse temporal excursion.
Study this equation. It's simple.
Extremely simple. Again,
>> what's the implication of the equation? [clears throat]
[clears throat]
>> Yeah. Say it one more time and then give
us the
>> either tell us what it means or give us
the implication because it's too many
numbers for me to do in my head.
>> Again, I will I will recap the equation
one more time and I will say it distinctly.
distinctly.
>> Minus deltat t
>> change in time
>> equals go ahead. Equals this ta of s
toao of s which is a dimensionous constant
constant
>> okay a constant
>> times delta omega / omega squar close
parenthesis change
>> the stars of s the star of s equals
10 to the 25 and I will tell you what
the 10 the 25 is we've discussed it
already 10 to the 25 times ah rather
rosy epsilon0 0 divided by sigma subs 2
close parenthesis open parenthesis the ratio
ratio
r subs divided by r sub omega close
parenthesis gentlemen this is the
mathematical formalism of reverse temple excursion
excursion
we have a time machine to the past
because the schwinger limit by breaking
the swinger limit the arrow of time is destroyed.
destroyed. >> Hence,
>> Hence,
Stephven Orings idea of the chronology
protection conjecture no longer applies.
>> Now 10 to the 25 represents jewels per
meter cube and hence it will give you an
idea. But one more thing I will say that
epsilon zero you know it well Ashton
>> they like
>> it's the electricality of free space
that sigma subs is the surface charge density
density
>> your followers and subscribers should
figure out of what it's essential do I
bet you Dr. Rossi over there knows all
right I bet you Dr. Forbes knows as
well, dude. We're all doctors. That's
it. I have the ability to do that. So
there you go. You're all you're both
PhDs. Oh [ __ ] Let me go back just one
more. Uh Sure.
>> I'm here I'm here as an engineer of the
United States Navy and I've worked for
the United States Space Force as um as
well. But these ideas, these these um
wild ideas are my own and do not
represent neither the opinions nor the
statements of the United States Navy nor
the United States Space Force.
>> So hopefully they refer to that
disclaimer. Okay, brother Ashen, you can
ask anything you want.
>> Well, now we've got everybody here. Now
it's time. Is this uh a thermonuclear
weapon that we are witnessing in this
video since since this is your you're a
free you're not you know you're here on
your own accord giving your own personal
opinions nobody here is giving any
official opinions based on any
militaries but I've got to say I think
this is a thermonuclear weapon although
I think I would can say it's a con
unconventional fourth generation
thermonuclear weapon the reason why I
say that is that plasma is technically
not uh a fishing detonator. It would be
a non-fish detonator, I believe. I've
learned a lot about thermonuclear
weapons, by the way. And we're looking
at this triangle formation, which is
consistent with pulse shaping, which is
like wave shaping. You need all your
waves to converge at the right pinnacle
moment, at the right pinnacle location
at the exact same time. And I can't stop
thinking about it because one of the
other things in thermonuclear weapons is
uh computers. Computers. One of the
first things I ever mentioned about
these was like AI and like how we might
these these orbs all this stuff might
must have like super advanced computers
going on as well. And turns out when we
first developed computers was also based
on nukes. Like I mean sure they probably
had the idea of computers before that
but that's what we were using them for
in the early stages. and John Kramer.
John Kramer admitted that one of the
things that they use quantum computers
for is nuclear calculations. So let's
start with uh let's start with S since
Sal just jumped in. S what do you think
man? Do you think that this is a
thermonuclear weapon? You think that's a
fourth generation?
And I hope we also speak about directed
electronic warfare devices which I
believe China employed one right before presi
presi
met with President uh Trump and it's
from one of the things President Trump
actually said on Air Force One to the
press that I deduced that when he said
bad fuel issues exposed directly to more
more electric engine technology which is
used on modern jets. One of them was a
jet fighter.
fixed wing. The other one was a hilo.
So, rotary. It's the perfect statement
basically saying we have a directed
electronic warfare device that can
disable and basically destroy your both
rotary and fixed wing aircraft. >> Hence,
>> Hence,
be careful with Taiwan. Dot dot dot.
This was a message. I truly believe
that. So, again, just like that was a
directed electronic warfare device. I
truly believe that. Remember, we're
talking about China here. We're talking
about the Misho satellite. We're talking
about quantum communications. We're
talking about the ability to have, as
you well know,
>> Dr. Ashton Forbes right there. You well
know that they have quantum radar. You
do you know that quantum radar is truly
the brainchild of a great a great great
mind Marco Lanzagorta of Naval Research Laboratory
Laboratory
circa the year 2000 he came um up with
this idea of quantum radar they thought
of it like sci-fi they give him minimal
money to play around with it meanwhile
the Chinese took all the pamphlets
translated it to Chinese and what in 20
years they have quantum radar so the
ability to render all stealth aircraft
>> Yeah. The quantum radar thing is
honestly mind-blowing to see that. Like
they it had been talked about five or
six years ago, I think, as China was
going to work on it. And the new news
recently was that now they're
mass-producing it for all their fighter jets.
jets.
>> That's unbelievable.
>> And I mean, quantum radar, when you even
look at it, says it uses EPR device.
Literally says it uses an EPR device.
Not only that, it's resistant to all
manner of electromagnetic jamming. So
while we would have to invent to take
care of the EPR paradox and gentlemen,
little light bulbs are lighting all
around. I hope our our best and
brightest are are are working on this as
I speak is a Q jammer, a quantum jammer,
something that affects
>> I've been wondering too
>> cuz Okay, so you kind of danced around
the question, but you did say that you
think that it might be like
>> it's a directed it's a directed weapon,
sir. Absolutely. I agree with you 100%.
This is But I believe they took it a
step further. It it I think that they
used the ideas beyond behind the fourth
generation thermonuclear device and
coupled it with autonomous AI units
room temperature superc conductivity
possibly the existence already of AGI. I
don't know what else to call these. I
mean maybe not AGI but something
extremely close something that has the
ability uh these let's call them AI
agents for now possibly SAB AGI but
they're definitely autonomous
remember the last sequence
when they compress
the space-time continum at a quantum
level energy density again speaking of
energy density that 10^ the 25 is jew
per meter cube which is necessary is the
energy density in order to bring break
the swinger limit 10 to the 25 JW per
meter cube. You understand what these
three freaking orbs are able to deposit
in that small area. What are these? Of
course, they would have to be based on
something thermonuclear in origin, but
it's far above that. There is it's like
a hybrid device. What? This could be
hybrid technology, gentlemen.
>> It makes you wonder because
like I think they figured this out in
the 60s. We signed the partial nuclear
testband treaty in 1963 right after the
Ripple project. Like it's like, oh, and
John Knuckles brags about, yeah, we
found how to make super high yield,
super high gain, clean fusion bombs, but
we never tested it. Never did it after
the Ripple project at least. and now
we're banning everybody else from doing
it. And then it makes you wonder, okay,
well that was 1963
and now what have we done for 60 years?
>> Go ahead.
>> If I could jump in quickly to add to
what brother Sal said. We have for
example we have a direct energy weapon
here and in the example here's the plane
for instance. It's possible the
technology they are using is set up such
that again in between that the the uh em
the the emitter and the plane if you
actually took electromagnetic measuring
equipment you would not get any electric
or magnetic current readings. However
what happens to the plane the result of
what occurs in the plane is
electromagnetic. So the transfer of the
energy is perhaps occurring at a
different level or layer of reality but
the actual effect is still
electromagnetic in the result of what
happens to the plane. It's so again this
is what makes this so uh interesting but
also dangerous because you can't detect
classically any of the electromagnetic
fields as the waves would be traveling. [clears throat]
[clears throat]
>> Yeah. And that's the big thing about
these quantum devices, right, that use
the airhop boom effect is there's no
classic electromagnetic signal to
detect. And the same reason why you
can't jam the radar either is that
there's nothing to get there.
>> And if I could ask one more thing, I
wanted to ask brother S. Um I'm sort of
leading the witness here, brother, but
do you think uh uh room temperature
superc conductivity is crucial to the uh
different types of uh energies and uh
you could say technologies you were discussing?
discussing?
Uh quite possibly but I believe it it
could be an effect thereof. There is
something greater that generates.
>> Gotcha. Got you.
>> And I believe that brother Ash and you
and I
have all talked about this non-stop.
Basically, you drive a non-equilibrium
plasma, a nonlinear medium far from
equilibrium while still while still
inducing an um an energy flux within it,
which means what? The engineering of the
pregoin effect.
>> Can I say s I want to say something and
I'm going to say just one sentence and
then I'm going to stop. Uh um privately
I've been looking at this the slooh rate
in high voltage transients.
>> Oh. Oh my god, Charles Proteius
Steinman. Speaking of which,
>> brother Ash, we got to talk about the
plasma disruption fusion weapon that's
really based on the plasma compression
fusion device
>> with a little added let's call it let's
call it a Zpinch with a fusion twist.
>> You get my favorite words and and sorry
very quickly S your work
>> like a drink. We should have that drink.
You know, [laughter]
>> s brother your your work s on high
voltage transients is uh is incredible.
By the way, thank you.
>> It's not mine, brother. I I I I'm trust
me. We're talking about Tesla combined
with Gabriel Cron combined with Charles
Brousia Steinmets, >> right?
>> right?
>> Those last two are amazing gentlemen.
Some of their works you cannot find.
>> I know.
>> I know. And there's a book by CR that is
like $5,000, but you can find it.
>> But if you wanted to buy it, you
couldn't find it. So anyway,
>> all these books like to if you want some
of these people's textbooks like you got
a lot of them aren't available on the internet.
internet.
>> Gabriel Cron's model for space for a
space-time metric was very interesting.
He viewed the space-time metric as one
big um uh circuit,
>> one big system. But that's why he did
his rotating electrical machinery.
Gentlemen, the Nobel Prize um 2025 the
one uh um on microscopic quantum tunneling
tunneling
>> they actually use they use um look at
the circuit that they actually use. They
use an inductor and a capacitor in series.
series.
>> Hence frequent vibration vibration on
the order of 1 / LC.
>> Oh okay.
I'm sorry, brother Sal. I thought I
thought we weren't gonna say Okay. So,
yeah. No, it's an LC circuit. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
>> I mean, if you just look at what a cubit
is, I mean, a cubit is just Josephson's
junction. It's just a two Joseph and
Junctions forming a squid or a Joseph
Junction forming a squid and then
connected to a capacitor with a pulse
current through it. Like, wait, what?
That's all. When I figured that out, I'm
like, wait,
>> here's another simplicity and
minimalism. All the greats have based
their ideas on Akam's razor.
>> If it's too complex, [ __ ] it. It won't
work. [laughter]
>> Right. I agree. If I can mention,
Ashton, this is for you and your your
audience. I want to mention I know
brother Sal knows all about this, but if
you took um for example, we know about
Joseph's and junctions. You have a
superconductor, an insulator, then
another superconductor. Okay. There's
another uh phenomena you can invoke that
combines the squid phenomena with the
aerongh bomb effect. is simple. If you
take a superconductor and then a normal
piece of metal instead of an insulator
and then another superconductor beside
it, you actually get aeronof bomb phase
modulation effects just by pulsing the
the junctions with voltage. >> Really?
>> Really?
>> Yeah. Which has some very profound
implications. Uh yeah,
>> I don't want to go on too many side
tangents here, but I have been talking
with uh Randall Mills as well. I find
brilliant light power to be really
interesting. He's got this hydrino
theory that's very analogist to negative
energy and like lowering the hydrogen
state below the ground state. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Um and he sent me a paper. He sent me
like a bunch of papers after I was
messaging him.
>> Well, we know that there's been
production of hydro anomalous hydrogen
in low energy nuclear reaction
experiments. They can't
>> he talked about low energy nuclear
reaction and the common theme I've seen
is vibration amongst all these things.
And I mean Sal just mentioned the
equations for time and and relationship
to frequency as well.
>> Not just not just vibration, brother
Ash. This is key. Accelerated vibration.
Again, you drive your system far from
equilibrium. This is key. You drive a
nonlinear system far from equilibrium
>> with with with if I could say quickly
with pulseed high voltage transients.
Um, and yeah, I'll I'll I'll maybe I'll
say something about that in a moment
because I know it's on the internet
already, but I I'm I'm just gonna think
about it for a second, but please carry on.
on.
>> Well, let me because I Let's go back.
Let's let's lower our our level down
now. So, we're not super in the math
physics for every because I know there's
just normal people that are watching
too. Let's go back talk about the orbs
for a second because
>> AI definitely in my opinion. I think the
only question is are we dealing with a
you know agi or is it more of like what
s was talking about autonomous
intelligence right but like you you look at how these orbs are flying around and
at how these orbs are flying around and it's got to it's got to have complex
it's got to it's got to have complex math going on for 3D vectoring through
math going on for 3D vectoring through the sky and even if without that the
the sky and even if without that the equations like the whole thing about
equations like the whole thing about reaching the shringer limit and the
reaching the shringer limit and the whole thing for why people don't think
whole thing for why people don't think nukes can manipulate at spacetime is
nukes can manipulate at spacetime is that we need this huge amplification of
that we need this huge amplification of energy. Massive amplification energy.
energy. Massive amplification energy. The math must be perfect, right? Like we
The math must be perfect, right? Like we need the orbs to be perfectly
need the orbs to be perfectly equilateral when they're converging on
equilateral when they're converging on each other. And it can't be off at all.
each other. And it can't be off at all. If it's off by even a little bit, then
If it's off by even a little bit, then the amplification doesn't work
the amplification doesn't work correctly, right? Like it needs to be
correctly, right? Like it needs to be and that's what all the physics and
and that's what all the physics and stuff around uh thermonuclear weapons is
stuff around uh thermonuclear weapons is all about. It's all about figuring that
all about. It's all about figuring that out and using these super powerful
out and using these super powerful computers. So to me it seems really
computers. So to me it seems really obvious that we must have really
obvious that we must have really advanced secret computers potentially to
advanced secret computers potentially to the idea even to the level of them being
the idea even to the level of them being almost sentient. I even wonder and I
almost sentient. I even wonder and I don't really think this is a high
don't really think this is a high probability but I think there's some
probability but I think there's some chance that we have like a defense
chance that we have like a defense system that's like AI already. Well, if
system that's like AI already. Well, if I could say quickly, you know, Ken
I could say quickly, you know, Ken Shoulders predicted in the early 2000s,
Shoulders predicted in the early 2000s, he wrote a paper that he predicted in
he wrote a paper that he predicted in the future he foresees the ability to
the future he foresees the ability to create an electrical circuit purely with
create an electrical circuit purely with uh a plasma Bose Einstein common and
uh a plasma Bose Einstein common and photons, nothing else and vibration. No,
photons, nothing else and vibration. No, no, no actual solid wires or anything.
no, no actual solid wires or anything. >> Yep. And that's what I think that the
>> Yep. And that's what I think that the orbs are doing. I think they're creating
orbs are doing. I think they're creating a quantum circuit. They're creating a
a quantum circuit. They're creating a circuit, but they're doing it, you know,
circuit, but they're doing it, you know, with the plane. And the plane's the null
with the plane. And the plane's the null point. And I guess my bigger concern
point. And I guess my bigger concern though is that I more and more I talk to
though is that I more and more I talk to you guys, more and more I research, I
you guys, more and more I research, I think I mean if that's a thermonuclear
think I mean if that's a thermonuclear weapon, like what's really even
weapon, like what's really even happening? Like what's even happening in
happening? Like what's even happening in a wormhole? Like are they are the people
a wormhole? Like are they are the people inside being annihilated? Are they being
inside being annihilated? Are they being heated up or does like the space-time
heated up or does like the space-time manipulation supersede the heating up of
manipulation supersede the heating up of the plane? Could that come out in one
the plane? Could that come out in one piece? Is it coming out in multiple
piece? Is it coming out in multiple pieces? What are you guys
pieces? What are you guys >> talking about?
>> talking about? >> We would have to perform the experiment
>> We would have to perform the experiment in order to find out. Remember that
in order to find out. Remember that experiment trumps theory every time.
experiment trumps theory every time. >> Well, you know what's scary about that
>> Well, you know what's scary about that is that I sit there and I go, are they
is that I sit there and I go, are they testing this out? Like, are they is this
testing this out? Like, are they is this an experiment? Like, of course, you
an experiment? Like, of course, you don't have to experiment on a civilian
don't have to experiment on a civilian airliner, but like imagine it's
airliner, but like imagine it's collateral damage anyway. Imagine you're
collateral damage anyway. Imagine you're going to run an OP on a plane anyway,
going to run an OP on a plane anyway, and you're going to hit it with a
and you're going to hit it with a missile, and you're like, you know what?
missile, and you're like, you know what? Let's just hit it with our super
Let's just hit it with our super spaceime manipulation weapon, just see
spaceime manipulation weapon, just see what happens. Like, do you think there's
what happens. Like, do you think there's a possibility that that could be in
a possibility that that could be in play?
play? >> Brother, I have a feeling. Sorry,
>> Brother, I have a feeling. Sorry, brother Rossi. Before it's a quick
brother Rossi. Before it's a quick interruption, but it's something based
interruption, but it's something based on brother Ash said, I have a feeling
on brother Ash said, I have a feeling these computers may be hybrid biological
these computers may be hybrid biological base, not just silica. We're not talking
base, not just silica. We're not talking about silica sanctions here. We're
about silica sanctions here. We're talking about possibly neuronbased
talking about possibly neuronbased sensions.
sensions. >> You think it might be that advanced
>> You think it might be that advanced where there's already biological
where there's already biological >> 100% 100%. This may not be silica based.
>> 100% 100%. This may not be silica based. It could be a hybrid thing. Yeah.
It could be a hybrid thing. Yeah. >> Yeah. Well, you know what's weird about
>> Yeah. Well, you know what's weird about that is that some of those derds or I
that is that some of those derds or I think it's one of the derds talks about
think it's one of the derds talks about maybe it's not the derds but somehow put
maybe it's not the derds but somehow put off saying how many like drones a human
off saying how many like drones a human mind can control at once.
mind can control at once. >> Wow.
>> Wow. >> That one really bugs me because it's the
>> That one really bugs me because it's the one paper that sticks out from the
one paper that sticks out from the the brain machine interface one.
the brain machine interface one. >> Yeah, the brain machine interface. We
>> Yeah, the brain machine interface. We know that Don Phillips, he was he he's
know that Don Phillips, he was he he's passed away now, but he was Don Phillips
passed away now, but he was Don Phillips was former uh Air Force, CIA, Lockheed,
was former uh Air Force, CIA, Lockheed, Skunkworks, the whole thing. He openly
Skunkworks, the whole thing. He openly said in the in the early 2000s that I
said in the in the early 2000s that I believe the company is now defunct, but
believe the company is now defunct, but it was called Light City International
it was called Light City International LLC. He claimed at least that at the
LLC. He claimed at least that at the time they were already working on Craft
time they were already working on Craft in the 80s with that they could control
in the 80s with that they could control with their thoughts. That's what he
with their thoughts. That's what he claimed at least. Um
claimed at least. Um >> yeah, it's hard for me to believe it,
>> yeah, it's hard for me to believe it, but I you know, at the same time, why
but I you know, at the same time, why not? I mean, if I if I'm saying that an
not? I mean, if I if I'm saying that an AI is controlling the orbs and getting
AI is controlling the orbs and getting them to spin perfectly like that, then
them to spin perfectly like that, then what's the difference between that or
what's the difference between that or like a a hybrid human biological or just
like a a hybrid human biological or just even maybe human? You believe in remote
even maybe human? You believe in remote viewing? You believe in psychic powers?
viewing? You believe in psychic powers? I mean,
I mean, >> right. No, to to your point, he he
>> right. No, to to your point, he he claimed it. I wasn't there. I can't say
claimed it. I wasn't there. I can't say for sure, but he that's what he claimed
for sure, but he that's what he claimed at least.
at least. >> Yeah. So, Don So, I just want to recap a
>> Yeah. So, Don So, I just want to recap a couple things that we've been talking
couple things that we've been talking about. One is Don Phillips. Uh there's a
about. One is Don Phillips. Uh there's a video out there where he's talking about
video out there where he's talking about seeing three like orbs spinning around
seeing three like orbs spinning around and then coalesque. He says his words
and then coalesque. He says his words and then disappear
and then disappear >> late at right Patterson
>> late at right Patterson >> or right Pat. Sorry.
>> or right Pat. Sorry. >> Yeah. And then the other thing we were
>> Yeah. And then the other thing we were mentioning S was mentioning a recent
mentioning S was mentioning a recent incident. And I I posted about it on
incident. And I I posted about it on Twitter from a couple weeks ago where
Twitter from a couple weeks ago where two US I think a helicopter and a plane
two US I think a helicopter and a plane both crashed within like 30 minutes of
both crashed within like 30 minutes of one another in the South China Sea and
one another in the South China Sea and Trump the excuse that was given was bad
Trump the excuse that was given was bad fuel like [laughter]
fuel like [laughter] what what does that mean? How many how
what what does that mean? How many how many planes got the bad fuel? How did we
many planes got the bad fuel? How did we figure out that it was bad fuel so
figure out that it was bad fuel so quickly?
quickly? >> Well, if I could say quickly, it's kind
>> Well, if I could say quickly, it's kind of like when the
of like when the >> It was a show of strength, brother. It
>> It was a show of strength, brother. It was a show of strength right before a
was a show of strength right before a trade deal. It was a coupra
trade deal. It was a coupra by one of the greatest diplomats of all
by one of the greatest diplomats of all time.
time. >> And if she of China
>> And if she of China >> Yes. Yes. And if I can mention as well,
>> Yes. Yes. And if I can mention as well, I'm not saying that I know this for a
I'm not saying that I know this for a fact, but I speculate that when you
fact, but I speculate that when you look, for example, I think it was
look, for example, I think it was earlier this year or last year when the
earlier this year or last year when the former uh supreme leader of Iran when
former uh supreme leader of Iran when his helicopter mysteriously crashed.
his helicopter mysteriously crashed. >> Oh yeah. The timing of that seemed to me
>> Oh yeah. The timing of that seemed to me like someone was sending them a message,
like someone was sending them a message, but again, I don't have the facts. So,
but again, I don't have the facts. So, just my speculation.
just my speculation. >> Yeah. The hard part with this is like,
>> Yeah. The hard part with this is like, and I'm I'm curious your guys' opinion,
and I'm I'm curious your guys' opinion, especially on this is like why I'm
especially on this is like why I'm careful about sharing some of this stuff
careful about sharing some of this stuff is like you when you know what's
is like you when you know what's possible, it's pretty easy to be like,
possible, it's pretty easy to be like, hm, that helicopter going down when
hm, that helicopter going down when there was two other helicopters and
there was two other helicopters and there was like no bad weather just
there was like no bad weather just randomly going down, that's pretty
randomly going down, that's pretty crazy. Or I mean this incident too, I
crazy. Or I mean this incident too, I gotta agree with S like
gotta agree with S like >> a bad excuse
>> a bad excuse >> and and for just planes like military
>> and and for just planes like military planes just go down like
planes just go down like >> no but but bad fuel speaks to more
>> no but but bad fuel speaks to more electric issues,
electric issues, >> right?
>> right? >> Which is what they use in their engines,
>> Which is what they use in their engines, >> right? Right. I mean it's hard and I
>> right? Right. I mean it's hard and I think this is where um
think this is where um >> and affect an an electric engine a
>> and affect an an electric engine a direct
direct device
device >> and this is where this is where we have
>> and this is where this is where we have to be careful right because
to be careful right because >> I put it in a satellite in a polar orbit
>> I put it in a satellite in a polar orbit and I have a constellation of these six
and I have a constellation of these six of them to be more exact but anyway all
of them to be more exact but anyway all right
right >> and this is where we have to be careful
>> and this is where we have to be careful though because I mean we talk about
though because I mean we talk about physics and science that is in my
physics and science that is in my opinion highly credible and
opinion highly credible and >> maybe sorry maybe the satellites are in
>> maybe sorry maybe the satellites are in a rosette geome ometry. Who knows?
a rosette geome ometry. Who knows? >> Oh. Oh my god. Yeah.
>> Oh. Oh my god. Yeah. >> This is where Tom Bearden got in
>> This is where Tom Bearden got in trouble, right? Because he starts
trouble, right? Because he starts talking about making earthquakes.
talking about making earthquakes. >> [laughter]
>> [laughter] >> Well, we know there was a newspaper
>> Well, we know there was a newspaper article uh back in the 1930s that I can
article uh back in the 1930s that I can pull up after the show if you want to
pull up after the show if you want to show to your audience, Ash, if you want
show to your audience, Ash, if you want in which there was speculation in New
in which there was speculation in New York City that Tesla would Nicola Tesla
York City that Tesla would Nicola Tesla at the time was making the ground shake
at the time was making the ground shake in all over the all
in all over the all >> with a mechanical oscillator, brother,
>> with a mechanical oscillator, brother, right?
right? >> Which shows you which shows you we do
>> Which shows you which shows you we do not truly understand our physics. He did
not truly understand our physics. He did it with a simple pressured driven
it with a simple pressured driven mechanical oscillator.
mechanical oscillator. >> You know the article I'm talking about.
>> You know the article I'm talking about. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> And and he had to break the damn thing.
>> And and he had to break the damn thing. He had to take a hammer to it because
He had to take a hammer to it because the building was about to go down
