← Back to Undated – Part Two – Inglewood Unit 15

Undated Inglewood Unit 15 Of Understanding Lee And Barbara Yates Host Dan Fry Ufos At Their Home

Understanding Audio Transcript

Recording structure

• [00:00] Opening and introduction
• [38:12] First major segment
• [01:35:31] Second major segment
• [02:29:00] Questions and closing discussion

Hover your cursor over the sentence to see the timestamp.

[00:00] Opening and introduction

Well, actually, they're going to do three. They're going to enlarge by some incident. I'll probably put it in soft cover.

Yeah, I'd really like to have that. What's your next book going to be? The next new one, there's two that they want built up and enlarged to a standard size. They want to be 128 pages. Well, this is easy because there was a lot of material that should have gone into that first book that didn't. And I've learned this from 10 years of questioning after people have read the book. There were things that could have been put in that would have eliminated the necessity for it. That text is all in. They want another combination of Adam's Galaxy

and Understand and the Stars. Well, the two books are already a combination. There's Adam's Galaxy. But they want to build that up to 128 pages.

Then they want a new one called Understanding is the Answer. And strangely enough, the owner of Best Books Incorporated was starting to write the book himself before he ever heard of it. And he went down to the floor and did a copy of it and happy-gratted me with this on every book stand. How about the curve of development then? What has been the response to that? Well, I haven't put any return address in it to get response. I did on the first few books. The result was devastating because I couldn't get the response. I got it in print, as it was. And I answered about 4,000. This is 10 letters a day. It was about 13 letters a day, 7 days a week. It just doesn't make any time to do anything else. So I didn't get all of them answered. I got about 4,000 out of 7,000. It was exceedingly costly. I mean, if you figure a post is supposed to be it's 4,000 letters now. And of course, none of these letters brought in anything.

It was just people who had more questions. And so I got a lot. I got a lot of comments. And so the financial statement didn't be simple. I didn't put a return address in it. Well, I've got a few anyhow. I thought that lecture, all the ones you've made, the standpoint of helping a person individually has been the most. Well, this seems to be the response everywhere. I haven't given it to them. Didn't you give it to a Jewish group one? Did they like it? Yes. Well, it gave them a new insight into the type of ministry that Jesus and Lazarus was given. And this is what we accept for the New Testament.

We don't accept that Jesus was the Son of God, but they do now, I think, most of them accept.

And it is expressed in a way so that they can understand a little bit about antagonistic or against looking into it.

Yes. And it is expressed in a way so that they can understand a little bit about antagonistic or against looking into it. And so, the first time I gave it up in Grants Pass, it was a proclaimed complete atheism for about 20 years. And he really gave us all this stuff and I can't understand it. It doesn't give it logic and it doesn't stack up and I wouldn't buy any of it. So, a friend of mine invited him to come down and he said, well, I'll come down. Anyhow, he came and he listened and when he left, my friend asked him what he thought of it and he said, you know, the only thing that ever made good sense to me, to me, She says, I'll buy that. Is that something I could buy? This is the first thing I've heard in 20 years that I could buy, yeah. But you know, I don't think they'd be an atheist, that's what I think. Well, actually, they aren't. And this is a point that I've made many times in lectures. And, of course, it is one of the moot points in The Man of Earth.

And I am emphasizing a little bit in my own edition. There are no such things as atheists among Earth men or any other planet, for that matter. There are many who proclaim it. When they proclaim atheism, they are in revolt against some particular concept of the deity. They're in revolt against the idea of God being an old man with a long white beard who sits on cloud nine and full strings and they all dance like puppets. Silly idea. Yeah, well, it is a concept against which your revolt is logical. Yeah. But in the rush of their emotions or the surge of their ego, they say if this concept isn't valid, then no concept can be. And therefore, there just isn't any such thing. But they know better. And sooner or later, circumstances always proves that they know better. I've seen this several times. Once very forcefully some years ago when I was working on an instruction job. And this was back in the days when safety precautions were minimal.

It was best. And we always lost a few men on every big construction job. Ten years later, there weren't lives lost. I've had the necessity of helping to scrape up some of the remains of some of my best friends who made a mistake at a critical moment. But on those jobs, you never knew when you went out whether you'd come back horizontally or vertically. It was, you know. Or in pieces. There were two young fellows that worked on this job with me all the way to God. And they were... They... They loved to argue atheism and all of this. Why, we're the... We're the supreme beings. We're independent of anybody else or any other power. But they don't say who made them or who made the world. Well, they didn't discuss this too much. But they... They were supreme and independent of any outside power. Well, we got into a position one day there on a job. What looked like the last second had come. There wasn't any... Any...

Any hope that we could see it all, that we would survive the next ten seconds. And they didn't lose one of those seconds in beginning to... In beginning to call on the supreme power. I mean, a man will deny any supreme power until he's exhausted all of his own. Until he's exhausted all of his own and he's still lost, he still helps us. Then he'll start seeking for the power that has no limitations. Come on in. Let's stop for a minute and do some more introductions. Mr. and Mrs. Kelly. Bill Green. Dan. Mrs. Frye is still out in the other room. This is Evelyn Livingston and Frank Burnett. Have you met the Reilly's? Bill Reilly and V. Reilly and Sylvia Conrad. You know my mother. Marguerite, you met them. And this is Marguerite's husband. Where's Mariela? Right here. And Daryl. Daryl too. Oh, we've missed Mariela since she's gone so long. Yeah, we've met the company of God that's already made. Oh, yeah. Came up in Mexico from San Diego.

He's a lady, ma'am, and he has to work all week. He's always working. That's right. He's always in a rush and coming up here, especially on Friday. Everybody's coming. I want Dan to tell about the plans for these. The symposium of the Dunsmuir. Sure sounds it. As to who he's having, he said it's really a matter of who they're not having. I mean, it'd be easier to mention those two. I don't think anyone has declined so far. There's been a lot. But mainly, it looks like we'll have a crowd there because for the first time, a symposium

such as this is getting the backing that it is. Usually, on a spacecraft convention, with a lot of effort and a little bang, you can get maybe a little sarcastic paragraph or so in the newspapers. By the way, I think I've got one of the newspapers in here. Mrs. Fry? This is Mrs. Fry, everybody. This is Mrs. Kilgreen. How do you do? Did you meet Mr. McGinney? This is Marguerite McGinney. Yes. Hi. This is Mrs. Riley, Sylvia Tompkins, and Evelyn Livingston, and Frank Burnett. I'm so glad to know you. Come on in. You can find another. I'm going to move right over here just a moment. The way this symposium idea got started in the first place, it was the idea of the editor

of the Reading newspaper, who put an editorial in the newspaper some months back remarking about spacecraft conventions that were held in the United States. There are the staff nivelles and the

paper they used to see. All right, so Marguerita, thank you very much for inviting me to the break. That's fine, ry. Or if you like it, you can take it from the beginning and just sing it all the way away.

Sure. I just got in.

Dunsmuir, California. That was the first town above Redding on the next state of life, above Sacramento.

The Redding newspaper was the first one to suggest it. And the editor of the Redding newspaper got a hold of the editor of the Dunsmuir newspaper, who knew me. And between them, they said, well, why don't we cook up such a thing, so they got a hold of me. I was kind of reluctant at first, but it looked like a rare chance to have a convention with all of the papers pulling for you,

instead of making snide remarks about what you were doing. So they have agreed to publish everything that's submitted to them verbatim. The result has been a constantly swelling interest in the thing,

all over the place. Over now, the... Well, this was the first squib that the Dunsmuir paper had. There's three columns here. Man in Space is the name of the symposium. The symposium at Dunsmuir. When this was sent to me, I thought, well, gee, they gave us quite a lot. It's all on the front page. Here's a quarter of the front page. Then I see that the editorial is also on this page here. We are getting information right now from the wonder of senior citizens. Only Dr. Daniel Pryor, an authority on flying saucers and UFOs, with a wide knowledge of the subject. A man that travels all over the world didn't cause him the subject. Dr. Pryor and a number of other authorities on the man in space UFOs and flying saucers will hold a symposium in Dunsmuir come June 3rd, 4th, and 5th, with public lectures at the elementary school gym. A school board has turned over the entire school to us for it. The Chamber of Commerce is sending out brochures advertising the symposium.

And the bus service, the city has offered to have free bus service from Dunsmuir to Mount Shasta. Those who want to see Mount Shasta and heard on Mount Shasta. All kinds of things. All of the authorities in these two cities are getting behind it to do their bit towards making it a success. And of course all these things tend to increase the number of people who will be there. We mentioned a moment ago, the convention was first announced on NBC in New York. And the first registration we got was from New York. So if we begin getting them from New York, we'll have quite a few of them. Tell them about your space. Yes, we're having a couple of first-time speakers as on a space convention. Pat Cody, L.D. Cody, is going to come and he's going to speak.

He is director of aerospace education for the entire Western Division. He is a person who completely accepts the reality of UFOs. In other words, he believes in saucers and he isn't afraid to say so, which is quite a rare key for a man in the Air Force, especially one who's in charge of aerospace education for the entire Western Division in the Air Force. It's something that's so seldom realized. This is a good thing because the Air Force as a whole gets blamed for what six people do. And the Air Force as a whole has nothing to do with that at all. All of the reports, the public reports that are made, these silly explanations that are made of the things that are seen, are all made by one person. One of six people and usually it's one of three. And it is their job to create explanations. The sillier the better. But it's their job to create explanations that will be accepted by those who desperately need means of escape

from a realization that they can't bear. And yet it's silly enough so it won't fool anyone who doesn't want to be fooled. This is a thing that doesn't seem to be realized throughout the country. And they say, how stupid can these explanations get? And they are stupid. And even the newspapers are beginning to ridicule the explanations. I don't know whether you saw the little cartoon B.C. the day before yesterday. It's a syndicated cartoon all over the country. These two cavemen, well there's more than that, but two of them, two of these cavemen are all together. And in the first cartoon they're sitting up on a pile of rock and there's a saucer coming across the sky. And the next picture it drops off, and there's a little ground craft, a little landing craft on the saucer. And it goes down, the landing craft comes up, and the next picture there's two other saucers going in opposite directions. And one of them turns to the other and he says,

the swamp gas is restless tonight.

Anyway, the newspapers are beginning to become more ridiculous with the explanations. But they're given for a purpose, and this is the thing that people don't realize. And one of the reasons I like you so much, because these questions should be understood by the general people. The Air Force isn't trying to fool anyone who doesn't want and need to be fooled. There are still a lot of people in this country, in fact, millions of people, like most of us were born and reared in the secure and somewhat smug belief that Earthman is not only the supreme product of the universe, but was its principal reason for creation. And the very existence of any superior race would destroy that concept. And they could not possibly accept the existence of any superior race, no matter how much evidence is available. Because it would destroy everything they have learned and accepted and believed, and would destroy their ego at the same time.

So these people can never accept the reality of life in the rest of us. You know, Jesus said, I have other plots. And a lot of people don't want to believe that. Now, there are many people, and this is the point that I have made many times in life, these people have said, they've used the Bible or the teachings of Jesus as a means of escape. They've said, well, if there were people on other planets, Jesus would have said so. Well, the thing is that he did. I mean, this is precisely and as plainly as could be said. And... He said, in my Father's house are many mansions. If it were not so, I would have told you. If you were really the only planet in this whole universe that had intelligent beings on it, I would have sold your ego by telling you so. But this isn't so. Anyway, there are these people who must have an escape mechanism. And it doesn't have to be logical. It doesn't have to make any sense. It can be just as ridiculous as

anyone wants it to be. Because these people are not looking for logic. They're not looking for a reason. They're looking for escape. And like a drowning man grasping at a straw, they will grasp at anything that offers a chance of escape. And so when someone sees an object flying at high speed in the sky and then slowing down and descending to Earth and settling to Earth and later taking off and flying away again, and someone says it's swamp gas, why, they say, well, fine. So the thing is explained. I don't have to worry about it anymore. But it won't fool anyone else. It won't fool anyone except those who need to be fooled. And so this is why these explanations are given. They're given for the benefit of people who still need it. But they're, in most cases, intentionally made so ridiculous that they wouldn't fool anyone else. Did you hear that sighting in Littleton, Denver, where those six-year-olds and six-year-old young people

were out there picnicking in those three ships? I don't know whether they were going down. I've heard of it, but I didn't see it in the paper. I mean, I've heard of it secondhand. Well, what I was going to ask you about, why, the girl said that the light didn't show in the back mirror. Now, what would be about the light that wouldn't show out of it? Well, I could speculate. I couldn't give a firm answer on that. It may have been, the light may have been polarized in some way. And the, the glass, the windshield glass is polarized to some extent anyway. And if it was polarized at right angles to the windshield glass or to the glass in the rearview mirror, you know, there, there is a, there is a possibility. There's a lot of things that, peculiar things that can happen if you're doing the polarized light to begin with. You know, you take two little pieces of plastic, they're actually polarization screens, although you can't see it.

The marks on them are much too fine to see with the naked eye. And you can hold them together and look up at the light, and the light comes through fine. And you just turn one of them right angles and it gets black. Well, I was kind of wondering, because Carl Anderson, you know, they said they put that X-ray out of his lungs after he and him, they don't show up in the X-ray. I wondered if it's some, you know, same thing. It could be. There's, there are so many possibilities inherent in situations like that that all we can do is speculate on them. We might create a theory that was perfectly logical. In fact, a theory that we could prove that we could duplicate the effect and still might not be the same, same way in which the effect was created. What do you think is going to be the ultimate of the space people to really show their here? And they seem to be more and more, you know, more of them coming all the time and more sightings.

And I was wondering, have they found a certain purpose on that or not? Well, I think there are some groups that are here with a purpose. This is the most basic of all questions that I discuss in a lecture in which there are people who are just beginning the subject. Because most of the questions that are asked about UFOs are not capable of being answered in any simple or direct way. Not answered fully because the questions themselves are great oversimplifications of the situation that raises the question. For instance, one person will see an object which is assumed to be a ship from someplace other than Earth. And someone else will say, well, from whence do they come? Or if a number of them are seen, from whence do they come? Do they come from Mars or do they perhaps come from Venus or do they come from someplace completely outside the solar system? Well, all of these people can be completely correct. I have heard the almost valid arguments

over whether the eggs of Dressros came from Mars or whether they came from Venus or whether they came from someplace else. And every one of the contenders could have been perfectly right. We live in a universe that teems with life and intelligence in every conceivable direction. And this has come to be accepted by, I think, every astronomer. Certainly every biochemist in the world has accepted it today and practically all of them. Life is something that is as much a part of nature and other places it isn't. The most common lecture that I give goes into this thing because it builds up understanding of the subject from the beginning. It starts with quotations from a lecture that was given by a prominent astronomer two years ago. And it was a rather remarkable lecture not because it said anything that isn't generally known or accepted but it's never been put together in that particular way before to the point where conclusions were reached.

He said we, in examining the possibility or the statistical certainty of extraterrestrial life and intelligence we can only proceed through the use of statistics. And he said, of course, statistics will not prove anything in any individual case. They are valid only when there are a large number of cases to study. But when there are a large number of cases they become a very precise science. The science of statistics is a science that enables an insurance company to determine an advance within one percent of how many policies they're going to have to pay off in any given year even though they haven't the faintest idea which policies they're going to be. And it is the science that enables the nuclear physicist to predict the half-life of an element to an accuracy of five decimal places even though he hasn't the faintest idea when the next atom will be efficient. So it is a precise science. But he said in this case we have

a fairly large number of items to deal with. We will discuss the number of astronomical bodies in this galaxy. Now this galaxy is our own star cluster, our Milky Way we call it, the cluster of stars of which our Sun is a part. At the present time we know of approximately 10 billion such galaxies. Ours is one of them and ours contains a little over 100 billion. 100,000 millions of stars in our own local star cluster. And this is one cluster of 10 billion known clusters today. But he said we will just deal with our own backyard, with our own local cluster because it's got 100 billion stars in it. This is a big enough number for a rather rigid application of statistics. So the first thing we will consider is what number of these stars have planets because life has to have a planet of some sort probably to originate on. To develop on. Although they become independent of planets at some stage in their development. But it is now assumed that virtually all stars

will have planetary systems. Even the nearest stars other than the Sun are too far away for us to see the planets with our present telescope. It is now assumed that they haven't. And it is now assumed that the average number of planets which a star will have if it has planets is 10. Now it is not assumed that all stars have planets because some of them are binaries and in some cases there are two or even three or more stars which rotate about a common center of gravity. And it's unlikely that these should have planets. Some of them might anyway. But it is assumed that most of the stars have planets and that the average one that has planets has 10. So the number of planets is at least twice as great as the number of stars and probably closer to five times that. So we would have somewhere between two and five hundred billion planets in this galaxy. Now the next question arises, what percentage of these planets will have conditions suitable for life?

And yet as we know life here, he pointed out that this is a very tiny segment of the total spectrum of possibilities because we don't even know too much about under what limitations we can have life on this planet. We find life teeming in every square inch of this planet. In polar regions where the snow never melts and the temperature is below freezing practically all the time we have a lot of various forms of life. And in the hottest portions we also have very active life. There's life in every corner of this planet no matter where you look. So we don't know just how much farther you could in terms of environment, how much hotter it could be or how much colder it could be and still have forms of life such as we have here. But he said we won't go into that. The possibilities there are infinite and we'd be forever just studying the possibilities of life other than the type we know. But we will consider how many planets may have life as we know it

or conditions for life as we know it. And he said of this solar system there are three of the planets we have here. There are three of them that we accept have conditions that could possibly support some sort of life as we know it. How three were they? Well, Mars, Venus and Earth. They have strong reasons for suspecting that Earth supports life. We have some reasons for suspecting that Mars supports it and some reasons for suspecting Venus supports it. At least they have conditions that conceivably could support Venus. So this would be a third of all the planets if we were going strictly by statistics. We'd have to say, well, a third of them would have conditions suitable for life. But it is pointed out that not all stars are as comfortably situated as ours. Some of them are variables. That is, they wax and wane in their energy output. Sometimes the output is three or four times as much as it is at other times.

And those produce a tremendous temperature swing on any planet. So they eliminate those. And some of the planets, of course, would be too far from the suns and some would be too close to the suns. He said we will take the most pessimistic of all estimates. And in every step of this consideration, where there is a controversy between one scientist and another, we will take the most pessimistic of all known estimates by a competent scientist as a basis for computing these probabilities. If we do this, if we make a whole chain of computations based at each step on the most pessimistic of all of the estimates, we will come out with a conclusion which we know must be far below the actual amount, but at least is a safe figure. It is an absolute minimum. So he said some argue that perhaps only one planet in one hundred will have conditions suitable for life. That would mean that there was only one planet in ten solar systems

that had conditions suitable for life. So he said we will accept that. This leaves us with two billion planets with conditions suitable for life, and two to five billion planets with conditions suitable for life as we know it, not to speak of all the other possibilities of life that there may be. The next step we have to consider is what percentage of those planets that have conditions suitable for life will actually have developed life. And here the biochemist today says it will happen on every planet that has conditions suitable for it, regardless. If we assume a divine plan of the universe, we have to reach the same conclusion that if these things were created for the creation of life, there's no reason why life shouldn't be created upon it. That would be sort of like building a house and then never having anyone live in it. It would seem to be a waste of effort. I think Dee Riley said it very well. One day somebody came to me,

and she said, God wasted a lot of space. Wasted a lot of material. But anyway, he said there is a, there is some degree of divergence in opinion among astronomers as to what percentage that had conditions suitable for life had life. But most of them say virtually all of the planets that have conditions suitable for it. The argument goes something like this. And I'm getting a little far-field, but these are points that are interesting to know. The argument goes something like this. One biochemist will say, well, I think life will develop on every planet that has conditions suitable for it. Another chemist who has to talk quite so deeply will say, well, no, this is a very delicate reaction to happen spontaneously. We have to first get amino acids generated spontaneously, and that's a very delicate chemical reaction. You have to have oxygen and hydrogen and nitrogen present at just the right temperature and in the right quantities.

And you probably have to have an electrical discharge, which would require lightning of some sort to be there. And so it is a reaction that's difficult to obtain even in the laboratory, and it wouldn't be too likely to happen at any given place at any given time just by chance. The first biochemist then says, well, all this is perfectly true. But on any planet such as the Earth, there are tens of millions of square miles of surface. On every square mile of that surface, there are tens of thousands of random chemical reactions taking place every minute of the day. And any planet that has conditions suitable for life at all will retain those conditions suitable for life for at least 2 billion years. For at least 2,000 million years, that planet will have conditions suitable for life. So sometime in that 2 billions of years on those 10 millions of square miles of surface that have tens of thousands of reactions taking place every minute,

every conceivable chemical reaction that can occur at all is going to occur not once but many times. So from a statistical standpoint, it's a certainty that it will happen sooner or later on any planet that has conditions suitable for it, even if we don't, if we're going by a theory of pure chance. If we don't accept the divine plan, if we have the divine plan, then of course it would happen too. So we reach the same conclusion whatever beginning point we start from. So the lecture said, nevertheless, there are some astronomers who say, let's not say all of them or even half of them or a fifth of them, let's say one or two, one in ten, it would certainly happen on life. So this leaves us 200 million planets that do have life in this galaxy, not in the universe, in this galaxy. 200 millions of planets. A certain number, is it the same number in every galaxy? No, the number of stars vary. An M31, M31 has about the same number as ours.

Most of the rest of them have a smaller number. The galaxies average, from 10 to 20 billion stars. We have the distinction of living in one of the larger galaxies. I mean, that's the only software egos that we have left. Starting with the concept that we were the center of the universe and everything revolved around us, and now the only thing we can say for ourselves is we live in one of the larger galaxies. But we come then with 200 million planets that have life. The next question that he dealt with, was the question of what percentage of that life had passed our present state of development, how much was behind us and how much was ahead. Well, if you were to apply pure statistics to this question, you'd have to say, well, and for lack of any other data, we'd have to say that probably half of them are behind us and half of them are ahead of us. But there is another specific factor that enters in here. We see that when a galaxy is formed,

and we see galaxies in all stages of formation today, among these 10 billion galaxies, that we see some are just beginning to develop stars, some of them are kind of this dark nebula, such as the Coalsack, or the Horse's Head Nebula in Orion. And they are incipient galaxies. They will be galaxies in a couple billion years from now. But as these things condense and develop into galaxies, we see that stars appear in the central portions first. And there is an estimated lag of about 2 million years between the time the stars appear in the center and the time the stars appear in the outer periphery of the galaxy. So all of the stars, presumably the planets on the inner portion of this galaxy, lead us by at least a couple of million years. That is a very small period of time compared to the time required to produce a galaxy itself, because this is at least a couple of billions of years, and so that's only one-tenth of one percent of the total time

to create the galaxy. But there is that lag between condensation on the inside and condensation on the outside. So the question comes down to, what part of the galaxy do we occupy? Are we in the center of the galaxy, among the great central suns where our life and planets originated,

[38:12] First major segment

or are we somewhere farther out? And of course our ego takes its final shadow and glow when we learn we're almost on the extreme outer edge. We're located in one of the spiral wings that's thrown out from the galaxy. We're definitely Johnny-come-lately's in this galaxy, probably one of the last planetary systems that was formed. There is even an estimate today, or quite a bit of evidence, that our sun is the secondary sun. That is, it is condensation of material that was thrown out from other suns earlier, which would place the interior suns in this galaxy at least four or five billion years ahead of us in terms of community. Well, it looks like creation goes on all the time. Yes, this is almost completely acceptable. I don't think creation... There are still a few adherents to the Big Bang theory, but they're growing fewer as our knowledge increases of the nature of the universe and our visual observation. We see galaxies in all stages of creation.

We can't say, well, we... By the laws, the original Big Bang theory produced certain laws, and the reddening of light with distance produced certain theories by which we measure the distances of stars in the ages of galaxies. And we had the big... When the Big Bang theory first became popular, we had everything nicely attuned to a two billion year age. We said this galaxy and every other galaxy were created two billion years ago in one big explosion that took about 30 minutes to complete. And the material was hurled outward and is still being hurled outward. It is not a very comfortable, philosophic concept because it requires you to sandwich 30 minutes of coherent time between two infinities. It's hard enough to imagine one infinity without trying to imagine two end to end and then putting 30 minutes of time in between. But, you see, this tremendous mass of matter that contained all the matter of all the suns in the universe

was in one lump, and it had been in one lump forever and ever and ever and ever. Because if you didn't accept it had been in one lump forever and ever, then you were faced with the question how it got in that lump in the first place, and you were just as bad off as you were at the beginning. So the adherents of the Big Bang theory said this matter was always there for billions of years, trillions of years, quintillions of years, any number, lot of time you want to state it was there. And suddenly it exploded. Well, no competent theory has ever been created to explain why after an infinity of quiescence it should suddenly explode. Nothing could be affecting it from the outside because all the matter in the universe was in one lump and hadn't been there forever. And yet it exploded, and the parts exploded, and in thirty minutes the galaxies were formed and the elements were formed just as they are now, and the galaxies started to recede

from each other, they started to move outward, and they've been moving outward ever since, and will continue to move outward forever and ever and ever and ever. So you see you've got two infinities, and you've got thirty minutes of coherent time sandwiched in between these two infinities, so it isn't a very easy concept. But anyhow it was, it was the ego of man that clung to this concept. It's no longer held by any competent astronomer that I know of because we see galaxies in all stages of creation. Well, do you think then that that has explained races too, the difference in the involvement of races, or? It may. There may be a lot of other factors that come in there. Races go up and go down, races destroy themselves and leave remnants which lose all of the culture, all of the abilities that were possessed by the race originally, and it may take ten or fifteen thousand years for that race to re-achieve the things that they had before.

But in examining, and going on in this lecture, and I'm dragging up more than I should, but there's many interesting points. Well, he lectured for about an hour and a half making these points, but he said we have, to accept the fact that most of the life in this galaxy will be ahead of us. We're probably one of the most backward races in this galaxy. And with the time like, he said now we reach a conclusion, and the minimum conclusion is this, we have to accept, based on what we know and all the science we know, and all the logic that we can apply to that science, we have to accept the fact that there were, in this galaxy, at least ten thousand planets in the central portion of this galaxy, that had on them intelligent life, and that intelligent life began to travel in space at least two million years ago. At least ten thousand planets that had races that began to travel in space at least two million years ago. And he said now you can,

this is an absolute irreducible minimum. We have reached this conclusion by accepting the most pessimistic of all the estimates given by a common amount of science today. So we can accept it or we can reject it, but if we reject it, we are rejecting with it all of the knowledge and all of the science which man has on this planet today. We have to start all over again. Let's junk all of our physics books, all of our science books and start all over again. We must accept that there were at least ten thousand planets in the center part of this galaxy which had on them intelligent races, which races began to travel in space at least two million years ago. Now he said to us that we must accept Now, he said, we come to the question of how many spaceships would 10,000 planets build in 2 million years?

How many spaceships would one planet build in 2 million years? Well, you can't express a number that would equal it. We'd build a few millions of airplanes on this planet. He said, it might help just a little bit. We can create a number at such a large power of 10 that the mind can't grasp it, but it is something we can work with mathematically. But it might help just a little bit in grasping what this means to stop long enough to remember that it has just been 55 years since Orville and Wilbur Wright managed to coax their first motorized box kite a few hundred feet off the ground at City of North Carolina. It's been 55 years since it was barely proven possible that you could get something heavier than air off the ground. The plane flew 128 feet in elevation. It was about six or eight feet above the ground, 55 years from now. Today, you can go down to any major airport on Earth, you will find tremendous planes laden with upwards of 100 passengers

taking off for foreign ports every two minutes of the day, right around the clock, every two minutes, 30 planes an hour, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. And every major airport on Earth, and there are hundreds of these major airports. So how many planes have we built in 54 years? He said, how many planes would one planet build in a million years? How many planes would 10,000 planets build in two million years? And what would be the degree of sophistication, the degree of scientific advancement? What would be the scientific abilities of those races or of their vehicles? Again, remembering that in 54 years, we have gone from a motorized box kite to orbital satellites that circle the Earth every 90 minutes in 54 years. He said, we couldn't even conceive of the abilities that a race would have that was as much as 100 years ahead of us because we can't begin to conceive of the abilities we will have in the next 100 years

any more than the person who left this planet 100 years ago could conceive of the abilities which we take for granted today. Bring back a person who left this planet 100 years ago and try to explain television to them. Show them that picture on that tube and try to explain how that thing is being transmitted is that it's a picture of something that's going on in New York and it's being scanned by a little black box and then it goes on to some wires and it comes to a microwave station from there it jumps into the air and it comes across the air for a ways and then it hits another little disk and then it goes on some wires again for a while and then it jumps out on another microwave station and pretty soon it gets here and so on and so forth. Try to explain television. Try to explain laser beams. Try to explain atomic energy. Try to explain orbital satellites. If you're any person who lived 100 years ago I became one of the greatest crackpots in Los Angeles County

about 1941. 42 I think. 1942 I was Treasurer and Secretary of the Pacific Rocket Society. And in an interview with one of the Los Angeles papers I was incautious enough to predict that we would have orbital satellites in our lifetime. That we would live to see them. And we got the most sarcastic write-up that a person could imagine. These young sprouts and kids and their dreams. True, this is something we might have sometime in the dim and distant future in a couple thousand years. Our ancestors might be able to do something like this or maybe even in a few hundred years they might but when we talk of orbital satellites in our lifetime it's just, how ridiculous can you get? As I recall it, this is exactly the deal. It's the same phrase that was used. So if we go back a hundred years and try to explain to people a hundred years ago the things that we take for granted now we find that they couldn't even have conceived of these abilities

much less attempted to work toward it. So if we assume that any race that visits us is as much as a hundred years ahead of us we have to assume that they certainly will have many powers and many abilities which are not only greater than what they are and those which we possess but in some cases are beyond our conception. We not only could not explain them we could not even conceive of those. But then he, the historian, went a little bit farther in his lecture and he said, we can create a number we can estimate by our own science how many airplanes we've built a few million airplanes in the last fifty-four years and we'll probably build twice as many in the next fifty-four years and maybe four times as many in the fifty-four years after that and so on but we can create an estimate of the number of spaceships that now exist in this galaxy remembering that we started with ten thousand planets and began building them two million years ago

and coming up to at least a hundred thousand to five hundred thousand planets additional planets that have since acquired the ability to travel in space during those two million we can create a figure and we can multiply this figure by the average number of miles that such a craft might travel in a year's time and we can divide this figure by the number of cubic light years in the galaxy and we create what we call a cross-sectional density of spacecraft if any of you have worked in nuclear physics they have what they call a cross-sectional neutron density this is just a number that predicts how many neutrons will pass through a given size opening in a given amount of time of radioactive material and he said by this we can predict how many spacecraft just at random would pass a given point in the galaxy no matter where that point was we can create an average figure of spacecraft that would pass say within one mile or ten miles

or a hundred miles at a given point in a given period of time and he said if we apply this to our planet we find that it predicts that we have had at least ten thousand visitations probably a hundred thousand close flybys but ten thousand coming close enough so that they would have to have gone around the earth to avoid hitting even if they didn't come here if they were just on their way somewhere else again this is a figure we can accept or reject but if we reject it again we are rejecting with it all of the science that man can apply it to this question if his ego wants to overtake his reason then your ego can throw out all reason if it wants to but as long as we retain any reason this is what we have to accept as being the answer now one step farther than this he said if we had ten thousand visitations and they were random visitations just a result of this spaceship cross-section density and just random ships traveling in some direction

for some purpose to some place if we had only ten thousand visitations it would be statistically improbable that any two of them would come from the same place because the number of possible sources is so much greater than that number that it would be statistically improbable that if there were just random passage that any two of them would come from the same place if you live in a steamer lane in some of the south sea islands that are in steamer lanes you may see twenty ships go by in a week and there would just be about an even chance that any two of those ships would come from the same country but there are a limited number of countries on this planet and despite the unlimited number of sources of life in the galaxy so he said when we see a ship or when we see something that seems to be a spacecraft and we speculate on whether or not it came from some place other than this planet no one can say whether this was from mars

whether it was venus or something like that there are two thousand or two hundred thousand planets that now have life traveling in space or not we could only locate that ship if we had communication with the individual that was operating that's the only way we could ever determine where it came from and then it would only be significant as far as that ship and the next one might be from an entirely different place he said of course if some other race had a large number of craft from the same planet generally the same type of craft and coming for the same purpose this would not then be just a random thing this would be an actual visitation but we could have had ten thousand spaceships landing here or coming close to our surface to look us over just by random that had no interest or intention of landing there at all but if we didn't have interest by some of these groups then of course we couldn't have a number of them coming to the same place

and this apparently is true because there are a number of types of ships which are seen all over the world and fairly recently and wherever they are seen they tally almost exactly I've never really discussed it I've only had the opportunity to speak with one such individual and only on for a case and so that is why there was any kind there has been specific information transmitted for specific purposes it's always precise and it always works out exactly but these have not been predictions as to conditions on the planet in most cases they have been descriptions of things that were required here or things to be done I did on one occasion ask whether there was any absolute knowledge as to whether there would be a general nuclear war on this planet and I asked whether he knew what he could say and neither could anyone else that this race is still endowed with the right of self-determination and that nuclear war will never be inevitable

on this planet until the first nuclear weapon bursts over the first city then it will be inevitable but up to that point we have the complete power of course when we say we this means the human race on this planet collectively rather than individually then wouldn't that that happen wouldn't that affect what possible effect do you think that would have on the other planets well there would be some effects it would depend on somewhat on how the weapons were used and where they were used if any of them were used in deep water there would be two suns in this solar system a small sun circling about the large sun and if they did it would certainly destroy all life on both Mars and Venus because then the earth the earth which would then be a sun comes close enough to both Mars and Venus to certainly destroy all life well assuming that and assuming there is a government in our solar system ahead of the government I would like to say that

we did have the right of self determination but when it affects the other planets couldn't they come to the conclusion that in self protection to themselves that they would not allow this to happen they not only can come to the conclusion they have come to the conclusion and have acted on that conclusion at least twice I don't know whether there were other cases or not but there is in the galaxy what we might refer to as a general doctrine it is a policy of non-interference in the development of life on planets they as an ordinary thing do not have the right to interfere unless the race requests it but there are two occasions when direct interference or intervention is justified that is in a case where a growing intelligence a growing race which has not yet reached the age of reason we are still adolescent here as far as the development of a race is concerned when such a race is on the point of doing something that will destroy itself

completely they have a right because a race has no right to destroy itself as a race also if that race is on the point of doing something that will seriously affect other races which have no choice in the matter there have been at least two occasions I thought that you had heard this story in at least one of the lectures I don't give it too often because I have no proof of the factuality of it except the evidence the known evidence of history itself although I did talk to a sailor who said he was on the boat I met him through my son whom I said was over in Kauai for almost four years firing regular missiles but through him I became acquainted with who had said he was on a certain boat and this aroused my interest now I think most of you if you think back will remember that in the very first series of tests the very first series of atomic tests which this country ever performed on Bikini Atoll and several other atolls and some at sea

there were two underwater tests of nuclear devices were scheduled one was a shallow water test and the other was a deep water test the shallow water test was completed you all should remember the pictures in the magazine there was a big picture on Line Life magazine of this tremendous column of water that was going up and about half way up the column of water one of our battleships looked like sailing vertically up this column of water it's a picture that was in many newspapers and many magazines at the time this was only one way of showing the almost inconceivable force of such an explosion now this was a this was a low yield it was called a low yield device in other words a toy atom bomb not even a hydrogen bomb just an atom bomb not even a small one and this was exploded a few hundred feet down but it threw a column of water into the air that was approximately a mile across and on one edge of it what happened to battleships

in the presence of an nuclear and it caught one of these ships that was only about a half mile away from the center of explosion was caught in the edge of the upsurge of water and it looked it didn't look too impressive he just looked at the picture without thinking here was this column of water with a big mushroom top on it and here was this battleship sailing vertically up this column of water it didn't look it didn't mean too much until you realized that ship weighed 32,000 tons and that the ship was about 900 feet long and in one of the pictures now there's various pictures this thing was filmed on motion picture film and so various pictures were printed in various places but one of the pictures showed the ship about two and a half ship lengths above the surface of the water so it was about 2500 feet in the air so this bomb lightly tossed a 32,000 ton ship 2500 feet in the air half a mile in the air just because it happened to be on the

extreme outer edge of the explosion of a very low yield nuclear device but this is beside the point they did complete this shallow water test the deep water test was to be a depth of one mile they were going to lower this bomb down one mile into the water and it went within 12 hours of next time the time it was to be fired the plans were complete at that time the test was first postponed and next was cancelled and I have never heard any serious talk of a deep water atomic test since that time and I had wondered about it several years had passed another series of tests had come up and nobody had ever talked about reactivating this deep water test and I had wondered a little bit about it I had speculated a little bit I didn't really know what they were doing but when I had heard this trailer was on the station ground the ship that had the the ship that had the nuclear device aboard it was to lower it that night and set it for touching off the next morning

after the ship was out of frame so I asked him if he knew why this test had been postponed and then cancelled and he said well I could tell you a story about that but I hesitate to do it because I've done it a few times before and everybody always laughs at me and I said well I'm real interested in it and I can't promise that I will accept this story but I certainly won't laugh at it whatever it is so he said well it seems the situation was like this at about 4 o'clock in the afternoon of the day that bomb was to be lowered now it was to be the lowering operations were to begin about 6 or 7 that night and it was to be fired about dawn the next morning at about 5 o'clock in that afternoon a common seaman approached the deck officer of the ship and asked permission to speak with the project scientist aboard and when they run these tests they have the regular military group but they always have a civilian expert aboard a nuclear scientist aboard

who supervises and he actually had surgery but the common sailor asked permission to talk with us and of course the deck officer came off he said well gee he's busy this is the afternoon the tests are over he wanted to talk to the common sailor anyhow but the sailor insisted and finally more or two he'd get rid of me and I'll see deck officer well I'll call him and tell him what you want to see and then I'll imagine but anyhow he called him and apparently they were having a coffee break and the nuclear physicist apparently told the ship from there on because the story from there on was what he had told to the other members of the ship and he said this one sailor came in and said sir I realize that these projects are not undertaken without a great deal of advanced thought a great deal of advanced study and careful consideration and I know that every possibility of this must have been deemed a safe one or it would never have been protected

and I know that you must have gone through the calculations of the energy reproduction rate due to fusion of hydrogen because as you know and I know if a nuclear device is exploded close to the surface the water is immediately displaced upward the fireball immediately expands and a great explosion takes place and a few million fish are killed except a large amount of the water to make radioactive but as you know water is completely incompressible or almost completely incompressible and if you lower one of these nuclear devices one mile down in the water it will have a tremendous amount of water to accelerate before it can expand at all this means the fireball will be contained instead of expanding the fireball will be contained it may be essentially contained for a major fraction of a second which doesn't sound very long to us but in nuclear physics it's a tremendously long time the entire explosion reaction of an atomic bomb

requires about 100 successive chains that is one neutron creates a fission and those two neutrons the three neutrons that result from that create two or three fissions and the three that result from that create other fissions such fissions before you get a nuclear explosion and the entire thing takes place in less than a million to a second so a second is a very long time except for all of this time for as much as a million microseconds in nuclear physics you have to use the microsecond because it is quite a long period of time for as much as a million microseconds this fireball will be contained it cannot appreciably expand at all and it will exist then as you well realize at temperatures of a few hundred million degrees centigrade and there will be pressures of a few millions of atmospheres based on the water and that under these temperatures of course the water will immediately be disassociated into its component elements

oxygen and hydrogen and the hydrogen will come off as monotonic nascent hydrogen without electrons or chemical bonds and that under these conditions you have an ideal circumstance for the fusion of hydrogen now no hydrogen bomb would ever be built at that time he says you will have an ideal condition for the fusion of hydrogen and some of that hydrogen is going to fuse as I know you must have considered this you must have calculated that the amount of hydrogen which would fuse would produce only an amount of heat that would be dissipated more rapidly in other words a recessive reaction rather than a progressive reaction you must have calculated that the energy reproduction rate would not go above one because if it did go above one you would have a hydrogen reaction a hydrogen bond that had all of the waters of all of the oceans you would have a hydrogen bond that had an explosive capability equivalent to almost a million cubic miles

and he said I know that your figures must have shown that this kind of thing will not happen but you also must know how many mistakes are made I would just like to remind you sir that this is one time in which you can only make one mistake and with that he turned on his wheel and he walked out while a scientist admitted that he was somewhat peeved at this because here was a common seaman coming and telling him his business that every indication was that so little hydrogen would fuse it isn't as though it were tritium deuterium and tritium going together he hadn't thought that very much but he began to think about that last statement he couldn't get that last statement out of it this is a case where you can only make one mistake and he began to remember how many other mistakes he'd made how many times he'd been sure of something so he finally concluded that perhaps discretion was the better part of valor and perhaps the figure should be rechecked

he got on the radio and called some of the other stations and they had a short conference and decided to postpone the test but immediately thereafter the scientist again began to think about this seaman he wondered how a common seaman knew so much about nuclear physics and he called the deck officer and said bring that young man back to me I'd like to learn some more I'd like to learn why he was educated the deck officer said ok sir I'll look him up I didn't take his number or location but I'll sit that down over there the sailor was the young man who was talking to me he said no it's darn same he said they went through that ship for three days nobody's ever seen that sailor before nobody's ever seen him since the interesting thing was the first time I told that story somebody in the audience immediately said gee why did he appear as a common sailor why did he appear as an officer and this is human nature everybody always says

why can't it be the authority but well the point is the point is this if that being had appeared as an officer it would have been recognized instantly that he was an imposter because all the officers were well known the deck officer said well what's your rating what's your class what's your rating but nobody pays any attention to a common seaman so in any event it is one of the interesting facets of history it is known that the test was cancelled it was postponed first then cancelled there hasn't been any serious talk since then of a de-quartered test the atomic bomb but we have in the meantime built the hydrogen bomb which shows how nicely and easily hydrogen goes together with hydrogen and what the results are we have a hydrogen bomb that has a blast effect of 20 million tons of TNT and it's about something around it's about 5 feet 2 and maybe 10 feet long and it has a blast effect of 20 million tons of TNT so imagine a cubic mile

of that stuff going off imagine having a block of it a mile in each direction going off and then multiply that by almost a million and it would not allow a true hydrogen bomb to go off because it would rip their planets well a true hydrogen bomb would make that would make the sun out of this planet and of course that would make the other planet but if that had taken place now we probably would have been 12 hours of losing this planet we were in 12 or within 12 hours of converting this planet into a miniature sun rotating about the other sun and of course when it came around we had to go back to Mars or Venus there's plenty of heat to destroy all life on this planet so in this case there obviously was direct intervention just sufficient just enough to prevent it from happening there was no order by anyone there wasn't a fleet of ships coming down that said well we'll sink your ship if you don't agree to cancel this test

probably would have been done I mean if they couldn't have made people see reason any other way it wouldn't have been the last resort because it would have been better to lose the ship than lose the planet but as it was the logical approach was successful but I frequently tell the story when people and it happens every once in a while in groups people will say oh gee if these beings are around why don't they do something for us slip us a million dollars a piece and of course they didn't money wouldn't do any good there's only so much money so much goods produced in the world but why don't they do this and why don't they do that and I say well it's a good deal it always reminds me of a story a fellow was complaining about his brother being a no good and his friend says well gee didn't he loan you $500 last week did Joe pay him back oh no well didn't he loan you $300 a week before that well didn't he loan you $800 a week before that

yeah he did that but what's he done for me this week so this is the attitude of a lot of people the fact that this planet is here at all due to the fact that we had the visitors who were concerned what might happen who had enough ability to observe what was going on avoid it well they're going to fire the third one yet that wasn't very strong what was the second time they interviewed was in Russia well actually it was it was about two years no it was about two years after that they built a bomb that they never fired at all and they claimed it was a true hydrogen bomb and this is exactly these are the exact words they used in their news stories of course it was written in Russian first but in the translation he said we've got one that's a real hydrogen bomb and they never did get it there were hints there were direct stories that seeped out here of the firing times that had been set the X times that had been set something went wrong

and finally nothing went wrong they pulled the trigger just nothing happened they didn't pull off they just turned it off

on the radio yesterday it was reported that they said that from all the evidence that they have that the Russians had seen it and it could well be true although if it is it's the first time that we have ever caught them in an exaggeration there has been speculation that much of what they said it might be for the purpose of gaining status rather than for many successful operations but they have the missiles there really isn't any reason why they couldn't the big argument the big problem is that only one man walked in space and the pictures of that man walking in space were taken from some place farther out in space I mean they showed the vehicle they showed the man getting out of the vehicle they showed the vehicle itself and of course the immediate question is who took the pictures if he was the only one that went out of the vehicle in space who took the pictures of him coming out so it is a good argument they said well this vehicle

had a little camera boom on it that swung out so they could take these pictures and so forth there could be explanations but they have nothing to make then and the pictures do not look like the pictures that we are getting of space walks the lighting seems to be complete it does look more as though it were done on a stage than as though it were done in space whether this indicates that they haven't walked in space I don't know it only requires a reasonably good space suit maybe they want to be first yeah well this is possible they realize of course they keep very close tabs on the radar which we are progressing and they want to do everything a few days at least before we do so it could have been that they weren't ready to actually send an astronaut out but wanted to have a first in all the categories although we have doubted their achievements many times and so far I have almost always found them to be correct starting with the very

first one the very first Kvetnik when they announced that it weighed 186 pounds our press immediately reported this fact they said that the report came that it weighed 186 pounds but that this was of course an error that the decimal point had been left out that it should have been 18.6 pounds because it happened that our little grapefruit that we were trying to get ready to fire did weigh 18 pounds and so they couldn't conceive of the Russians being able to launch a substantially larger vehicle and we especially one that was 10 times as large so they just put it down as an error that the decimal point had been left out I read stories from two or three papers that all quoted the same thing well it obviously really was only 18.6 pounds but it had been erroneously reported as 186 which would have been alright except for the fact that about 60 days later they launched one that weighed a half a ton and this was kind of hard for us to take

because we still hadn't quite got our 18.6 pounds but these things they did there's no question that they had a large launching vehicle they had concentrated everything they'd put all their eggs in one basket and they'd got a tremendous launching vehicle which is still all that they have essentially they have only one space vehicle where we have half a dozen and their technology in many ways is much simpler ours is much more sophisticated than most of their technology they're getting some real good instrumentation really in control now but when the first Sputnik was launched people by the hundreds or almost by the thousands came to me and called me and wherever I was because they knew I'd been in the rocket field since the beginning of the rocket in this country as a governmental development and they said well how in the world did the Russians ever manage to get ahead of us well the answer of course was if they hadn't got ahead they hadn't got ahead they had always

been ahead they started a good four years before we did in a concentrated development of rockets when I first started working up at Caltech up in Eaton Canyon we were testing the very first military rockets this country ever built and they started with the little float lights as they called them they were eleven and a half inches long and seven eighths of an inch in diameter we went from there to the beach barrage the BBR missiles that were two inches in diameter and about eighteen inches long and we went from there to the well the anti-submarine bomb had the same size motor on it we went from there to the three inch spinners and then the five inch spinners and up to the holy Moses as we called it and so on and Tim but when we first started that facility there in Eaton Canyon or Pasadena the Russians were already in the war and they were using the Capuchin missile by the thousands in the battlefield every day they had these

mother barrel half track launchers they would load about a hundred of these and end up in just in racks on this half track and they would move this out in the battlefield they could fire either solver they could fire it individually they had a regular keyboard they could fire these things they could fire a whole row at a time or they could fire it one at a time or they could fire the whole thing at a time but they were using rockets in the field by the thousands before we ever began to develop the personnel so they were a good four years ahead to begin with we did catch up with them in some ways we bypassed and we went by well we were ahead of all of the world in in solid fuel missiles at the close of the war because we had developed the means of extruding cordet that was based in Bocan it was used in almost all of these it's it is a combination of nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin and it isn't too sensitive after you get it

combined but it's pretty sensitive along the way and the under certain circumstances the nitroglycerin can sweat out in beads on the outside and then it becomes pretty sensitive but in the grain itself it isn't sensitive to shock it's sensitive only to heat but it's darn sensitive to heat do you think they've taken pictures on the other side of the moon or oh they published some that were presumably taken on the other side of the moon and again the argument comes up that they didn't it's a pretty poor picture and it isn't too much well it got lately I saw it published one that was much better than the original ones but it didn't look too much like the original one that was pictured so maybe they have got some now yeah well there's no question that they can do it any time they choose now and as I say probably have the only question is was the first picture they claimed authentic or not but they certainly did put a spacecraft out there in a position to

get a shot because all of our own dishes followed its flight all the way up there's no reason why they shouldn't have gotten a shot but didn't the Russians get the start from the original German V2's and they got the majority of the V2 technology this was this was our now this was our oversight this was our own negligence and I've written this up many times including the article on the rockets passed by in the future it was our negligence that they got it because we took that area we took all the area around Queen Wendy first and we occupied it for a number of weeks we had promised to turn it over to Germany or to Russian control but we actually occupied it for some weeks well we could have occupied it longer we could have postponed our evacuation a little bit longer if we wanted to but yeah well we rushed in well the bombs alone wouldn't have done any good it was the people that it was the people that we left behind it that hurt

we took most of the V2's with us we loaded up over 200 V2's in various stages of completion a few that were complete in fact we ran over a three year test program at Hoyt-Sanford and Brown's using it since it had been brought over we hopped them up a little bit upgraded them to use different types of fuels and so forth and increased the range and the velocity and the altitude but we picked up say what V2's were lying around loose and we picked up Wernher von Braun and Willie Lay and about two other there were only two other scientists that we brought over at all we have in this country our problem is we placed too much store by the big brass by the top figures so we took four over and left 10,000 behind and the Russians came in and they approached every scientist they approached every engineer they approached every technician they approached every laborer that ever worked on rockets and gave them all an opportunity to come to Russia

and join in the big rocket development and most of them went whether they agreed with communism or not most of them had no chance no choice because there was a total technological vacuum in Germany I mean you could go to Russia and build rockets or you could stay in Germany and dig ditches and there weren't very many ditches to be dug you could go hungry real easy in Germany if you didn't go to Russia so they really had no choice there isn't any evidence that they were forced to go apparently offered their choice but most of them chose to go because this is what I heard well I don't doubt that there were some of them that didn't even the common labor men from eastern well there may have been some that were recalculated and all right and I don't doubt that those went to Siberia but I mean in the most in most cases they didn't have to do that the mere invitation was enough because if they just left them behind they were pretty well they were

putting it as bad in Germany as it would have been in Siberia if they just left them behind so there really is there really wasn't any choice regardless of whether they used force or not but by hook or crook or by force or not force they did get the bulk of the German technology it doesn't make any difference now both sides have for some years been independent of any outside technology but it did give them a big head start Dan I want to ask we had quite a breakthrough this year with the so many sightings and so many new people becoming interested young people our meetings we've had kids even come on dates you know um what is the new phase now that we're getting the interest what do you think will happen next well it is a general progression and a completely predictable progression a new generation is coming on which accepts this thing at its face value whereas new generations always accept new conditions the old generation always fights

to maintain the status quo and that's the battle against any new innovation especially if you put it down to a certain point the new generation is born with it it comes up and accepts it completely and goes on from there in the time before the voyages of Christopher Columbus I would say probably at least 999 out of every thousand people in Europe were completely convinced that the earth was flat it would ridicule any suggestion that it could possibly be otherwise they would say well it's ridiculous to talk of a spherical earth on which people on the underside are walking with their heads down and don't fall off of course they would fall off I mean it's common sense so the world couldn't possibly be spherical it required an entirely new concept to the physical science even to enable people to conceive of such a thing it was totally inconceivable at the beginning well the trips the voyages that Columbus made certainly did not prove anything

he never got around the world he never even found the Indies that he was going after but there was complicity about his going and his coming there was a lot of talk about it and so forth and he brought things back and this caused in the end caused a lot of people to open their minds to possibilities that were never before considered it still required more than a full generation after Columbus' last trip it still required more than a full generation before as many as half of the common people of Europe could accept the concept of a spherical earth more than a full generation in fact after men had sailed around and after the remnants of Magellan's crew completed their circumnavigation it still required almost a full generation before half the people could accept it the possibility of a circular so these things these new advances new breakthroughs and concepts don't come about rapidly usually they require to accept completely it requires another generation

coming in well what I mean is this space program as it is now what do you think is going to happen within the next couple of years in our own space program is there going to be a lot of no I mean in the space people's space program well we are becoming aware are there going to be mass landings well we won't have any mass landings until we a substantial percentage of the people in this planet want it this has been gone into so many times I said the same thing first and got the same answer the answer is the same as the doctrine we were talking about we will not and we cannot force our knowledge or our culture upon your race and we cannot and will not appear en masse at least before your people until there is substantial evidence that the majority of people want it because otherwise we are forcing ourselves upon them as long as the majority do not want it and they declare the evidence that they do not want it we cannot do it

but don't you think Dan can't cause the forces building up but then they will do it this brings up a different situation they are then not forcing anything on us they are merely taking off those who want to go it's a completely different situation if you get on the Queen Mary you get on a speed boat and come up to Queen Mary and climb aboard and say I want to run this ship for you and you do this is one thing but if that ship is sinking and there are people in the water and you go pick some of them up well it's a completely different situation you are not then demanding to run the boat you are just rescuing the survivor there is this reversal of the poles you know it's been talked about a lot well it happens occasionally and it has happened a couple of times in geologic history and probably will happen again when I'm not holding my breath until it happens let's see things that have 42,000 years in between them and of course it could happen in the next five minutes

and it could happen in the next 500 years or the next thousand years but there is some evidence at least some people say they have evidence that it is imminent and they may well be right but it isn't a subject that I take too seriously that is I accept the possibility I accept this hazard as we have to accept a lot of hazards and I don't want to carry it together as if I started to worry about it too much then I wouldn't I subscribe to the statement of the philosopher who once said that the path from the cradle to the grave is so beset by a multitude of dangers it's a wonder any of us live to reach the latter

I want to say we have a break it's almost 10 o'clock refreshments and be thinking some questions did Dan say anything about Pat Cody speaking at the symposium yes he did so we'll I was wondering how he's bringing it to the Air Force when is this June 3rd, 4th, 3rd, 4th, and 5th he has he has noted for his lectures to high school groups now he's being paid by Air Force for lecturing to groups and this is one of the best groups that the Air Force as a whole is not trying to conceal or hide information on this there is a group who does and we should go into it for at least it takes about 5 minutes maybe 4 minutes to illustrate the whole position of the Air Force on this matter various attitudes and so forth

[01:35:31] Second major segment

and of course there are many flyers many Air Force flyers that have observed these things close enough to know that they're real and there are these too in combat one of them is out of the service and is willing to admit it the other is still in and isn't quite ready to talk in public about this yet but in evaluating the attitude of the Air Force toward unidentified flying objects we have to remember first that the Air Force at a point in our history was established as a separate entity in itself originally the Navy had a few planes and they didn't use them very inefficiently and someone suggested that they have an Air Force that controlled itself that was independent of both the Army and the Navy so this was thought to be logical but in order to set up such an agency you have to have an appropriation of money from the Congress in order to get such an appropriation you have to have a bill introduced and when you introduce a bill, the bill has to say

why you want the money what is this force going to do, what is its purpose for existence and if you will look up that original statement the purpose, you will find that the Air Force was organized to protect the people of the United States against danger from the air quote unquote to protect the people of the United States against danger from the air now if you look at any official release which the Air Force has ever made about unidentified flying objects is but it's an official release released by the Air Force itself you will find oh first statement X thousands of these things have been investigated so many we think were balloons so many we think were aircrafts so many we think were unidentified or unexplainable as yet but we have reached the conclusion that these objects do not represent a hazard to the people of the United States it's a very peculiar statement you will find it in every release but you can see now what it means

they exist for the purpose of protecting the people of the United States against danger from the air the instant they say we have decided that these things are not a hazard to the people of the United States they are washing their hands of the whole matter they no longer have any concern no longer have any responsibility if that object is a manned craft if it has beings from another planet and it does land on earth and some being gets out if he doesn't have a passport that's the State Department's problem it's no business of the Air Force if he doesn't have a health certificate and doesn't have his shots that's the Public Health Service's problem if he doesn't have an immigration quota that's somebody else's problem if a thing sets down in the middle of the runway that's the Aeronautics Department's problem it's always somebody else's problem unless they have bombs aboard or unless they come here for the purpose of attacking

the people of the United States because if they don't it's none of the Air Force's business if they don't it's none of the Air Force's business they may be curious but they have no right to spend public money on that subject unless it offers some threat to the safety of the people of the United States so when they're saying we have reached the conclusion that these do not present it as people of the United States they're officially washing their hands of the whole matter now when one of these objects appears it is the business of the Air Force the unknown object is picked up on a radar scope and it's coming from especially it's coming from the north moving southward at high speed it could be a missile it could be a missile from the Soviet Union it could contain a 20 megaton bomb it could be on its way to a city to kill a million people and this is the Air Force's business they've got to concern themselves with that object right away

they have to throw everything they've got up in the way of that thing and try to either identify it or they've got to shoot it down if they can't these are standing orders and it's obvious why I mean they can't risk losing a million people just because some object is up there where we don't think it should be and it doesn't identify itself so they will intercept if they can they will identify if they can and if they can't they will shoot it down if they can but if they fail to do any of these things the object gets by and if it doesn't go down when they shoot at it none of them ever has yet but if it gets by and goes on about its business it's moving much too fast for planes to intercept from the rear if they don't get it then they have no chance but if 20 or 30 minutes passes and there's no explosion anywhere it obviously wasn't a missile and therefore in that sense it was not a danger to the people of the United States

and it's no longer any of the Air Force's business they watch the Air Force as a whole it washes its hands of the matter at that point but there is one point there is one problem remaining and that is that when intercepts are ordered when these things are seen it always comes to the attention of the public millions of people know that something was chased up there and they want to know what it is they say what in the world was that thing that was chased there has to be some answer given to them because if there isn't then these questions will pile up in the mind and they'll pester the individual and he'll begin formulating his own conclusions and they may be correct and they may be incorrect in any event they can lead to hazard even if only mental hazard to the people of the United States the questions have to be answered in some way so that they can quit thinking about it so the Air Force has set up a very tiny office

it's never consisted of more than six principal individuals they do have people with whom they can consult who will be paid for consultation and so forth and they do have office workers and some officers with whom they can consult but the Air Force itself has nothing directly to do with this the Air Force has a division called the AMC or the Air Material Command this is the agency of the Air Force that does most of the purchasing and arranges the contracts and gets the material necessary of this subdivision there is a subdivision which is known as ATIC or Air Technical Intelligence Center it's located at Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio it's responsible for the obtaining of specialized information for the Air Force if the Air Force has a problem has a question and they can't find the answer in the encyclopedia they call up ATIC and say run this down research this for us find out the answer that we want to know so of this subgroup

there is a sub-sub-subgroup a branch of ATIC which as I say has never consisted of more than six people its headquarters is also at Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio they are the ones who are given the task of making creating some explanation that people will buy now it doesn't have to be the correct explanation it doesn't matter darn a bit whether it's the correct explanation or not and probably very seldom is the correct explanation sometimes it may be if it does it's more chance than anything else but they are given the responsibility of relieving the public mind of concern over what this thing was the Air Force is interested while it's still in sight and it might be a missile but after it's proven not to be a missile then the only one that's interested is one or more of these six people this little windowless building at Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio where they go in and they get all the data together and they say well was this a balloon

was it a misinterpretation of a conventional aircraft was it an astronomical body and so forth and they go through them and they probably have a chart up on the wall with all these things on it and they throw darts at it whichever one the dart penetrates that's the explanation for the object well whatever means they use in obtaining their answer the answer very seldom ever explains the observed data in many cases the explanation is much more incredible and ridiculous than the observed data which it purports to explain but nevertheless the people that need that explanation will accept it it doesn't matter how ridiculous it is they've never told anyone so far as I know let's have a picture but in any event this is the situation that the Air Force I mean the great bulk of the Air Force has no responsibility in this matter at all a certain force has responsibility to intercept an object if it's unexplained then it could be a mess

and we've got to make sure that it isn't before a million people get killed but once they're satisfied that it isn't they have no more concern but there are six people and practically every public release that's ever been made under the cloak of the Air Force has been made by one of these six people this is a very interesting group in some ways it's called Project Blue Book now it's come full cycle when Ruppelt first took charge of this group at the very beginning it was also called Project Blue Book and then about two years afterwards it was announced that the whole thing had been discontinued they'd completed their job and the whole thing was discontinued and the name was changed to Project Grudge and two years after that it was again announced that the whole thing was being discontinued they'd completed their job and the name was changed to Project Sign it's had five names and of course it has had different personnel

because some of the personnel are enlisted personnel and they complete their tours of duty and they go on and other people are assigned but the project itself has gone on without a day's interruption ever since it started with Captain Ruppelt and this was admitted by Captain Hector Quintanilla in an interview here last year he gave a very candid interview I was amazed at the facts that he admitted the admissions that he made raised questions and he didn't answer any of the questions because the questions themselves were very startling he admitted first that these researches were carried on in a windowless building that was constantly surrounded by armed guards now I've seen this building and they do have this is a little different proposition than having a guard at the door that you flip your badge at as you go through the door to have armed men patrolling almost always indicates that there is hardware present under no circumstances

I know in any military establishment that they had armed patrols around the building if this is simply a building where data is taken that is taken at random throughout the country publicly known data is supposed to be taken in there for analysis and they'll have a computer or two and some business machines in there and a couple of people who do some data but if this is data that was public long before it ever came in there what is the excuse or the reason for having armed guards around it? it's not necessary to have a windowless building in which to do this one of the ladies in our unit was telling Barbara that her son was one of those guards and he said to her a long time ago he said that mother don't let anybody tell you that there was no armed soldiers well then now he's out there somewhere he won't talk about it and he just kind of keeps quiet like they all do one of the other things that Clinton Allen admitted in this interview

to the press and I've got the clipping I think I've still got it here he stated that the project he said originally the project was called Project Grudge and he said it has since been changed to Project Blue Book but he says the Air Force declines to state what either of the names mean or why they were chosen and that he admitted that it had been changed but he said it's now Project Saucer or was Project Grudge he did not admit he did not state that it was Project Saucer to begin with then became Project Grudge then became Project Sign then there was another one which I'd forgotten in the meantime and then it became Project Grudge again and now it's Project Saucer but every two years they've changed the name they've been disbanded but he admitted a number of other things he said they have been investigated 10,000 and some hundred items and of these at the present time 10 percent remain totally unexplained well this was interesting

in that only about a year before that came out they had stated that the unexplained were down to a little less than 2 percent 1.8 percent pardon that's two years well here's the thing see now a year before this interview they'd explained all but 1.8 percent a year later they were 10 percent unexplained well there hadn't been enough investigations or enough reports during that time so even if all of those were unexplained it still wouldn't raise it to 10 percent it means only one thing it means that they had finally really become interested in what these things really were and the more ridiculous of the explanations and reclassifying these things as unknown there are many ways of glossing over this thing I read today in the newspapers today time after time you'll see a statement well the Air Force says there are 6 percent or 7 percent or 8 percent or 10 percent of unknowns or usually they say 675 or 78 that have not been explained

but the Air Force says these are probably unexplained because there isn't sufficient data well that is a lot of pure bull because in the analysis that you see they have already classified 18 percent of them as insignificant data insufficient data they've written off 18 percent of them to begin with because they say there isn't sufficient data even to process these the residue that remains remains simply because the data is so complete it is so perfect it is taken by people of such unquestioned veracity and ability that the residue that are unexplained are unexplained because there is only one way on earth to explain them and that is as extraterrestrial vehicles and that is an explanation which they will never make no matter how much the evidence proves they don't even consider the possibility in that evaluation of what these things are the possibility that they are spacecraft are never even considered they make a choice among the earthly explanations

that any of mark if that is the only conclusion that can be reached they are simply enlisted as unexplained what do you think will come of this hearing or will it come to a hearing I don't know it may I don't know what will result from it if it does if they have a hearing they will probably have a hearing among a lot of people none of whom know anything about the subject and so the conclusion they reach I didn't even see it

it was college back then she didn't even see the thing that's the one they interviewed two others they were on a picnic and one was they found out she knew less than the other so she's the one they interviewed well this is the same process that is followed whenever reporters come out to a spacecraft convention I've had a dozen times when a reporter would come up and start interviewing me and I'd start giving them answers and I'd start fighting this all you're too logical I'm not interested in you I want to get some of these answers and they'd go out and they'd get the more wildest story they could get anyone to tell that's the one that would be printed see all the logic that they heard would be completely ignored and all the logic and reason and statistics and data Dan, what do you think of the hollow theory or the possibility of some of the UFOs originating from inside the earth we heard about Admiral Byrd taking this extended trip beyond

which one, the South Pole was it and then the government has the information well I don't know personally I've read the current data on it and some of the empirical data there's one thing that's a little surprising to some people this is by no means a new concept the first book on the subject of the hollow earth was written well I don't know whether it was the first one but I mean there was one written in 1846 on the subject in which there was quite a bit of data and there have been at least seven or eight books written since then at intervals of 15 or 20 years so whether the concept is valid or not it certainly isn't a new one it's been around for some time and most of the statements about the thing agree fairly well as well as it would as any statements by different observers would agree even if they both were observing the same thing there are a few rules of physics that you might have to alter or explain the concept that

that wouldn't invalidate the possibility I mean we've been changing rules of physics around ever since we started writing books on it yeah quite a few rewrites in the book yet let's have intermission and we're looking at a face on it's a disc except that most of them are spiral galaxies that is there are wings thrown out it looks as though this thing rotated so fast that part of it parts of it swung out and from a distance it looks like just a glow of light if you get farther away it looks like a single star it's only in the last couple of decades that you realize that a lot of the single stars we were looking at weren't stars at all they were galaxies but they were so far away that you couldn't see the individual lights they all blended together in light they will contain somewhere between 10 and 100 billion suns and each of those suns is much like ours some of them are bigger some of them are smaller but there are more bigger ones than there are smaller ones

our sun is a little bit below the average size of stars it's only about a million times as big as the earth there are large stars such as planetaries and beggars which are over 100,000 times larger than our sun and it's a million times bigger than the earth but these are still just tiny specks in the kind of distances that you have between the galaxies the distance between the galaxies is measured in thousands of light years and usually tens of thousands of light years where distances from one star to another are a few light years the nearest suns to us other than our own sun the next two are Alpha and Proxima Centauri they're technically at the same distance because they're binaries they rotate about a thousand they're about 4 and 6 tenths light years away is every star a sun? and then we can assume that each star or each sun has other bodies revolving around it? we can and we do assume it at the present time we can't see them yet

because our telescopes aren't good enough to pick up that small body that far away what method would they use to count them? well, how many stars are in this galaxy? they've been counted do they actually count them individually? not all at one time they have a camera that will take 10,000 pictures so many degrees at a time do you actually count them all? well, most galaxies have been counted but they count enough of them so we get quite a precise estimate I see you get a cross-section so we know just about approximately the density but I think actually well, let's see in the new general catalog I guess there's less than a million there's almost a million of them that have been studied the composition is known the size is known the information is known if you get the copy of the new general catalog I don't think you can get all of it in one volume a lot of times on an astronomical picture you'll see a galaxy or you'll see a hundred

you'll say NGC

actually this is too new

if you don't somebody else tried a deep water test the device on this other planet didn't have quite enough water to vaporize the planet possible explanations are being questioned and there are possibly other planets beyond Pluto there should be technically there should be one more I don't know there's supposed to be one more planet to be shown it's always unknown the dark side or the back side or something it can't be I think we're beyond Pluto unless they're quite large we've covered Pluto

and others are charmed in the same way these charmers were told where to look but there were certain perturbations in the orbit of Uranus Uranus got around to a certain spot and that's why

are there twelve planets pardon are there twelve planets not officially as yet we don't admit our head is red

no there's a point there's a discussion on it there apparently are other people they show that

Lord don't you think that we might have yes I of course reincarnation was a cardinal part of the Christian religion until the year 4 or 417 or something it was plucked bodily out of the dogma of the Catholics it was plucked out at a time when the church felt that they weren't paying their tithes as readily as they should the church itself they felt that it was perhaps because of the fact that people two of these people felt that if they didn't make it this time they'd have another go around to make it anyhow the church at that point began preaching eternal damnation they said you gotta pay your tithes this time you'll never get another chance so they plucked out the how about you Mr. Goldbeck do we have any spacecraft there on earth under observation that we're studying have they been either captured or given to us as far as you know well I'd say I haven't seen any I've heard about a number of them but I haven't seen them until I see them I can't say

I know of my own

the air face is one at right field this one that was building is constantly swarming but I haven't got a sense because there isn't any other

logical reason why it should be

we can't get short and explain it so it was well illustrated and I've got the shown the pictures of Lyndon Johnson now the thing that a lot of people have forgotten about him is one of the men who admitted that he believed completely in the election campaign

the more useless made of that type of history but what he said and they said well this indicates that there isn't too much probability of intelligent life and he said well you know I'm almost glad glad that I won't have the existence of life I'm still one of the generation that had their pants scared off of them by Orson Welles so of course this is what the saucer likes to say people say well why doesn't the government say that they say well they're afraid a panic will be created and they refer to the Orson Welles case and other people say oh nonsense

that doesn't have anything to do with it well there's still places in the Bible that mention reincarnation because where Jesus said down the Bethel this is a lie it's come again and I see

it well Jesus said you must be born again and no man is born he was saying just exactly that I mean when they when the the Catholic Church plucked reincarnation out of the Bible they had to explain this in a different way but the explanation they were very good and they said well this means born of the spirit but that's exactly what he said too he says you must be born of the spirit and he says you are born of the spirit so he was pointing out that it was the spirit that made that was was common to the various bodies and it was the same spirit going on it was going on to different bodies but it was the same he said ye are gods and also the things I do ye shall do and greater than no minister well I do I give a lecture

frequently I am a minister I can perform a perfectly legal wedding at any time did you have to go to school to do that kind of thing some yes this was the Christian spiritual alliance church and I did not seek the ordination and it was not one of these things that you buy I didn't seek it I paid nothing for it but they were I had I paid nothing for it I had money and I had money and I had money and I had nothing I had nothing and all the money that I had I had nothing to do with the death of my This is valid, but, oh yes, well, I have Caltech and from MIT congratulating me on a number

of things, a number of papers that came out, a geophysical year, but were not accepted

before that. So, again, the degrees, titles, and so forth, whether or not I'm an engineer, I can do your

engineering until an engineer comes. There are three control instruments that have been on every Atlas missile that has ever left the ground that I personally designed, I personally built in the lathe, built the prototypes of these instruments. I was vice president of press and engineering research, and the company built nine. There are nine instruments on every Atlas missile that's ever left the ground that our company built, that I personally designed and built, and there are more Atlas missiles that have been fired than all other space vehicles. Is your town of Merlin, Argonne, growing very fast?

Percentage, in relation to percentage of population, it is, yes. There are new people coming in almost every day. It is not a large town yet. We hope it never will get too large, but there is ample room there for a town of five or six thousand. Weren't you given directions about establishing this town from somebody at the matter's place? I was given directions as to the desirability of making it available to people. I had bought it for myself. That is the original, the first 80 acres. I had purchased it for my own use, and I had determined this before I ever had any contact. I had decided to buy this on the evening of the day the first A-bomb fell on Hiroshima, because it is a place that will have the purest air of any place in the United States, at least, in the case of the general nuclear war. It's one of the few spots where survival will be possible at all. I wouldn't even sow. I wouldn't go there. I would go there just to escape from a possible danger, except for the fact that it's a darn

nice place to live anyhow. I mean, would you ever have any nuclear war? I wouldn't go into an uninviting or an untenable place or a difficult place to live just to get away from danger. That's where I feel bad, too. Yeah, but this is just as nice a place where they ever have any nuclear war. Is it located in relation to Portland, I was saying? Oh, it's far south. It's just above the California border. Oh, I see. I see.

I see. But it's not this nice, isn't it? I mean, in order to go down there, you have to get out of the harbor. Right. You have to go down to Oakland. Then you go to Florida. Then you go to Watertown. You go to Cleveland. Then you go to the Chesapeake district. Then you go to however far north of you, and then you'll be out of the harbor. But at the end of the day, remember, you're going to live in the Shawn County area. So you're not going to live in the harbor. You're going to live there. Remember that? In that way, you're going to live there. Then 12 miles beyond this is Medford, and 30 miles beyond Medford is Grants Pass. This town is just seven, this, Merlin is just seven miles northwest of Grants Pass. Well, you can find Merlin on a road map. If it's a road map of the state, it'll have Merlin on it, because Merlin is on the railroad. It isn't highlighted on road maps so much, because, of course, the freeway bypasses it now,

but the railroad goes through it, and it's on almost all maps of Oregon or of any size. And yet, at one time, it was bigger than Grants Pass. There was a case where one town grew and the other one didn't. Well, most of Merlin was burned out in 1915. 1915 or 1914, it was bigger, bigger than Grants Pass. Most of them were mined. Gold mining was the thing that was keeping the town going then. Most of the miners just threw up flatboard wooden shacks and got a fire started and wiped out most of the town. The entire city block of buildings, the old business buildings, there was never any attempt to rebuild it for several decades after that,

because the gold had begun to run out by that time anyway, and there wasn't an incentive to stay there. So people moved to other places, and the town just became a ghost town for quite a while. Then lumbering came back, and we've got now the biggest plywood mill in southern Oregon that's right in Merlin. That's very good. It depends on what a person wants. It's a mild climate. The rainfall is greater than here, but only about half of what it is in Portland. The trouble with Oregon is it derives its reputation primarily from its least desirable areas. When you talk of Oregon, everybody thinks of Portland, and they say, ooh, it rains there all the time, and it's foggy when it doesn't rain, and so on and so forth. Well, this is true. Portland is not a good place to live, but it just happens to be. It happens to be the place where almost half the people in Oregon do live, because of the bay there, because of the shipping facilities.

The town grew up there. It was the place where the ships could come in and mine. So many people live there that the state derives its reputation from these areas. But this Merlin Valley there, the Vast Pass Valley, actually it's the Rogue River Valley, and it has a relatively beautiful climate there. There's almost no wind. It has a breeze all the time, but never any severe winds. And it has rainfall. It's 29.6 inches. That's a 50-year average of rainfall, which is just about right. Pardon? The winters are mild. Do you have snow that lasts, oh, three or four days, and you'll have it maybe once in four years? There were two six-year periods where they only had snow once at all. It stayed on the ground all. We had some snow last year. It stayed on the ground about four hours in the places where the sun hit it and the places where it was shady, where there was some around. It's just about 1,000 feet.

Well, it varies between 1,000 and 1,100. The airport is 1,104 feet elevation, and it's up on a little table land. It's about 100 feet higher than the surrounding area. It's a beautiful little airport, and it's right in Merlin. It's a county airport, but it's a county building. They've got 7,000 feet of glass and a little blacktop runway, and you can touch down on the first five feet of the runway. It's like landing on a blacktop. You don't have to dive over any telephone poles or buildings or trees. It's up on a table land, and you can just touch right down. You can land anything that flies in there. We may go up there and investigate some time. We haven't retired in three years. No earthquakes persist down here, but we just might come up that way. Well, I wouldn't say myself whether we'll have an earthquake, but I know that the seismologists are real concerned about it, as well as the New Agers. This is a case where the scientist agrees with the New Agers.

Usually, this doesn't happen. Usually, they're loggerheads. But the seismologist or the plan who studies earthquakes is very concerned about Southern California because they know the rate at which this fault works, and they know the number of settlement shocks that are required, to keep the pressure down. As this fault works, there has to be a certain amount of cracking. And if there is a certain amount of cracking in small doses, it keeps the pressure down, and everything remains normal. But if there's not, then this bending motion keeps on going and gets stronger and stronger and heavier and heavier. It simply means that the fewer earthquakes you have in the area, the rougher the one will be when it comes. You'll get all accumulated. Of course, then, because there have been so few, almost none of any significance in the last eight or ten years, that they know that there's a dilly cooking up. Nobody says, no informed person says anymore

that Los Angeles couldn't disappear. I don't know how many of them there are that think it will, but none of them say it can't. This is only true since about a year and a half ago. A lot of them would have said that you couldn't a year and a half ago. They would have said, gee, you have to get 150 feet of displacement, and you never get that in earthquake shocks or resettlements. You might get a displacement of two or three or four or five feet. Well, of course, if you had even a displacement of five feet, you could get a tidal wave. It was only probably big enough to sweep over most of Los Angeles. But a while back, I said, a while back here, you know, we had an earthquake up in Alaska, and people living in the towns on the bay there said, some of them said, well, gee, it looked just like the bottom fell out of the ocean. Well, there was no evidence of this afterwards. I mean, the water was up to its usual level.

But the Geodetic Survey sent a boat up there just on a routine trip to measure the bottoms of the bays there to see if any recession was measurable. And there's a report, and I think I've got that news clipping here with me, too. I've got a lot of news clippings here. But they reported, well, the way they put it, they said, when the people said that it looked like the bottom fell out of the ocean, well, they were right. That's exactly what did happen. But they measured one of those bays. There had been 150 feet of water in it before, and there was over 450 feet of water in that same bay. So it went down 300 feet. And there isn't, I don't think there's a square foot of Los Angeles, it's as much as 300 feet above sea level. It's just a question of where the slippage takes place. Now, this didn't inundate the city, because it was the part already in the ocean that went down. And if it had gone down the other way, the whole area would have been...

But the fault runs back here between Pasadena and L.A. I mean, the majority of the fault runs along the base of the mountains there. And if that slips down, why Los Angeles can you go under? There's no... No... Besides, biologists can say it can't happen anymore, because it did happen in Alaska, you see. They would have... Prior to that, they would have said it couldn't. They would have said you couldn't possibly get that much recession that fast. But it just happens if it did. So they can't argue against something that didn't happen. According to Edgar Casey, we'll be given a 90-day warning period as the interruption... You know, we had... Dr. Sears and his wife over here. He lives in Gardena. And he and his wife, they go to community dances here in the area. And on their trip over to Catalina, they met some Indians. And during the conversation, he was talking with this chief, and he found out he was interested in earthquakes.

And he said that they feel, on the basis of information they've been told, that there will be, I think, six hours if these volcanoes erupt. And their people have been advised to leave this area. And most of them have left. You mean six hours instead of 90 days? Six hours. Now, where can you go in six hours? Can you go in six hours on the side of the chopper? Oh, boy. Wait up. Jean Dixon is speaking tomorrow at SC. I'm wondering what she's going to say. Oh, she is. My niece over here is going downstairs. She'll tell me. I'd like to hear it. It'll be a good deal later. Well, there's a lady who was becoming seasick on the steamer. She was very wealthy and always accustomed to getting away. She called the captain and says, Captain says that I'm getting seasick. I've got to be pretty sure. Which direction is the nearest land? And he says, well about three miles, ma'am. And she says, good, put me ashore at once. And which direction is this land?

And he said, straight down, ma'am. The digest comes on about five minutes every morning on KMI. They had a dump, what it amounted to, of some of their fishing materials, and since they

had been putting this in this dump, or this well, as they called it, they had been having all these minor quakes. Oh, yes. Around Denver. Yeah, I remember. And that it was, they just give little, very short explanations. They don't go into detail and all, but said that there had been, what was it, 2,000 in the last two years, something like that, an enormous number of very minor but recordable quakes around the Denver area, but that they had no big ones since they had been putting this stuff in the earth, and they didn't give the details as to how they were putting it in or how far down it went or anything else, but. But only since. Only since that the rate had increased very markedly, but that they were all very minor. And it just left with the, I think the question they asked, well, would that be at least a possible way of controlling violent earthquakes? We have a series of little, incredibly, one whopper.

Did you hear what Carl Anderson told about the space people trying to bring the fault together a little? They go with their ships, and they use the energy, but he said they have to stop it, because our ships come in, and they can't, they would wreck it with the beams, see? And so they can't control it. They can't continue along all the time. I thought that was very interesting.

Dan, comment or explain about the collapsing of time.

When you get into outer space, or perhaps even before that, this expression, collapsing of time. I don't quite fully understand it. It's a philosophic concept. You wouldn't have to have a blackboard to do the job of doing it correctly, but a sixth grader can understand it if you do. The whole thing goes down to the misunderstanding that has grown up around a paper which a certain

doctor, Albert Einstein, wrote in 1905 called Theory of Special Case Relativity. He later wrote a second theory of general relativity, which is a theory of special case relativity. And that theory is the theory of general relativity. And that theory is the theory of special case relativity. And that theory is the theory of general relativity. And that theory is the theory of general relativity. issued in 1914, but his first one, issued in 1905, was a theory of special case relativity.

We have attempted to forge this into a universal law of absolutes by reducing it to mathematics

which we can use without even beginning to understand it. There's nothing difficult to understand about it. I gave a talk for Lockheed's top engineers group up in, above San Jose

there in Maryland, and it went over very well. I mean, one fellow came up to me afterwards

and he said, you know, I studied physics for fifteen years. And he said, I taught it for another fifteen years. And he said, now I've been working with Lockheed using physics for about eight years. And he says, this is the first time I ever really understood relativity. He says, I've taught it, I taught it when I taught physics, but this is the first time I've taught it. ever understood it, is you can teach it as a mathematical formula, but teaching it and understanding it is a different thing. He said, I've never seen it presented in such a simple and understandable way. So anyway, you have to do it. You have to first realize what Einstein wrote at the beginning of that paper.

Now, he wrote a foreword, a preface to that paper, which has been completely ignored by almost everyone. It was a very simple preface, and it explained the purpose, the meaning of the whole paper. But like most prefaces, people are too busy to read it, they scoot right on to the main body of the book. How many people read a preface or a foreword to a book anyway? So it was completely ignored. I've only seen it in print once in my life, and that was in a little book which Einstein himself wrote a long time ago, because my sister gave it to me as a gag, gave me the book as a gag on my 12th birthday. And after, well, she thought, you know, something by Einstein, you give a 12-year-old kid something by Einstein, but after I'd read it about four times, it became understandable. There were no higher mathematics in it, it was a simple expression. I came to understand it. I didn't, I couldn't agree with it, I didn't begin to agree with it until about 25 years

after that, but I could understand it. But he gave the foreword, he repeated this foreword, and repeated the fact that people tended to ignore this. And so it had created a lot. And he was writing this book in an attempt to break down these thought blocks which had grown up around the theory. But he said, we must consider the preface, and he repeated the preface. He said, all of the knowledge which we have concerning the universe about us, and all of the knowledge which we can ever get, must come to us through our senses. They are the only contact with reality which we have. No matter how large or how precise.

[02:29:00] Questions and closing discussion

The telescope, the light which comes through that telescope, must still enter our eyes, must still reach our brain before it can create anything significant. So our senses are the only contact with reality we have. Therefore, if we are to formulate mathematical laws concerning this universe, we must begin with the postulate that what our senses tell us is true. Literally true. Because we have no way of proving that it is not. Anyone on this? This means that if we observe through a large telescope the eruption of a nova, or explosion of a nova in a remote galaxy, and at the same time observe the eruption of a volcano upon our own earth, we must, for the purpose of these mathematics, we must accept that these

two events are simultaneous. Because they are simultaneously observed, and we have no way of proving otherwise. We can't be out there. And that's why we have to be out there. And that's why we have to be out there. We can't be out there. At a galaxy where that nova is exploding, and at the same time be down here where the volcano is erupting, to find out whether they're really happening at the same time. We see them happening at the same time, so for the purpose of these mathematics, we must accept that is true, that they are happening at the same time, so far as our point of observation is concerned. Now, this would mean that simultaneity would vary with every different observer. He said this is a concept which is difficult to accept, because the fact that we are all which we call reason, immediately interposes the objection that a separation in space involves an elapse of time between the event and our perception of it. But if we allow reason to

interfere before our mathematics are complete, we will be evolving a concept whose value is based only on the validity of our reason and has nothing to do with the accuracy of our observation. For the purpose of these mathematics, we must look with our eyes, we must sense with our senses, and we must say that for the purpose of these mathematics, whatever they perceive is true, is literally happening exactly as they perceive it. So once you have read this foreword, it predicts completely and precisely that nothing can ever exceed the velocity of light, insofar as an observer at one point is concerned, because it is through that light that the object is observed, and nothing will ever appear to be going faster than light, since it doesn't appear to. So we have to say that it isn't because we can't get out there with it and prove how fast it's moving, but to explain how this limits velocities to the velocity of light.

We'll say that we're down here and we're going to build a spaceship, and we want to visit a planet. Now, we'll put a planet around Alpha and Proxima Centauri, so we'll have a cool place to land up there and have a kind of an eccentric orbit, because these two stars are going around each other, and they're rotating about in orbit, and the planet that is going around would have a rather eccentric orbit. But we're going to put one out there. It'll probably stay long enough for the purpose of our discussion, you know. But we'll say that is exactly four light years away. And we have built this ship, and we have discovered

a new source of energy that we can draw upon in any quantity we want. We can use infinite energy if we choose, or any quantity up to infinite energy. Now, according to ordinary classical mechanics, the kind you learn in high school, we can draw upon any quantity up to infinite energy. The velocity of a body is proportionate to the energy applied. So if we apply infinite energy we'll achieve infinite velocity. In other words, we'll get there in zero time. So we say, well, we're not going to apply quite infinite energy. We don't want to get there in zero time. We're willing to spend a little time on the way, but we'd like to get there in one hour. So we're going to apply just a little bit less than infinite energy, but we'll get there in one hour. So we go over and we tell our to an astronomer a friend of ours who has an observatory just a short distance away from our launching pad and we say we're going to get there in one hour and he will shake his head

sadly and you say oh no boys i really don't believe you can do it because the mathematics of relativity state very clearly that nothing can travel faster than the velocity of light well of course they don't say with respect to what i mean before a velocity has any significance at all has to be with respect to some reference point because everything in the universe is moving with respect to everything else all the time but he says i don't believe you can make it because relativity says you can't go faster than the velocity of light but this is a good chance to test this theory because i have just finished the telescope i just invented a telescope with infinite resolution and infinite magnification i can watch you every foot of the way so you go ahead and blast off and i'll watch you as you go and i'll keep a logbook and i'll write

down when you reach the one quarter point when you reach the halfway point when you reach the three quarter point and when you get there so we'll see whether you can travel faster than right now so we say okay and we blast off and in 15 minutes we have covered one quarter of the distance but in having covered one quarter of the distance we're now one light year away from earth the light that we reflect at that point will require one year to return to earth and it will enter the telescope of the observer the astronomer one year and 15 minutes after we blast it off so he will say we'll write down a notebook i saw they reached the one quarter point one year and 15 minutes in 30 minutes we've reached the halfway point we're now two light years away and the light we've met at that point requires two years to return to earth two years and 30 minutes after blast off that light will enter his telescope and he's

looking up at he said i see they reached the halfway point it required two years and 30 minutes in 45 minutes we're three quarters of the way but we're now three light years away from the planet the light we emit will require three years to return to the telescope he says they reach the three-quarter point three years and 45 minutes after takeoff in one hour we have reached our destination but we're now four light years away and the light requires one year for four years to return to earth so he makes the final notation in his book i see that they reached their destination four years and one hour after takeoff and in parentheses underneath you would like the mathematics of relativity are completely proved they had almost infinite energy they still couldn't quite make the velocity of life it required four years and one hour now we might have turned around and come back two hours later we might be back at the observatory and for three years 364 days

and 22 hours we might be seated beside him at his telescope assisting him in his observations but it wouldn't make a particle of difference as far as his mathematics of relativity are concerned because he sees you out there and he's got to say what i see is true i have to accept what my senses tell me for the purpose of this these mathematics i have to accept what my senses tell me about so i see you out there therefore i must say you are out i see you here too and i must accept that you are here but there is nothing contrary to general philosophy in that in that statement by but by the special requirements of this relativity you must say that if i see you out there and you're still going you haven't reached your destination that we even if you're saying beside me so we can see it once that nothing could exceed the blast of light we say well we'll try another experiment uh we didn't quite use full throttle before we used a little less than infinite energy

so that took us one hour this time we're going to use infinite energy so we should get there in zero time so we blast off and we get there in zero time we're a zero appreciable time but it still takes four years for the first light we emit to return to earth the astronomer says well now it's again the mathematics of relative you're approved because now you did use infinite energy you just barely made the velocity of light because i saw it for you but something else is also proven

the very theory on which relativity is based is proven einstein based the theory of special case relativity primarily on a paper on time contraction which stated that as an object increases in speed

with respect to an observer at the starting point. A differential in time, time will begin to collapse on the moving vehicle. As a differential in time will begin to exist between the moving body and the observer at the starting point. If that velocity reaches the velocity of light, time will cease on board the moving object. So the astronomer says, see, it was proven. That's exactly what happened. Time ceased for you because you made it in zero time. But I saw that it took you four years. So this is the whole basis of this time lapse. It depends entirely on the way things appear to an observer in a given spot. And things will always appear this way to us here. No matter how many tests we make, they all verify the mathematics of relativity because we're here. But if we are on that spaceship moving, the length of time it takes for the astronomer back here to see us means nothing whatever to us. We're not moving at all with respect to ourself.

The individual is always motionless with respect to himself. Wherever he is. Now, all of you are sitting around in more or less comfortable chairs and you say, well, we're not moving very much. Obviously, we're motionless. But you happen to be on a part of the surface of the Earth that's rotating about 1,000 miles per hour. It makes a 24,000-mile revolution every 24 hours. So it moves about 1,000 miles an hour. And the Earth and the Moon are sort of galloping around the Sun in a rather complicated pattern. We say the Moon rotates about the Earth. This isn't quite true. The Earth and the Moon actually are binary bodies. That is, they rotate about a common center of gravity. But because the Earth is so much bigger than the Moon, that center of gravity is so close to the Earth that for all practical purposes, we can say that the Moon goes around the Earth. But if you were watching from a point out in space, you wouldn't see if this wasn't quite true.

They go around talking like kids. So they're doing a complicated dance around the Sun. And they're both going around. And they're both going around. And they're both going around. And they're both going around. And the velocity of this dance amounts to about 3,000 miles per hour. No, a little bit greater than that. So you're moving in a rotation. You have a rotational velocity of 1,000 miles per hour and a directional velocity of about 3,000 miles per hour. But then the entire galaxy is rotating on its axis. And the Sun and all the solar system is, which, as we pointed out, is almost on a complete outside edge, is rotating with this galaxy. And the velocity of this rotation is, is about 240 miles per second. Every single second that passes, you occupy a point in space 240 miles removed from the point you occupied one second before. It's practically painless, you don't even think. Which is just another evidence that motion is relative.

It means nothing. Once it's been acquired, it's a question of what you're observing, whether you're moving at it. If you're observing it there, you aren't moving at all. If you are being observed from the Moon, the observer, the observer from the Moon would find you have a very high velocity. An observer from the Sun would find you have a still higher velocity. And the observer from the center of the galaxy would find you have a velocity of at least 240 miles per second. So all of these motions mean nothing to us because we are at our own reference point. We're not in motion with respect to each other. If we were all going in different directions at that speed, then we'd notice the motion very, very soon. But as long as we're all moving at exactly the same speed and the same direction, we're not going to be moving at the same speed. So we're not going to be moving at the same speed. But these are some of the problems of relativity.

They're simple enough, but they have nothing to do with... There's no inhibition as far as traveling. It doesn't mean... The mathematics have been accepted to mean things they don't mean at all. The mathematics are perfectly valid and will prove out as often as we test them from the Earth. But they have no significance to a person moving. There's nothing in the mathematics of relativity that says, that man can't get to Alpha Centauri in less than four years. At least nine out of every ten teachers even will tell you that it does. But there's nothing in the mathematics of relativity to say we can't get to Alpha Centauri in less than four years just because it's four light years away. The mathematics only say, they do not say that you can't get to Alpha Centauri in less than four years. They only say that no man on Earth can ever see you do it. And that is 100% correct. Well, doesn't time collapse when you get out in space?

Well, it collapses with respect to the person who was left behind. You wouldn't notice the variation yourself. Can I take this trip again? Now, if I have infinite speed, and everything's infinite, there's no stopping, what happens? I want to go beyond getting there instantly. Then what do I get into? Well, there's a little verse about this. And actually it came into being about... Oh, at least 45 years ago, because I can remember it as my earliest youth, one of the first verses I remember hearing. It took a little while to understand it, but it is on exactly this subject. And it goes something like this. There was a young lady from White whose speed was much faster than light. She departed one day in a relative way and returned on the previous night. You and Lear. I thought that was in the original book. So, anyway. Well, that's what I meant. Now, all right, if you've given me infinity and I've done this, will I come back the previous night?

No. Actually, you would gain time in going now if you went from here to Alpha Centauri in one hour. And you had a telescope good enough to see what was going on back on Earth. If you looked back toward Earth, you'd see yourself as you were four years before you started. You would be looking back, you would be looking four years into the past. Because this light that left four years, that left four years before you did this, is just now getting to the planet where you are. So you passed it up, you passed it by and going. And you could sit and watch yourself go through your own life history for four years. Actually, it's just a matter of maybe I could look back eight years. Well, if you went twice as far, you could look back eight years. If you went back as far as some of the stars, if you went as far as some of the stars that we can see in our big telescopes, you could look back a billion years. You could look back a thousand million years.

You could look back when this Earth was just beginning to get a little vegetation on before there were any men on it. You go back a third of the distance, half of the distance or so, you could see the dinosaurs. You could look back on Earth and see how it was when the dinosaurs were here and so forth. It's just a question of running out beyond faster than the light and stopping and waiting for it to catch up with you. But there's another interesting facet that isn't too often brought out, that you could see history going back all the way during your trip. Say you went out at twice the velocity of light. If you look back toward the Earth, you wouldn't see anything. You would have to have your telescope mounted in the front of your ship, pointing away from the Earth. Then you would see the Earth in front of it, and you would apparently be approaching the Earth. But you would be approaching in reverse order. That is, history time would be moving backwards.

Because you are now overtaking the light that left before you did, but you're overtaking it from the front. As long as you're moving backwards, you're faster than light. You're overtaking it. So you'd have to have your telescope in the front to overtake that light that left before you did. So you wouldn't see the Earth in back at all. You'd see it in front. As a matter of fact, everything would be reversed. It would be the same as running a motion picture filmed backwards. It's the same case. The last scenes that took place, you would see first, because that's the first light you would overtake. Then you would overtake the light that left a little earlier and the light that left a little earlier than that. So you would be going back through history. You wouldn't have to wait until you get out there and then look back and wait for it to catch up. You could actually observe it as you were going. I'm trying to get it on theory that we know light.

We would accept light. Yeah. Well, on theory that this energy is moving and that we can intercept it. And we intercept light that we estimate left some of these stars at least a billion years ago, a thousand million years ago, and it's been traveling ever since. So, except this at all, why then? The rest wouldn't follow. And astronomy does accept at least that some of the stars are a billion light years away. Well, these motherships that travel between planets, what is the source of energy? The same source that the planets use? Well, you wouldn't need any energy in traveling between planets. All you'd have to do is get an acceleration to begin with. Once you have created an acceleration or a velocity, the very first laws of Newton say that once you have attained that velocity, you will continue to move in the same direction at the same speed forever until something stops you. I mean, you would have to apply a decelerating force.

What is the force used by the orbital satellites, the boys who go up there and orbit the Earth for a week at 18,000 miles an hour? They don't burn a bit of fuel after the first five minutes, even if they stay up there a week. They burn a little fuel that's just to change the orbit, change the position of the craft. They don't accelerate it anymore. Well, what type of energy would these huge spaceships use? Oh, there are so many types of energy available that I imagine all of them are used by some beings. Again, we're trying to oversimplify. We're all trying to say that they use the same sort of energy. It's as though some Martian or Venusian would come down here and say, well, show me how you travel on this planet. What are your conveyances, your means of travel? And we were to show a marauder's skate on one hand and a Queen Mary on the other. They'd find quite a bit of difference, quite a bit of variation in the methods of travel.

And this is just one little planet. In an infinity of planets, there must be an infinity of means of getting around, varying all the way from complete teleportation to travel in rather crude spaceships. Well, we've heard the use of the term electric magnetic lines of force, Tam. Well, it's a general term. I can bring it down a little more precisely. I don't know whether I should or not, although it will be in the book. But there's three sentences in that book that may be worth a billion dollars to somebody. Is that a new book that you're writing? Yeah, it isn't out yet. Well, it's the old book, but it's a new edition. I mean, it's a white-sense incident. But there's a little more of the discussion that went on at the time in it. At the time, I wanted to make it as brief as possible because it wasn't written for the scientist anyhow. It was written for the average reader. So I didn't put any technical data really

that was discussed, and not much of it in the book. But if the question comes down to what is a gravitational field? Now, the ideal thing to use for such travel is a gravitational field because gravitational field acts equally on all mass regardless of the nature of the mass. If you drive that ship with a gravitational field, you don't have to worry about how great the acceleration is. It's never going to bother you, though. You're never even going to feel it. No matter how great that acceleration is, the force that is producing that acceleration is acting equally upon every atom of mass, not only of the craft itself, but every atom of mass of the pilot's body. Every atom of that mass is equally accelerated. It's just like an object in free fall. No matter how fast the free fall is, as long as you're in free fall, you aren't going to be affected in the matter. So a gravitational field is the ideal type of field

to use for propulsion. And one of the problems is how to create it. And these ships, at least some of them, do create it. They create a field, a gravitational field, which is the center of gravity of that field is just ahead of the center of gravity of the craft itself. And so the craft tends to accelerate into it. But it is constantly being reproduced just a few inches ahead of the center of gravity of the craft. So the center of gravity accelerates into a field which in itself produces it. That's a process that's totally independent of the Earth or any other planets at all. But it will accelerate in any direction in which you care to produce this craft. That is, the field can be produced off-center of the center of gravity so that the mass tends to move into the field constantly. In principle, it's a good deal, as I explained, it's a good deal like the small boy who harnesses his dog to his little red wagon

and then ties a wiener on the end of a stick and holds it out in front of the dog's nose. The dog, of course, pursues the wiener and pulls the wagon. Well, in pulling the wagon, he keeps pulling the wiener ahead of himself so he never actually catches up with it. But in making the effort, he pulls the wagon. This is not a perpetual motion of free energy. I mean, you have to feed that dog occasionally. Even though he doesn't catch up with the wiener, you have to give him some food or it'll soon stop running. But the same thing is true of the craft. I mean, the process requires energy, but it doesn't require any reference point other than the craft and the field. And it will accelerate any gravitational field. But when it does, there's no feeling of motion at all by the inhabitants because every atom of their body is accelerating at the same rate that every atom of the craft is accelerating. If you get in an airplane and you have some propellers

or you have some jet streams, then they produce the thrust. They produce the thrust on this craft, and this pushes the craft ahead and accelerates it. That does not accelerate the pilot. The pilot is accelerated only by the thrust against those parts of his body that are in contact with him. In other words, the plane moves ahead and then pushes the seat ahead and the seat pushes against the pilot's body and accelerates it. But the rest of his body has inertia and tends to remain where it is. So in cases of extreme acceleration, the body is crushed between the thrust of the seat and its own inertia. And this is what produces the feeling of acceleration. You get in any good car and race the motor and let out the clutch, you'll feel the seat push against you when you start out. Well, this is the acceleration we can feel, and there's a limit to the amount of it the body can take. But if you have that same force acting equally

on every atom of mass, every atom accelerates at the same speed. You don't feel a thing. You don't feel any more than you feel here, traveling at 240 miles per second through space. So this is the ideal way in which to accelerate such a craft. But it requires the production of a gravity field. And I think every major missile company in the country now has gravity programs going. I don't know. I know a few of them, and I know a little bit about the degree of success that has been achieved, which isn't too outstanding, but is progress. I wonder those spaceships that are up at Edwards Air Force Base, are they getting anything from them, from looking at them the way they are? I don't know, possibly. I described a method of creating such a G field in the same way that nature does. If you put an oscillating current through any conductor, you will create an electric field about the conductor. Well, you'll create a field anyhow.

If electricity is flowing through any conductor, you'll create an electric field around the conductor. If that field is changing in intensity, if it's oscillating or even changing in intensity, it will create a magnetic field at right angles to itself. And because it is changing in intensity, the magnetic field is also changing in intensity, and that will create another magnetic field at right angles to it and so on. Sounds very complicated, but this is the way the physicist explains radio transmission, light transmission. They're all forms of electromagnetic radiation, and this is the way it's propagated. What I was wondering was why did they leave those ships up there? Was it to help us, or what was it for? How did you find out? Which ships were these? The one in Edwards Air Force Base. I met a man that goes up there. In fact, he puts the leather goods on some of the things, and he knows that they are up there.

Edwards Air Force Base. Whatever it is there. Well, if they are remaining there, they may have been left there for study by some member of the races. If they have, it would seem logical if they would give some explanations along with it to enable some history to be made of them. Well, I wonder why. Because, you know, our president thought he was only wrapped at Van Tassels and Eisenhower. Well, I researched this to a considerable extent a month or two after it happened, at the request of one of the engineers of Boeing aircraft, and I am convinced that it did happen. Simply because all of the data pointed in one direction, all the data was positive, I couldn't find any negative data. None of this would have been absolute proof. But then, there is no such thing as absolute proof of anything. If a person wants to be skeptical, I can doubt anything under the sun, and can create, if they are intelligent, can create pretty good arguments

against the validity of anything, no matter how much evidence there is. There are still groups of people in England, in fact, quite a well-known society, who still maintain that the Earth is flat. They have not accepted the spherical shape of the Earth at all, and they have some fantastically complete and complicated explanations for every evidence that makes it appear to be flat, that it appears to be spherical. We call them the Flat Earth Society. And I don't know whether they really believe what they say or not. I kind of doubt that they really believe it. It's just a society in which they have performed the mental exercise of showing that you can disprove anything if you spend enough effort, or at least you can cast doubt upon anything if you spend enough effort on it.

Oh, this was the case where a craft landed at... Oh, as we do the case, to have landed at Edwards Air Force Base, and to have been in one of the hangars there for a period of some four days. And that President Eisenhower was called from Washington to come out and speak with the pilot thereof. The things known, the things which I discovered without any arguing the question at all, were first, of course, Eisenhower did make the trip. I mean, in public knowledge, when he ostensibly went to Palm Springs to play golf. To play golf on what at that time was a rather inferior and incomplete nine-hole course. There wasn't much reason for crossing the country or for leaving the country during a busy season at the White House to cross the country in a large private plane just to play a couple of rounds of golf at a nine-hole course that wasn't complete yet. And by a remarkable oversight, he forgot to bring his gloves along. This you established?

Yes, this is established. There was no, in fact, none of his baggage was ever unloaded in any part of Palm Springs. Mamie came along, and Mamie stayed at a motel in Palm Springs, and we had the name, we knew the name of the owner of the motel, later known as the motel. And there was some discussion with her of what went on, and she said Mamie got a, they came to the motel in the limousine. Newspaper men came in another limousine, in another car, she can say whatever. Mamie got out. Her baggage was unloaded. It was taken into the motel. They, Mamie and Ike were photographed in front of the motel by newsmen. At this point, Mamie and Ike got, Mamie went into the motel. Ike got back into the car and was driven off. And did not appear again in Palm Springs until three o'clock. So this is all she knows. She didn't know where he'd been, but she knew he wasn't in, he wasn't in Palm Springs, and certainly didn't play any golf there.

From there on, we had two members of understanding that worked at Edwards Air Force Base. One was just a truck driver, and he wouldn't have been in a position to know very much anyhow, but I questioned him. They,

they,

Having worked in the maximum

and the most leading Alex was to go to the beach when she was like redu disciple for the Marcock High Schoolúc. out and get lost so he said i know that the base was closed that's all that i can contribute we had another member you understand he who came from washington who worked in pentagon who was an engineer was designing some of the test base and i called him about it and he said

i can't talk period well i says can you say no he says i can't say no i can't say yes i can't say maybe i can't say period so that's how that's how we got out of him so uh we processed a number of other leads and they say none of it was positive proof of anything but all of it pointed uh in the same direction there was an interesting thing that happened uh about two months after that there was a tv program on downtown here

and it was one of these marathon things they were some sweet charity they were collecting so many

thousands they had to collect and the program was supposed to go on until they'd gone over the top i mean they put people on every once in a while somebody'd phone up and say well i'll pledge a hundred dollars i'll pledge twenty dollars so they moved the little thermometer up a little bit anyhow this thing these things go on hour after hour and they have to have something doing all the time and they'll take anybody that comes around that is of all an interest to the public at all to keep the thing going but i was watching it and one evening it was fairly late they had a

young air force officer on he was talking they were talking about rockets or what would probably be achieved in the way of rocketing the next few years when we'd get to the moon and when you get to mars and so forth and the master of ceremonies suddenly said well i probably shouldn't

you but it's too good an opportunity to miss he said i think we can lay a ghost here he said you are an officer to edwards air force base and she said yes you're stationed there and have been for some months uh were you on the base at such and such a date and the reporter says well

you know there's a widespread report around that on that day a spacecraft from somewhere

other than the earth landed at edwards air force base and then for several days it was recorded in hangar 12 and it was surrounded by a couple of armed guards and the president was called to talk with the operators now and he said were you on the base during that time and the officer said yes he said well would you say that story was true or that it was untrue and the officer said well sir as you put the story i would have to say that it was untrue so the master of ceremonies stuck out his chest and he said well i'm going to tell you that it was untrue well of course we all knew that it was ridiculous we knew it was untrue but i thought we'd just lay the ghost once and crawl so you were willing to say officially that the story was untrue and the answer yes sir as you have told the story it was untrue because it was not hanger 14 it was hanger 12. so at that point the screen suddenly went blank and uh owing

to circumstances beyond their control they were unable to continue with the progress well i never saw anything after that thing came flickering on it would click on for a few seconds they were trying desperately to get something going i don't know what happened in the studio well they shot there was somebody shot the dagger what but uh the program went off and it stayed off for oh several minutes and this never happens they have canned music standing by or something or a film that they can put on to keep something on that screen the station just doesn't go up the air and stay off but this one did they were off for four or five minutes and i watched wondering whether the set had gone bad i did turn on another channel long enough to see that the other channels were right so i turned back and oh it was i guess a good five minutes it seemed like half an hour i guess it's five minutes or came on again as well we've had some technical difficulties but we are now ready to continue the

program but they didn't continue anything they had some canned music first and then they had somebody who wasn't on a schedule i mean the entire remaining schedule that program was disrupted for the rest of the night none of the stuff that went on that was supposed to everything in the schedule did not show up at all it was mostly uh studio people i guess that were appearing and saying uh did you know that uh the sea contains uh 50 cents worth of gold for every time it has

some more music and so i don't know what was going on there but again even a thing like this isn't any proof but it could have been a gag but it was really remarkable how that statement disrupted the reprogram the entire station yeah i saw that somebody asked mel noel about that edward's air

force thing he says well you californians that's all you talk about is edward's air force base because it's here in california but he says the big stuff is in dayton ohio at the bright patterns of the u.s he says that's the big museum of all the spacecraft well i don't know whether we have whether there are any around the deadwoods now this one was supposed to have taken off after yeah we may have had some more come in since then well you know i had interesting experience um a little lady called me up she had been to our meeting two months ago

and she was um interested in the flying closet and she thought she called me up to tell me that

she's taking a um adult school class in english in writing and that she wanted to write a term paper on the subject

at her teacher's request teacher was interested so um we talked to them the next time she came to

the meeting i got her some friends with them she called the other day and said that um she thought it was interesting about this that it happened well she didn't think it was new mexico but i asked her

where the ship had come down with the little men you know that were dead she said that her son is about now to get his 20-year retirement from the army and this was just happened 20 years ago that he one of his first jobs was to stand guard over that ship that well had the dead little men in it

i think it was that the one in new mexico and she didn't think it was in new mexico but i while she told me it sounded like the same thing and he uh he told his mother he says don't you ever let anybody tell you there isn't any flying father because she said he was quite upset about these little bodies i mean you know not having

ever seen anything like that before and he would be well now he's about ready to retire he's under uh security he denies everything he ever said about it she kids him or he'll change the subject or something just won't yeah that's what they do is change the subject so she reads them she said about uh you know not talking not owning up to his but you know there's quite a fine if they ever are found out that they ever talked about and those are always fine and 10 years before i have a little artifact here that anybody

might look over some of you i'm sure have seen it before but i have

used it in the past as an answer to a question how the boys have analyzed this really mauled it up and they took out about 20 times as much as was needed for spectrographic analysis which is what i've got here i'm sure they wanted to quite a little bit to play with themselves and if they took out at least 20 times they might require this is a gadget which i have had around for many years i've used it as an answer to one of the commonest questions

about ufos that is if these things come around if they've been around from time to time and if

they land once in a while why doesn't someone have some material evidence why don't they have an artifact or something from one of these ships and of course the answer that i have to give to

this is how would you be able to tell what i imagine makes the question allows you to not we have on this planet all of the elements which we have ever discovered anywhere else by spectrographic analysis anyhow plus we all have at least 12 that we have made here that don't exist anywhere else

this only means that any object under the sun or under any other sun could be made here if the knowledge were available here we have the elements to make it if we had the knowledge so the mere existence of anything wouldn't prove it was extra So, the answer to that is usually, well, this should be an artifact that was not common

to Earth. That is, you couldn't find anything like it on Earth. If someone had an artifact that doesn't have a duplicate here, any other material like it on this planet, why, then this would be considerable evidence, at least, if not proof. It would be evidence of its extraterrestrial nature, because almost anything that we have on Earth can be duplicated somewhere else on Earth. So at this point, I would get out this little gadget and I'd say, well, I have here an artifact. I at this time do not care to say anything whatever concerning the nature of this article,

its properties, or its source of origin. But I will say this, that there isn't another one like it on the face of this planet. And I am willing to back that statement with money, marvels, or jockery. And that I will. Well, if anyone wishes to challenge the statement, I am perfectly willing to deliver this artifact to any recognized chemical analytical laboratory in the United States, with the sole agreement that if, upon complete study and analysis, it turns out to be ordinary Earthly material, I will pay all of the cost of the examination and the study. If it turns out that the analytical laboratory cannot find the duplicate to it, I will. Thank you.