John Blitch — “Delta Force Operator Dr. John Blitch” (JP Touchette, May 25 2025)

Speaker: Dr. John Blitch (Ret. Lt. Col.), interview on the JP Touchette channel. ~1h59m.
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5c63rVzhuM (2025-05-25)
Captured: 2026-05-29 via yt-dlp audio → Whisper.
Primary (supplementary) for blitch-darpa-abduction-claimant. His thesis that the government’s UFO secrecy is driven by the ABDUCTION phenomenon (“at the core of the fear that our government is rightfully trying to prevent”), restated with his Delta/DARPA/Pershing-II framing.
NOTE: Whisper auto-transcript; verify quotes against audio. (Searched for a ‘general admitted military abduction involvement’ exchange — not present in this transcript.)

Correct me if I’m wrong, but we’re kind of talking about the psychology of a cover-up, right? Is that what we’re kind of getting into now? The abduction phenomenon is at the core of the fear that our government is rightfully trying to prevent. None of the scientific literature that claims to refute this, none of it addresses the nuts and bolts, abundance of physical anomalous effects that go along with these experiences. You can try to wrap yourself up in this warm cocoon that says there’s no such thing. The vast majority should not have to worry about it. But we want a police force. Just because it’s not repeatable in your little lifetime or your little 20 or 30 or 40 or 50 year career, that doesn’t mean it’s not science. Look at this, the trauma myth. You’re telling people that have been traumatized that their story is a myth. So part of leadership is the willingness to accept risk on behalf of your troops and be vulnerable. You stand up in front of everybody and say, I screwed up. The ultimate question is society, is our global society ready for this? And one of the things I wanted to ask you is how have you overcome those traumatic experiences? How do you get to a point where you can behave the way that you are? Because I know there’s a lot of viewers here that are going through some pretty horrifying things and I’m sure they could learn from that. All right, I’m getting a little choked up here. All right, folks, this week, we’re back with a very interesting podcast. I’ll just put that as an understatement. We have Dr. John Blitch on the show. Welcome, sir. Thank you so much for coming on. Well, thank you, JP. I think all your podcasts are very interesting. Oh, wow. Thank you. Well, I just think that we’re at this incredible vertex point in our modern disclosure movement. It’s like we’ve gone from 2017, where we had this article come out. We have people within the government saying that not only are UFOs real, but we’ve been studying it. And then 2023, equally as credible witness comes out and says, yeah, not only that, but we have their technology and in a skiff, I can tell you where those things are. And then 2025, we have Jake Barber, part of the crash retrieval team, one of them at least, and interactions with the craft. And you, sir, with your credible standpoint, saying not only do I back him and all the rest, but I’ve had abduction experiences. And I certainly agree with you in admiring Jake Barber’s saying that this is more on the ontological relief side. But I still think that some people probably find that too far, mainly because the media still will show alien abductions through parody or through, you know, purposefully someone who’s mentally unstable to discredit the whole thing. And so for the benefit of the audience, I was wondering if you could go over your history, your CV, if you will. Well, well, first of all, I want to augment what you said, you know, before Lou, there was David Fravor, Ryan Graves, of course, Alex Dietrich, right. So that was all in 2004. And then back during the previous century with, you know, all the way back to Major Donald Kehoe, another phenomenal aviator, Gordon Cooper, right. A lot of these aviators, Gordon Cooper testified not just to Congress, but to the U.N. on Foo Fighters and all the rest of this, not to mention Edgar Mitchell, you know, Apollo astronauts. So so there are so many people who have been chipping away and chipping away and continuing that stair-step climb towards disclosure. And I want to thank you for what you’re doing, you know, to spread this word out. And I also want to commiserate with you, as we were discussing, you know, before you started recording, you know, some of these very challenging diseases that haven’t been diagnosed yet. And every time you go to a medical professional, you know, there’s this there’s this air of psychosomatic conditions, right? It’s all in your head, whatever it is. And nothing could be more infuriating to somebody who is having a difficult experience than for someone to tell them it’s just in your head. You know, one of the one of the most powerful things, one of the most, you know, I used to I used to think that the three letter term, I love you, was the most powerful term in the human language. And I still think it probably is. But second to that, or maybe before that, is I believe you because I can believe you without loving you. Right. And so so in these situations where you have a horrible disease that is is mysterious, we can’t we we haven’t been able to diagnose it or you have this experience that that doesn’t fall into our our categories, our nice little, you know, cups of bins to put things in. This is really, really important in dealing with this on a compassionate basis. And so that is probably my biggest agenda of all. And, you know, my little piece of this is to blow the whistle on what I’ll call corrosive leadership that does not promote compassion, even for your own troops. Right. It’s bad enough if any government’s military is treating its own civilians in a discompassionate manner. But to treat your own service members, soldiers, airmen, Marines, seamen, whatever, you that is corrosive leadership. It just doesn’t make sense to me. So so this book is an effort to try to connect all the dots in a way that does make sense. And what I can’t what I had a difficult time resolving is these these wonderfully heroic, selfless people who have come forward and then they get trashed. And and it just it is a corrosive element to the cohesion that that military organizations, since the dawn of human existence, thrive on. You know, five or six or 10 or 20 cavemen and cavewomen. Right. Look, I’m a direct descendant of Neanderthals. Right. Look at that frontal slope right there. Right. And so we had to get together to deal with threats, the saber tooth tiger, etc. And so it’s the cohesion of that group taking on this huge, very challenging threat that really is is probably at at the very foundation of human, not just survival, but arguably our ascent to be an upper tier on this planet, at least as far as we know. But this topic brings out an ontological problem with we think we are top. Maybe not. Who knows if they’re like Tim Gallagher talks about the potential of some of these these beings, maybe two thirds of our planet, they’re underwater. You know, the movie The Abyss, many other sci fi books and much of the literature. Matter of fact, I think I got a book up here. This is my mini library here on my book. What’s the UFOs in water? There’s a there’s a great book up here somewhere that that that Tim that Tim referred me to that really presents a very compelling case for the the the possibility, if not the probability of a subsurface species of some sort far more advanced than us. It makes all the sense in the world to me. But anyway, to wrap this, bring this back around in a nutshell, I’m a I’m a former army nuke turned Green Beret, turned dabbler in hostage rescue, turned robot geek, turned, you know, firefighter, wannabe, rescue wannabe with robots, turned cognitive psychologist with, you know, dabbling in neuroscience. So that’s that’s probably my my nutshell best attempt. Well, yeah. And that just, I mean, cuts through all of this talk that, oh, all of these people are deluding themselves or they’re crazy. And when you have someone who’s not only been put in like the PRP program, but also has been put in, you know, in charge of all these other projects and went and got all these degrees and understands the brain and can tell the difference between, you know, a hallucination and something different. Right. And and also to touch on what you said before, I never would want to discredit the century of serious research that has gone into this subject. I just meant the the the modern what we I guess post modern, current modern sort of disclosure movement. Current century anyway, right? Yeah. Yeah. Because I feel like a lot of what we would call disclosure is just the public catching up to other people, catching up to that previous century of research. Yeah. So let’s I know you’ve done this in a lot of different interviews, but would you mind, however much or as little as you like, describe your experiences with the phenomenon? Sure, I’ll try to summarize as best I can. The you know, I did mention in several interviews, probably the main one being with Ross Coulthard trying to support Jake Barber, that I have had a number of anomalous experiences and and in a self-awareness situation, anomalous behavior on my own part. You know, back growing up as a kid, you know, I was breaking hockey sticks and baseball bats against the trees out in back of my yard. And it just wasn’t, you know, everybody gets angry. Right. But my mom and dad were getting sick and tired of, you know. Get me a new bat or a new hockey stick or, you know, I was I had this rage that I thought everybody had. But looking back on it, you know, after half a century of. Higher education, like Mark Twain said, don’t don’t let your schooling interfere with your education. Right. Yeah. Yeah. So so looking back on that now with some training in the cognitive sciences and like I said, dabbling in neuroscience, I still I’m less inclined to dismiss all of that. And the two the two primary experiences that happened way later, you know, when I was in graduate school, both times grad school, the first time at the Colorado School of Mind study in A.I. and robotics in math and computer science, and then graduate school, the actually the third time after a dabbling in geophysics and studying quantum psychology during both of those periods of graduate school, I had these very anomalous experiences that I can’t dismiss. One was the missing time period during my mountain bike ride, which is proud daylight. And and so the sleep paralysis thing doesn’t explain why I turned around on that mountain bike and and felt drawn like a moth to the flame, like an obsession to jump that fence, which is which is. Beyond anomalous, I mean, that’s that is disrespectful to a Native American burial ground. And why would I do that? Having a little bit of Native American blood myself. But I did. And it and and then the other very anomalous aspect of that is that soon as soon as I got on that other side, it wasn’t immediate. It was, I would say, you know, I’ll take it back on it, maybe 50 yards down that dirt road. I decided to to walk my bike instead of riding it again, because somewhere back here I I was I was suppressing that urge to to get in there as quick as I could. And somehow I managed to maintain enough control of my own faculties to suppress the urge to get on and ride as quick as I could. So I was plodding along on my bike shoes and I got around 50, 50 yards in. And that’s when that that drop formed on my nose. And I got this nosebleed, which, again, is is very anomalous. I hadn’t had a nosebleed in I don’t know how long. I have had my nose broken a bunch of times. So it’s not it’s not wildly anomalous, but it is on a temporal sense because I hadn’t I hadn’t bled out of my nose in a couple of years. So so that was a weird sort of synchronicity with this. And then the other aspect of it is that, you know, when I when I laid down and sort of pinched my nose to try to stem the flow, the second is the severity of the nosebleed, which was it went from dripping just to, you know, sort of a gusher. And that’s when I decided to, you know, lay down in the grass and pinch my nose. And it was I don’t remember anything other than going like this. And then, boom, I was out immediately. Yeah. So so that was the anomalous thing. And then waking up shivering, you know, frigid and it’s full darkness. So that tells me it had been dark for a while because this was late summer. Right. Early fall, autumn time frame in Denver, Colorado, a suburb suburbs of Denver in 1995. And it just didn’t. So none of that lined up. None of that made sense. And then crawling up that steep bank instead of continuing down the road again, it’s irrational, anomalous behavior that that clued me into that. And then fast forward, you know, I have this sort of terrifying event happened up there around the fuel truck guy with the red shirt and weirdly evading it, jumping back on the bike and stopping at that ranch house to try to call my wife and realizing there’s nobody awake and then realizing, oh, crap, it’s way later than I thought. It’s not an hour after sunset, it must be several hours after sunset. And, you know, I talk about this this notion that is very common throughout the experience or world of irrational ambivalence. Why didn’t why can’t I remember looking at my watch? And I don’t even remember if I have a watch. I don’t even know. To this day, I don’t remember if I had a watch or not, which is which is just very weird. And then so then, you know, go to that 7-Eleven, horribly dehydrated, exhausted from a a really low level bike ride in terms of challenge that that mountain bike ride was probably about a three out of 10. And I’ve had some, you know, nine point five, nine point nines where where my heart I’m throwing up. Out of exertion, you know, so, you know, it’s not uncommon in the special ops community to push yourself and just keep bumping up against that limit. David Goggins talks about this a lot. Maybe see the David Goggins, you know. Extreme marathoner and all of us, you know, that made it through assessment selection are of that ilk. You know, we’ve all pushed ourselves. Ranger School pushes you to push yourself. Right. So anyway, it just didn’t make sense. And that level of dehydration didn’t make sense that, you know, I would I would plop that down. So that was that was extremely anomalous. And then let me see, must have been what, 20 years later, grad school, the second time weird storm over the the half acre between my me and my neighbor’s house. And this this miniature hurricane with with eerie suppression of sound. I mean, it was totally silent. It was almost I almost felt like, you know, just had this recollection. It almost felt like he and I were talking in an anechoic chamber. Because I could hear him so clearly, my neighbor and I, and he’s pointing up and he’s like, you see that? It was almost like he was right on the other side of my deck with me, which was weird. And then again, irrational ambivalence. We both see this weird cloud. Dark hole in the center that seems to be centered between our two houses. We look to the north blue sky, we look to the south blue sky and yet right centered over us, this dark cloud. And instead of, you know, meeting in the middle to have a beer or one of us goes to the other guy’s house and sits down and discusses the issues of the day. And what was going on? Right. We just shrug and go inside. And then again, it’s early, I would say early evening, late afternoon. So it’s like four or five o’clock, same general time frame. And boom, the next thing you know, I’m getting I’m getting ready to go to sleep and closing with this sort of OCD behavior, closing the drapes, making sure there’s not even the slightest little sliver of opening. And so, again, it’s just all it’s that anomalous behavior. But the key factors are the independent corroboration in the first case with my wife, my daughter’s police officer. You know, it’s that independent corroboration that I can’t dismiss scientifically. And then in the second case, the bruises on the inside of my bicep, that’s sleep paralysis, doesn’t give me bruises. Sorry. It’s just, you know, and the anomalous behavior in the morning where as soon as I got up, I went down, grabbed that camera and took the videotape. That just doesn’t. That’s totally anomalous behavior for me. I hadn’t used that camera in five years. I hadn’t taken a picture of myself, maybe a still shot camera or something. I don’t know here and there, but certainly not in a mirror. So anyway, that’s a summary kind of those of those anomalous experiences. There are many, many more that I experienced pretty much on my own. I guess if I really pushed, I can probably find maybe some hint of independent corroboration somewhere in there. Well, there’s another one, which is walking through that bookstore with my daughter and freezing when I saw that that picture of Whitley Streepers book communion up there. Again, that’s a very common when you look at the UFO literature of a small subset of my library has probably got, I don’t know, maybe as much as a thousand books in there between me and my dad. But that that’s that’s a very common feature in in the abduction literature post 1987, I think, is when that when when Whitley’s book came out somewhere in the mid 80s. So that’s my that’s my. Yeah, thank you. And again, if anyone wants to, like, listen to you talk more about your experiences, there is a wealth of other interviews out there, and I think they’re fascinating. But there’s some things I really want to, like, pick out in terms of not only behavior, but recall of the memory, too. There’s so much I’d love to unpack about this. Like, so I appreciate you sending me Susan Clancy’s book. Even though I think we both disagree with it. Susan Clancy, for the audiences, the lady who wrote the book, abducted how people come to believe they were kidnapped by aliens. And sounds if that doesn’t sound biased, I don’t really know what is. But I appreciate her leg up from just calling everybody crazy. But her thing is like you have all these very mentally stable people. But she stops there and says, OK, that’s sleep paralysis. We we can simulate these experiences ourselves in an environment. Therefore, this isn’t what they think it is. And on top of that, her claims are like most abductee experiencers have these experiences throughout their lives, and then they go to a hypnotherapist and have that recall happen. But just to cut through that for you, I remember an interview that I and I guess my question is, if you recall this without hypnosis or not, but you have memories as a kid of that communion type face looking through the window at you. And these experiences are what caused you to go out and the angry young man chapter in your book and feel violated and want to break things. Is that correct? Oh, there’s so much to unpack there. So first and foremost, I want to point that in my literature here, there are five books that are directly refuting the abduction experience and the notion of repressed memory. So it’s very important as a scientist to read your challengers, your critiques. You got to welcome that. Here is the problem with all of that literature, at least everything that I have read on the opposite side. And you sent me some other articles from some other folks. And I dug two levels deeper. In other words, not only did I read, was it Penderson? What was it? What was the guy’s article? Michael Persinger. Yes. Not only him, but I read his co-authors all the way back to the mid 80s, early 80s. And and so so a lot of this research. Matter of fact, I want to debate on this in one of my favorite classes of graduate school ever. And it was kind of a Socratic method. But the problem with all of that is or the vast majority of that is that the brain that walks into a laboratory is not the same brain that the other 23 hours of the day is driving a car back and forth to work, working, playing sports, riding a bike, playing a kid’s playground, playing with your brother and sister out in the backyard. So to claim that you can simulate these experiences in the laboratory. I’m sorry. That is total BS. And I’m not talking behavioral science. I agree. That is bull shit flat out. OK, now. Yeah. In it. And on the other side of, you know, in the aftermath of John Mack’s passing, what is so critical about John Mack? Number one, very compassionate man. And I claim that some of these people appear are not very compassionate with regards to the people they’re talking about. For example, look at this, the trauma myth. The trauma myth, you’re telling people that have been traumatized that their story is a myth. Just the title of that is is not expressive of a compassionate approach. So John Mack, as an MD psychiatrist, who is who has to take the Hippocratic Oath. And one of the first aspects of the Hippocratic Oath is do no harm. Do no harm. Just that title. Does harm because it’s it’s dismissive of the problem. But. I had to read it. I had to get in there and and and to be able to, you know, so so again, the problem with all of that is in the laboratory, you are legally and arguably morally prevented. From using sufficient trauma. To induce PTSD in the laboratory, no IRB, Institution Review Board that has to clear your experimental protocols, no IRB is going to allow you to traumatize people in the laboratory. So that takes these experiments off the frickin chart right off the bat. So all of that out the window, that’s one first criteria to throw out the window. The second criteria. Is the the duration, right? Typically, when when I was in graduate school the entire time, the vast majority of us did our research on volunteers who need to volunteer to be part of a study in order to get their class credit. And the way they would do that very cleverly is, hey, look, you can either volunteer to go participate in some of these cognitive psychology experiments that, you know, other graduate students or your advisors are running, your professors are running, or. You can write a two thousand word paper. What would you rather do? And the vast majority, I don’t want to say all, but the vast majority of people I wonder, I’ll be a guinea pig. Yeah, go ahead. In Susan Clancy’s case, there was also some incentive. We’ll pay you to come in and try to make up stories and imagine that you’re an abductee. The third and probably the most compelling of all, refutation of that skeptical body of literature. And it’s valuable. And don’t get me wrong, just because it’s skeptical doesn’t mean you should throw it out. The reason you should throw it out is that Don Donderry, a retired professor, I think he may even be emeritus from McGill University, close to you, or closer to you than to me anyway, did a number of very compelling experiments that directly refute this. And the way he did it was he had a control group that had nothing to do with E.T. abductions or any of that. Then he had another group that were asked to imagine that they had been abductees, you know, based on whatever they had seen in sci-fi or read or whatever it is, and to behave like an abductee. And then you had the third group of, quote, real abductees with independent corroboration. And what I’m talking about in that third group are people who were missing for hours, who had other people looking for them. Law enforcement, search and rescue teams, their own family members. And they had implants or scoop marks or scars, inexplicable scars or burns or any number of these, quote, nuts and bolts, physical evidence that that went along with that, that missing time, period. And so what Don Donderry does, and I’m killing myself because I think I have those I have all four copies of his books, two copies of the both books back in Colorado driving me nuts. Otherwise, I’d show up. But one is UFOs, aliens and abductions. But but he has two books. And I recommend to the reader to look him up. Don Crosby, Don Donderry, Ph.D., McGill University. And that, you know, D.R.I. D.R.I. Yes, sir. And that directly refused that. And the statistical clumping of that is very compelling. There is no overlap between groups. And that’s what I think a 95 percent confidence interval. So so that’s what I would offer to folks over and above. And here’s the other thing. John Mack. Was trained and paid to not only detect the presence of mental illness. Cognitive pathology, but to characterize it, not just detect it is there, but know exactly what kind it is. Is it schizophrenia? Is it bipolar? Is it this? Is it that? And as a result, he would obviously refer those patients to a specialist in schizophrenia, a specialist in bipolar disorder, whatever it happens to be. And so he had this very tight, very fine mesh filter over anybody that eventually made it into his cohort of, I think, around 300 experiencers. None of none of these other folks up here. Have any of that skill. Training or capacity to do that. So so those other, quote, studies, I don’t care if it’s from Harvard, the methodology of that experimental paradigm is way below standard. And so so that’s what so those are the four reasons that I pretty much I acknowledge it and I respectfully disagree with it and do not consider it to be compelling evidence at all that the abduction experience is anything other than what the folks claim it is, which is beings that are non-human are taken folks. Yeah. And this is what so for the longest time. OK, so there’s equally just as much to pack in there. I love this conversation, by the way. I know. I’m sorry. It’s so fascinating. So like when you touched on the Michael Persinger stuff, right, just again for the audience, his stance is we can take you in a lab, which, you know, I think I agree with you, too, in which I commend you, by the way, in using your EG out while people are out living and doing stuff instead of in the lab. But just because they can simulate. OK, so I’ll ask you and the audience, if I can sit you down in a lab and put an electro an electric current through your brain and make you feel love. Does that mean that when I’m out in my in my life and my wife smiles at me and I feel love, does that that doesn’t those don’t those don’t those are two different things. And just because you can sit someone in the lab and mess with their brain and now you’re making their two different lobes overlap. So their feeling of their sense of self is overlapping. And so they feel a presence in the room. That’s not simulating beings that are three feet tall with huge black eyes coming and taking you and moving, like talking to you telepathically. And again, like one of the biggest things for me is is the fact when you talk about trauma as well as in John Mack’s book, Abduction, you have all these cases where I think it was Sheila, for example, she was talking he was talking about how she had gone through all of these this process with different psychologists and psychiatrists to try and figure out if something was wrong with her, if she had some sort of sexual abuse in her past, if this if she was crazy, if she had some sort of mental disorder and she had become increasingly more desperate and unwell because they were not finding what was what was really going on. And as a person, not only just my personal experience, but two people in my life, my wife and my sister, who have been through horrifying things, but nobody can figure out what it is and they misdiagnose it. It is so detrimental. And then when they finally figure out what the real issue is, it’s such a 180 degree turn because now they’re dealing with their with whatever the issue is. And that really struck me hard. It’s like it’s no, it’s not just people who are taking their experiences through media, which I think it’s the reverse because you have abductees who who have experiences that do not represent any movie I’ve ever seen. It’s way out there. And but that and I totally just lost my train of thought. Not only do you have people who who have experiences that aren’t just through the media, but yeah, go ahead. Go ahead. Yeah. So so last unpacking just what you said. So I’m I’m glad you lost your train of thought because I wanted to interject to a couple of good. Thank you. So so. You asked me about the simulation, right? Again, I already pointed out. Yeah. That you are not legally or professionally or morally allowed. To induce trauma in a laboratory. So this notion that you can simulate this horrific experience, that’s off the table. If you are doing that, you ought to be in jail because you’re essentially raping somebody while studying rape. Secondly, by the way, I wanted to point out that in John Max cohort, he never used real names, as I understand it. And so I don’t think Sheila was Sheila. And I’ve had a long discussion about this with Karen Austin, who has taken over John Max, the Johnny Mack Institute. And she is a wonderful, amazingly brilliant and very compassionate human being. And she has as double, triple down on that, that none of John Max cohort, their identity will ever be known by anybody. So Rice University is adding layers on top of that. So it’s a very important aspect of this as well. So but in any case, you know, back to the science of it. Another aspect of this is that just because we can put an electrode that that directs some degree of energy. And again, you really have to go through an institutional review board to approve this. And you have to prove that you’re not doing any harm. And that’s difficult to do sometimes. So, you know, a lot of times with new technology, we use animals to to test this out before we tested on humans. It backed that out a little bit with this this shift in ontological worldview. Are they using us to test their stuff? I don’t know. It brings up another point. But but but here’s here’s the point. A lot of this other literature is dated way before a lot of our modern instrumentation that has been developed. And so modern technology gives us so much more insight than even John Mack had. You know, when he passed in 2004, we were just at the advent of of getting high fidelity fMRI and EMG and TCDS, transcranial direct stimulation, a lot of these other mechanisms using magnetism, electromagnetic fields and a variety of other techniques to stimulate different parts of your brain. And some of that is enormously valuable and almost near miraculous in terms of, you know, not only intervening in development of epilepsy, epilepsy, but reversing it in some cases. It’s it’s phenomenal. However, to use that. To try to. induce trauma. I have big issues with that, ethically. Secondly, to use that to try to even induce the notion that somebody else is in the room with you, which is what the vast majority of some of the folks that you mentioned did all the way back into the 80s. And I think it’s a reflection of this, I won’t call it unethical, but it is not scientifically valid to come in with bias. And the bias that they came in with was, it can’t happen because you can’t travel faster than light. And so it’s got to be something else. And so when you look back at a history, a longitudinal study of someone’s research, you see this bias build up over time. That, well, we tried to pin it on this, wasn’t that? We tried to pin it on epilepsy. There’s no epilepsy. Oh, well, we tried to pin it on this anomalous tumor growth. Well, no, it wasn’t that. And they keep going and keep back and forth. Whereas John Mack took all of that off the table right off the bat. And so you see this trend to try to constantly chip away at it. And I have no trouble with trying to replicate time and time again, because persistence is an aspect of scientific exploration. It’s very important. But when you look and you look into that sequence of papers, like I’ve done over the last couple of weeks, since you emailed those to me, a pattern becomes very clear that it is there. There’s, what did John Brandenburg use? I’m going to use his term. He called it, there’s pathological science, and then there’s pathological skepticism. And he was talking about it in terms of his discovery of this extremely anomalous isotope ratio of xenon, I think 239 versus 232, or 229 versus 232. I forget that isotope. But it was two times, two and a half times anywhere else in the solar system we’ve ever seen on Mars. And the only two places that he as a plasma physicist had ever found that was in a nuclear detonation, an H-bomb detonation, or a supernova. And if a supernova occurs in our solar system, we wouldn’t be here. So it had to be a nuclear detonation. So he had all this backlash, people attacking him and so forth. And he just has to, you know, stand firm on the foundation of parsimony that that is the only explanation that anybody has offered. And he systematically, with Occam’s razor, chops through a lot of these alternatives. So you know, to bring that full circle, the only thing that connects all the dots for me, and John Mack, and Don Donderry is, and a host of others, Roger Lear, who has extracted what, 19 anomalous implants in abductees, or people who claim they’re abductees’ bodies. And some of them actually try to evade the scalpel. Lou Elizondo, an eminent, right there, in his book, he shows a picture of it. And he said it scared the bejesus out of the military surgeon who was trying to remove that implant from a military service member. And the thing was moving to try to avoid his scalpel. And Roger, in the back of his book, I think it’s up here somewhere, Aliens in the Scalpel, he not only shows pictures of many of his procedures, but he does a very similar analysis, or he sent these samples out for analysis, with very anomalous isotopic ratios, and very anomalous structures. And across virtually, again, I hate to say all, but the vast majority of his samples, no immune reaction. And he saw that as he was, you know, extracting it, that around the shrapnel that he would operate on from military folks, or people in accidents where there was an explosion, pieces of metal throughout their flesh or whatever, and their feet, he was a podiatrist, you would always see a anomalous tissue buildup around that invasive material inside the human body. And then with these, this small subset of all the people he ever operated on, none of them. And it is mind-boggling as to how that occurred. And, you know, with regards to reverse engineering, wouldn’t that be wonderful if we could do that? And, you know, we were talking about autoimmune diseases and challenges, you know, before we came on. How wonderful would that be if we could reverse engineer that? And yet, we just ignore, all these people ignore that physical evidence, the nuts and bolts to go along with the anomalous scars that literally heal the day after like that, like within hours. So this is the problem I have with these claims of simulations. They don’t, even if you could, and none of them did, in my opinion, everything that I’ve read, which, you know, just because I haven’t read it doesn’t mean it’s not out there. So I’m open to that. If somebody can provide me a peer reviewed study or whatever. But even if you could replicate that traumatic experience and, you know, produce those effects, and by the way, Roger was stumped. Dr. Lear was stumped on many occasions that there was no scar. How the heck did that thing get in there in the first place? So no scarring material, no autoimmune warding off that the body typically does to protect itself, encapsulate it and turn it into a cyst or whatever. And then the weird isotopic ratios and the fact, and he has the measurements, that they were emitting, they were transmitting electromagnetic energy from this device. And that is across many of them, I can’t say all, but many of them, an EMF meter. And while it’s in the body, it is transmitting at very interesting frequencies. And then after it’s removed, very soon thereafter, that transmission stops. So it almost seems like the body is used as a power source to aid that transmission. So none of the scientific literature that claims to refute this, look how thin that book is. There ain’t a lot of data in that doggone thing. None of it addresses the nuts and bolts abundance of physical anomalous effects that go along with these experiences, not to mention the independent corroboration of search parties and all the rest of it. Look at Travis Walton, five days. Yeah, wild. This is one of the main reasons why I wanted to have you on the show, because I’ve been reading these books from the 90s, where you had the explosion of people like John Mack and Bud Hopkins and stuff like that. And I really found it so fascinating, their point of like, okay, we find their experiences to be authentic. And I think this is one of my favorite quotes from Mack is, so what? Not so what, but so what? What do we do now? Where do we go? And that was the question leading into this, because they were at that point where it’s like physical, non-physical, we’re not sure. It seems to screw with so much of our worldview and stuff like that. But what I find so interesting about so much of what you’re talking about is that once people actually start looking, there are nuts and bolts aspects of it. And that’s exactly what you were just saying. And I feel the same with my community I’m a part of with TSW, is that nobody just took the time to look. And we have all these questions about what’s the core of the secrecy? And you can point to, oh, well, financial reasons or for reasons of war. But I think one of the biggest, if not the biggest, other than what your book is about, biggest object in between us and understanding more is just people’s worldview. Yeah, so now we’re talking, I guess, correct me if I’m wrong, but we’re kind of talking about the psychology of a cover-up, right? Is that what we’re kind of getting into now? Yeah. So this is what I offer to you at the intersection of a career in special forces, special operations, and a career in cognitive science. And that is that every special operator who made it through all their training and eventually were deployed has to come up with a cover story. Because as part of our training to resist interrogation in POW camps and so forth, everybody develops a cover story. And so we practice that, how to do that. And to sum up the vast majority of that training without giving up sources and methods that would protect us. And so I really don’t want to put any of my brothers and sisters in harm’s way. There’s this concept of the onion. And what you want to do is you have many layers, layers of layers and layers. And so every time you’re brought in and tortured and made uncomfortable and interrogated, you give little bits. We found out after the Korean War that was sort of summed up in the literature and the entertainment industry, in terms of the Manchurian candidate, that just sucking it up and standing by, name, rank, and serial number, that’s all I’m giving you, that is not the way to survive in a POW camp. A lot of very heroic folks lost their lives and went down the tubes on that process. So we adapted, especially after and during the Vietnam War and thereafter, we adapted our process, that rather than having these folks that are running these POW camps and torturing you, rather than sacrificing a limb like Bob Dole, like John McCain, some of these other folks, to this horrific torture, give them a little bit and trickle it, trickle a little bit at a time. And so the way I see this cover up unfolding since at least 1947, probably before then, is a little bit of a trickle, the outer layer, the next layer, the next layer, the next layer, the next layer. And what my claim is in my book is that the very core of that is the abduction experience. Because the thought across the voting populace, if you’re a politician, across all the people that you want to vote for you, all the parents who wake up to this notion that their children can get taken in the middle of a mountain bike ride, off the playground in the middle of the afternoon, out of their backyard in the middle of the afternoon, and subjected to some of these terrifying procedures. I talk about, you know, by potentially galactic, you know, veterinarians, I talk about, you know, my dog being, me abducting my dog to go to the vet, and wanted to remove his memory. I’ve talked about that in many other interviews, so we can go into that in more detail if you’d like. But the notion that this can happen, and we are powerless to do anything about it, that does not sit well with the voting populace. And that is the level at which you might have a societal uproar. But we’ve had 80 flipping years to deal with that. And so my argument is, look, we’ve grown up, we’re not toddlers anymore as a society, you know, based on the internet that we’re talking over right now, we’re more like rebellious teenagers now. Okay, Dad, you can tell me not to do whatever it is, but I’m 18, and I’m gonna go do it anyway. And if you’re gonna get me out of the house, fine, I’ll go out and do it myself. And so I feel like that’s where our society is right now, in that in the 40s and 50s, post World War II, we were toddlers. And we trusted everything the government said, and we did what the government said. And then as we got further and further, wait a minute, now we start to hear these leaks, just like out of the Manhattan Project. Remember, the Manhattan Project was only kept secret, what, five years-ish? We’re talking about 80 years. That was stupid. I’m gonna rest this shoulder here. So anyway, the notion is that the abduction phenomenon is at the core of the fear that our government is rightfully trying to prevent. And that is where you connect the dot for me, the many dots of the many wonderfully heroic and selfless military people and winning members of the military industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us about, that they were trying to protect us by reverse engineering whatever crash vehicles they could find so that they could craft together some sort of weapon to be able to protect us from these abductors. And I’m absolutely convinced that the vast majority of them are not abductors. But it only takes a few. Look at serial rapists. Look at serial killers. You can try to wrap yourself up in this warm cocoon that says, there’s no such thing. But we know, look at law enforcement statistics. Are they arresting crash test dummies that fell from a balloon in the middle of the New Mexico desert? Is that what they were arresting? Is that what our law enforcement, our global law enforcement, Interpol have been arresting? No. There are rapists and murderers, and there are spiritually or morally compromised scientists, just like we saw were revealed during the Nuremberg trials that would do horrific, terrifying experiments on fellow human beings, just because they had some other religious belief. And of course, I’m talking about the Holocaust and the Nazi treatment of Jews and so forth. So that’s a lot of where the Institutional Review Board guidance on experimental protocols came from. And those come back around after the Stanford Prison Experiment, after Stanley Milgram’s shocking, The Man Who Shocked the World. I think that’s one of his books back here as well. So what makes sense to me is that all of the visitors coming here are just, who knows? It’s a wide variety of a cross section of different beings. Richard Dolan in his book, Alien Agendas, has about 30 diagrams of the wide variety of those different beings. And this is where I’m going to offer a direct refutation of Stephen Greer’s claim that they’re all humans. Really? Then how many different costumes can this abduction squad by the cabal come up with? And a costume doesn’t explain how this size head can fit on a neck this big, this thin, right? And how does a human dressed up like a six or eight legged little bug with a human looking head on it, like Tom Reed reports in his abduction experience in Western Massachusetts. So that just doesn’t address the data. What Greer’s claim that all abductions are human abductions, that does not connect the data. It does not connect the scientific dots. It just doesn’t. And so this, and now the question is, the ultimate question is, is society, is our global society ready for this? My claim is absolutely. And this is where I’ve got to agree vigorously with Jake’s. And I love the term that I’m going to claim he coined. It’s not ontological shock. It is ontological relief. It is a positive shift in our worldview. And it’s all okay. You know, just like, you’re probably not going to get raped after this interview. I’m probably not going to get raped, right? When I go out to dinner tonight, and out of the how many, how many dinners when you look at 365 times 65, whatever, how many dinners that I was walking back and forth to, how many times did I get raped on that? You know, the average human, zero. And so just because there’s this percentage, and again, I claim a very, very small percentage, but it’s not zero of terrifying experiences with this galactic society, the vast majority should not, of us, should not have to worry about it. But we want a police force. We want somebody to respond when we call 911. And what has happened since 1947, is when society called 911, the United States Air Force said, okay, and they’re, you know, can you imagine calling 911 and the dispatcher laughing at you? Okay, yeah, we’ll send somebody. We’ll send somebody out there. Have a good one. Hey, Jimmy, click. Right? And that’s what the United States Air Force has done since 1947, with a few exceptions. And against this dark cloud of the cover up, I’ve got to show some, I’ve got to point out some rays of sunshine between those clouds. You know, the formation of Arrow, even though I don’t have a lot of respect for Sean Kirkpatrick, and I don’t agree with the continued obfuscation of things that that office continues to provide, I have a lot of a very optimistic hope that that John Kozlowski will flip this to whatever level. But you got to remember, he’s got layers above him that are part of the suppression. So it’s going to take a very courageous John Kozlowski to push up against that or resign. So we’ll see how that goes. But just the formation of that is a very positive sign, as opposed to Project Blue Book, 1969, and the jackwagon at the University of Colorado, Condon, and his clear obfuscation and suppression and flat out dishonest report that shut that down. That lasted for a long time, that momentum lasted for quite a long time, at least until, you know, 2017 or whatever. So and that was not a nutshell, that was a bag of nuts. But that’s my best response to that particular question you had, JP. And I’ll rest my soapbox now. You know, what I find so fascinating about your perspective is that, since, you know, as you say, you’re kind of part of the military industrial complex, you’re able to humanize the people behind the secrecy, because in some cases, those types of people were your peers. And this whole humanizing of the secrecy is analogous to how older generations of men, especially military men, would deal with their trauma. It’s all about putting it aside, not talking about it. Choke it down. Yeah, choking it down. And it makes total sense to me, in that sort of zeitgeist of mental health, if I was the leader of a nation, and I was shown, like the example you gave, a craft with both non-human beings and body parts of human beings, first of all, that would be incredibly traumatic. And what would I do with it based on my mental health practices? I would suppress that, because it’s just too terrifying to have to deal with. And yeah, that’s one of the things that blows me away the most about your perspective. With regards to the trauma, again, there are a lot of folks that have had it way worse than me, and very heroic folks who put themselves out there, who were vulnerable. So one of the key aspects of leadership that I have come to appreciate, not because I was a good leader, but I know a lot of good leaders, some folks at the unit that I used to belong to. I mean, anybody who wants to really get into the depths of Operation Gothic Serpent, and the phenomenal heroism in there, and the leadership of Lee Van Arsdale, who took over and literally came to the rescue. And there are so many other folks. So part of leadership, and this is way different than management, leadership, two critical components of that is the willingness to accept risk on behalf of your troops, and be vulnerable. And by being vulnerable, I mean, you stand up in front of everybody and say, I screwed up. And you acknowledge your shortcomings and truly express contrition for them, not lip service. You acknowledge your mistake, you’re contrite about it. And then those troops, next time you get in the crap sandwich, and when you turn around, they’re right behind you. And so Lee Van Arsdale is one of those folks, right? And so this notion of having somebody with enough courage to say, look, folks, for 80 years, we have not been able to prevent these abductions from happening. But now, thanks to the $3,000 toilet seats that we’ve been charging you, we have been able to reverse engineer some of this technology. And we think we can do a much better job. It’s not 100%. We can’t catch all the criminals. But as your global law enforcement, police force, we can get a good chunk of them. And so don’t fear. Go about your daily lives. And let’s use some of this technology, the implants. We’re spinning up these projects. Now, all that money that we put into the defense systems, now we’re going to use some of it to fight autoimmune diseases, to provide greater power. I’m not sure that the government has a full zero energy system. I don’t have any evidence of that. I mean, there’s a lot of speculation by a lot of folks, but I personally don’t have any knowledge of that. It may be there. Who knows? I mean, when you look at Gary McKinnon’s hacking and this fleet, alleged fleet of non-terrestrial craft and non-terrestrial officers, humans, with human names and ranks associated in those spreadsheets that he downloaded, that’s quite possible. And that’s some interesting, very interesting data to examine. But back to this notion of pushing down the trauma and admitting that you were vulnerable, you were paralyzed. Look at Terry Lovelace’s story. And he’s told it many, many times. Look at Mario Wood’s story. And he is told that many, many times. Look at Jeff Goodrich’s story. All PRP qualified, personnel reliability program qualified, nuclear duty service members who have very compelling cases, abduction cases that they have shared. So they have embraced what I’m calling a need to be vulnerable. So they are leaders within our community. And I can’t put them high enough on a pedestal, along with Bob Jacobs sharing his story, Robert Hastings sharing his story, and so many other folks. So my hat’s off to them. And that’s my response on the trauma issue. Yeah. And if I may just touch back on intent and humanizing, one of the things in regards to your experiences with non-human beings that really struck me was when you talked about your memory of seeing a seven to eight foot tall praying mantis grasshopper being, and specifically what that being was conveying to you. That, hey, stop squirming, quit fighting, let us do our job. And you may notice that behind me, I have some praying mantises here because I’m a wildlife photographer, and I also had a pet praying mantis. And the amount of times I have been out at night taking photos of mantises, and I said to the mantis, hey, stop, stop fighting, stop running away, stop squirming. You’re only making it worse for yourself. If you just let me take my photos, I’ll be quick, and I’ll leave you alone. And that expression of intent that you gave, starting with the Ross Coldheart interview, and others, of course, I really feel upgrades our understanding of the phenomenon. It’s a level up from, of course, the parody portrayals of abduction in the media, or in movies, or just pure speculation in podcasts and stuff. Because when you have a window into what this non-human intelligence sentience might have going through its head when it’s conducting an abduction, that’s what I feel people are really after, that insight. And yet I see this great resistance to want to mention things like that, because it’s so out there, it’s so different than what people are used to hearing when it comes to abductions. The same with Mario Woods’s story. He told the initial investigators of his case, not about the beings that he saw. He left that out of the story, because it was just way too out there. And so I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about this part of your experiences. And I’ve got to tell you, JP, part of the reason why I’ve never related the mantis part of that mountain bike story to anybody before is that I didn’t believe it. In 1995, I was well aware of the many, many claims of Grey’s abducting human beings. I had read many of the books, Bud Hawkins, David Jacobs, a lot of the folks associated with the Lyndon Napolitano case, Doug Cobble and the incident at Copley Woods, all of that stuff. I was very, very familiar with that. And of course, Whitley’s book, as well as my own personal observation of these beings in my room, not just outside the windows. So I was well aware of that. And I had pretty much followed the momentum, the inertia of societal perspective, that pretty much all aliens were these little grey guys. And that was propagated by E.T., the movie E.T., Close Encounters of the Third Kind, a lot of that realm. But what’s interesting about both of those, they didn’t have the horrifying big eyes like Communion. They didn’t look like that. They were rounded faces. And the eyes were much rounder. They didn’t have that very, you know, sinister looking facial feature. So that’s why I just immediately assigned that mantis appearance to a dream and the mountain bike ride to be a totally separate incident. And not to mention that I still, I’m pretty sure, and my daughters are still fuzzy on it because they were obviously younger at the time, that the walkthrough of the Barnes & Noble bookstore when I saw the Communion face, that was all, all three of those events were right around the same time. And I consolidated those memories as three separate events. I later associated the mantis event with the mountain bike event. And we can talk about that some other time. But I’m going to offer now, not a wild ass guess, not a wag, a swag, a scientific wild ass guess, okay? We’re going to get into the speculation realm here. And, you know, I’m going to invoke a perspective, an anthropological perspective. My mom was a sociologist, but she dabbled in anthropology. And I know quite a few other folks that have gotten into this through the anthropological realm, kind of following in the footsteps of Eric Von Daniken and others. When you look at the magnitude of time, one of my favorite places that I took my daughters when I was in grad school the first time at Colorado School of Mines was a place called Florissant Fossil Beds. And what I loved about it is it had a mile long trail through a bunch of petrified, a petrified forest. And you have these huge stumps that are probably half the size of this size of the cabin in my boat here, monstrous stumps. And, you know, you kind of walked back through time. And the very last step of that mile long trail, they had a footprint that was cast in like concrete. And they had a big placard there that said, this is the relative amount of time that Homo sapiens sapiens, that we have evidence of Homo sapiens sapiens, human fossils. It was one footprint out of a mile long hike. Right. And so they had the Pleistocene, they had all the errors and blah, blah, blah, the Paleozoic, you know, all of those ancient errors and so forth. And so that really struck me when it comes to evolution of life on any planet. Well, so using that as a backdrop, and with a scaffold of Darwinism overlaid there, it is not inconceivable to me, and I’ve had some very prominent scientists agree with me on this, and I used to use their names, but I haven’t asked them. So I’m going to hold back on that. But it is not inconceivable to me that insects and reptiles may have evolved into sentient beings far earlier than us, either here on this planet, and then gone out and become, you know, what now the term is ultra terrestrials, that life from here went out, got older, evolved, and came back. Right. And now they want to come back and just kind of check out what’s going on at home for the last, you know, million years or so. And so that’s a very interesting notion that, by the way, even though Hal Puthoff and Eric Davis and a lot of these folks are using this term now, and it’s like, oh, what a brilliant, dude, light years, right behind me, the story of one of many, many versions of the Billy Meyer story in Switzerland from the 70s was very clear about that in his contact notes with the Pleiadians, who were the Plejaren, his contacts, who very clearly laid out that that was unquestionably the case. case, and that they are the ultra-terrestrial visitors coming back to check on us and help us and so forth and so on. So I have, you know, since that experience, I have come across a relatively large body of literature where other abductees do describe mantis sorts of beings being extremely intelligent. And apparently, and again, it’s all very fuzzy and, you know, it just lacks the crisp empirical data to make this claim. But there is a pattern of the mantids having little gray guys as sort of their workers, their biological robot workers, and then maybe some sentient layer of tall grays or whatever, kind of above the little gray guys, and, you know, some of this hierarchy thing. I don’t have any direct evidence of that. But there are other folks who have had an experience with these mantid sort of beings. And again, in a direct refutation of this, and I feel bad because now I’m sort of invoking an air of condescension into this, the ridiculous claim that all abductions are human abduction squads by the evil cabal. I have to entertain that possibility. I don’t agree with it. And it does not connect the dots. It doesn’t even connect a significant portion of the dots because of the data. Because the data that shows via sketches recreated, just like what, why is a criminal face sketch of a suspect in a murder acceptable in court, but a sketch of a mantis looking being or a big light bulb headed being, or the beings in Pascagoula with the carrot nose and carrot ears, right, and the claws? Why are those unacceptable when the others aren’t? Right? You’ve got to, if you’re going to allow one, you got to allow them all. Well, that is a fallacy of logic. But just to bring that point home, there are a large number, a relatively large number of abductees who have sketched mantis beings. And again, they got this skinny neck and this massive head with these massive eyes. How do you put a human in a costume to replicate that? Not a lot of seven foot people to start with, nevermind, you know, special effects will. So this notion of very advanced beings with very advanced technology being either of an insectoid sort of lineage or reptilian sort of lineage, that is totally consistent with the realm of possibility in terms of evolution of life. So that puts it on the table for me as not only a possibility, but now a probability. When you look at the number of cases, the number of dots, in itself, the number of dots is a form of evidence. Yeah. So when you’re talking about beings that have, you know, you touched on this earlier in the podcast, we were talking about, I think it was Tim Gallaudet, talking about the possibility that non-human intelligence that’s greater than us, at least, doesn’t even have to come from an extraterrestrial origin, especially when you take into account that we’ve barely explored enough of the ocean just, you know, to account for the whole of it. And if you also take into account, you know, you talk about putting the facts together and the dots together, there was a time in our Earth’s history where there was so much more carbon in the atmosphere that insects were massive, especially dragonflies and things like that. When we dip into topics that aren’t just as simply like visitors from another planet, that really starts to get very, very interesting to me. There’s also, I guess I really want to ask you this, because I want to be conscious of your time as well before we go, but I really want to ask you about the potential spiritual aspect of this phenomenon. Over and over again, you have this recurring theme of contact experiencers feeling a sort of spiritual connection, or at least connecting it to the dead. And that is another big obstacle in terms of the Western Cartesian mind to understanding this. Yeah. So, wow. So, so much to spread out, you know, from there with. First and foremost, for me, you know, the more I dove into this, the more the possibility of intelligent, sentient insects and reptiles, that went from not just possibility to probability. The more I looked at and became, I guess, sensitive or aware to logarithmic time scales, it makes more sense that that did happen than it didn’t happen. It makes a lot more sense that insects evolved and reptiles evolved and became, and if they did evolve to the point of, you know, eventually becoming spacefaring beings, you know, that does make sense to me that they would then, and here we go, the question of time travelers. When they come back, aren’t they time travelers? You know, they go up and evolve or whatever it is. And so this notion of they’re either time travelers or they’re extraterrestrials or they’re interdimensional, as I’ve said many times, those three are intrinsically connected. So I’ve got no trouble with that. What, you know, from a personal basis, you know, taking off the scientist hat and trying to put my experiencer hat back on, all I could say is that, you know, my anomalous behavior was, after that mountain bike ride, don’t squish a bug. I told my kids, and I’ve said this many times, I would stop, go get a glass and escort the spider outside. You don’t squish him. Now, I got to say, when there’s a bunch of flies hovering over my plate over here, I may, you know, override, you know, my highfalutin spiritual old soul and go get a fly swatter. I got to admit that. But, you know, the notion is that was kind of anomalous behavior that, again, serves as independent corroboration, not just from family members, from after my wife and I split up, and then she passed, and I was I was dating again. And, you know, some of some of the women I would date, they would be like, what the, dude, really? You’re trying to prevent me from squishing a fly, and then they go overdo it. And that was, I think that was pretty much the end of that freaking date or whatever. Yeah. It’s not the right lady for you, man. I mean, it just, you know, it’s just a little bit of mutual respect, right? I mean, for crying out loud. So anyway, I think those are sort of intrinsically connected, somehow, especially when you look into this, this notion of consciousness, that again, the woo-woo literature and the scientific literature, they, that is overlapping more and more as we continue on. And it’s not a linear progression of that overlap. The speed at which these Venn diagrams are overlapping is really picking up. When you look at quantum entanglement, and this is one of the things I do agree with, with Steven Greer on is that it is the notion that quantum entanglement could very well be how communications occur faster than the speed of light with distant beings. I mean, I know it sounds wild to anybody like me who has grown up in the Newtonian physical world. But, you know, we’re in a kind of a new Copernican era here, you know, where we’re really starting to validate, look at the telepathy tapes. You know, telepathy tapes, back when I was growing up in the, in the 70s, that was ESP. And that was, you know, that was card tricks. That was like the magician never revealing how they pulled it off. Here we are. And now look at, look at Dr. Powell’s stuff. I mean, her, it is extremely compelling. And the vast majority of the peer reviewed science world is really waking up to it. I had a very prominent professor, very prominent scientist at a meeting just last week, who basically said that flipped him about the abduction experience. Because he had dismissed the abductions, because all this telepathy stuff. And then we saw the telepathy tapes. And he’s like, whoa, wait a minute, does that mean maybe all these abductees, maybe there’s something to that. And it really, and I think that’s, that may have been one of the factors in him finally deciding to attend this, this woo-woo sort of conference. It wasn’t woo-woo, it was very well structured, etc. But anyway, yeah, so that’s another one of these bright lights of progress. Despite this black cloud of cover-up, it’s, you got to look for the light, the silver lining, and that’s another one of them. Yeah, it’s, I forget who coined this term, but at a certain point for human science, before you scientifically figure out something, it can be indistinguishable from magic. From magic, yeah. And we’re getting to that point. I don’t know if he, I don’t know if he started that, but Stanton Freeman, you know, a legendary ufologist, who was also a nuclear propulsion physicist, let’s not forget, he uses that term, and I think it may be one of these books up here. Yeah, science was wrong. Yeah, science was wrong. Stanton Freeman wrote that with Kathy Martin, and they have a bunch of, again, anecdotal stories that specifically irrefutably point out that the mainstream peer-reviewed science convergence was wrong, and it was flipped. But Gary Nolan talks about this. That’s what science is all about, is being wrong. And this is another aspect of leadership in science that I claim Gary Nolan stands on. He is willing to be vulnerable. He is a courageous man. And look at all of the peer-reviewed journal articles that he has published. And this is what’s really, really important about writing a book and publishing. You know, all these people that say, well, can’t be true just because they published a book. They’re just making stuff up to publish a book. Oh, really? That’s courage. When you put something on paper, and you make that statement, you’re putting it out there for all the cowardly, lazy pundits that are just critics of anything. Yeah. How about you take your counter theory, sleep paralysis, and put it out there? And to Susan Clancy’s credit, she did. And she got ripped to shreds by a bunch of us. I’m certainly not the only one. Dawn Dundery and a lot of other professors did not come to the same conclusion as her. And that’s why the peer-review process is important. You put it out there, and you leave yourself open to critique. And then the courageous scientists keep going. They respond to that, and then they do another experiment. They respond and do another experiment. I was a coward when I got to the Air Force Research Lab. Because of my ego, I was demoted, a bunch of other stuff. I was really upset. And I just sat back and coasted. I’d maybe publish one conference paper a year just to keep myself from being fired. But I was a wussy boy, because I had this awakening. Oh, my God, this freaking cover-up is not just real. It is all over this base, the way of this compartmentation. And it’s horrific, and it’s tragic, and it’s corrosive. So I wasn’t a good scientist. But Gary and a bunch of other folks in the Scientific Coalition of UAP Studies, the Society for UAP Studies, I think, they have really woken me up. And I’m going to get back in the game now, start publishing again. So I’m really excited about another silver lining of the cover-up that we can exploit. So hopefully that answered that question. Yeah, for sure it did. And I agree with you. Science is a process. And seeing this with the community I’m a part of, with TSW, you have to allow yourself to be wrong. And with the gentleman I spoke to from the NIH, he had to approach some of the doctors and his colleagues and say, I think you may have been a part of hurting these people with this current issue. And I myself had to, like you said, read about people I disagree with. And that’s how it should be. Another thing I heard about science was playing this game that took place in Baghdad in the 800s or 900s. And there was a fact about how it was an incredible boom of science. And one of the things that they did was make this incredibly complex gizmo, for lack of a better word, to find out where Mecca was. And it was this overlapping of their spirituality with science. And one of the last questions I would love to ask you is, is there a point where that starts to overlap with the abduction phenomenon? I may have put it in the notes about this book called Black Elk Speaks, this Lakota man who had this incredible vision. He specifically said, this was not a dream, this happened. And I don’t want to ask too many questions for you to have to unpack, but I guess the definitive question is whether or not the human is interpreting everything that’s happening to them. For him, for Black Elk Speak, Black Elk, it was the six grandfathers. And horses and geese. And is that its own thing? Are humans along history just interpreting whatever this phenomena is differently, but it’s the same? Or is there a whole host of suite of things going on? That’s one big thing I have trouble unpacking. Yeah, so a couple of things there. First, with regards to the science, before we slide that over into the intersection between science and spirituality, I do want to push back a little bit on the notion of repeatability. As if it’s not repeatable, it’s not scientific. Whoa, hang on just a second here. You know, how long does it take to repeat a volcano? Right? Krakatoa, right? That didn’t repeat for 100 years. Still hasn’t. Still hasn’t re-erupted. So does that mean it didn’t exist? You know, this is where geology and archaeology refute the claim that it’s got to be repeatable in a lab to be considered. So, you know, I just pushed Gary Nolan and a bunch of other folks up on a pedestal for this scientific courage, and I will continue to do that forever and ever. Amen. However, I’m going to say that just because it’s not repeatable in your little lifetime, or your little 20 or 30 or 40 or 50 year career, that doesn’t mean it’s not science. Science is about discovery. And so, archaeological dating, whether you use carbon, or some other form of decay, or some other relative layering of fossils, or whatever it happens to be, repeatability or lack of repeatability is insufficient as a disproof. Okay? That’s my claim. And that allows me now to slide into this spiritual overlap, this spiritual overlay. Because as a youngster, like I talk about being the angry young man, I did not appreciate the value of what was going on. And the older you get, the more orbits that you get, there’s some repeatability. But here’s the thing, an orbit is not repeatable. Because here’s the thing, here’s our planet, we’re orbiting, right? So was I in the same place this year as I was this year? Oh, no, that’s an illusion, because this whole planet’s moving. This whole solar system is moving. So it could be that the Oort cloud, that our solar system is moving through within the galaxy, it didn’t occur last year, but it occurred this year. And so we’re saying that we made this observation this year, at the exact same time, with an atomic clock, under the exact same conditions. No, they may not be the same conditions. Because our solar system is moving through a galaxy within a universe, where there are other conditions going on. And so part of this spiritual awakening that we’re having is that as we kind of zoom out, there’s a great scene at the end of Men in Black, the first one, where at the very end, they kind of zoom out from our little blue marble, into the solar system, into the galaxy. And then our solar system is like an atom within a pool ball on a table. And then it’s at a bigger level, and they’re kicking it around right on the field, whatever. So you get the point that I think this expansion is huge. And so I’m gonna go back to 1947, not because of Roswell. But the reason I want to go back to 1947 is that was the year Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier. And there were plenty of people who said, Oh, my God, no, ain’t gonna happen. Right? It’s so much easier to say, impossible. It that that that takes no courage. And so before 1947, nothing could go faster than sound. And we’re limited. And we’re, again, we’re the anthropological arrogance or anthro arrogance saying what I can’t hear can’t happen. There we are. And so it that was a step function in our progress. Oh, science is wrong. Sometimes. I’m pointing to Stanton’s book with Kathy Martin. And so we may be very close to a recognition, not a discovery, because it’s already been discovered. I’m claiming it. We know that faster than light travel is feasible. You just need enough power. Just like, you know, before 1947, part of the reason that we couldn’t go faster than the speed of sound, we didn’t have enough power to propel that X-15 to get there. Right now, we don’t have enough power to bend space time and go faster than light. But we just split the atom a little while back. And we know there’s an enormous amount of power in that Nagasaki, Hiroshima. So we may be on the step of that next threshold. And that one is going to be a big leap. It is a giant leap for mankind, a bigger leap than Neil Armstrong’s footprint on the moon, in my opinion. Because now, our place in the cosmos, all hail Carl Sagan’s cosmos, even though you were part of the cover up. I know. And there is evidence to support that. I had to get that little jab in. So all scientists are like, oh, man, Fletch, I was with you until you said that. But in any case, that opens up the spiritual awakening, especially once you choke down that anthropomorphic arrogance that we’re the only ones. And that’s why I’m claiming this is a Copernican moment that we’re waking up to that. And so this journey of Black Elk and others, we’re just rediscovering what Native peoples, First Nations folks in Canada, Native Americans here in the US, the Maori in New Zealand, the aboriginal realm in Australia, those cultures have, the Dogon tribe in Africa, those cultures have been aware of this for quite some time. So I’m not sure it’s so much a discovery as an awakening. So one of the last questions I’d love to ask you, John, is if we’re talking about a lot of Venn diagrams and overlapping is to kind of come full circle to how the TSW community relates to the abductee contact experiencer community. You’ve had a suite of traumatic experiences in your life. I know you’ve talked about the Oklahoma City bombing and other experiences. And yet you seem like a very level-headed, centered human being. You’re very humble. You’re able to point out, set aside the ego. I know you mentioned you used to meditate. And one of the things I wanted to ask you is, have you overcome those traumatic experiences? How do you get to a point where you can behave the way that you are? Because I know there’s a lot of viewers here that are going through some pretty horrifying things, and I’m sure they could learn from that. All right, I’m getting a little choked up here. Oklahoma City was particularly traumatic for me because of the, matter of fact, I have a, I think it’s a section, it’s not an entire chapter, called The Lady in the Purple Dress. And it was the wheelbarrow that probably a mother, I never found out who exactly it was. But the problem with that was that, as a soldier, you go through training to try to deal with the consequences of the use of lethal force. And I think that probably shields a lot of us from the trauma of taking another life. But what was so, the magnitude of my emotional response to The Lady in the Purple Dress was the innocence. She didn’t, as near as I could tell, she didn’t bring that bomb in there, right? And because the child care office or whatever, the federal, it was a federal building, and federal employees would bring their kids in there, it was, I think that was located back in that area. And so, the taking of innocent lives, kids, in that nursery area, toddlers, that has been very difficult for me to get over. And I’ve seen dismembered hands laying around and things like that. But the way to get over it, one of the critical aspects of resilience, which I think you were kind of dancing around there, how to develop resilience and grit and things. One of those books up there is named Grit, right there, I think. A critical component of that is talking about it with others that were there in that same arena. And that’s why rape is such a difficult kind of trauma to deal with, because it’s so deeply personal, and you’re alone in much of that. So, one of my vehement anger points, I’ll call what it is anger, with the lack of leadership or the contrapositive of that, the corrosive leadership of these so-called commanders that separate these military abductees from each other and prevent them from talking to each other. That is unconscionable in my mind, because the natural human process for trauma recovery is to share the experience with your colleagues, with your comrades, with your fellow patients. And that is so powerful, that communicative, and it goes way beyond just words. It’s body language, it’s pheromones, there’s so much of that. And in some cases, maybe it’s a shared consciousness in some manner. But for Terry Lovelace’s commander to separate him from Toby, who was abducted with him, for Mario Woods to be separated from Michael Johnson, who was abducted with him, and from—I’m not sure if Jeff was separated from his guys, but the folks at Rendlesham, for them to be separated from each other, that’s horrific, in my opinion, because you’re not only adding to the trauma. You’re not only double experiencing it at the hands or the claws, if you will, whatever, of these other beings, but now your own beings, you go back and your own family ostracizes you. So you re-suffer again and again and again. And so you are compounding the PTSD with this corrosive, compartmented policy that I can’t even call leadership. That’s not freaking leadership. That’s a disgusting form of invasive harassment. And so, again, the silver lining of this cloud is that we’re hopefully going to wake up and learn from our mistakes, that this compartmented, divisive, divide and conquer process that people rise to power with, bad juju. And it will eventually lead to your downfall. If wherever you sit on that pile, if you’re leading through terror, leading, if you’re out front via terror or squashing others or dividing them and separating them and individually oppressing them, that’s going to lead to your demise. And I’m speaking to you, members of the cabal. I’m speaking to you, intermediaries or the folks that carry the water for the cabal. You better flip it because it is harming you. You’re harming yourself by that kind of behavior. So hopefully that provides you and some of your fellow patients a little bit of hope that we’re recognizing that at least. And your interaction with each other is a tremendous source of strength. And I’ve had some friends, we’re getting up there, right? I’m no spring chicken anymore. Evidence. This is an ego writing checks the body can’t cash, right? And so getting together with other freaking knuckleheads that have their sling on the other side, right? And that’s why the VA system is so powerful and I’m horrified at how ineffective and inefficient and corrupted it is. And it’s got to get better. But the power of that shared experience can’t be overstated. And so I know of some Parkinson’s disease gymnasiums, a gym specifically for Parkinson’s, because you get used to others with tremors and you’re not an outcast anymore. It’s part of the game. And you’re lifting that weight and it’s going like this. And a guy over on the other side, they’re lifted and they got a worse tremor than you. Awesome, right? Because it makes you that feeling of membership. And then, you know, the further along you go, and then many of you start to realize, holy crap, this may be a gift. It makes me appreciate this side. That’s not true. It’s not shaking. It makes me appreciate those 65 previous years where, you know, I did the best I could before this happened. And you get to tell stories and you go back to the glory days, you know, the what was that Bruce Springsteen song, glory days, you know, and you reminisce. And there is power in that. And there’s healing energy that is shared in that. And it also is really important for the way you pass, the way you transition to the other side and recognizing that there is another side. Dude, this is just fourth grade. You got a lot of grades to go. And guess what? If you screw this up, and if you’re part of the cabal, and you’re part of this frickin, I’ll call it evil, you’re going to have to repeat third grade. And you may be repeating third grade as one of the folks that you tortured, that you mistreated in that, you know, Dachau, Auschwitz prison camp. You may have to live that in your next lifetime. So there is an enforced accountability. You may not recognize it right now. But better be good for goodness sake. And it ain’t about Santa, ain’t about chubby guys, bringing you a present that you didn’t deserve. You know, that was part of my, I didn’t bring that into our previous thing. But that’s what set me on the skepticism path when I was three frickin years old, and five, and telling my dad, no, I am not going to tell my sister that. I’m not participating in this Santa Claus conspiracy. If you want to tell her, fine, but I ain’t telling you. And that shook my dad up. And so hopefully that will reverberate back up through the cabal so that they recognize that they will be held accountable for their misdeeds during this lifetime. Yes, sir. That was a very beautiful response. Deeply moving to see how it still affects you and how you’re willing to discuss things and then touching on, like, a human’s deep need to be part of a group, to feel connection. I can’t think of a better way to end the podcast on. I can’t even put it in words as well as you did. I’m going to hold a mirror up to you, JP, and say you are making that happen. Your work is extremely important because you’re connected, right? You’re connecting us with shared trauma. And so every time you do this, somebody is benefiting. Many people are benefiting. It’s like a positive aspect of nuclear criticality. When a reactor goes critical, that just means that it’s sustaining itself. You got to go super critical to explode into a bomb. So you are creating a critical reaction of healing. And I can’t thank you enough for it. I can’t thank you enough for the opportunity for me to tap into that and shed a few tears even now. So you have yourself a fabulous day, JP. And I’m hoping your healing continues and ramps up. And I look forward to the next time that we get a chance to interact. Thank you, John. Yeah, I’ve just had a big acceleration in healing just now with that conversation. So good to hear it. Mirror back to you as well. Yes, sir. Feel good about yourself. Have a great day too. You too. Thank you so much. Bye now.

UFOpedia

Explorer

blitch-touchette-2025-whisper

John Blitch — “Delta Force Operator Dr. John Blitch” (JP Touchette, May 25 2025)

Graph View

Backlinks