Psicoactivo #813 — host commentary on the Fowler/Reed-Summers “dog whistle” interview (27 Jan 2026)
Source: Psicoactivo Podcast (host solo commentary, English-language; the channel is Mexico-based). Episode #813: “James Fowler’s Dogwhistle details & Skywatcher’s UAP classification system source.” URL: https://youtu.be/HRw9gbKdtno (2026-01-27; ~17:57). Captured: 2026-07-01. OpenAI Whisper (whisper-1) via scripts/speech_to_text_remote.py. Single narrator; timestamped paragraphs, verbatim. What this is: secondary commentary, not a primary. The host reacts to and embeds clips from Reed Summers’ James Fowler interview (fowler-reed-summers-emergent-dogwhistle-part1-2026-01-27) — which he names as his source — and adds his own opinions. The embedded Fowler quotes (the dog-whistle mechanics, the “class system came from the UAP task force,” the 200-sorties figure) are from that primary; read them there. Captured for the host’s distinct contribution and framing:
- He highlights Fowler’s claim that Skywatcher’s UAP classification nomenclature originated with the UAP Task Force, calling it the interview’s most important revelation.
- His own unverified assertions (treat as the host’s claims, not established): that most core UAP Task Force members are unnamed/unknown, and that Jay Stratton, David Grusch, and Luis Elizondo are “not really part of the core UAP task force.” No sourcing is given beyond “I found out about that recently.”
- His read on Skywatcher: it did not fulfill the “year-long promise” Jake Barber made; he speculates it was “red teamed”/infiltrated or absorbed by a government contract; notes Fowler “is no longer part of Skywatcher” (helping “from the periphery”); and says team members (he names “Batista,” “Jordan,” “Jozak”) left to do their own thing. He judges the effort “probably completely dead,” while conceding “I may be wrong.”
- A defense of Jake Barber: that a “bad guy / counterintel” operator would not introduce his own kids/family to UFO-community figures (he cites Chris Bledsoe), so he does not think Barber is “one of the bad guys,” and attributes Barber’s incomplete candor to not being “allowed” to tell the full truth. His own opinion, offered as such.
- He also declines to promote Summers’ 2026 UAP Summit with promo codes because doing so would contradict his prior public criticism of the Sol Foundation — a stated coherence/consistency stance, noted here only as context on his priors. Weight as secondary commentary; the primary Fowler material lives in the Reed Summers interview linked above.
[0:00] What’s up, humans? And welcome to a new CECO Activo. Happy Monday, everybody. And I wanted to talk about something that was coming out today. I want to make a slight clarification of why I am not fully supporting the effort that Reed Summers is having with the UAP Summit. I am supporting it, but I am not offering like promo codes or anything like that on my channel.
[0:35] If you guys want to go there, I’m going to leave the link in the description so you guys can check it out. And if you want to pay for that, that’s on you. Be my guest. I would recommend it, yeah, because I think that what Reed Summers is trying to do is very important. I think that talking about the science of this is very important. But if I supported this, I would have to take back stuff that I’ve said about the Sol Foundation, which I’ve criticized in the past, and I wouldn’t be coherent.
[1:06] So that’s the reason that I’m not like putting promo codes anywhere or anything like that. That’s something that I’m choosing not to do because I want to remain coherent. Having said that, I do want to highlight the work that Reed Summers is doing because it is very important. The Navy says it still doesn’t know what the objects are. The minute you get eyes on them, they go dark. They must disclose more information to the public.
[1:31] Unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAP, are being reported across air, sea and space domains. In the absence of verifiable data, misinformation fills the gap. Explanations are lacking and often contradictory, leading the public to ask, what’s really going on in our skies? Recent congressional testimony has raised urgent questions about UAP. Risks to flight safety, lack of oversight and potential challenges to national security are now being formally acknowledged by governments around the world. It’s becoming clear we can no longer ignore the reality of UAP. But testimony alone is not enough.
[2:12] We need the full capabilities of science and technology in order to move from uncertainty to understanding. We need data. The UAP Detection and Tracking Summit convenes researchers, technologists, policy makers and informed citizens to build new capabilities to detect, track and analyze UAP and gain critical understanding into the anomalous objects and craft increasingly reported over our homes, cities and critical infrastructure. With calibrated instruments, coordinated field research and transparent scientific collaboration, we can detect and track anomalous objects and generate the data needed to drive forward the disclosure of UAP. The technology is available. The expertise is here. The capability to understand what’s in our skies is finally within reach. We invite you to join us.
[3:14] A few weeks ago, he had a very, very thorough conversation about UAP science with Dr. Gary Nolan. That was very, very good. I’m going to leave it in the description so you guys can check it out. And continuing with that, he’s going to talk about UAP detection a lot in this summit. He’s going to have a wonderful panel of speakers that I think that people should pay attention to. If you guys don’t want to pay for it, you guys can wait for it to come out. It is still going to be free for people when it comes out.
[3:45] It’s going to be edited and all that, and then it’s going to come out. But Reed Summers just came out with something that I want to show you guys that he just did today, which is an interview he did with James Fowler, the former Skywatcher member of the UAP team. And in this interview that he does with Fowler, they speak about all the classifications and he gives away a few things that I wasn’t aware of.
[4:14] One is more details into the dog whistle, how it works, how long it takes for them to detect something. And I think the most important thing that he did was to give away a few things that I wasn’t aware of. And I think the most important information that I was not aware of, where these classifications came from. And this is really interesting.
[4:42] And there’s a piece of information that I think you guys don’t know either, that the UAP task force were the ones who gave a lot of these classifications to Fowler. And there’s some misconception about the UAP task force. Did you guys know that the majority of people from the UAP task force are not known? Did you guys know that people like Jay Stratton, David Grush, Luis Alessandro are not really part of the core UAP task force?
[5:16] I didn’t know that. I found out about that recently. Apparently, that’s the case. And the majority of people who are part of the UAP task force are not known. Their names are not known. So that’s news to me. I don’t know if it’s news to you, but I’m not going to investigate who those names are. There’s people that know the names and they’re people like really high up in government positions, military positions. But that’s the case. And I had no idea. And I was surprised when I heard that.
[5:45] But the first thing I’m going to show you is a revelation from James Fowler that he got the classification system or parts of it directly from the UAP task force, which is news to me. So here it is. So take us down the road from there. How did you get further into UAP detection and tracking Skywatcher? I know folks will be very curious to know about key insights or findings from your time as Skywatcher to the extent that you can share those. So, yeah, take us through the rest of your journey.
[6:15] Yeah, sure. So immediately following that event in 2021, we left that event, came back to Virginia and started talking to people. People in government positions, people in certain locations. I believe one group I may have spoken with adjacent to indirectly was UAP task force just to share and find out, hey, you know, costly. It was costly going through my mind. What if what if what if this isn’t ours? What if this is read as an adversarial? What if this is not U.S.
[6:49] technology? Because when I took to the government, there was there was no answers back. It was, hey, us presenting up to them data and facts and a narrative of what was observed and times and dates and all the data that accompanied a presentation. But there was nothing coming back to us. So we we really didn’t know anything other than our observation.
[7:12] So we kept it in very close circles and reached up and we didn’t get any answers back. So actually, the class system came from the UAP task force as this is indirectly, we couldn’t get a hold of them at the time, but we had some associates that that knew them. And and it’s kind of funny when when we spoke with those associates, I said, well, don’t tell us what you saw. We will tell you what we think you saw. And so they relate to us a description of the Tetra UAP class.
[7:43] I believe they might have called that the class one, which is what I call it, the class one. And then they relate to me the jellyfish, which is our class seven. But we had not observed that yet. And they were laid the Tic-Tac, I think it’s a class three. So that that that nomenclature, that vernacular wasn’t native to me and to my team that came from the UAP task force, frankly.
[8:03] But between 21 and 22 and different events, we start planning and figuring out, hey, if if these things aren’t made in America, if they’re not ours, if this isn’t somebody’s special toy. And it was reacting and reactive to us. How can we provoke it? How can we get more of a reaction? How can we poke the bear and see what the bear does? So when we came back in 22, we’d done a ton of OSINT.
[8:27] We’d spoken with people adjacent to the task force and we come up with some hypotheses. We have an entire parallel to our actual program. We have an entire effort designed around cause and effect to see if one, if we’ll make another observation. And if we do, what can we do to cause more of a reaction? So in 22, we rolled out what was the preliminary dog whistle, but included some radar load sets that are custom. It included some more technology at the event.
[9:01] It included deploying resources in a manner with which unknown to them, they were looking for UAPs, but to us, they were doing enhanced UAS counter drone discovery technology and tactics development. So we really kind of enmeshed the two, if you will. And while we didn’t detract from what we were doing with our war game, at the same time, one or two of us were basically keeping score and trying to see if we could poke the bear and see get more of a reaction.
[9:35] And we did. In 2022, we saw over 200 sorties of UAP. It was really quite spectacular. In one day, in one instance or across a time period? It was over a few days. We actually, at the site we were running the 2022 event, when we saw the UAPs, there was a schedule and a timing to when they, at that time, were coming to the events. So it wasn’t day one. It was later in the event. So it was, again, kind of towards the tail end.
[10:07] And then we had once in a millennia or whatever, a hundred year flooding that corresponded. So we made observations for a couple of days and then we had horrible flooding and we’re weathered out, frankly, for a couple of days. Let me show you now where James talks about the dog whistle and how it works. Dog whistle. There’s a certain electromechanical configuration we deploy to the field. We have tested for weeks and weeks on end. So when we run these war games, we run them sometimes 24-7.
[10:38] And there’s only a certain window when we’ll make observations, a certain window in terms of days since we start using the dog whistle and certain times during those days. So it’s not like we turn on the bat signal and UAPs show up and there they are. Although that has happened, we know the bat signal, as in the dog whistle, does work because we’ve run events without the dog whistle and not had them come for weeks and weeks on end.
[11:08] So we’ve had plenty of times where there was no dog whistle, no effort to call in UAP, and there are no observations made, having the same radar load sets and the other technologies available to us. Conversely, when we do use the electromechanical signaling that we have, the bat signal, the dog whistle, we do get observations. And those observations have changed over time.
[11:29] They started out being late in the exercises, late to arrive on the tail end of things. And now when we employ the signaling, sometimes they appear within hours. So it’s gone from over a week to now a few hours from calling that they arrive. Very interesting. 200 within a few days. That’s crazy. And obviously, you guys know what the main issue with this is, is that Skywatcher clearly has not fulfilled the year long promise that they made, that Jake Barber made. I believe it’s because they were red teamed.
[12:08] There’s an interview where James is with Jesse talking about him, why he’s not like being more public about the data that he’s collecting. And he made it seem like he was waiting for the government to just offer him a contract so they can tell him to shut up and to not share anything. And that seems to have happened. I don’t have any confirmation of it, but it kind of seems like that probably did happen because James Fowler is no longer part of Skywatcher. He claims that he moved on to somewhere else.
[12:40] He’s still helping the effort, I think, from the periphery, like stuff like this, for example. He’s talking to people, but he’s no longer part of it. And they didn’t fulfill what they promised that they would fulfill. And that’s because I think it’s because they were sort of infiltrated, in a sense, or red teamed, in a sense. There was just way too much of a crowded place at a certain point.
[13:09] And this impeded for more things to happen with Skywatcher and with Jake as well. And I know that Jake gets a lot of shit for this. I don’t think he deserves it, to be honest. I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again. If Jake Barber was one of the bad guys, or like a counterintel guy, or he had bad intentions, he wouldn’t be presenting his family to people within the UFO world. That is not something that somebody who’s part of the bad guys does.
[13:45] He wouldn’t jeopardize his kids, which is something that he presented his kids to people like he introduced them to Chris Bledsoe and to a lot of more people. From within the UFO community, that is not something that somebody who’s like doing nefarious things would do, in my opinion. And that’s why I don’t think that he’s one of the bad guys.
[14:08] I think that he probably couldn’t tell the truth about what he did, but that’s different. Like he couldn’t because he wasn’t allowed to. In my opinion, he has a lot to lose if he risks anything. If he tells the truth about what’s really going on, he does risk a lot because his family is exposed, his livelihood is exposed. So I think that’s why he wasn’t telling the full truth, in my opinion, but that’s just my opinion. I don’t know what you guys think about it. What do you guys think about James Fowler talking about the dog whistle?
[14:44] What do you guys think about the UAP task force delivering some of those classification systems? What do you think about the UAP task force members? Not known really, most of them, the core group, nobody really knows them from outside of those circles. That was news to me when I heard it first. And that’s an interesting data point that I think people would be interested to hear.
[15:08] And what do you think about the whole promise that wasn’t fulfilled by Skywatcher? What do you think happened? Because, yeah, they will deny a lot of this stuff that leaked online and shit, but it does sort of feel like they weren’t allowed to continue doing what they promised that they would do. It feels that way. You can tell that many of them were frustrated.
[15:34] A lot of the people that were part of Skywatcher came out on their own and they started doing their own thing. Like Batista, like Jordan, Jozak and more people that were part of this team. So what do you think happened? Or if you know, let us know in the comments. Tell us, where did you get your information about it? We’re dying to know. And it’s a shame that they weren’t able to fulfill their promise.
[16:01] It would have been nice to see something happening. Maybe they have something in the pipeline. I’m not aware of anything. I honestly think that the whole effort is completely dead, but I may be wrong. If I am, I will correct it in a future video. But for now, let me know your comments. I’ll be reading. If you like the content you see, I’m going to ask you to like, share, hype, comment, subscribe and hit the bell icon.
[16:27] That’s all you need to do in order to help us. And it is what helps us the most. So thank you. But if you want to support us in other ways, there’s a few links down there you can choose from. You can also become a member on YouTube. You can become a member on Patreon. We have merch on Patreon that you get after three months on the platform. That’s the way Patreon does it.
[16:44] And that’s what we’re going to do to get you merged and incentivized to be part of Patreon. You can also leave us a nice review on Spotify so you can help us upscale in the algorithm in English-speaking countries. Because we’re in Mexico and the algorithm doesn’t catch us as easily. And that’s a problem because compared to the numbers we’re doing on YouTube, we’re doing like a tenth of that on Spotify. And that can’t happen. That’s, that’s really bad. So we really need your help. It only takes you a few minutes and it’s free. You don’t have to pay a thing.
[17:20] Or you can also support us through KGRA. Anything you choose to do is always appreciated. So thank you. That’s it for me today on this video, but I’ll see you guys in the next one. Remember, stay curious and inquisitive like Reed Summers and James Fowler. Always. Bye.