David Fravor の証言 : tic-tac UFO 遭遇体験の詳細

July 2, 2025 · 187 min read

前置き

Joe Rogan の番組に David Fravor がゲストで出演し、証言している。2時間に及ぶ証言動画なのでかなり詳細。

概要
音声対話
主要項目の詳細
timeline
主要関係者
UFO が海軍機による lock-on を active-jamming で回避
海軍ヘリコプターパイロットの USO 遭遇
Gimbal 動画映像
GoFast 動画映像
メキシコ空軍の UFO ビデオに関する「石油掘削施設や火災の光」説は否定されている

概要 : 戦闘機のパイロットが見たUFO

このテキストは、元海軍パイロットであるデイヴィッド・フレーバー司令官へのインタビュー記録です。

彼は2004年に経験した未確認飛行物体（UFO）との遭遇、通称「ティクタック事件」について語っています。この遭遇は、米海軍のニミッツ空母打撃群の訓練中に発生し、彼の視覚的観察、レーダー記録、そして後に標的ポッドによって撮影された映像によって裏付けられています。フレーバー司令官は、目撃された物体の異常な飛行能力や、レーダーをアクティブに妨害する能力について詳しく説明しています。さらに、彼は東海岸で発生した別のUFO目撃事件についても触れており、これらの物体が既知の航空技術をはるかに超えていることを強調しています。

音声対話

https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/7cb6dad2-2154-498d-aaa6-20852771bdfc/audio

情報源 : Youtube 動画(1:54:26)

Joe Rogan Experience #1361 - Cmdr. David Fravor & Jeremy Corbell

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eco2s3-0zsQ

米海軍パイロットによるUFO遭遇に関する詳細ブリーフィング

このブリーフィングドキュメントは、提供された音源「戦闘機のパイロットが見たUFO」、「未確認航空機と未知の技術」、および「米海軍パイロットが語るUFO遭遇」に基づき、主要なテーマ、重要なアイデア、および事実を引用を含めて詳細にレビューします。

ニミッツ事件（ティクタックUFO遭遇）の概要

2004年11月、米海軍のニミッツ空母打撃群が展開準備のための訓練を行っていた際、カリフォルニア州沖で未確認飛行物体（UFO）に遭遇した事件。この事件の中心人物であるパイロット、デイブ・フローバー司令官（発言者の一人と思われる）は、当初懐疑的であったが、この遭遇を機にUFOに対する見方が変化したと語る。「完全な信奉者から、信じられないほど懐疑的になり、オープンマインドになろうとし、今ではこれまで以上に信じている。」(0:01:10)

目撃者と証拠の信頼性: 目撃者であるパイロットは、高価な戦闘機（当時1機7,000万ドル）を操縦する「馬鹿には与えられない」ような高レベルの軍人であると強調され、彼らの証言の信頼性が強調されている。「私が信頼を置く人々は、あなたのような高レベルの軍人だ。」(0:01:37)
この事件は、USSプリンストン、ニミッツのレーダー、E-2早期警戒機によって追跡されており、高度なレーダーシステム（SPY-1システム）が関与していた。「USSプリンストンがそれらを追跡している。」(0:04:10) 「ニムイッツのレーダーでも見え、E-2もそれらを見ることができた。」(0:04:15)
遭遇前のUFOの活動: パイロットが介入するまで、プリンストンは2週間にわたり、高度80,000フィートから20,000フィートまで降下し、3〜4時間滞在した後、再び上昇する物体を追跡していた。「彼らは80,000フィート上空から降りてきた。」(0:04:10)

ティクタックUFOとの遭遇の詳細

訓練中に突如「実世界のベクトル」として未確認物体への迎撃任務が与えられた。「トレーニングをキャンセルします。リアルワールドのベクトルが入ったので、西に派遣します。」(0:06:17) パイロットは非武装のF-18で派遣されたが、これは訓練中は実弾を搭載しない海軍の規則によるもの。「はい、私たちは何も持っていません。」(0:07:08) 「実弾ミサイルを飛行機に搭載して訓練で引き金を引くと、誰かが必ずスイッチを間違えて撃墜されます。」(0:07:27)

目視による観察: パイロットは海面に奇妙な「白波」を発見した。これは「水面下の岩のように」見えたが、実際には「737型機ほどの大きさで、十字架のような形をして東を向いていた」。「私たちは右を見ると、水は完璧に穏やかで、白波一つない。」(0:08:58) 「それは737型機ほどの大きさで、実際には十字架のような形をして東を向いている。」(0:09:15)
ティクタックUFOの外見と挙動: 白波の近くには、白い「ティクタックのような」物体が水面上にあり、南北・東西に「自由に急激に前後に、左右に」動いていた。「私たちが見たのは、水面上に南北を向いていて、南北、東西に動いている白いティクタックのような物体で、自由に急激に前後に、左右に動いている。」(0:09:49)
この物体は推定40フィート（ホーネット戦闘機と同じくらい）の長さだった。「40フィートぐらいです。」(0:09:59)
パイロットが降下して接近を試みると、ティクタックは向きを変え、パイロットの動きを「ミラーリング」するように上昇し始めた。「ティクタックは急激に「ポッ」と音を立てて向きを変える。だから今は東西を向いていて、私たちをミラーリングしている。」(0:11:50) 「私が降りていくと、それが上昇し始める。」(0:12:00)
パイロットがティクタックへの最短ルートを取るために急降下すると、ティクタックは「1秒も経たないうちに」パイロットの機体の前を横切り、「消えた」。「そして、私が引き上げ始めると、それが私の機首を横切り始め、加速し始める。そして、1秒も経たないうちに、私が機首をそれに向け始め、私の真正面を横切ると、それは「プフ」と消えた。」(0:12:35)

他のUFO事象とティクタックUFOの比較

この遭遇は、他の有名なUFO事件、特にギムバル・ビデオやゴーファスト・ビデオに関連する東海岸での事件と類似点と相違点がある。

ギムバル・ビデオ（2015年）: 東海岸での出来事で、ギムバル・ビデオに映る物体は「透明なビーチボールの中に立方体」のように見え、「オーラ」のようなものがあったのに対し、ティクタックにはなかった。「それは透明なビーチボールの中に立方体のように見える。だから、それが実際に周囲なのか、それとも力場なのかは分からない。そして、ギムバルビデオでは、それにはオーラのようなものがあるが、私たちの方にはなかった。」(0:35:35)
ゴーファスト・ビデオ:これも東海岸で撮影されたもので、非常に高速で海面を移動する物体を映している。この物体はティクタックに似ている。「それはティクタックのように見えるもので、東海岸で撮影された別のものだ。」(0:37:20)
共通の特性: これらのUFOはすべて、「非反作用型推進システム」という共通の特性を持つ。「それら全てに共通しているのは、非反作用型推進システムだ。」(1:46:46) これらの物体は、排気、翼、ローターなどがなく、推進システムが不明である。「ローターはない。煙もない。排気もない。尾翼もない。テールナンバーもない。この物体は停止状態から離陸する。それは私たちが持っていない、そして他のどの国も持っていない推進システムだ。」(0:29:50)

未確認物体の技術的特性と示唆

このUFOは、我々が知る航空技術をはるかに超えた能力を示している。

レーダー回避能力: ティクタックUFOは、戦闘機のターゲットポッドが物体を追跡している間も、レーダーが距離測定を行うのを妨げた。「レーダーが距離測定できない。」(0:26:44) これは、通常のドップラーレーダーとは異なる方法で機能することを示唆している。
信じられないほどの機動性: ギムバル・ビデオの物体は、「非常に速い速度で海面を横切っている」が、それは従来の航空機では不可能な動きであると説明されている。「それは非常に速い速度で海面を横切っている。」(0:37:20)
パイロットは、F-22ラプターのような世界最高の航空機でさえ、ティクタックのような急加速はできないと述べている。「どんな飛行機だろうと関係ない。F-22ラプターを使おう。おそらく世界最高の飛行機だ、性能面では。それはあのように離陸できない、特にホバーならね。」(0:29:20)
水中・空中・宇宙を自在に移動する可能性: 「非反作用型推進」であれば、物体は水の中に入り、水中を移動し、再び浮上し、空を飛び、宇宙に行くことさえ可能だと推測されている。「もしあなたが非反応的な推進力を使っているなら、あなたがいる媒体、空気、何でもを操作しているだけなら、水の中に入ることができる。」(0:44:23)
第二次世界大戦以来、水から飛び出して空を飛ぶ物体が報告されており、パイロットの親戚も同様の体験をしていた。「未確認物体が水に出入りしている。」(0:48:07)
複数機体の存在: ギムバル・ビデオでは、ターゲットポッドが追跡している「主要な」物体に加えて、レーダーには「5つの小さな物体」が前方にあったことが、別のパイロットによって明かされた。「このビデオで見ているのは、彼が追跡している物体だ。別のパイロットと話したとき、彼は言った。レーダービデオを見ると、彼らの前方にまるで編隊のように5つの小さなものがあるように見える、と。」(0:39:03)
これらの「艦隊」が「母船と小型機」のような関係である可能性も示唆されたが、レーダービデオは機密レベルが高いため公開されないだろうと述べている。「母船と小型機のようなものかもしれない。」(0:54:21)

政府とUFO現象への対応

米軍は長年にわたりUFOを文書化してきたが、それらはしばしば軽視されてきた。

政府の認識と隠蔽: 米政府内では、これらの現象は「重力推進」であると認識されており、リバースエンジニアリングが試みられているという。「これらは重力推進だ。これは政府内で知られていることだ。」(0:41:20)
元大統領（ビル・クリントンやジミー・カーター）でさえ、UFOに関する情報へのアクセスを拒否された経験がある。「彼は「嘘をつかれたり、情報を要求したのに拒否されたりするのは初めてではない」と後で言った。ビル・クリントンがそう言った。」(1:49:10)
機密と情報共有: ニミッツ事件のような事例は、事件後も情報が共有されず、レーダーオペレーターでさえ何を見ているのか分からなかったという。「誰も、これらが2週間前からそこにあると教えてくれなかった。」(1:00:46)
懐疑論への反論: パイロットは、科学的なアプローチで客観的に情報を評価することの重要性を強調し、懐疑論は「怠惰な見方」であると批判する。「なぜ、懐疑論者であろうとするのか。それは怠惰な見方だと思う。」(1:14:13)
機体の素材研究: ジャック・ヴァレのような研究者が、UFOの墜落現場から回収されたとされる素材を17点も所有していると語られている。「ジャック・ヴァレは17のサンプルを持っている。」(1:27:17) これらの素材は、原子レベルでの多層構造を持ち、超伝導体のように機能すると考えられている。「原子レベルの積層があり、グラフェンのように層を重ねている。」(1:29:09) これらは「異方性」や「元素的に異常」である可能性が研究されている。

哲学的・社会的な考察

UFO現象は、人類の科学的理解と社会構造に大きな影響を与える。

宇宙における人類の存在: 広大な宇宙を前にして、「私たちは本当に一人なのか？」という問いが投げかけられる。「私たちは本当に一人なのか？」(1:21:25) 「もし私たちが周りに唯一の存在だとしたら、そして私が見ているすべてがそうなら、それはかなり悲しい場所だ。」(1:21:46)
技術的進歩のパラダイムシフト: これらのUFOが示す非反作用型推進技術は、人類の技術を根本的に変える可能性がある。「私たちが推進力を考え出したとき、私たちよりずっと前の人々が反作用型推進システムを考え出した。そしてそれが私たちの標準となった。」(1:31:51) この技術が共有されるべきか、あるいは秘密にされるべきかという問いも提起される。「人類の課題として共有するのか、それとも自分たちのものにするのか？」(1:35:59)
社会への影響: ニミッツ事件は、目撃者にとって「4,000時間近くの飛行時間よりも、白いティクタックを追いかけた5分間に飛行士としてのキャリアが定義される」ような、人生を変える出来事だったと語られている。「私の全飛行士としてのキャリアは、白いティクタックを追いかけた5分間によって定義されている。」(0:34:02) この事件は、世間の注目を集め、政府高官が真剣に耳を傾けるきっかけとなった。「これは真剣な問題だと、もう少し力を入れる必要があると感じた高官たちがいた。」(1:40:36)

結論

ニミッツ事件は、高レベルの軍関係者によって複数の独立した証拠（レーダー、目視）で確認された未確認飛行物体の遭遇であり、その物体は既知の航空技術をはるかに超える性能を示した。この現象は、既存の科学的理解に疑問を投げかけ、推進システム、素材科学、そして宇宙における人類の位置付けに関する再考を促している。政府内での関心は高いものの、情報の隠蔽や共有の不足は依然として課題となっている。

タイムライン：未確認航空機とUFO遭遇

本タイムラインは、主に米軍関係者によるUFO遭遇の証言と、関連する政府の取り組みに関するものです。

1940年代頃

第二次世界大戦以降: 未確認物体が水中から現れて飛行する報告が存在するようになる。

1952年

ワシントンD.C.上空での大規模な飛行物体目撃: 米国首都上空でUFOが大規模に目撃され、ジェット機がスクランブル発進する。この事件は新聞で広く報道され、通信がダウンするなどの混乱を引き起こしたため、UFOに関する情報開示政策に影響を与える。

1989年

ボブ・ラザーのS4施設での証言: ボブ・ラザーがS4施設で地球外技術に触れる。彼は当時1989年の技術水準でそれを解釈しようとした。

時期不明（おそらく数年前）

素材サンプルの分析: ジャック・ヴァレが収集した、既知の墜落事故や破片から得られたとされる複数の素材サンプルが、ニューメキシコ州で5人の科学者によって分析される。これらのサンプルは原子レベルの層構造を持ち、異常な元素組成や結合様式が示唆されている。

2004年10月半ば

スクアドロンの指揮官就任: 証言者（パイロット）がスクアドロンの指揮官に就任。

2004年11月〜12月

空母ニミッツ空母打撃群の訓練: 空母ニミッツ打撃群が、2005年の展開に向けた訓練（ワークアップ）を太平洋沖で実施。空母、巡洋艦、支援艦艇を統合した防空訓練が行われる。
未確認物体の出現: 約2週間前から、USSプリンストン（イージス巡洋艦）のSPY-1システム、ニミッツのレーダー、E-2ホークアイ早期警戒機が、高度80,000フィート以上から20,000フィートまで降下し、3〜4時間滞在した後に真っ直ぐ上昇する未確認物体を追跡していた。これらはニミッツ乗組員やレーダーオペレーターの間では周知の事実であったが、パイロットには事前に知らされていなかった。

2004年11月14日 (推定)

ニミッツ事件（Tic Tac UFO事件）:
- 午後: 証言者と彼の僚機（女性パイロット）が、通常の訓練（2対2の空中戦）のためにF-18戦闘機で発艦。彼らは訓練用ミサイル（CATM-9）のみを装備していたため、実弾は積んでいなかった。
- 訓練中止と「実世界」ベクトル: 発艦後すぐに、USSプリンストンの管制官から訓練中止の指示を受け、「実世界」のベクトルで西方60マイルの海域へ向かうよう指示される。管制官は、過去2週間、未確認物体が降下してきており、調査が必要だと説明。
- 水中での擾乱の視認: 飛行中、証言者らは海面に737型機ほどの大きさの「白波」または「擾乱」を目撃する。これは水中の物体によって波が砕けているように見えた。
- Tic Tac型物体の目視: その擾乱の近くで、約40フィート（F/A-18ホーネット戦闘機と同じくらい）の長さの白いTic Tac型物体が水面近くを異常な動き（前後左右への急激な動き）で飛行しているのを肉眼で確認。
- パイロットの降下と追跡: 証言者はTic Tac型物体を調査するために降下を開始。僚機は上空に留まり、状況を「神の視点」で監視。
- 物体の反応と消失: 証言者が約18,000フィートまで降下し、Tic Tac型物体に対してアグレッシブな操縦で接近しようとすると、物体は突如、方向を転換し、証言者のF-18の機首を横切りながら、1秒未満で視界から完全に消失する。
- レーダーからの再出現: 消失後、Tic Tac型物体はレーダー上では約60マイル離れた地点に瞬時に再出現する。
- その後の飛行: 証言者らはその地点へ向かうが、物体を発見できず、艦船に戻って着艦する。
- 別のクルーによる追跡: 証言者らの後に発艦した別のクルーが、ターゲティングポッド（FLIR/ATFLIR）を搭載したホーネットでTic Tac型物体を追跡する。この映像は「GoFastビデオ」として知られている。物体は排気や推進システムが見られず、異常な加速と動きを見せる。レーダーは物体を捕捉するが、距離を測定できない（Dopplerレーダーの距離測定を妨害しているかのような挙動）。また、この映像の際には、主要な物体以外にも5つの小さな物体がフォーメーションを組んでいたことが後から判明する。
海軍ヘリコプターパイロットの類似体験: 同じ時期に、東海岸沖（プエルトリコ沖）で海軍のCH-53ヘリコプターパイロットが、水中で魚雷を回収中に、Tic Tac型物体と同様の「吸い込まれる」ような現象を目撃。

事件後

軍関係者の間で共有: ニミッツ事件の証言者たちは、当初はこの話を個人的な場でしか語らなかった。
「Gimbalビデオ」事件: 2015年、東海岸沖（米国沿岸の「警戒区域」）で、米海軍パイロットが別の未確認航空機（「Gimbalビデオ」として知られる）に遭遇。これは「クリアなビーチボールの中にキューブが入っている」ように見え、Tic Tac型物体とは異なる形状で、オーラのようなものをまとっていた。

2017年

New York Timesの記事掲載: ルイス・エリゾンドの依頼により、ニミッツ事件に関するNew York Timesの記事が掲載される。証言者は当初辞退したが、説得に応じて協力。この記事の公開後、世界中でUFOに関する議論が再燃する。
米政府高官との会談: 証言者はNew York Timesの記事公開後、米政府内の3つの異なるグループの高官と会談する。当初20分の予定が1時間半に及ぶなど、彼らの関心は高かった。

2019年 (情報が提供されたポッドキャスト収録時)

継続的な関心: 米政府内には、UFO問題に真剣に取り組む人々が依然として存在するとされる。
AATIPの誤解: 「AATIP」が2200万ドルの資金を受け取ったというNew York Timesの報道は誤りであり、実際にはハリー・リードが設立した「AUSAP」が唯一の受領者であったと説明される。
宇宙での生命体についての考察: 証言者は、広大な宇宙において人類が唯一の知的生命体である可能性について疑問を呈する。
推進システムに関する議論: 目撃されたUFOの「非反作用推進システム」は、既存の航空技術とは根本的に異なるものであり、もしこれが秘密裏に開発された技術であれば、その出現は人類の技術を劇的に変える可能性があると考察される。
懐疑論への反論: 証言者は、懐疑論者が客観性を欠いていると批判し、科学的アプローチの重要性を強調する。
過去の大統領によるUFO情報への試み: ビル・クリントンやジミー・カーターといった過去の米国大統領もUFO情報へのアクセスを試みたが、拒否されたことが言及される。

現在（ポッドキャスト収録以降、継続中）

UFO調査プログラムの継続: AATIPの終焉が宣言された後も、米国内でUFO/UAPに関する調査が継続されている可能性が示唆される。

主要登場人物：未確認航空機とUFO遭遇

証言者 (氏名不明: (*: 実際は David Fravor のこと。AI は映像を見ていないゆえ判断できなかった))

経歴: 元米海軍F-18戦闘機パイロットで、スクアドロンの指揮官を務めていた。2004年のニミッツ事件（Tic Tac UFO事件）で、未確認航空機を肉眼で目撃・追跡した主要な目撃者の一人。飛行時間約4000時間を持つベテラン。
役割: 本ポッドキャストの主要な語り手であり、自身の体験とUFO/UAPに関する見解を述べる。

Trevor Burrus

役割: ポッドキャストの司会者の一人。証言者への質問を通じて、物語を深掘りする。

Jason Kuznicki

役割: ポッドキャストの司会者の一人。証言者への質問を通じて、物語を深掘りする。

Aaron Ross

役割: ポッドキャストの司会者の一人。証言者への質問を通じて、物語を深掘りする。

Paul Mueller

役割: ポッドキャストの司会者の一人。証言者への質問を通じて、物語を深掘りする。

僚機パイロット (女性、氏名不明)

経歴: 証言者とともにF-18戦闘機に搭乗し、ニミッツ事件でTic Tac型物体を視認したもう一人のパイロット。
役割: 証言者の目撃を補強する存在。

ウィザード (武器システム操作員、氏名不明)

経歴: 証言者とその僚機のF-18にそれぞれ同乗していた武器システム操作員。
役割: パイロットの視認を補強する存在。

USSプリンストン管制官 (氏名不明)

役割: 2004年のニミッツ事件において、F-18パイロットに「実世界」のベクトルを与え、未確認物体の調査を指示した人物。2週間前から物体を追跡していたことをパイロットに伝える。

海軍ヘリコプターパイロット (氏名不明)

経歴: 元海軍CH-53ヘリコプターパイロット。ニミッツ事件と同時期に東海岸沖で、水中から浮上・潜行する未確認物体（魚雷を吸い込んだかのように見えた）を目撃した。
役割: 証言者の体験と類似する、水中の物体に関する情報を提供する。

ルー・エリゾンド (Lou Elizondo)

役割: 証言者にNew York Timesの記事への協力を依頼した人物。米政府のUFO調査プログラムに関与していたことで知られる。

ボブ・ラザー (Bob Lazar)

経歴: 1980年代後半に、ネバダ州の秘密施設S4で地球外の技術をリバースエンジニアリングするプロジェクトに関与したと主張する物理学者。
役割: 未確認航空機の推進システム（重力推進、要素115）に関する議論の文脈で言及される。

ジャック・ヴァレ (Jacques Vallée)

経歴: フランス出身の著名なUFO研究者、コンピュータ科学者。米軍のUFO研究プログラム（プロジェクト・ブルーブック）のために最初のコンピュータープログラムを作成した。映画「未知との遭遇」の登場人物のモデルになったとされる。
役割: UFO関連の素材サンプルを多数収集し、その分析を進めている人物として言及される。

ビル・クリントン (Bill Clinton)

経歴: 元米国大統領。
役割: 大統領時代にJFK暗殺とUFOに関する情報へのアクセスを試みたが、拒否された人物として言及される。

ジミー・カーター (Jimmy Carter)

経歴: 元米国大統領。
役割: 大統領就任前にUFOに関する情報を探求すると述べた人物として言及される。

ミック・ウェスト (Mick West)

経歴: 著名な懐疑論者、デバンカー。
役割: ニミッツ事件などのUFO目撃を合理的に説明しようとする人物として言及される（証言者は彼の見解に反論）。

「レーダー妨害: 物体をロックオンするとレーダーが妨害される (アクティブジャミング) 」を敷衍して。

映像記録（FLIRビデオ）のより大きな文脈において、レーダー妨害、特に物体のロックオン時にレーダーがアクティブジャミングされることについて、情報源は以下のように議論しています。

FLIRビデオの撮影とレーダー妨害の確認:
- デイヴィッド・フレイヴァー司令官とその僚機がUFOを目視で追跡した後、別の乗組員が標的ポッド（targeting pod）を搭載したスーパーホーネットで出撃し、この物体をレーダーで探知しました。
- 物体をレーダーでロックオンしようとした際、レーダーは直ちに妨害（jamming）されている信号を受信しました。
- レーダー画面には様々な表示が出現し、レーダーは「ジャム推定（jam extrapolate）」モードに入りました。
- これは**アクティブジャミング（active jamming）**と呼ばれるもので、この技術がシステムを能動的に妨害していることを意味します。
- 画面に表示される「99.9」という数字は、レーダーがこの物体の距離を測距（ranging）できないことを示しています。これは、物体がレーダーからの信号を返さないように、何らかの能動的な干渉を行っているためです。
アクティブジャミングの性質と技術的示唆:
- 情報源によると、ジャミングは「技術的に戦争行為」とされています。
- このアクティブジャミングは、ステルス航空機のような**受動的妨害（passive jamming）**とは根本的に異なります。ステルス技術は、形状や素材によってレーダーに見つかりにくくするものであり、物体を「見えなくする」ものではありません。
- 対照的に、このUFOのアクティブジャミング能力は、それが知的に制御されていることを示唆しており、単なる形状や表面の特性に依存するステルスとは異なる、より高度な技術を持っていることを意味します。
- 司令官フレイヴァーは、F-22ラプターのような世界最高の航空機でさえ、その飛行性能限界までポッドで追跡できると述べていますが、この物体はレーダーを無効にし、追跡を不可能にしました。これは、通常の航空機では考えられない性能であり、物体がレーダーの追跡を許さなかったことを強調しています。
物体と推進システムの異常性:
- FLIRビデオに映る物体は、**排気プルーム（exhaust plumes）**が全くなく、またローターや尾翼もありません。これは、既知のいかなる航空機や推進システムとも異なります。
- 物体は静止状態から瞬時に加速し、視野から消えることが可能でした。これは「コップの中のピンポン玉」のように瞬時に動き回る様子に例えられています。
- このような動きは、従来の**反作用型推進システム（reactionary propulsion system）**では不可能であり、これは米国の兵器目録にない技術であり、他のどの国も保有していないと理解されています。
- この性能は、**重力推進（gravity propulsion）や非反作用型推進システム（non-reactionary propulsion system）**の可能性を示唆しており、空気や水の媒体を選ばずに移動できる可能性があります。この技術があれば、航空機は水中に入ったり、宇宙に行ったりすることができ、今日の通常の推進システムの障壁を取り除くことになります。

要するに、FLIRビデオにおけるレーダー妨害は、単なる機器の誤作動やパイロットの錯誤ではなく、米軍が保有する最先端のレーダーシステムを能動的に無力化する高度な技術が存在したことを裏付けています。これは、UFOが既知の技術を超越した能力を持つことを示す重要な証拠として提示されています。

海軍ヘリコプターパイロットの水中物体遭遇について、敷衍して。

映像記録（FLIRビデオ）の文脈におけるレーダー妨害の議論に加え、情報源は、UFO現象を理解するための類似の遭遇事例として、海軍ヘリコプターパイロットによる水中物体遭遇に焦点を当てています。この事例は、既知の技術を超越した物体の異常な能力を裏付けるものとして提示されています。

この遭遇について、情報源は以下の点を明らかにしています。

遭遇者の身元と経緯:
- デイヴィッド・フレイヴァー司令官が、彼自身の遭遇体験が公になった後に、元海軍ヘリコプターパイロットと出会いました。
- このパイロットは、司令官の体験を知り、自分が「一人ではない」と感じたことで、自身の類似の体験について打ち明けることに踏み切ったとされています。
遭遇の状況と場所:
- このパイロットは、海兵隊も使用する大型輸送ヘリコプターCH-53を操縦していました。
- 事件は1990年代半ばから後半にかけて、プエルトリコ沖（当時、閉鎖されたルーズベルト・ロード沖）の非常に透明なカリブ海域で発生しました。
二度の具体的な遭遇:
- 最初の遭遇（BQM回収時）: パイロットがBQM（標的ドローン）を回収している際、水深から**「暗い塊」が上昇してくるのを目撃しました。ダイバーとBQMがヘリコプターに引き上げられると、その物体は再び水中に潜っていきました**。
- 二度目の遭遇（魚雷回収時）: 数ヶ月後、パイロットが魚雷（テレメトリー弾、データを収集し浮上する訓練用魚雷）を回収している際に再び遭遇しました。彼は水深から**「巨大で円形の物体」が上昇してくるのを目撃しました。パイロットは、それが潜水艦ではないと断言**しており、過去に潜水艦を見た経験から混同することはないと述べています。
- 物体の行動: パイロットがインターコムでダイバーを引き上げるよう叫ぶと、ダイバーが水面からわずか数フィートのところで引き上げられ始めました。その直後、**魚雷が「文字通り水中に吸い込まれていった」**とパイロットは証言しています。そして、物体は再び水中に潜っていき、魚雷は回収されませんでした。
異常な特性と技術的示唆:
- この水中物体は、既知のいかなる技術とも異なる挙動を示しました。水中の物体が魚雷を「吸い込む」ような動きは、従来の水中推進システムでは説明できません。
- この事例は、フレイヴァー司令官が遭遇したティクタック型物体と同様に、「非反作用型推進システム（non-reactionary propulsion system）」の概念を強く裏付けています。このようなシステムは、空気、水、宇宙といった異なる媒体の障壁を取り除き、「トランスミディアム（transmedium）」能力を可能にする可能性が示唆されています。
- 情報源では、このような物体は、既知の推進システムとは異なり、水中で抵抗や水しぶきを発生させないとも指摘されています。
報告の困難さ: パイロットは、この事件をどのように報告すればよかったのか、そして魚雷の紛失をどのように説明すればよかったのか、困惑したと述べています。彼は、魚雷が単に沈んだのではなく、「吸い込まれた」ように見えたと主張しています。
メディアへの影響: この事件は、1990年代の出来事であるため、新しい情報を求めていたニューヨーク・タイムズの記事には含まれませんでしたが、記事のためにパイロットは取材を受けています。

このヘリコプターパイロットの証言は、UFOが空中に限らず、水中でも異常な動きや能力を示すことを示唆しており、その技術が地球上のいかなる国家も保有していない「ゲームチェンジャー」なものであるという主張を補強しています。これは、軍関係者からの信頼できる目撃情報が、UFO現象の現実性と、それがもたらす技術的・国家安全保障上の意味合いを浮き彫りにしている一例です。

東海岸で撮影された Gimbalビデオについて、敷衍して。

類似の遭遇事例のより大きな文脈において、情報源は東海岸でのGimbalビデオについて以下の点を議論しています。

時期と場所: Gimbalビデオは2015年に発生し、デヴィッド・フレイヴァー司令官の遭遇（2004年）よりも後の出来事です。場所は米国の東海岸沖、特に「ウォーニングエリア（Warning Areas）」と呼ばれる訓練区域です。
遭遇者の情報: フレイヴァー司令官は、Gimbalビデオに関わったパイロットの一人と毎日連絡を取っており、親しい友人であると述べています。このパイロットの飛行には、フレイヴァー司令官の友人も同乗していました。
物体の特徴と動き:
- 当初、彼らが見始めたのは、「透明なビーチボールの中にある立方体」のような物体でした。これは、周囲を覆うものなのか、あるいは「フォースフィールド（force field）」のようなものなのかは不明です。
- Gimbalビデオの物体には「オーラ（aura）」のようなものが周囲に見られますが、フレイヴァー司令官が遭遇したティックタック型物体にはありませんでした。
- これらの物体は風の影響を受けず静止しており、90ノットの風が吹いていてもそこに留まっていました。これは、風に流される気球などとは異なります。
- 物体は、横向きになって飛行し、その後「腹から前方に」飛行するという反直感的な動きを示しました。これは、ラザーが語った推進システムと「不気味なほど似ている」と評されています。彼らは高速モードでは「腹から」飛行し、重力波増幅器を集中させることで機能する可能性が示唆されています。
- 映像では、物体が機械的に回転しているように見えます。
レーダーでの探知と確認:
- スーパーホーネットの新しいレーダーは「非常に、非常に高性能」であり、60～70人もの人々がこれらの物体をレーダーで見ていました。
- レーダーが誤った標的を表示している可能性も当初は疑われましたが、パイロットがターゲティングポッドを使用し熱源を確認したことで、実際にそこに物体が存在することが判明しました。
危険なニアミス: これらの物体の一つが、飛行中の航空機に「50フィート近くまで接近し、衝突寸前だった」事例がありました。
NOTAMの発行: これらの物体が非常に頻繁に現れたため、海軍は「航空情報（NOTAM：Notice to Airmen）」を発行し、パイロットに注意を促しました。これは、物体との衝突を避けるためです。
複数の物体説（未公開情報）:
- Gimbalビデオでは一つの物体が追跡されていますが、レーダーでは複数の物体が確認されていました。
- パイロットの一人は、レーダー画面に「5つの小さな物体が、追跡中の大きな物体の前で編隊を組んで動いている」のを見た、と証言しています。
- これらの「艦隊（fleet）」の動きは、Gimbalビデオの音声でパイロットが「おい、見てみろ、あちこちにいるぞ！」と叫んでいる部分と一致します。
- この「編隊」に関する情報は、ニューヨーク・タイムズを含むこれまでの報道では公開されていませんでした。
推進システム: Gimbalビデオに映る物体も、ティックタック型物体と同様に「非反作用型推進システム（non-reactionary propulsion system）」を使用していると見なされています。これは、排気プルーム（exhaust plumes）がなく、既知のいかなる航空機とも異なる推進方法です。
政府の認識と対応:
- 政府内では、これらの物体が「重力推進（gravity-propelled）」であると認識されており、リバースエンジニアリング（逆行工学）を試みているとされています。
- 米国国防総省は、これらの「異常な航空宇宙機（AAVs: anomalous aerospace vehicles）」によるニアミスの頻度が増加していることを認めています。
- 海軍は、パイロット向けの新しい報告プロトコルを導入し、これらの物体を「何であるか分からない」と認めるなど、現象を真剣に受け止め始めています。

Gimbalビデオは、フレイヴァー司令官のティックタック遭遇と同様に、米軍が遭遇した未確認航空機が、既知の技術を超越した能力（例えば、非反作用型推進、トランスミディアム能力、レーダー妨害など）を持っていることを示す重要な証拠として提示されています。特に、レーダーが単一の物体だけでなく、編隊を組んだ複数の物体を捉えていたという新たな情報は、この現象の複雑さと規模をさらに浮き彫りにしています。

GoFastビデオについて、敷衍して。

類似の遭遇事例のより大きな文脈において、情報源はGoFastビデオについて以下の点を議論しています。

GoFastビデオは、米海軍パイロットが遭遇した未確認航空機（UAP）の重要な事例の一つとして挙げられており、フレイヴァー司令官自身のティックタック遭遇やGimbalビデオとの類似性が強調されています。

このGoFastビデオに関して、情報源は主に以下の点を述べています。

特徴と外見: GoFastの物体は、ティックタック（Tic Tac）に酷似した形状をしていました。フレイヴァー司令官は、GoFastとティックタックを「同じ種類」のものと見なせると示唆しています。
遭遇状況と場所: このビデオは、米国東海岸沖で記録されました。物体は水面を「猛スピードで移動」しているのが目撃されています。乗組員はまず目視で物体を確認し、その後フレア（FLIR：前方監視赤外線）システムを使用して自動追跡を開始しました。
時期: GoFastビデオは、Gimbalビデオと同時期、つまり2015年頃に撮影されました。フレイヴァー司令官のティックタック遭遇（2004年）より後の出来事です。
撮影者: Gimbalビデオを撮影したのと同じ、戦闘機の**後席搭乗員（Backseater）**がGoFastビデオも撮影した可能性が高いとされています。これは、複数の重要なUAP遭遇が、信頼できる同じ軍関係者によって記録されたことを示唆しています。
異常な性能: 物体は非常に高速で移動しており、「猛スピードで海面を横切っている」と表現されています。一部の懐疑論者は、実際にはそれほど速くなかったと主張していますが、搭乗員はその見方を否定しています。
推進システムの示唆: GoFastビデオの物体も、他のUAP事例と同様に、従来のジェット機や既知の航空機とは異なる推進システムを持っていることが示唆されています。その「猛スピード」での移動は、排出プルーム（排気）がないことを特徴とする非反作用型推進システムの概念を裏付けるものとして議論されています。この種の推進システムは、空気、水、宇宙といった異なる媒体の障壁を取り除く**「トランスミディアム（transmedium）」能力**を可能にする可能性が指摘されています。

結論として、GoFastビデオは、海軍パイロットが遭遇したUAPが、既知の技術を超越した異常な速度と推進能力を持つことを示す、もう一つの説得力のある事例として提示されています。そのティックタック型との類似性や、Gimbalビデオとの共通点（場所、時期、撮影者）は、これらの現象が単発的な異常ではなく、共通の特性を持つ未知の技術によるものであるという主張を補強しています。

メキシコ空軍の UFO 映像について、敷衍して。

類似の遭遇事例のより大きな文脈において、情報源はメキシコ空軍の映像について以下の点を議論しています。

映像の起源と目的: この映像はメキシコ空軍によって撮影されたものです。元々は麻薬密売人を探知するために搭載された赤外線カメラ（IR footage）で撮影されました。これにより、肉眼では見えない範囲のものを捉えることが可能でした。
物体の特徴:
- FLIR（前方監視赤外線）の専門家やNSA（国家安全保障局）の関係者がこの映像を分析した結果、「遠くの光」ではなく、**排気プルームや熱の兆候がない「機体」**であると結論付けられています。
- これらは非伝統的な「場」推進システムを使用しているとされています。
- 当初、「水中の石油掘削施設の光」や「火災」などとして懐疑的な説明が試みられましたが、これらはすべて反証されています。
遭遇状況と時期:
- この映像には6つの未確認物体が映っており、追跡されていました。
- 場所はエンセナーダ沖の同じエリアであり、デイビッド・フレイヴァー司令官が遭遇したティックタック事件の「直後」に、同時期に発生したものです。フレイヴァー司令官は、この映像を見たときに「我々が追跡したものとよく似ている」と述べています。
広範な現象との関連性:
- ペンタゴンの報道官が、これらの「異常な航空宇宙機（AAVs: anomalous aerospace vehicles）」によるニアミスの頻度が増加していることを認めており、メキシコ空軍の映像もこの現象の一部として位置づけられています。
- これらの物体が、イーロン・マスクが持つような現代の技術とは比較にならない、全く異なる推進システムを持っていることが強調されています。
- この映像は、フレイヴァー司令官のティックタック遭遇と同様に、既知の技術を超越した能力（非反作用型推進システムなど）を持つ未確認航空機が存在するという主張を補強する重要な証拠として提示されています。

Me:

その

当初、「水中の石油掘削施設の光」や「火災」などとして懐疑的な説明が試みられましたが、これらはすべて反証されています

について、できる限り詳しく敷衍して。

AI:

メキシコ空軍の映像に関して、情報源が「当初、『水中の石油掘削施設の光』や『火災』などとして懐疑的な説明が試みられましたが、これらはすべて反証されています」と述べている点について、さらに詳しく説明します。

この映像は、メキシコ空軍が麻薬密売人を探知するために搭載していた赤外線カメラ（IR footage）で撮影されたものです。この技術的特性が、懐疑的な説明を反証する上で非常に重要です。

懐疑的な説明とその反証は以下の通りです。

「水中の石油掘削施設の光」説の反証:
- この映像に映っている物体は、当初「水中の石油掘削施設の光」ではないかという見方が示されました。
- しかし、情報源はこの説が「反証されている」と断言しています。
- 反証の根拠として、FLIR（前方監視赤外線）の専門家やNSA（国家安全保障局）の関係者が映像を分析した結果、これらは「遠くの光」ではないと結論付けていることが挙げられます。FLIRカメラは可視光線を超えて温度変化を捉えるため、単なる光であれば特定の熱源として記録されるはずですが、そうはなりませんでした。
「火災」説の反証:
- 同様に、物体が「火災」であるという説明も試みられました。
- これもまた**「反証されている」**とされています。
- 理由として、これらの物体には**「プルーム（排気）がない」、そして「熱の兆候がない」**と明確に述べられています。通常の航空機や火災であれば、はっきりと排気プルームや熱の署名が赤外線で確認できるはずですが、この映像の物体にはそれが見られませんでした。

これらの映像は、デイビッド・フレイヴァー司令官のティックタック事件と**「同じエリア」、つまりエンセナーダ沖で撮影され、時期もフレイヴァー司令官の事件の「直後」であったとされています。映像には6つの未確認物体が追跡されている**様子が記録されており、これは単一の静止した光や火災ではない、**物理的な「機体（craft）」**であることを示唆しています。

要するに、メキシコ空軍の映像における物体が単なる光や火災ではないとされたのは、赤外線カメラのデータが、これらの物体が排熱や排気を伴わない「非伝統的な場推進システム（non-traditional field propulsion systems）」を持つ「機体」であることを示していたためです。

文字起こし

(transcript 1of3)

（以下は Joe Rogan の Youtube 動画の文字起こしです。ゲストは Cmdr. David Fravor と Jeremy Corbell のふたりです。動画が長いので全体を 3分割し、これはその part1 部分です。）

And here we go. First of all, gentlemen, thanks for being here. Jeremy, thanks for coming back again. Thanks, Joe. And thanks to you, sir. It's very exciting to be here. Very exciting for me to be here to be able to talk to you about your story. Thank you. I'm glad to be here. David, tell everybody who you are and tell everybody your background, please. (0:00:23)

Okay, my name is David Fravor. I served 24 years in the military. I enlisted in the Marine for a couple of years. They sent me to the Naval Academy. Then I flew for 18 years for the Navy. Had literally flew A6s, Hornets, and then Super Hornets. Had every qualification you could get in the airplane. Everything, even the stuff they're not doing anymore. So I had NVG, high, low. (0:00:46)

Went to Top Gun. And at the time of the incident that we're going to talk about, I was a commanding officer of VFA-41, the Black Aces. I've gone through a journey with this whole UFO stuff. From being a full-on true believer, to being incredibly skeptical, to trying to be open-minded, to being more of a believer now than I think I've ever been before. (0:01:10)

And one of the things that I've always said is, the people that I believe, there's a lot of loony people out there, but the people that I put my trust in are high-level military people like yourself. So when I hear someone like you, who has a story that defies logic, or defies conventional understanding of how aircrafts work, that's when I sit back and I go, okay, this is a different thing. (0:01:37)

Because there's always people that are telling you they're psychic, or they sense things, or they're in communication with Bigfoot. There's always loony people out there. But when someone is in the military, someone who's trained to defy these incredible – I mean, how expensive are those jets? When we had them, they were about $70 million a piece. Yeah, they don't give those to morons. (0:01:58)

Typically not. Some people in my family would probably argue that point, but hey, better lucky than good. It just seems to me that this is – for rational people that want to look at this whole UFO phenomenon objectively, you're the type of person that I want to talk to. So I was very excited to have you in here. So what year was your incident? (0:02:23)

And you have a very, very famous incident that's corroborated by actual evidence, which is one of the rare ones. What year was it, and where did it take place? So it was 2004, November 14th. It's really – if you draw San Diego to Ensenada, Mexico, we're about 60 miles off the coast in between the two. We're doing workups. So when we get ready to deploy, this was for the 2005 deployment. (0:02:49)

We were going at sea for November and December of 2004. So we had been out – I had just taken over the squadron mid-October. So I had been the CO for a month. (0:02:57)

So we go out, and we're putting the battle group pieces together. So it's not just the air wing, but we're on the carrier. We've got the cruiser. We've got all the support ships out there. And we're going to integrate all the defenses and train as one unit. So the exercise that we're going to do is an air defense exercise where there's good guys, bad guys. (0:03:17)

They're all from internal, from the air wing. So the bad guys today are going to be the Marines, VMFA 232, the Red Devils. So they're going to launch, and they're going to go about 100 miles south of the ship, and we're the good guys. And it's – we call it a 2v2, so it's two of us against two of them. And we're going to work with the USS Princeton, which is going to be the controller. (0:03:34)

And they're going to control the blue forces, and then the red guys are going to give us a presentation that, you know, they're going to try and intercept so we can stop them from getting up towards the carrier. So that's kind of the training set that we're all good. So the Marines take off first, and they start heading to the south. Now, we have no idea that for two weeks, the two weeks we've been at sea, they've been tracking these things coming out of the sky. (0:03:54)

And when I talk to the Princeton controller, he's, like, up to about a dozen of them. They would come down from above 80,000 feet. They'd drop down to about 20,000 feet. They'd hang out, and then they'd go straight back up after about three or four hours. Now, when you say they've been tracking them, who specifically? This is the USS—the Princeton is tracking them. (0:04:10)

They saw them on the Nimitz radar, and the E-2 could see them. So—because they're out there, you know, that radar is on all the time. And the SPY-1 system on an Aegis cruiser is, you know, the state—it's probably one of the most sophisticated systems in the world. So typically when something like this happens and there is some unexplained phenomenon, what do they do? (0:04:30)

In this case, you know, if we were in a threat environment, they would tell us. But if we were off the coast of San Diego, it doesn't come to the airwings. We have no idea that these things are out there at all. So they observed these things, and they never bothered telling any of you guys. That's correct. So they just knew that these things had been visiting this area. (0:04:48)

Yes. But they just allowed this training exercise to take place anyway. Yeah. Talking to them, the previous—for the two weeks, they would show up, but it was when we weren't flying. So the typical carrier schedule is, you know, for us, it was about noon to midnight. It's a 12-hour day. There's reasons for that. It can go a lot longer. (0:05:05)

But for training, we just do the 12-hour day thing. And it's cyclocops, so you've got guys taking off and landing periodically. So we were on one of the first goes. You know, it's, you know, noon, 1 o'clock, somewhere around there. And we take off. The Marines take off first. And my buddy Cheeks, who's the CO of the Marine squadron, he was leading the red air. (0:05:22)

When he launched off the carrier first, they called him up and said, Hey, what have you got on board? Well, the small, the original legacy F-18s don't have as much gas as the Super Hornets. The Super Hornets are about 30 percent bigger. So they start talking to him about fuel, and based on how long we're going to be airborne and everything else, they go, Hey, why don't you just go ahead and proceed to your cap point? (0:05:39)

Because we had just taken off. And that's when the controller had come up and said, Hey, I forget our cost. It's probably like dealer is usually what we went. So it would be like dealer 1-1. This is Princeton Control. What do you got? You know, say your loadout. I kind of chuckled. He said, I said, Well, I got a CATM-9, which is a – it's basically just a blue metal tube with a seeker head for an AIM-9 IR missile. (0:06:03)

It's a training. It doesn't come off the airplane. You can beat it with a sledgehammer. That's the only way you're going to get it off or you got to unlock the lugs with a key. So I'm like kind of chuckling. He goes, Well, hey, we're going to cancel the training. So we're like, OK. He says, We got real-world vector and they're going to send us out to the west. (0:06:18)

So picture if it's – if you got a clock, the Nimitz is in the middle. We're a little bit south of that, about 40 miles south, and then the Marines are about 100 miles south of the ship, about 60 miles between the two of us. So this is all happening. My wingman is joining up. And these are F-18s, so there's two people in each jet. (0:06:37)

So it's me and my wizard, which is a weapons systems operator, and I've got the other pilot and the weapons systems operator in the other jet. So they tell us all this. Hey, we're going to real-world vector and they send us out 270, about 60 miles away from where we're going. So now we're going out even further out to sea. We have no idea what we're intercepting. (0:06:53)

And this is when the controller starts talking to us. He says, Hey, sir, we've seen these objects. They've been – for two weeks they've been coming down. And he's given us the whole story. He says, We need you to go investigate. We want to know what these are. Trevor Burrus But they're asking you to investigate in a jet that's unarmed. (0:07:08)

Aaron Ross That's correct. Yeah, we have no – and there's reasons for that, that we don't fly. We typically don't fly with live ordnance unless we're actually going into like a combat zone or we're on a training range and we're going to shoot something. And the reason is you can go through history of the Navy or Air Force. If you put live missiles on airplanes and then you start doing training where you're squeezing the trigger, someone always messes the switchology up and someone gets shot down. (0:07:30)

It's happened multiple times. So we don't do it. There are times that we do, but it's rare. So we start flying out to the west. Now, I want you to think because the other pilot has a – when you talk to – it's out there. It was a female. When you talk to her, it's – here's the – kind of goes through the mindset of, hey, we're off the coast of Mexico, real-world vector. (0:07:52)

We have no idea what we're going to look at. Probably a drug runner because you get the drug runners coming up the coast. So we're like, OK. So we drive out and they're calling down ranges. So they're telling us, hey, it's 270 at 30 miles at 20,000 feet, and it's – and then you just count down the ranges. And we're talking back and forth the whole time. (0:08:10)

So they got to a point where they say, hey, merge plot, which means radars have resolution cells, range and azimuth of what the radar can actually see. Once you're inside that box, you can't tell the difference between me and the object I'm going at. We're just become one big blob. So they call merge plot and so the other jet is on my left-hand side and we're going to – I'm going to go to a clock code to make it simple. (0:08:36)

So the object we're going to end up looking for is right in the middle of the clock and we are at the 6 o'clock position. And my wingman is off to my left side. So it's – she's further down with her wizard. So as we're looking around, we look to the right and there's a – yesterday was a perfect example out here. The water is perfectly calm, no whitecaps. (0:08:58)

I mean it's literally a perfect San Diego, California day. And we see whitewater, something like if you see a seamount rock underwater when you're standing on the shore and the waves are breaking over and you're like, what is that? It's usually because there's a rock under the water. So it looks like that but it's about the size of a 737. It actually kind of has a shape of like a cross and it's pointing to the east. (0:09:18)

So you've got the long part going east-west and you got a couple of things going north and south. So as we're looking at it because that kind of draws our eyes. (0:09:25)

We're like, oh, that's kind of odd. We look down and the wizard in the other airplane comes up and says, hey, skipper, do you? And that's about what he gets out of his mouth and I'm kind of looking at the same thing. I go, dude, do you see that? What is that thing? What we see is this white tic-tac-looking object just above the surface of the water pointing north-south and it's going north-south, east-west. It's just radically moving forward, back, left, right at will. (0:09:49)

And it's moving around the disturbance, the white water that we see. Trevor Burrus How big is this thing? Jason Kuznicki Over time, it's about 40 feet long. And the way I estimate that is – I mean I got a lot of time fighting other airplanes. So it's about the size of a hornet. So that's why we say 40 feet. This thing is just going left. (0:10:05)

So the first thing you see when you look down, you go – and this is with our eyes. It's not sensors. So we're looking down at this thing and first thing you think is helicopter. The helicopters typically stay below 200 feet when we're out there and they're just driving around. We're pretty far away from the ship for a helicopter for one of ours. (0:10:20)

So what is it? So the first thing you look for is rotor wash. If you've watched any TV show that starts kicking the water up, you can see that. It's really easy to see from the air. So we're like, no, no rotor wash. Matter of fact, I don't see any rotors. I don't see any tail rotor. I don't see any – the main rotors. (0:10:36)

We're like, that's kind of weird. So as we're driving around, we're looking at this thing. We get to about the 9 o'clock position. Trevor Burrus How far away are you from this thing? I'm at 20,000 feet and it's right down on the surface, right off our right side. So I'm probably maybe a couple miles lateral and 20,000 feet and we're just watching it move around. (0:10:52)

Trevor Burrus So it's very small in your eyes. Not overly small. I mean an airplane down that low, it's 40 feet. You can see pretty well. It was pretty clear. So I'm like, OK. So I said, I'm going to go check it out. That's what we're trained to do. The other pilot says, hey, I'm going to stay up here. And I'm like, that's perfect. (0:11:10)

So now we'll get some separation. We'll get it from different views. And the other airplane will kind of have a God's-eye view of everything that's going on as I go down and check this thing out. So I start driving around and it's still doing its forward, back, left, right. It's still pointing north-south. We get to about the 12 o'clock position. I'm just in a nice easy descent for a reason because I've been asked, could you go more aggressive? (0:11:29)

You can. (0:11:30)

But when you're out over water, the water looks the same at 20,000 feet as it does at 2,000 feet. So you can easily put yourself in a non-recoverable position if you're not paying attention and you go into the water. So I got this nice easy descent. I get to about 12 o'clock. And as I'm coming down, I could guess probably about 18,000 feet now, a couple thousand feet below the other airplane. (0:11:50)

The tic-tac just kind of rapidly goes boop and turns. So now it's kind of pointing east-west and now it mirrors us. So it's above the surface. We're up high. We're coming down. It starts coming up. I'm like, well, this is getting interesting. So we kind of drive all the way around a circle. I'm descending. It's coming up. And I get over to about the 8 o'clock position on the clock. (0:12:11)

And it's over at about the 2 o'clock position. Well, the quickest way, as we know as kids, to get someone, you can keep going around the circle. Nothing is going to happen. You cut across the circle. So I'm about, I don't know, probably 2,000 to 3,000 feet above it. And I just kind of drop my nose aggressively and I cut across the circle. (0:12:27)

And it's coming this way. It's because I'm trying to fly to where it's going to be because I want to join on it. I want to see how close I can get to it. And as I'm pulling up, it's kind of starting to cross my nose and it starts to accelerate. And within about less than a second, as I start to pull nose onto it and it crosses right in front of me, it just goes poof and it's gone. (0:12:45)

So I call the other airplane. I said, hey, do you guys see that thing? And they're like, sir, it's gone. We don't see it at all. So I'm like, OK, that's kind of weird. So we don't see it. We're looking. At the same time, I say, hey, let's turn around and let's go back to see what was in the water. Was there something there? (0:13:06)

So we turn around. We're right there. We haven't gone anywhere. It's gone. Water's perfectly. There's no white water, nothing. It's just blue. We're like, OK. So we turn back around. Now we're heading back out towards the east. And I tell the controller, I said, well, I said, you know, I first said I'm kind of weirded out. And I told my backseater that. We start heading back and the controller on the Princeton comes up and he says, sir, you're not going to believe this, but that thing is back at your cap point. (0:13:32)

That was our original point where we were going to hold 40 miles south of the ship. So this thing has went from wherever we were at to about 60 miles in, you know, maybe 30, 40 seconds. It's already over there. (0:13:45)

And it just – and they didn't track it. It just appeared. He just shows back up on the radar and they go, it's here. So we're like, OK. So we fly back. We don't see it. We don't see it on our radar. We don't see it on any of our sensors. We do like two runs and we come back to the ship and land. (0:14:01)

So as we're in our – we call it the PR shop. We're taking off our flight gear. One of my crews is getting ready to go out and I think they were going to be on a tanker mission, but they had a targeting pod on board. So they launch off and we're telling them about this before. And the backseater, Chad, says he's really determined. (0:14:21)

He's going to find this thing. So he tells the pilot, hey, we're going to find this thing. So they're just out driving around and in the backseat of a Super Hornet, there's no stick, but there's side stick controllers and they're to control the sensors because that's what the weapons systems guys do. And they can change displays really fast by just hitting a button and it will flip from the radar to the targeting pod. (0:14:40)

And the way the system actually works is when you see something on the radar and you designate it as your primary target, all the other sensors will look at that point. So everything is kind of synced together. So he picks up a hit on his radar and he goes to lock it up because I watched all the tapes. He goes to lock it up and immediately the radar can tell, it gets signals back that it's being jammed. (0:15:02)

So and technically jamming is an act of war. It starts jamming the radar, goes into a jam extrapolate. A bunch of stuff happens on the scope. Well, he's smart enough to castle to his targeting pod and he takes a passive track. And that's the video that you see of the Tic Tac where it's just sitting in the middle of screen real quiet. So he does that and he goes through it. (0:15:22)

If you watch the video, if we had it, I'd go through it with you. But they go through all the different modes. So he goes, it's an IR and an EO. EO is TV. It's black and white TV camera. We can get the video right online. Yeah. Let's get the video, Jamie. Where would you... can't show it to anybody. We can't show it on YouTube, but you can see it and people will be able to go to it. (0:15:43)

You know what we'll do? Go to the video and we'll tell people when we're starting. And we'll tell people what the title of the video that you get to is. And they can sync it up themselves if they're watching it. It's publicly owned, sir. Yeah. It's publicly owned. It's, you know, American government released it. (0:15:57)

So it is actually something in the public domain. So you think we could play it on YouTube and not get pulled? Yeah. A hundred percent. You think so, Jamie? It's a government... Those things, I would say, yes, we should be able to. But sometimes those things get messy. Let's take a chance. Okay. Let's take a chance with this one. I know if you go... if you're on a New York Times article, there's a link to it. (0:16:16)

It's a Pentagon released... YouTube is crazy with copyright stuff. And we've always been, like, two steps away from getting pulled off of YouTube completely. It's a real disaster. I understand, from their perspective, there's a lot of legal issues they have to deal with, but... I have it on a private server. I could maybe send Jamie... The issue, I believe, though, is the actual copyright of the video itself. (0:16:38)

Oh, it's just... it's a Pentagon released video. Pentagon released public domain. And the Pentagon is going to come after us. I don't think so. I don't think so either. Did you find it? I want to find a good version of the video that doesn't have somebody else's copyright. I've got an un-watermarked version. Let me just look it up. Jeremy will get it to us. (0:16:56)

I have to figure out how to send it to you right here. Give me a second. Do you have AirDrop? Could you AirDrop it? Yeah, but I got it on a page... a private page that can send Jamie. Oh, yeah, okay. Do you have Jamie's info? No. Okay, I'll figure it out. Well, you can send it to me and I'll send it to him. (0:17:14)

Okay. That's pretty easy. Sorry to disrupt the momentum. No, you're good. But I think it's probably important to be able to have this... the video itself so you can just talk about it. And we're about to yank it up here. Okay, Jamie wrote it down for you. Give me a second to get it out. Okay. And for people who don't know, Jeremy also produced Bob Lazar, Area 51 and Flying Saucers. And he was in here when we had Bob Lazar in to talk about Bob's experience. (0:17:49)

And Jesus, if that wasn't a game changer for me and for a lot of other people. This is a subject that it's so easy to mock. You know, this is why I think it's so important that we talk to people like you. Because, like I said, just your average everyday UFO crackpot. They believe everything and anything. Have you ever had any UFO experiences before this? (0:18:15)

No, the irony, and I tell this story. My mother-in-law, she'll be listening. She literally, every time I would go home, she would ask me, hey, do you see a UFO? Do you see a UFO? And I'd be like, no. When I first started dating my wife, she was a big National Enquirer. She had all the, you know, supermarket tabloids. (0:18:31)

And I would always just feed her crap for it. So this happens and I never say a word. So my friends all knew it was a great story over beers because they'd be like, hey, what's the coolest thing you ever saw flying? I go, I chased a UFO. And they go, get out of here. I go, no, seriously. And I tell them the story and they're like, dude. (0:18:47)

I go, yeah. So I go home and I got asked by Lou Elizondo to do the New York Times article, which as like anything else, I always say no. Like it took a bunch of times to get me on your show. Jeremy kept asking, asking, asking, and it was… You got to thank my contractor's wife, Angel, who we were at a party drinking and she goes, you got to do Rogan. I go, what? (0:19:08)

She goes, it's the biggest podcast on the planet. She goes, you got to do it. And I go, all right, I'm going to do it just for you. I'm going to do this show. Shout out to Angel. Yeah, from New Hampshire. So my mother-in-law, we're sitting there and I know the New York Times article is going to come out. And so it was at Thanksgiving in 20… when the article come out, 17. So it's Thanksgiving in 2017. And everyone had kind of left the house. (0:19:30)

So it's just my wife and my in-laws, a couple of us sitting in the kitchen. And I said, hey, I got to tell you guys this. They said, what? I said, there's going to be this article comes out in the New York Times and I'm in it. And they're like, yeah. I go, well, I chased a UFO. My mother-in-law is like, ha, ha. (0:19:44)

She looks at my father-in-law. He's rolling his eyes looking at me like, are you serious? And I go, yeah, yeah. And she's like, you never told us. I go, I never really told anyone. I mean my wife and kids knew the event happened, but they didn't have all the details because it's just one of those things we just didn't… I just didn't get into. (0:19:58)

Is it classified? No. Was it at any point in time? No, there's a lot of rumors out there that it was classified and the ship got locked down. No, it wasn't. It was… we were never… men in suits did not show up. No one told us not to talk about it. And this is because there's a lot of other people saying other things. (0:20:17)

And I said, let's look at it. Here's the context. So in the battle group, you've got the admiral, you got the captain of the ship, the captain of the Princeton, and then you've got the other COs. So position-wise, I'm probably, as a CO of a squadron, in the top 20 out of 6,000. And no one came to talk to me. No one came to take my tapes. (0:20:39)

No one showed up in a suit. (0:20:40)

No one told me not to talk. No one talked to any of my air crew that were involved in this. There were six people total involved, the two that shot the video and the four of us that looked at it for five minutes with our eyes. No one, nothing. And I can get into how – there's a report that George Knapp got released. (0:20:58)

It's a – I call it the unofficial official report. And I had met someone and I'm like, hey, can you find anything? I had this incident. Normally when you tell people this, they look at you like, dude, what are you smoking? I'm like, no, no, I'm good. I'm tested. And they go – and they said, well, let me see what I can do. (0:21:19)

And I had got a call. I was working – I was doing some aerospace work and I had gotten a call on my cell phone from a guy. And he said, hey, I want to investigate your incident. And I go, OK. So he did. He investigated the incident and it was very, very thorough. I mean if you've read the – it's about 10 pages long. (0:21:38)

And he – I mean he tracked down everybody. He tracked down all the people that were – the air crew that were involved. He talked to – he tracked down the admiral. He talked – I mean it was a pretty thorough report. And I didn't think anything of it because the people that worded it's out there, so they want to do FOIA. But it was never released in a FOIA request. (0:21:56)

I actually had the Navy call me. I had been out of the Navy for like six years and – Let's explain to people. That means freedom of information. So I got called by a public affairs person from the Navy and said, hey, is this Commander Fravor? And I said, yeah. And they said, hey, do you know of any documentation on your UFO incident off the Nimitz? (0:22:16)

And I said, official. And she said, yeah. I said no because I knew the report existed. But to me it was unofficial because I didn't know who – where it went. And I had a copy of it. But because it wasn't official, well then years later I find out that the guy who actually did the report was part of the AATIP team. And I was talking to Lou Elizondo who runs that program. (0:22:35)

And Lou showed me the documentation of the original. I think it was like 13 people that were part of AATIP and they were FOIA exempt. And I'm like, well, that's kind of – well, hey, I know that guy. He's the guy that did the report, which is why it never ever came out until George got his hands on it. How is something Freedom of Information Act exempt? (0:22:52)

Obviously DOD has the ability – because I'm not a conspiracy theory person at all. (0:22:59)

I mean I'll just tell you that. I think there's reasons that the government doesn't tell the public everything. And I don't speak for the government. But I think there's a good reason for that, that not everything needs to go out to the public. But most of it does. And they just – what they do is they put a clause on, hey, for this program or whatever we're doing, which would have been an AATIP program, the work that they do and what they find is not – it's not releasable through Freedom of Information Act. There's probably other avenues to get that. (0:23:22)

And then you go, well, what really is Freedom of Information? Because I got into this on – I was talking to someone who's a conspiracy theorist. They said, well, so-and-so wrote and they're not getting any information on your event. I said, so what are they going to do? They're going to call up – you're going to put in your request for Freedom of Information. You go, here's what I want. (0:23:37)

It goes to some poor guy at the Pentagon who's like, I have no idea what this is, and he searches around. He doesn't find anything. He looks at his bud and I go, hey, Joe, you got anything on the Nimitz incident? You go, nope. I go, OK. Well, I didn't find anything. I looked. I did my due diligence. But I'm not going to spend the next six months of my life doing your research project for you. (0:23:54)

So you get nothing and then you assume the government is covering up when the government really isn't. They just – the guys doing the research doesn't know where it's at or doesn't have access to it. Jamie, we have the video? OK. Here we go. Now, explain what are we seeing and why are we seeing it in this particular state? So we'll just kind of go around. (0:24:13)

So if you look at the – OPRs operate in the top left corner. NAR is narrow field of view, which is zoomed in. IR at the top middle, it means it's in infrared mode. So instead of seeing color, you're seeing temperature variations. And these things are extremely sensitive to when like tens of degrees, they will tell you the difference due to color. So it will go from black to white. (0:24:36)

So in this case, white is hot. So if you look down in the bottom left corner, it says WHT. That's white. It means white is hot. So the object that you're looking at is hotter than the sky around it. But what you also notice is there's no plumes. Now, if you're looking at an airplane, when you get closer, you'll actually see the exhaust coming out and there will be a really glowing plume. (0:24:54)

That's important as we look at the video. And then most of the stuff on here, you really don't need to know. What you can look at is the bottom right corner. (0:25:00)

It says 19,990 in a B. That's the altitude. And if you look up in the little words where it says HDG and then BALT, it's autopilot. So it's on altitude hold. It's just flying for that. So you can go ahead and play the video. And so those two bars next to the white object, that's a passive track. So what he's done is he's commanded the FLIR to track that. (0:25:25)

So what the system does is it uses – it's actually tracking. It can track pixels. And it's just basically blocked those hot pixels, those white pixels from the black ones. And then you're going to see now – pause it real quick. So over the top, see it went to a white screen with the black object. This is a black and white TV mode. (0:25:41)

And if you look at the top, it says TV. So narrow in TV mode is actually – you can get closer than narrow in IR. It's literally narrow in IR is about medium in TV mode. So you can get closer with the TV mode. So as you look at it now, in this case, you would actually start to see stuff going on. And even in TV mode, because you get exhaust, the black exhaust that comes out, you'll usually be able to see kind of some of that coming out of the back. (0:26:04)

And you don't see anything. This thing is just sitting there. And if you look at the top where it says three right, that's the pod is looking three degrees right of the nose of the airplane. So he's just flying along the bottom numbers. Don't worry. Those are time. So it's 41.56. So go ahead and hit play. And what he's doing is he's going – Chad is going through all the different modes because he's like, oh, I got it. (0:26:26)

And he's going to try and see the best video that he can get. Now, there's rumors that this video is like 10 minutes long. No, what you're looking at is the entire video. Now, notice where it says 99.9. So hit pause real quick. What that means is while he's got the pod, the targeting pod, because that's his primary sensor right now, the radar is still trying to look at this object and trying to range it. (0:26:44)

And the radar can't get ranging on it. So the object is doing something to say I'm not giving you back because it's just a Doppler radar, just like a police radar is a Doppler. It's trying to get a ranging on you and it can't do it. So when it says 99.9, the radar cannot see this object right now. It's not allowing it to get ranging. (0:27:02)

And I think that's super important, Dave, the way he explained it to me, active jamming compared to passive jamming. This is a technology that is actively jamming this system. Rather than something like stealth aircraft, which is the shape and texture of the... Yeah, it's because everyone thinks stealth is invisible. (0:27:20)

It's not. It's just it's a technology to to basically make it harder for radars to see you. You know, and that's the whole thing. You know, if you look at, you know, airplanes that are nose on are harder to see than airplanes at the sides. Kind of like think of a barn door. If you're looking at the whole barn door, it's really easy to see. (0:27:37)

If I turn the barn door sideways where it's really thin, it's going to be a lot harder for you to see it. Got it. So that's the easiest, most basic way to look at this. So keep going. You can play again. And you can look. The airplane is still sitting at 20,000 feet. It's doing 250 knots. He's going to go through different modes and try and lock it. (0:27:53)

And it's just kind of sitting in all of a sudden. As the video goes on, I think it's a minute and a half long. See, it's going to try and reacquire. It recenters the pod. So it's slowly drifting to the left. The Hornet is still going the same heading. It's just kind of hanging out. And they're just filming this thing. And then when they get close, it's going to zing off the left-hand side. (0:28:13)

When you see it on a full... because you think digital, you'd be able to get a one-for-one copy. Unlike when you copy your album to a cassette, you lose a little quality. Well, you still do in digital world. And off it goes to the left. And that's pretty fast to leave that field of view. We have big monitors that we look at these when they come back. (0:28:30)

So we're looking at the original tapes. Play the end of that again, please, Jamie. So when it's taking off, when it just sort of leaves the field of view and takes off to the left, how fast is that going? I would say pretty fast. It's an estimate. If we had ranging, you could obviously do the triangle and go, hey, because we know how big the field of view is. (0:28:49)

But for something to leave the field of view that fast with the pod just staring is pretty fast. It's like out of here. Like nothing that we have? No, because we can't... I don't care what airplane it is. So let's just use the F-22 Raptor. That's probably one of the... it's probably the best airplane in the world right now, performance-wise. It can't take off like that, especially if it's a hover. (0:29:12)

I mean, you're talking something that's just sitting in space in the wind, and then it just all of a sudden accelerates. Airplanes don't work that way. And it's not leaving any exhaust plume. No, notice there's none. Play it again, Jamie, at the end. Even in the IR, you don't... Yeah, see, there's IR zoomed in, and there's no... you would see a plume if that was an airplane. (0:29:28)

It's creepy how it takes off. (0:29:30)

Yeah. With active jamming, it's intelligently controlled. There's no rotors. There's no plumes. There's no exhaust. There's no tail fin. There's no tail number. This thing goes from a standstill, takes off. It's a propulsion system we don't have in our inventory, and no other nation does. That's how it's understood by the government. Now, if the fastest plane on Earth was trying to do that same maneuver, this system would be able to track it? (0:30:00)

Yeah, it would stay with it until it got to the limits of the pod as far as looking to the left. And the radar would see it. I mean, when you get close enough, everything becomes visible because you get burned through with radar and how radars actually work. But this one is – you tell me, but this was performance beyond – I mean it's like when we saw it disappear when it flew in front of my nose. (0:30:29)

I'm talking something – I'm within a half mile of it looking at it, and it gets in front of me and just disappears. So take – we'll just go to something that everyone knows is fast. Let's just say SR-71 that's doing Mach 3. The visibility is 50 miles. So even at 35 miles a minute, I'm going to be able to see this thing turn into a little dot as it goes off into the horizon for probably a minute. (0:30:52)

The thing that we saw disappeared in a second, just gone. And that's from two different angles. Remember, the other airplane is 8,000 feet above me because we get close to it at about 12,000 feet. So the other airplane is above me looking down, and when it disappeared, I said, do you guys see it? And they said, no, it's gone. It just literally was poof. (0:31:10)

Now, when you came back and – what do you do with this information? Do you report it? Do you talk to people about it? So the typical process – anytime we fly, everything gets debriefed. So because it was a two-seat airplane, usually the junior person in the jet goes down. So I was the boss, so I wasn't going down there. So we have a thing called Civic, C-V-I-C, which is the Carrier Intel Center. So they go down. (0:31:37)

We always take our tapes because we record stuff when we're fighting. They take it down, and it's really to exercise the system when we're in training so that when we actually get over to – in this case, we were going over to the Persian Gulf. Anything that we do comes in and gets debriefed, and then it all gets sent off. That's how you get the CNN video and all that. (0:31:52)

So they go down, and they debrief, and they have to tell, hey, we chased this object. We don't know what it is. And, of course, everyone now is going to make jokes because we know we're going to catch shit because that's how the Navy works. (0:32:04)

And I told him. I said – I remember telling the guy in my backseat. I said, dude, we're going to catch maximum shit for this. And he goes, yes, sir. I'll show you the comics. I have them on my phone. We do – the airplane comes out. So we know it's going to come down. So he goes in. They debrief this. Both crews go in, and, of course, everyone at Intel thinks this is hilarious. (0:32:25)

So the flight – Chad comes in with his tapes when he lands, and here's the thing. Oh, VFA-41. You guys see any UFOs out there? And he pulls out that tape and drops it on the counter. He goes, yeah, it's on here. So they're like, oh, shit. So they copy it. They play it, and there's a big – it looks like a rack system. (0:32:47)

They put the 8-mil in. It gets copied to a hard drive. And then they archive it. So you go, OK. So they got this video. And then the ship – this spreads – if you have a rumor on the ship, 5,000 people are going to know about it within probably 30 minutes. I mean it spreads. It's like a virus. So the whole ship now knows that we chased this. (0:33:07)

I guarantee the whole Princeton knew this stuff was going on. And it goes all up. The admiral knows about it. The captain of the ship knew about it. And then all the movies because we have – they play movies for us on the ship, and they run like a 12-hour loop. So of course the movie selection is Men in Black, Men in Black 2, Signs, Independence Day. And we know we're going to be on the airplane comic because there's always a comic. (0:33:30)

So you do something stupid or like this, then you're going to be on the comic. I'll show you the comics here in a little bit. They're pretty funny. But so that went on for two days. But we're in the middle of workups. I got a squadron to run. So it's like there was – after about the first day and a half, it really died down. (0:33:46)

And then it was the – there's always that closet people that you don't think that are really like UFO buffs. And we had – one of the Marines would always come and sit down. Hey, Skipper, can I sit with you? You want to talk about the UFO? Yeah, I just – I can't get it out of my mind. And then we would just sit there and talk about it. (0:34:02)

And to me it was like – we're just saying my entire now flying career is defined by five minutes of chasing this white tic-tac vice almost 4,000 hours flying. Now, did you encounter anyone else that had a similar experience? I've talked to the guys, a couple of guys from the East Coast event, the gimbal video. (0:34:23)

One of them I talk to daily. He's a pretty good friend of mine. Totally different now. Keep in mind ours is 2004. The gimbal video is 2015. The funny part about the gimbal video and the East Coast stuff that was going on – because that's off the Bay Cape. So off the coast of the United States, they're called warning areas and all they are is they're – if you look on an aviation map, they're these big areas that are blocked off by blue and they say like Whiskey 291 or Whiskey 243. Is the gimbal video available in the same way that that video is available? (0:34:57)

Yes. Yeah. OK. Find that, Jamie. So – and I was talking to him about it because I – and I actually have a buddy of mine who just retired. He was the – he led the fighter wing on the East Coast and I had called him up because we start finding out that these things were so prevalent out off the East Coast of the United States and there's a couple of them. (0:35:15)

So there's the – we're going to talk. What they started seeing originally was these things and one of them almost hit – the airplane almost hit one of these things. But it looks like a cube inside of a clear beach ball. So they don't know if it's actually like a surrounding or it's – you don't know if it's a force field. And you see kind of in the gimbal video, it's got like an aura around it where ours didn't. I always laugh. (0:35:35)

I go, ours was a tic-tac. These are not. That means there's different stuff out there that we don't know. But they had two airplanes flying and we fly – when we go out to train, we're usually – we have a distance. We'll just say we're a mile apart as we're flying out. So they're flying out and they're – the airplanes are deployed. We call it combat spread. (0:35:53)

And one of the airplanes almost hits one of these. It goes close down like 50 feet down the side and almost hits one of these floating cubes inside of the beach ball. And someone goes, oh, it's a balloon. It's not a balloon. I mean these things are literally sitting still. They're no effect from the wind. So if you got 90 knots of wind and they talk about it, these things are just sitting there. (0:36:14)

So 60 or 70 people had seen it because the radars, the newer radar in the Super Hornets is extremely, extremely capable. OK. And at first when they started seeing stuff, they were like, oh, it's just like – maybe it's the radar just giving me a false target. That radar really doesn't give false targets. And then someone did exactly what Chad did is they threw their targeting flare out there and all of a sudden when you see a heat signature, there's a return. (0:36:39)

There's obviously something out where that blip is at. (0:36:41)

Trevor Burrus What is a targeting flare? Paul Mueller That's a – we call it the AT flare. It's an advanced targeting flare. It sits on the left side of the airplane and it's – Trevor Burrus Can you launch it like a flare? Paul Mueller No, no. It's a flare, forward-looking infrared receiver. So it's – when you see the bombs blowing up on TV and it looks like a black and white and you see it flash, that's the targeting pod. (0:37:00)

It's got a laser in it. It's got an IR marker in it. It's a very capable system that syncs up to the Hornet so everything kind of marries up. So this is the GoFast. No, this is GoFast. Trevor Burrus That's not it? Paul Mueller No, it's the other one. Trevor Burrus It's the one that looks like the – what is that one? Paul Mueller That's called the GoFast. That looks like a Tic Tac and that was another one taken off the East Coast. But they grab it and it's – Trevor Burrus Bookmark that one. (0:37:20)

Paul Mueller It's going – it's screaming across the ocean at a very high rate of speed. And there have been some debunkers that say, well, it's really not going that fast. It's just the way the airplane is and how the mechanics of the pod are working. When you talk to the crew – because it's actually – I could ask my bud. I'm pretty sure it's the same backseater who took both of these videos, took the GoFast video and took the gimbal video. (0:37:41)

And my buddy was on the flight with the gimbal video. But they – these things – so I called my bud because I'm like, hey, how many people are seeing these things? I got like 60 or 70. Trevor Burrus 60 or 70. Paul Mueller 60 or 70 people had seen these things on radar. And I said, well, what are you doing? They said, well, we put out a NOTAM, which is a notice to airmen that just says, hey, these things are out there. (0:38:01)

So just be careful because we don't want you to hit one. Yeah. Trevor Burrus Whoa. Paul Mueller And it's kind of like ours. You go – because you would ask, who do you tell? Well, everyone knows. Well, what do you do? And I said, well, because it was all white and it didn't have any markings on it and it didn't have any wings and it didn't have any rotors. (0:38:17)

And it was just – it outperformed anything that we have. I think if I would have painted China or Russia on the side. Trevor Burrus Is this the gimbal video? Paul Mueller Yes. Trevor Burrus OK. Paul Mueller So it's the same pod. Trevor Burrus Starting from the beginning, Chairman? Paul Mueller What we're looking at. And when the crew finds it, now what you're not seeing, you're seeing the targeting. (0:38:35)

When you hear them start talking, when you listen to the video, you'll hear the guy go, dude, look, they're all over. (0:38:41)

Look at the SA page. So we have a situational awareness page. Whatever the radar is getting returns on, it will show up. It's kind of like our god's eye view in the airplane. So the pod can only look at one thing. So he designates that as his primary target. So that's where the pod is there. The radar is still seeing everything else. So what they're actually seeing in this video is when you see the object that he's tracking. (0:39:03)

When I was talking to one of the other pilots, he said there's actually – when you see the radar video, there's like a – it almost looks like a formation in front of them, like five smaller ones that are moving in front of it. And then they turn. So like a formation of these things turns and starts going the other way and while they're filming the gimbal video. (0:39:21)

And that's kind of the comms when you hear, dude, holy cow, look, they're all over. This is unreported new information that he's actually saying right now. Everybody knows this video. This is the one that they say turns like the Lazar craft like belly first. However, what he's telling you right now is something that is not public yet. He's telling you that there was a V formation of other objects that the public has yet to see. (0:39:43)

You're not going to. You're not going to. It's just a radar tape. But there were more objects surrounding this is what he's telling you right now, which is fascinating because the world doesn't know that yet. Just so you know. I mean that's brand new. That's never been reported by New York Times, anybody. Okay. So you can go ahead and play. So the cool thing with this is when he goes into – so he's in IR mode right now. (0:40:08)

(transcript 2of3)

（以下は Joe Rogan の Youtube 動画の文字起こしです。ゲストは Cmdr. David Fravor と Jeremy Corbell のふたりです。動画が長いので全体を 3分割し、これはその part2 部分です。）

You're still seeing no plume. He's looking 47. So they're actually turning into it. So it's starting to pull it back towards the nose. See how the number at the top is decreasing. And it's against the wind. Now he's in TV mode and this thing is going to just start to roll. And you can kind of see it's got that aura around it. He said they were saying that the ones with the squares inside that look like the beach ball are the same. (0:40:30)

And this thing is just hanging out. So the airplane is in a left-hand turn and it's – now it's right in front. Yeah, it's just rotating. Now this is how Lazar described – don't put that up. Lazar described that, that these things would lay flat and then when they would travel, they would turn up on their side. And that's how they maneuvered. So this is very similar. (0:40:59)

Eerily similar to the propulsion system that Lazar talked about. And that's why this video, we're seeing it very differently now. Especially with what we know about Lazar. But the idea is that it would fly belly-first in high-speed mode. (0:41:13)

So if they have – these are gravity-propelled. This is something that's known within the government. They're trying to back-engineer it. They're trying to understand it. We know there's a program currently that they said is gone. However, it is currently active to study this. These things will turn belly-first, these saucer-type looking ones. And then that's the high-speed mode because they focus, allegedly, these gravity-wave amplifiers. (0:41:37)

Look, this thing turns mechanically. Again, no typical form of propulsion, as an expert is telling you. This is not a glitch. This is seen by multiple radars, multiple people. Commander Fravor was so close to it. This is something that is not aerodynamic. And it could move in ways and fashions. When he's underplaying it, when we first talked, the idea of this thing going... It's instantaneous acceleration back and forth. (0:42:05)

There's no slowing down, no turning like a ping-pong ball. He said to me, our first talk, ping-pong ball in a glass. Nothing moves like that with traditional reactionary propulsion. Somebody has technology that we don't have in our inventory at all. So this is counterintuitive, the way it goes from being aerodynamic to being un-aerodynamic when it goes sideways and then flies belly-forward. That's correct. (0:42:31)

Well, it's not... if you talk... because I was just talking to the guy the other day. And he said the irony with this is these things would be out there for hours. We don't have... a high-performance airplane does not have hours worth of gas. Hornets, if we don't have aerial refueling and we're actually out doing a mission and fighting and going fast, you're talking hour and a half and you're coming back to land. (0:42:54)

Some airplanes are even less based on their size. So like an F-16 doesn't have external fuel tanks. It doesn't have a lot of gas. And the Soviet airplanes are the same way. The MiG-29 does not have a lot of gas. The Su-27s, Su-30s have a lot of gas. Because of weight? It's weight, performance, size of the airplane. So even our intercontinental bombers like B-2, they still take off in the air or fuel. (0:43:18)

They keep topped off so they can get to range. That's how we extend things. You got something like this that's coming down. Just think of the physics. I'll use my instinct because that's the one I really know the best. You've got an object coming from above 80,000 feet. So I'll just tell you that 80,000, it's somewhere around 70,000 to 80,000 feet is where you can actually start to see the curvature of the earth. (0:43:38)

So that's considered space. So they're coming from above that. They're coming straight down. They stop at around 20,000 feet. They hang out for three hours and then they go straight back up. And I know you had Elon on the show. So SpaceX is really excited because they can launch a rocket and then they can have the booster come back to earth and actually land on a pad. (0:44:00)

Very impressive engineering feat. (0:44:03)

Next to this technology, that's like a Model T next to a Porsche. I mean, it's like, wow, really? That's it? And you got something that can just at will move around. Now take it to the next level. And I know there's a lot of talk about this. So Dave's going to go into speculation mode. But when you take a shape like that, so just take the tic-tac shape, which is shaped like a submarine. (0:44:23)

If you're using a propulsion that's non-reactive where you're just manipulating the median that you're in, air, whatever, you can go into the water. So when you hear all the reports of, hey, we've seen these things since World War II that would come out of the water and fly. If you have a technology like this, as long as the object is sealed where you're not going to get water inside of it, there's nothing that says you can't do that. (0:44:47)

Because all you're doing is you're not – where a jet engine sucks in air and blows it out the back or a propeller actually pushes the water, it's a force. Now you've got something that's actually manipulating the gravity field and it's just moving through a void. Then it doesn't – then air – you could literally in theory fly, go into the ocean, cruise around, pop back up, fly around, go to space. (0:45:10)

Nothing – you remove the barriers of the normal propulsion that we have today. There's been many instances of sightings off the coast of California of things that plunge into the water or escape from the water and take off into space. Yeah, with the field propulsion system as Commander Fravor is describing, as Lazar described, it doesn't matter the medium of space, air or water. (0:45:34)

There's no resistance, no splash. And this goes back to when Christopher Columbus reported a UFO sighting. He did? Oh, yeah. This idea – so this has been around – anyway, this idea, boom, that you can go through these different mediums. Hold – pause for a second. Christopher Columbus had a UFO sighting? Yeah, it's a written account. So it's like – Find that. No video. (0:45:54)

It's not a video. No video. This is bullshit then. It's bullshit. But that's what's so cool. So Commander Fravor's encounter, it's not the most documented. It's not the most dramatic. However, it has had the most impact out of any sighting because of his credibility and the mere fact that the New York Times picked it up with video footage, radar evidence, and somebody who is as credible as Commander Fravor. It has changed the dynamic of the way people – the government responds, new Navy protocols because of Commander Fravor coming forward. (0:46:29)

There are closed-door congressional and Senate briefings. He's been part of them. He's admitted that before. There's a new study about UFOs because of this encounter. It's so much – evidence has so much power to it compared to other ones. (0:46:45)

So Christopher Columbus, great, cool story. Somebody wrote it down. Who knows if he even wrote it down? We have highly documented cases. This one has changed our culture, and that's what's so cool. People are talking about it differently. So here's – this is a good story. This is true. So I was sitting at home and usually when people try and find me, they get my wife's cell phone because it's the first one on the cell phone bill and it's all in my name. (0:47:06)

So I get – I see this call from California and I'm like – and normally I don't answer them. And it's her phone. I'm like, who's calling my wife? Because that is me. So I answer it and this lady says, hey, is Commander Fravor there? And I go, who's calling? She goes, well, I'd like to talk to Commander Fravor. I go, who's calling? (0:47:23)

And she says, hi, I'm a 79-year-old woman and I would just like to tell him my story. I go, well, you're talking to him. And she goes, I've never in my life told anyone this. She goes, I grew up – my dad was in the Navy. She goes, he was stationed in Rhode Island at first when she was a child. She says, we were walking – her and her mom were walking on the beach and they saw these weird lights. (0:47:43)

So that kind of got her into that. Ooh, UFOs. She goes, a few years later they had moved to San Francisco. So I imagine Treasure Island, because at her age it would have been probably in the 50s. Her dad was – she said her dad was working as a Navy liaison to the agency. And he came home one day and he had a telegram in his hand. (0:48:01)

And she goes, for some reason he let me read it. She's telling me this story. And I said, well, what did it say? She says it was – it basically said, hey, unidentified objects going in and out of the water and it had latitude and longitude in it. And he looked at her. She goes, and I'm a child. I always remember this. She says – he looked at me and said, we get these all the time and it's always in the same area. (0:48:21)

And I go, of course. I go, well, you got the telegram? She goes, of course not. He had to take it back to work. I said, you don't have to remember that latitude and longitude. She said, no. She goes, but you seem to be so credible and believable. She goes, I wanted to tell someone the story that I've never told anyone in my life. (0:48:40)

So that's what you're starting to see is people that – very credible. They're not crazy. They're not making stuff up, but they're coming out and going, hey, I've had these experiences. I've got a lot of that from over the last two years where people just find my email and send me stuff saying, hey, this happened to me or I saw this. (0:48:59)

And there's – some things are explainable because I got asked to tell this. So – because we're kind of – I have a sick sense of humor at times. So like I said, I had all these qualls. So we used to fly – they don't do it right now because it's a little bit dangerous. But we used to fly night vision goggles, low altitude in Hornets. So when you put on night vision goggles, they amplify light like a lot. (0:49:21)

So you can see a campfire like 50 miles away. So we used to do it at good spots. We're down in Lake El Centro, California. There's a range that – there's some bombing ranges. But people go camping in the Superstition Mountains, which is kind of north and west of Imperial by – I forget what it is, the springs. It's real pretty in the desert. It will come to me in a minute. (0:49:41)

So we would go out at night flying around on goggles and you'd see a campfire. And you go, oh, UFO time. And then you get the airplane going about 600 knots and then you pull the power back to idle so you can't hear it. And you get zinging towards the fire. Well, you turn the lights are all down because we're in restricted areas. (0:50:01)

So we can do that. And there's lights on it that you can only see if you're on night vision goggles. So the other airplanes can see us, but no one else can see us. Then you go zinging at it. And then right when you get to the campfire, you pull the airplane into the vertical. You stroke the afterburners. You let them light off. (0:50:16)

You count to three. You pull them off and then you just go away. Instant UFO reporting. I'm sitting out in the desert. It's all quiet. And then all of a sudden there's a lure. There's lights in the sky and they go away and it's gone. You would do that just to fuck with campers? Yes. How rude. Yes. Yes, I did. I know I'm not the only one that did it. (0:50:35)

But like I said, we have a sixth sense of humor. Yes, I'm sure. So some things are explainable because I guarantee there were phone calls made on some of the stuff that we did. And I guarantee you're not the only one who's ever done that. Oh, I know I'm not. Yeah, I'm not that creative. But it's just, you know, you think about it. (0:50:52)

Because people go, I saw this or I saw that because I've got stuff like that. And I go, yeah, I used to create stuff like that. Just not tell it was me. Are you, Jeremy, I'm sure you're aware of this, the footage from the Mexican Air Force? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Very aware of that. What do you think about that? Well, again, it's IR footage, which is really interesting. (0:51:07)

They actually got the cameras for drug runners, right? (0:51:09)

So you can see in the infrared. So it's beyond the observable eye. I myself have not detailed looked at the footage. However, FLIR experts and people that work with NSA have looked at it for me. And these are not lights in the distance. These are craft, very similar to what Commander Fravor talks about, without plumes, without heat signatures. You know, non-traditional field propulsion systems. (0:51:35)

We don't have that. I thought they tried to... is this it right here? Is this Mexican Air Force footage? Yeah. So they tried to say these were lights on like an oil rig out in the water. That's been debunked. Yeah, they tried to say it was a fire. The 2004 Comcast video of the year was the Mexican Air Force tracking like six. So literally right after our incident, we come back and I think we were getting ready to go to Fallon. And I had Comcast and the homepage comes up and there's this video. (0:52:04)

And I go, holy cow, that looks like what we chased. And it was like six of these things and they were tracking them in the same area too, right off the coast of Ensenada. And it's not as rare. There's now admitted an increased frequency. A Pentagon spokeswoman finally went off script. I was tracking the scripts for the last two years of what Pentagon spokespeople say about Commander Fravor's experience. (0:52:22)

Someone went off script last week in the New York Times. And she admitted there's an increased frequency of near misses because of these AAVs, anomalous aerospace vehicles. So it's pretty astounding. We're getting all these kind of revelatory moments in these little seeds that these are not ours. We don't have this. Even Elon doesn't have this. I mean, this is a propulsion system unlike anything we have. (0:52:45)

It's amazing. It's gravity propelled. Now that gimbal footage, when it said that there's a fleet of them, how far away are those guys where you don't see the individual objects, you only see a singular spot? Well, the pod is, you know, when you get pretty narrow, it'd be like, you know, if I put three people around you, I can look at you and not see the other people. (0:53:06)

So that's what the pod is doing. But the radar is seeing everything because it has an AESA radar in it, which is an active electronically scanned array. So instead of like the radars we had, which did the mechanical doing this like old school, this thing is just a panel that sits in the front of the airplane and through beam sharing or beam shaping, it can move and it can look all over. (0:53:24)

So we used to have what was called track while scan. So we would be able to track a target while we're still scanning. This thing has scan while – it scans while tracked. So it literally – if it sees you, if the radar sees you, it has basically a weapons quality solution. (0:53:37)

Then it can do that on multiple targets. That's the same way the spy radar, the Aegis system works on the cruisers. It can track multiple targets and have weapons quality on all these different targets while it's still scanning a volume. So in that image, you're seeing one individual object, but there's other objects? Yes. The radar is seeing the object that the pod is looking at where they're talking. (0:53:59)

And when you hear the video, you hear the pilot say, dude, look at the SA page. There's a whole fleet of them. So what they're seeing is the pod is looking at the main – that's the bigger object of the gimbal, the thing that's rotating on the screen. And there's five smaller things in front. So this thing is just sitting there and then they kind of – he said they turn around on the radar and start going the other way while the pod is looking at this guy just kind of rotating. (0:54:21)

So like a mothership and smaller aircraft. Could be. Something along those lines. Is there a video of those smaller aircrafts or just the video of the one large one? The only thing they have is the targeting pod. I would highly doubt, even if they had the video, that they're going to release the radar video because of classification levels. Are you able to tell the story you told me about what was underwater with your other buddy because – is that OK? (0:54:46)

Yeah, yeah. So it's amazing. People come out of the woodwork when they figure out you've had this because now they don't feel alone. So I was working – I still do it. But I was doing oil and gas at the time on a contract and one of the guys – the story came out and he was a Navy helicopter pilot. And he comes and he goes, dude, can I talk to you, man? (0:55:08)

I go, what about it? He goes, dude, I got to talk to you. I said, well, what do you want to talk to me about? He says, dude, do you know your UFO? He said, yeah. He goes, I had a similar experience. I said, what's that? He was flying CH-53s, which is a big lift, heavy lift that the Marine Corps uses and the Navy uses it for certain things. (0:55:24)

And when they go off of – for the east coast, they do a lot of shooting off of – at the time, it was off of Puerto Rico. We had Roosevelt Roads that they ended up closing. But he was flying out of there and you got super clear Caribbean water and they have these things. They're called BQMs. They fly around and then when they're all done because they'll fly towards the ships and the ship can – sorry about that. (0:55:44)

They can track with the radar. And then they also do – like the ships or submarines shoot torpedoes. (0:55:50)

They're called telemetry rounds. So they have – they gather all the data on what the torpedo is doing underwater. And then they blow ballast and this thing will come to the surface and float and then they go pick them up and then they can extract all the data out of them. So they do it for both. So he said the first time they're out and they're going to pick up this BQM. And those things, when they're flying, they're done. (0:56:08)

A parachute comes out and they got to go – they hook it up. The helo drops the swimmer in the water. He goes and hooks this whole thing up and then they hoist the whole thing up and fly back and then they extract the data. So he says he's sitting in the front. In helicopters, there's – CH-53, you can actually see down by your feet just like typical like you go to Hawaiian rides because you can see when you're touching down. (0:56:25)

So you got really good visibility out of those things. You can stick your head out the window too because you're just kind of hanging out. He says he's going on there and they're getting this thing hooked up. And as he's looking down because they're – I don't know what, 50 feet above the water. He sees kind of this dark mass coming up from the depths. (0:56:39)

And they're starting to hoist the diver up and he's got – they've got the BQM. And as they hoist it up, he says – and he's looking at this thing going, what the hell is that? And then it just goes back down underwater. It's just like – once they pull the kid and the BQM out of the water, this object descends back into the depths. (0:56:55)

So he thinks, well, that was pretty weird. So he goes out. He says not too long later, a few months later, he's out and he's picking up a torpedo. So he says they got the – they hooked the diver up on the winch and they're lowering him in. And as he's looking down, he sees this big, massive – he goes it's not a submarine. (0:57:10)

He's seen submarines before. Once you see a submarine, you can't confuse it with something else. This big object kind of circularly says it's coming up from the depths. And he starts screaming through the intercom system to tell them to pull the diver up. And the diver is like a few feet from the water. So they reverse the winch and the diver is thinking, what the hell is going on? (0:57:28)

And he's getting pulled up and all of a sudden he said the torpedo just got sucked down underwater and the object just descended back down into the depths and they never recovered the torpedo. And this happened in the late 90s, mid to late 90s I think it is. I can probably get in touch with him and ask him. (0:57:47)

And he told me this story and I'm like – How do you report that? You come in and go, well, where did the torpedo go? It just got sucked down. It just went down and then you get the people that attribute it as something happened when it blew ballast and it just took on water and sank. And he's like it didn't sink. He goes it literally looked like it got sucked down. (0:58:04)

The only reason they didn't – they talked to him when they did the New York Times stuff. They talked to him because the incident was – from the 90s they didn't want to – they wanted something newer. So they did not include it. But I know they talked to him about it. Now what was the other footage that we were looking at? There was the first footage that Jamie pulled up that wasn't the gimbal footage. (0:58:23)

Oh, the go fast. The go fast. What is that? That's a – it actually looks more like a tic-tac. But it's – they saw it going across the water and they're just grabbing a lock. So they're seeing this with their eyes and he gets the fleer to lock on it. And that's when you hear the kid go, oh, I got it, because he gets the auto track. (0:58:39)

And it's just something screaming across the surface of the water. And this is in the same area? This is east coast, yeah. This is the same timeframe as the gimbal video. So the idea that these are birds or the idea that this is a radar glitch or somebody said pilot error like on a clear blue day, Commander Fravor has nerves. I mean that kind of thing that people have said on your show to you that these are explanations that make sense. (0:59:02)

Who said that? I don't even want to say the names. Mick West? Yeah, sure. Mick believes everything. Like every single thing that's ever happened has a rational explanation for it. So the probability that all the radars went off at the wrong time, Commander Fravor had nerves, all the other pilots up there with him, that this thing shot off like a can, like a gun instantly, that that was somehow perfectly coordinated. (0:59:28)

That's a conspiracy. That's a fabrication. Probably, Occam's Razors, the events happened exactly like we're being told. Yeah, for us it was – and I'll go back to the beginning of the story of the other pilot who was brand new. She had been in the squadron for four months, five months. So she's pretty junior. She was still working on her initial quality airplane. And so she gets the – we get the real-world vector and it's like, OK, real-world vector, cool. (0:59:56)

I'm going to get to do something real, exciting. Then you see the water and you think, oh, something is sinking because it's kind of that shape of an airplane, that cross type. So now it's – oh, crap. (1:00:07)

Now it's search and rescue. We got to go down and see because there's people and we are sympathetic. And to the tic-tac and as soon as the tic-tac, it's like, holy shit, what is that? When you get – some people get very emotional when you talk about it because for me it was like – for her, when you talk to her, she has a disdain for some of the leadership that didn't tell us that these things were out there. (1:00:37)

Now we're getting vectored because we were the first time the manned airplanes had been airborne when one of these things showed up. That no one even gave us a brief that, hey, we're seeing these objects out here for the last two weeks. They're just kind of – you might want to know they're out there and they never told us. No one knew these things existed besides the radar operators and the radar operators didn't know what they were. (1:00:55)

They just knew they were seeing blips. So there's a lot of stuff that it flew around and it came around me and it didn't do any of that stuff. It's – the story that I gave you is just relatively benign. But it was – it's an interesting experience. So these incidents that they reported were taking place before you saw your – that tic-tac encounter. (1:01:19)

They were taking place over a period of how many weeks? Two weeks. We went out at the beginning of the month for this two-week at-sea period. We pulled in for Thanksgiving. But other than that, we were out until I think December 21st is when we pulled the ship back in besides pulling in for the three days of Thanksgiving. So yeah, for the two weeks prior – so this was on the 14th and we went out at the beginning of the month. (1:01:40)

So about two weeks they had been watching these things come down, go up, come down, go up. But it was always when we were not flying, which is really probably like the midnight timeframe until early in the morning the next – until due the next day. And then we just happened to go. And if you think about it, I laugh. If there was some little green man flying around in that tic-tac, he probably got back to the mothership and got yelled at for being seen. (1:02:01)

Like, oh my god, you let him see you. So have you communicated with anybody that has any thoughts on what these things are doing or whether or not there's any consistency to the size of them or whether or not they think they're coming out of a larger object or anything along these lines? No. You can ask, well – because I was asked, what do you think they were doing? (1:02:30)

And I said, you can look. Well, they were observing because they're coming down and watching. Number two is they were communicating because I think in my heart I think there was something under the water. (1:02:42)

I don't know what it was doing there. This is because when you saw the X, the cross-looking thing. Explain that again. So the disturbance seemed to be in the shape of a cross? I describe it as it's about the size of a 737. So just think if you submerge the 737 pointing it to the east underwater by like 10, 15 feet. So as these waves are coming across, when they hit that object, they're going to break on top just like you would with a submerge like a seamount. (1:03:11)

And they're breaking and that's where the tic-tac was at. That's the only reason we saw the tic-tac. That's what drew our eyes down there is we see this white water when it's a perfectly clear day with no white caps. And you go, whoa, what's that? And then you see the tic-tac and then we do all the chasing of the tic-tac and we turn, we're right there. (1:03:27)

And we turn around and there's no white water. It's just blue as far as you can see. So at that point you go, okay, what was it doing? Because there was obviously something there that's not there now. So that's where I say, well, it was observing us. It could have been communicating with whatever was there. And then someone else looked at me and said, I was talking to Lou and he goes, what about prepping the battlefield? (1:03:51)

I go, okay. So if you go, where are these things from? We don't know. Are they from China, Russia, someplace else? I don't know. But it's a capability that we do not possess to my knowledge. And if you ask me in 2004, because there's a lot of guys go, well, maybe it's some secret government program. I go, all right. Well, let's be honest. (1:04:15)

One, if you have a propulsion system that gave the capabilities that we observed visually, that's a huge leap for mankind, period. So you would say, yeah, think about it. It's going to be 15 years next month that we saw this. I would like to think that, okay, maybe let's just say in 2004 it was something. Somebody had this. Some government had this. Ours, whatever. (1:04:42)

If you come to now, you go 15 years later, you don't think that technology would have emerged because it literally would change everything we do. I mean we're happy about hybrid and electric cars and all this other stuff. But if you've got something that works like that, air travel, it would change air travel forever. Trevor Burrus No visible system of propulsion. No plumes. (1:05:02)

No, it's just a – yes, we joke. Think of a 40-foot long tic-tac that can move at will through the air at speeds well beyond what we've ever witnessed. I mean even when you watch a rocket go off, one of Elon's or one of the NASA – whatever. You sit there and while I grew up during the Apollo ages where you just look at the thing go up, up, up, up, up. (1:05:25)

I've seen them shot out of Vandenberg where you go – I'd sit in my house in central California and you'd watch it go up and go, oh, I can watch that thing for a while. (1:05:31)

This is something that just like poof, in a matter of seconds, is gone. Trevor Burrus Now, are other pilots or other people that have sighted these things, have they also reported something larger that's in the water near it? Jason Kuznicki No. Trevor Burrus No. Jason Kuznicki Not the ones I've talked to. I mean I think you can get on History Channel. There's all kinds of stuff on there about people talking about stuff. (1:05:51)

But here's the question is what do you believe, what do you not believe? My biggest frustration is our incident and even the folks on the East Coast, it is what it is to us. There's no reason to embellish. There's no reason to make stuff up. But yet there's still groups of people that are making stuff up like someone came out on ours, was talking about, and he's like, oh, I saw the whole video. (1:06:14)

It was 10 minutes long and it was doing all this. It's bullshit. What you see is that's literally the entire video. It's a minute and a half long. I think it's about a minute and a half long. What people haven't seen that I saw, I mean, I've seen the radar tapes because I had them as my squadron. You know, I've heard, you know, the men in black show. (1:06:32)

You know, I just, I'm for, you know, maybe, okay, I'll give you the credit if they did. But why wouldn't they show up and talk to the guys who actually witnessed it, chased it, and is one of the senior guys in the battle group. Right. And it's also possible that that men in black stuff was something that they used to do back in the day and that that program was no longer continued. (1:06:49)

And, you know, from Jeremy, you would know this, the older sightings, when they go back into the day to historical sightings, and I'm not, not Columbus, but, you know, 50s and 60s. Did they have similar things that they talked about where something moved in this manner? Yeah, it's absolutely incredible. And I want to dumb this down because that's how I had to understand it. (1:07:09)

When I was talking with Commander Fravor years before, I kept his secret years before New York Times blew it up. I told him it's probably going to happen. It wasn't by me. We were talking about it. This system that we have seen for over 70 years, just documented by our military. This is so important. This is a non-reactionary field propulsion system. Everything we know is a reactionary propulsion system. (1:07:35)

You push something out the back, it goes forward. This is not like a mag system. This is a gravitational field propulsion system. And throughout history, our military has documented them. And there has been ridicule. I'll tell you exactly why. In 1952, there was a huge flyover of Washington DC. Jets were scrambled. All the papers covered it. It's a very famous case. (1:07:58)

Everybody can look up. It's an important case. Because at that time, a policy was started. And that policy started because it crashed our communications. The teletypes went down. The panic of the UFOs that were being seen by people. With fighter pilots trying to capture and trying to engage them. And it crashed the teletypes. So our government was like, oh, that's not happening again. (1:08:21)

Because Russia could use that as a scare tactic. So this policy of denial, don't look here, nothing to see, move on, UFOs are fake. That's what Project Blue Book was tasked to do, specifically. The guy who ran it admitted that. That it was tasked to debunk this and demystify the UFO thing. That's J. Allen Hynek, correct? Right. I also, yeah, J. Allen Hynek. He was once asked by a friend of mine, do you have the smoking gun? (1:08:48)

I'll give you this document. It's pretty amazing. It's an Air Force manual where they explain what they know about UFOs at that time in 1967. But here's the point. Yes, this has been going on since the beginning of recorded human history. These propulsion systems that are captured on footage that is confirmed now by the Pentagon. Like Commander Fravor's experience. This technology is not ours. (1:09:13)

It was here 70 years ago. You said about 15 years ago. We would see it now. These exact things at 20,000 miles an hour were going on 70 years ago documented. Somebody has a non-reactionary fuel propulsion system. Now, are they aliens or some subsect of humans? You know, somebody has them. And they're flying through our airspace with impunity. And pilots like Commander Fravor, who, by the way, defended Los Angeles after 9-11. I mean, this is a guy we put all of our trust in. (1:09:43)

He was defending Los Angeles right after 9-11. So we got people like him coming forward saying, I saw this. And you get internet warriors being like, it's a bird, it's a glitch, it's Superman. Let's not concentrate on them. What about the Columbus thing? Did you find that? Yeah, it's listed as like 1492 light signature event that they saw light in the distance. Is the actual text available? (1:10:08)

No, just like Wikipedia stuff. It's just one of the oldest accounts I was trying to throw out that this is something that... Do you know if there's a very famous painting that shows what appears to be men in crafts flying through the sky in the background of an ancient painting? Do you know what I'm talking about? I do. I actually have a page. (1:10:29)

One of the first pages I ever put on my website is like a bunch of these. Because throughout history, there are these indications of ships, of craft. But you know what I'm talking about? That's the shape of it. It's also like a plate turned on its side, and then there's a person inside of it. Yeah, man. And it's flying through in that same... yeah, that's it. (1:10:54)

Like, look. Look how it's flying. (1:10:56)

But you know, the thing is that everybody can say... the one above that's pretty cool, because that was a hidden thing. I've studied that one where it says, Discovery, 15th century. Above her left shoulder, there is an object. And if you really zoom in, look at the dude staring up at it. As a painter, my wife is a painter, everything is intentional. Where's the guy? (1:11:17)

Yeah, right over there. It's pretty cool. Looking up. So I think that's 15th century, it said. So the problem with this, Joe, is that... Go to the original one. The one that we just looked at, Jamie. The one right before that. Yeah. So you get a big picture. Yeah. That is so strange. (1:11:35)

Like, here you got Christ being crucified, and then above him, UFOs. Like, is that supposed to be aliens? Or is that supposed to be angels? So what is that supposed to be in these things that they have... it's real similar to what we're talking about here. That's the argument of Miracle of Fatima, let's say. I mean, again, this is so speculative. We have a witness here, you know, a pilot. (1:11:54)

But when you see something like the Miracle of Fatima, if you look at that... What is the Miracle of Fatima? God, that's that one that was, you know, considered a real miracle by the church. And the three kids were getting messages, I'll get this all wrong, but for like months, that they're going to be visited. And to bring people in bigger and bigger groups gathered to where there was over 100,000 people. (1:12:12)

What year is this? 1917. 1917. So, you know, dozens of thousands, if not hundreds, but dozens for sure, see an event, a mass sighting of something that happened. We're talking people that were religious, people that weren't religious, you know, doctors at the time. That's not a real image, is it, Jamie? No, that one was doctored a little bit so you could see like they're all looking at something. (1:12:36)

But that's not real. But that's the crowd, right? The crowd is real. Is that right? Yeah, yeah. So here's the thing. People come out, something happened that was so intense. Some people thought it was religious, that it was a visitation. But other people saw it as technological, like something descended. You know, look into it. I'm just saying art pictures like paintings we're talking about, man, you can interpret them all day. (1:13:00)

I can't hold on to that. I can't hold on to an eyewitness with other eyewitnesses with radar systems and with video. We're in a different era now. We don't have to paint it, man. We get to see it. It's fascinating, man. It is fascinating, but it's way more fascinating when someone like you talks about it versus some fucking random kook. You know, that's what makes me incredibly interested is your credibility and the fact that you don't have a history of seeing wacky shit that other people don't see. (1:13:33)

No, just this once. (1:13:34)

But it's on video and that there's other ones as well. It's really strange. I've seen people try to explain it away. And what I don't like about when they explain it away or attempt to explain it away is that they're trying really hard. They're not going, who knows what this fucking thing is. They're not looking at it like cleanly. They're looking at it like a quote-unquote skeptic. (1:13:55)

I don't like the idea of being a skeptic. Not that I don't think you should be skeptical of certain things. I certainly think you should be, but there's a lot of people that brand themselves as skeptics. And I think it's a lazy way to look at things. I really do. Because I think you're just looking for the holes in things without looking at it objectively. (1:14:13)

If you wanted to be a scientist, if you wanted to be someone who is a fan of science, then you have to look at it as a thing. Look at this information and let's study this without any bias, any preconceived notions. I don't think they're doing that. They're looking at it and they're trying to find a way where they can justify that it's fake. (1:14:34)

And they're just doing all sorts of mental gymnastics to try to make it fake. That video that you show where that thing slips off to the left and takes off at incredible rates of speed. That alone should freak people the fuck out. Yeah, well I think because people confuse all the time. Like we took the video. No, it was another crew that took the video. (1:14:52)

We watched it for five minutes with our eyeballs. And there was four of us. And we all have the same story. We all saw the same stuff. We all came back and looked at each other and scratched our head and said, WTF? I mean, serious? What was that? And then what do you do? You move on? We never saw it again. I imagine they probably saw them on radar after that. (1:15:16)

They're probably seeing them on radar all the time. They just don't bring it to the attention of the general public. Oh yeah, because if you don't – for a ship when they see something, what is that? You don't have any way to go out there and look at it. Like when you're talking about how they were informing you that they were seeing these things previous to your mission. (1:15:36)

When you're doing this exercise and they let you know that they're seeing these things, did you say, Hey, how frequent is this? Is this something that happens all the time? I didn't get into that. Ours was more of the moment of, you know, when he's telling us, Hey, for the last two weeks we've been tracking these things. Right. And we don't know what they are. (1:15:55)

But you don't know whether or not it was just those two weeks or maybe it was a year ago. (1:15:59)

There was other similar situations or... There's other situations that have happened out there. But I would say, you know, for this, I don't even know. One, you got to take it serious. We have a tendency, if we don't know what it is, if we just ignore it, it'll go away. You know, and I joke, you know, there was an incident years – it's probably not too far off the same timeframe. (1:16:19)

I think it was like the Constellation was doing her workups before she got decommissioned and an Oscar class, a Soviet Oscar class submarine surfaced behind her. Right. And then it's – now it's like, you know, go to battle stations, World War III. How did this foreign submarine get in our area and has been monitoring our workups? That's a big deal. I said, but now we go out and we have these things that are coming at will and there's nothing we can do about it. (1:16:46)

We don't know what they are. We have confirmed sighting by two aircrew, four of us, two planes that said, look, this is not – this is not an airplane. This is not a weather balloon. This is not a blip. It has performance well beyond – you know, and the airplanes that we were flying at the time were literally brand new Super Hornets right out of the Boeing factory. (1:17:06)

I mean these were brand new first Block II series that came out. And you go, why wasn't something done? You know, it's like, we don't know what it is. I think it's good now, you know, the moves that have happened over the last two years since the original article came out that, you know, now there's a new reporting for the pilots. The Navy has acknowledged, hey, these things, we don't know what they were. (1:17:28)

You know, they're starting to take it serious because, you know, I know there are other events that are not out, recent events where people have been called in to go, hey, I've seen this thing. So the investigation process is still going on. You know, we don't – the military doesn't stop. Even if you take funding away, we don't stop. We don't stop until we're told to stop. (1:17:49)

So, you know, what's going on? You go, well, AATIP ended. They spent $4.5 million a year on it. I think it was $4 million. It was $22 million over the five years. So you go, what are they doing since then? Well, I mean I'm pretty sure there are still people looking at this and there are still people that are taking this serious. I will tell you that – I won't get into specifics, but there are people inside the United States government that are taking this serious. (1:18:13)

And I've been down to D.C. twice to talk to folks, you know, behind closed doors to go – because they want to hear the story. And I've got a lot of you got to be joking. (1:18:23)

I mean this seriously happened. And I'm like, yeah, it did happen. And it is real. What are you doing about it? So what kind of people are you talking to? High-level government officials is what I'll say. And most of that is because that conversation is between me and them and I don't want people speculating. But you can say high-level government officials I have talked to. (1:18:44)

Well, that was always the speculation about like what would someone do if they became president? Well, the first thing I would do is I would tell everybody about the UFOs. I would ask immediately what's going on. And I always thought about it. I said how many people actually know what's going on and how much of the information – I mean it's not like if they're dealing with something like this, like your experience. (1:19:09)

It seems like what you described is what is known. So it's this anomalous event where this thing defies our current understanding of technology and then it's gone. And so what do you have? You don't have anything else other than that. Like what other information does anybody have? Well, I would say this because I've talked to Bob. Bob Lazar. Yeah, we did an event together. (1:19:37)

And I'll leave it to everyone to – it's up to you to believe Bob. I'll say this. Bob is a normal guy. Bob is not crazy. He's not crazy at all. Not at all. That was the weirdest thing about talking to him. But when you look at it and go – because I had asked Bob. I said what he describes in the technology when he talks about his story. (1:19:57)

I said, well, do you honestly think we could reverse engineer it? I said, how long do you think it would take us? And his response to me was another hundred years. He goes, Dave, it was so far beyond – he goes the stuff that he says he worked on. He's like – he was on your podcast because I watched it. Hey, there was no wires. (1:20:17)

Because I had asked him when he said you first described the ship that he got to see. He said I used to say they built it and then it was like wax and you'd heat it up. He goes now I would say it was built with 3-D printing because now with 3-D printing we can build things literally from the ground up. And it's basically built as one, not panels, no rivets. (1:20:33)

(transcript 3of3)

（以下は Joe Rogan の Youtube 動画の文字起こしです。ゲストは Cmdr. David Fravor と Jeremy Corbell のふたりです。動画が長いので全体を 3分割し、これはその part3 部分です。）

It's just made. And so when you talk about that and you go, well, it's still another hundred years. So you go, well, what if you had the technology? We still – if what Bob says is correct, we still don't understand it. And how fast would it take us to understand that? I mean if it's driven by something that we don't even have on earth, which is when he talks about that element, we can't create it. (1:20:58)

We can create it for a microsecond and then it decays. (1:21:02)

Element 115. Yeah. So I think we're still a long ways off. I'll argue with the people that go, are we really alone? I was telling Jeremy we used to go out on goggles. Out in the middle of the Pacific, there's no light pollution. Goggles? Night vision goggles so we can see. Well, you go out at night. I'd be on like a tanker hop or something just hanging out, not doing anything, driving around in circles with the autopilot on. (1:21:25)

You just turn all the lights down in the cockpit so you have no light pollution and you just roll your head back and look up. There's billions and billions and billions of stars out there. And I always look up because I'm like, are we alone? And I go – I look up and go, well, if we're the only ones around and that's – and I'm looking – everything I'm looking at, it's a pretty sad place. (1:21:46)

It's a pretty lonely universe. I asked my astrophysics prof that once. I said, do you believe in extraterrestrial life? And she's like, of course not. And I said, well, there's billions and billions of planets. You think we're it? I mean just the probability of it is you'd go, oh, there's probably something else out there and I'm not crazy. I'm just opening up the possibility that we are not the only planet that has life on it. (1:22:08)

I think people don't like to seem silly. They don't like to be foolish. And I think when people start talking about anything that's not proven or anything that's connected to a bunch of loony people that are making up stories, which UFOs certainly are. UFOs are connected to so many people that have made up so many stories. What was that gentleman's name from? You would know that guy was from another country. (1:22:30)

Billy something or another. Billy Meyer. Billy Meyer. Seems 100% full of shit. Yeah. Yeah. He's proven to have done tons of hoaxes with this. But here's the deal. Sometimes I think people have a real experience and they're always like chasing that dragon and they get UFO disease and the brain goes fucking berserk. Right. I know that there are people that have had profound experiences and then they can't ever replicate them. (1:22:52)

So then they just start going crazy. And I don't blame them for it. But you got someone like Commander Fravor. When he saw that AAV, Anomalous Aerospace Vehicle, his reaction was, I want to fly it. That's a pretty cool reaction. I'd like to fly it. Yeah. Imagine flying that thing. That's what I told my buddy. He was my ex-boyfriend at the time, Del. I got back after all this happened. (1:23:13)

He looks at me and we're just standing right here. And he goes, hey, dude. I go, what? He goes, what do you think it is? I go, I have no idea. But it was pretty freaking impressive. And I'd like to fly it. (1:23:22)

Of course. And he goes, yeah. I go, I mean, it was. It was, you know, it's just like any pilot. You always want to fly the coolest thing. Yeah, of course. You're a race car driver. You want to drive the fastest car. That's it. Now you look at it and go, well, that's something we don't have. Yeah. This idea that, you know, maybe we're not alone, that some of these other stars have planets that are maybe technologically advanced. (1:23:42)

So the next thing people say, and, you know, new eras are going to say, well, they're not coming here because the distance is so vast. Hold the fuck up. From the very beginning, when Babazar came forward and talked about field propulsion, gravity propulsion, distance becomes completely irrelevant. So if we believe, and the radars are right, and Commander Fravor saw this thing moving like a ping pong ball in a glass of water, it's gravity propelled. (1:24:05)

That's why you can make those maneuvers without exploding. Okay. Then distance becomes completely irrelevant for travel. You're literally warping time and space. You're falling into place. Well, it's like the idea of showing someone a video on your phone long before video was ever invented. People would be like, what are you talking about? Like, before photography was invented, which is shockingly recent, right, you had to draw pictures of things you saw. (1:24:31)

Just like those people that drew or painted those images of those men and whatever those things were with Christ in the background. The idea that we could understand what some insanely impressive technology from a planet that is nowhere near us could manifest. It's nuts. Yeah. Bob Lazar talks a lot about this. Remember, he's a young guy, right, in 1989. He gets shown something, and all of a sudden he's trying to interpret it through 1989 technology. (1:25:01)

So he said it looks like it was injection molded, because that's what he had. And then I sent him this thing about nanotechnology and, you know, working towards an atomic printer. He's like, dude, that makes a lot more sense. So he has to view it through where he saw it in 1989. However, I will say this. It is my knowledge that we understand exactly how these craft work. (1:25:20)

Our one limiting factor is our material science. We can't replicate, not the fuel source itself is another... When you say we know exactly how they work... Yeah, it doesn't break our laws of physics. This concept of amplification of gravity, this concept of gravity propulsion. We understand how things can move from point A to point B almost instantaneously. Our physics doesn't disallow it, but our material science and the fuel to create that machine that we... we have machines from other places. (1:25:51)

So we have... What do you mean? Well, Bob Lazar, whether you believe him or not, there was a program. I have other witnesses that I will be bringing forward about S4 where he worked. (1:26:02)

We have craft... You have other witnesses that worked with alongside Bob? People that corroborate Bob's account in that they saw him get on and off the red and whites, the Janet flights that come on. Somebody that went to Papoose Lake and was stopped by non-military guards at that time. People that were aware of Site 4 and ET exploitation projects. One is an SR-71 pilot that I've been talking with for a couple years. (1:26:31)

These people are coming forward now. And it's like, I'm sick and tired of doing it. These little nitpicky things about Bob. Okay. There was a program. There was a back engineering program. They've admitted there are materials. So this is like the metamaterials you heard about in the New York Times, all that. We have materials associated with UFOs that are interesting. What is that? (1:26:52)

What are you talking about? So this is something that was launched in the first New York Times article, I believe, in December of 2017, that there is studies being done right now on materials associated with UFOs. So actual metals that have come off of, you could say, crashes. Who is that that explained that there was something? They were with Eric Weinstein. That was explaining that there was someone who reportedly has something along those lines. (1:27:17)

Jacques Vallée has 17 samples. 17 samples. How does one guy get 17 samples? Well, he's Jacques fucking Vallée, right? So he's the guy first ever for the United States military created a computer program for the study of UFOs for Project Blue Book. So he's an old school guy. They modeled him after in the Close Encounters movie. It's modeled after Jacques Vallée, the French guy. (1:27:37)

So he's kind of like been involved with this. He's had more access to government databases than any of us. He went around, collected samples from known crashes or like when things will come off. And what's the conclusion? Well, they're studying them right now. There was just something on Fox about they're studying some of these materials and what they will find because I actually the ones they're talking about. (1:27:58)

I actually took to New Mexico and had five scientists study it about five years ago. I got my hands on it, got to study it. The famous parts they're talking about now. It's layered and the way it's layered is what they're trying to see if it's anomalous elementally or the way that the elements are bound together. And also the atomic level of layering is what's interesting. (1:28:21)

We'll find out if it's... Explain what you're talking about. What is this thing that you saw? Okay. Well, there are a lot of different samples, but when you get a sample of something and you can see... How big are these samples? The ones that I looked at, they ranged from about this size. They range from the size... Size of an orange? Yeah, size of an orange to the size of a quarter. (1:28:44)

These are materials, right? (1:28:45)

Are they materials from a crash? So that's allegedly or there's a known crash. This is in the public domain rather than government control. So what I was looking at or having the scientists look at is isotopically and elementally. What are the elements that are in this? Are they engineered? And what's the conclusion? Well, I'm going to leave it to the people that are doing it now who have much better machines than I had. (1:29:09)

Do you know any cliff notes? Yeah, from what I understand, there's atomic layering. There are levels of it like we do with graphene. We lay down these layers that are basically oriented at a certain degree. That's how you get a superconductor or something like that. If you take a piece of graphene and it's highly machined, so it doesn't deviate from that atomic layering. (1:29:33)

You can push it right through ice like a hot knife through butter. It's the weirdest feeling in the world because you just take this piece of what feels like graphene. And it goes right through butter because it's a superconductor and the heat from your hand melts the ice. So that is a metamaterial. It doesn't occur naturally. Humans created it. And it has special properties because of the way it's atomically layered. (1:29:52)

So if these materials are from somewhere else, then we suspect that they're going to be highly machined, that they're going to be created for special use. So my whole point is our material science has not caught up with the physics that we understand for these field propulsion systems. I'm just telling you, believe me or not, but you'll hear more about it. That our material science in 1989 and today is our limiting factor. (1:30:19)

And as our material science gets better as humans, we know how these things work. Now the fuel source, that's a whole other conversation. But as far as creating these machines, that's what we're trying to do. That's why there is secrecy. We're trying to exploit the technology because whoever exploits it first wins. It's a game changer. We don't want Russia to do it. We don't want China to do it. (1:30:41)

If we had a non-reactionary propulsion system, the world would look different instantaneously. What is your perspective after the incident versus before the incident? How much did it change the way you view the world and our place in the world? For me, I never believed that we were alone. It's just me. I just look up and go, there's way too many stars up there for us to be in our own life. (1:31:07)

After it, it makes it a little more clear to go... One, my questions are, where did it come from? That's the biggest one. Where did it come from? What was it doing? And then I've asked, why me? I mean, why did I happen to be... because you can say wrong place, wrong time. Right place, right time. Or right place, right time. (1:31:31)

For me, it was... I think there's more out there. And if I could get word out to anyone, it's like, especially the debunkers of... One, quit trying to debunk it because it is what it is. There wasn't a system glitch. I mean, this was a real incident that happened. And number two is, let's open our aperture a little bit and start thinking outside of the box. (1:31:51)

If you go... you look at it and go, hey, it's just non-reactive propulsion. Well, it's because when we came up with propulsion, we... The people long before us came up with a reactionary propulsion system. And that became our standard. Had we done something different or we developed non-reaction, we might look at something like a gasoline engine and go, holy cow, how's that thing work? (1:32:12)

We wouldn't have that idea. So I think there's... if you look at it and go... people thought Einstein was kind of nuts. And we're still proving his theories today. And what we're learning is that he was right. And he was right. There was a time when the earth was flat, except for some people in California. The earth isn't flat. It's round. People in California, they're all over the place. (1:32:34)

There's not an ice wall. So when you look at that and you go, a lot of the stuff that we thought was true isn't true. It's totally been changed. So for me, I just say, I think let's get outside of the box and go, if we can develop a technology that would... And I don't look at it from a military standpoint because it would be a game changer from a military standpoint. (1:32:55)

Technology like that would be a game changer for mankind completely. I mean, it would literally... everything that we do. And we don't know exactly. Do you want that system in a car? People have trouble driving in two dimensions, let alone three. It's kind of like your joke last night. You can't even handle the vaping thing, let alone driving a car that goes up, down, works in three dimensions. (1:33:20)

That was what they originally wanted helicopters to be. They wanted to be flying cars. Yeah. You get out on the road, you see how people drive. And I always laugh because people think, well, we're three-dimensional. Like we know that this table is not the floor, but really humans are two-dimensional people. And you learn that, especially when we would fight. If you can really work in the third dimension, which is up, and you go, well, we are three-dimensional. I go, no, if you look at like a tall building is 1,700 feet high, the big ones. (1:33:48)

And you go, no, for an F-18 to do a split us, which is go from up here and just do a vertical 180 degree turn. So you're going this way and you go down here. It's like 2,500 feet. And that's tight. That's a tight turn for a jet. (1:34:02)

Unless you're running like vector thrust stuff, but everything has a cost. So if you do some big hiyaka, you bleed off energy. There's a cost associated with that. That to a pilot, that's three dimensions. To most people on earth, you go, no, I look at a hill and I don't want to walk up that thing. And in an airplane, it's a totally different thing. (1:34:20)

So if we just open up that expanse for what we're trying to do for technology and go, is there another way? Because we still build suckers and blowers, which is a jet engine. We just refine the internals, the turbines to get them to be more efficient. Where I go, why don't you just put your efforts someplace else? Like I was talking to – there's a whole realm of physics that really doesn't get explained and it's – I was talking to Steve Justice about it. (1:34:47)

It's more into the magnetics type side that we don't spend a lot of time on. I know what he said when he was working at Skunk Works. He did – it's called – I read internal research and development money that he would fund to try and look at some of these other technologies for propulsion. And he's now since retired. But really impressive to talk to him at the level that you can, which is for us would be an unclassified level. (1:35:13)

But the stuff that goes on behind closed doors, there's reasons for it. Because if a technology like that got out where someone could rapidly reproduce it after all you've done or they got it first, you think of the atomic bomb. Germans almost had it. We got it. Russians were working on it. We got it first. Changed the world. Literally changed the world when we detonated the first one and you go – I'm not going to get into the politics behind it. (1:35:39)

But now we had it and now it was the race, everyone else, because they had to get on equal par because it's a destabilizing thing. Now all of a sudden if you develop a technology like this and you keep it to yourself, you've got something that no one else has and it's a huge leap. I mean it's a quantum leap. Do you share it? (1:35:59)

Because it's a mankind thing or do you keep it for yourself? Right now it's not for me to decide. I'm just Dave. Well, it's fascinating that some other method of propulsion could have been established in some other place and that we're experiencing it or that you've experienced it and some other folks have experienced it in action. And I just think for us as people, as human beings in 2019, it's really easy to think that what we have now is so amazing and that what we have now is the pinnacle of discovery. (1:36:39)

And that what we have now is with our electricity and with our LED screens and that we are experiencing the height of technology when if you're some creature from some other planet that has got easy access to element 115 and some gravity propulsion system, you're looking at us like we're digging holes in the side of a mountain to protect ourselves from the rain. We're cave people. (1:37:04)

Yes. Yeah. Well, we do that here on Earth. Yeah. I mean, you look at like a first world, you know, like the United States or, you know, these developed nations and then you go to some of these other and go, you know, people are still getting their water out of a hole in the ground with a bucket. (1:37:17)

Right. Or people in the rainforest are living these indigenous lifestyles. Yeah. So, you know, take them something. I mean, take them one of these flat screens down to one of these tribes that no one's ever seen and go, hey, look. Yeah. And start showing them pictures of themselves that you're shooting real time or video that's feeding directly into it. They'll freak out. They'll think it's magic. (1:37:36)

Like, would you capture my soul? Right. So it's where are we at and what are we going to do and what can we do? Did it change the way you look at life? I mean, even though you knew that or you had this feeling that we were not alone just from looking at the stars, but when you actually see the thing, like how, I mean, I would imagine that that has got to really shift your perspective. (1:37:58)

I don't know if it shifted my perspective, but it was more of a, it's a validation. A confirmation. To go, you go, yeah, you know, I've always like, yeah, there's a lot of stars. And then you see something like this and go, well, maybe we're not, because that pushes you to the next point to go, you know, one lands in my front yard, then I'll be 100% sure that we are not alone because it's sitting in my front yard. (1:38:21)

But I mean, I got within a half mile of this thing, which is people go, a half mile is pretty far away. Not when you're flying an airplane. Half mile is like really tight. When they bring you in to have these conversations with high level government officials, how long are these conversations? So I went to the, I've been, I've talked to three different groups of people. (1:38:41)

This is post the New York Times article. So the New York Times article comes out in 2017. Yes. And then our government. The other pilot that was involved had been to DC multiple times. This is how kind of I got in touch with Lou. She had called me and said, hey, I need to talk to you. So I called her and I said, what's going on? (1:39:03)

She says, hey, have you been, has anyone called you about the tic-tac? And I said, no. She goes, I've been to the Pentagon like a half dozen times and they'll take me in and anywhere from Starbucks to inside of a vault. And she goes, and they'll talk to me about the story and then they'll show me a picture of something goes to look like this. (1:39:18)

And then she gets pretty frustrated and goes, we call it the tic-tac because it looked like a tic-tac. What part don't you get? I mean, go get a thing of tic-tacs and look at it. When they're saying, did it look like this? Are they showing actual crafts that they have? No, not pictures that they have, but like a video from someone else. Like they'd show the gimbal video. Hey, it looked like this. (1:39:35)

Oh, okay. (1:39:35)

And it was no. So, and that's when I told her, I said, well, just, just tell this guy that you're talking to, just give my name and number. I go, I'll talk to him. It's not a big deal to me. You know, and that started. So when we, I got asked, you know, multiple times to go down and talk to, to people. One of them was supposed to be 20 minutes. And these, you know, these are important people. (1:39:54)

Getting 20 minutes of some of these folks' time is like, that's a huge deal. So we went in thinking, okay, we're going to do the thing in 20 minutes. And then we're in, and an hour and a half later, we came out. I mean, that's the interest of, you know, and there were some people, you know, you get the group, you know, the folks that come in and out. (1:40:11)

But there's a few that just sat there and were enamored by what we were saying, like you're joking. We're like, no, this is, this is all real. I mean, these are, these are pre-senior officials that are taking the time out of their day to take this serious, to go, you know, maybe we do need to put a little emphasis on this. I mean, if, literally, if something can just show up at will and do whatever it wants, and I'd probably at least pay attention. (1:40:36)

Yeah, pay attention. But what could be done? I mean, what could they do? If you put yourself in a position of one of these high-level government officials, what do you do? Just spend more money on looking at them? If you look at money, though, I mean, I know when the article came out and they talked about the AATIP program that Harry Reid got funded $22 million over five years. (1:40:52)

So it's $4.4 million a year. And you go, everyone's freaking out. Oh, it's $22 million. No, it wasn't $22 million a year. It was $4.4 million. That's not even in the rounding year for the United States. We just got approved what? It was $750 billion for a defense budget. $750 billion. If you took $100 million out of that, it's not even going to put a dent. (1:41:13)

And I go, why can't you – if you're only spending $4.4 million a year and you can actually get some good work done, because you don't need a huge team. Because you figure if you look at I think – what's the number? Like 10, 15 percent of all these UFOs, like if you look at Project Blue Book, really remained unexplained. And you go, OK. So you can weed out – you can weed out me flying over someone in a campfire and lighting my afterburners. (1:41:36)

So you can go, no, that was Dave being Dave. So you can weed that stuff out. Now you go, now I'm really kind of concentrating the funds. The most important thing – and I talked to the folks when we were talking because we talked about funding and I said, let me leave you with this. (1:41:50)

And I had got some pretty good stuff. I was talking to Chris Mellon who's a former undersecretary and understands how the government works. It was where he gave me some really good feedback and I said – I talked to him. I said, look, I'm all for you guys funding a program. But what you need to do is fund a program that there's going to be oversight over. (1:42:05)

When I say oversight, I mean because what happens is you go, here's money, but we're going to distribute it in the government. So we're going to distribute it to these three different agencies across the United States government. Just call them agency A, B and C. So you give it to them and I'll go back to like the 9-11 stuff where we really had the answer, but all the agencies weren't talking to each other to put all the pieces together. (1:42:25)

And that's my fear that you go, hey, we're going to take $100 million of taxpayer money. We're going to fund a program to actually seriously investigate this stuff and look at the technology. But there are three different entities working on their own and not talking to each other. So there's got to be a joint collaboration to where you go, we're going to do it, but Joe is going to be in charge and you guys are all going to play nice in the sandbox together because we want to get our money's worth. (1:42:49)

Because people will raise the fraud, waste and abuse flag that we're wasting money on something stupid. Now the Gimbal video shows a different kind of thing. Yes. How many different kinds of things are you aware of? Well, those are ours too. If you look at the GoFast, it kind of looks like a Tic Tac. So you could say those two are the same. (1:43:11)

I think there's other stuff out there. And sometimes it's not that the – you got to look at where do you obtain the video. It's just like intelligence. I know you got that picture of Pablo out there. And there was the guy, Tom Cruise made the movie about him. What's his name? Louisiana dude who was flying the drugs for Pablo in and out. (1:43:31)

Barry Seal. Hey, it was all great until Reagan posted that picture that they had the cameras inside the cargo plane. And then Pablo puts – the only place that picture came from is Barry Seal's airplane. And then now Barry Seal is a dead man. So you got to watch when you release because you go, hey, we got this video. But it was taken someplace we probably weren't supposed to be. (1:43:51)

Or how did they get that video? Like I look – the video of our – the Tic Tac video, that thing first came out. It's kind of funny. The guy that was in my backseat had sent me an email and this is about probably 2008. So I was retired and he sent me this video. (1:44:10)

He said, Skipper, does this look familiar? And it was on Strangeland.com, not suitable for work. I will just say that. But I look and the next thing you know, it's on YouTube. So when I would tell this story to my friends, I would go – I would send them a link to the YouTube video. And this was years before the New York Times article. (1:44:25)

And then when they did the unofficial official report, the video was taken down off of YouTube. And it kind of puzzled me. Like why did you take the video down? And I told the guys when they did the unofficial official report. I said, well, you really need to look at this. How did this thing come off of a classified drive system on an aircraft carrier and end up on Strangeland.com and YouTube? (1:44:42)

Because at the time, the videos were classified secret. And that's not because it was a UFO. It's the AT FLIR video. They did not want that released. So you would see it on CNN. They blocked out all the performance stuff, what the airplane was actually doing. But in this case, you know, the one you see, it's 250 knots with the autopilot on. So it's not that big of a deal. (1:44:57)

But, you know... Jeremy, how many different types of vehicles are you aware of that have been reported? Credible reports for decades. Hundreds of different shapes. Even Lazar himself said he saw, you know, nine different styles all working off the same propulsion system. The tic-tac shape, you know, vehicle, that goes back in history. Some people say cigar shaped, you know. Big ships, small ships. (1:45:25)

You know, they're all different kinds. I think it's important to state, though, there are other funded, government-funded UFO programs. It's a misnomer, actually, that AATIP was the recipient of the $22 million. It was actually Harry Reid who created a program called AUSAP. AUSAP was the sole beneficiary of that $22 million. The New York Times got it wrong. And then what happened is AATIP was a different funded program to study military encounters with UFOs. AUSAP was created because of Skinwalker Ranch, a government program to study UFOs and associated phenomenon. (1:45:58)

AATIP and AUSAP communicated and shared information, but they were independently funded. So the $22 million was for AUSAP, and then AATIP had its own sources, and then they did collaborate two UFO programs. There are more that I think we're going to learn about. So the different shapes that Bob Lazar saw, there was nine different shapes that he saw inside the hangars. Only one up close, yeah. (1:46:26)

And none of them were like the tic-tac. Not specifically, however, that's not an uncommon. If you go back in history of, like, military sightings of craft going maybe over 20,000 miles an hour, the tic-tac is a shape. They have triangles. They have ones that look like rectangles. The thing that is common with all of them is the non-reactionary propulsion system. (1:46:46)

I think even Commander Fravor said the thing noticed him was words he first said to me and kind of went towards him with its nose. But it could move in any direction, right? I mean, it could just move at will, however it wanted. Yeah, when we first saw it, it was just basically – it never turned. It was just going left, right, kind of doing this. (1:47:02)

Shape probably doesn't matter. And then it became aware because it turned and it actually mirrored what I was doing. When I was coming down, it came up. So it obviously knew we were there. I don't know if it was picking up energy coming off the airplane or what. I do know that when they tried to lock it, it actively – it jammed a radar. (1:47:18)

It made it pretty much useless. Chad was pretty good about kicking it over and grabbing that video. Pretty wild. It's a big deal to actively jam a radar of ours. Yeah. Whenever someone tells you an awesome story, it's great to hear. But God, I wish I saw it myself. It's like this thing. You're telling me and I'm like, wow, I'm listening. I'm trying to imagine. (1:47:49)

I'm putting it in my head. I'm visualizing it. But damn, I wish I could see it. Yeah, I said this to a guy. He's pretty – I won't say who it was or what his position was. He's pretty prominent in the UFO community. I'm not really a UFO guy. And he starts quoting – like Jeremy Kinney quoted it. So this was this event, that event, that event. (1:48:08)

He keeps looking at me. He goes, well, do you know about this event? I go, nope. And he goes, what about this event? I go, nope. He gives like three of them. I look at him and he goes, well, you're not a UFO guy. I go, no. But I chased one. Have you? And he goes, no. I go, I'm an expert. You're an expert tool. (1:48:27)

He kind of got deflated a little bit because he looked at me like, you suck. Well, it's like people that are into baseball stats but they've never played. Yeah. You've got to get your hands dirty. Get out in the field. Yeah. I'm with you, Joe. I wish I had seen that. I've been so curious about the propulsion system since Lazar. I wish I could see something too. (1:48:45)

Oh, my god. Yeah. I would give so much. I'd almost think about running for president just to win, just so I could get in and find out about UFOs. Everybody's tried. And then go, I quit, bitch. Everybody tried though, man. Clinton tried. He tried to get – Did he? Oh, big time. That was his – he came in. He said – first thing he – Webster Hubble. He said, I want to know two things. (1:49:05)

Who killed JFK? And I want to know all about UFOs. And he was denied access. (1:49:10)

And he later said, it's not the first time I've been lied to or denied information after asking for it. Bill Clinton said that. Additionally, Jimmy Carter. He said before he was president, I'm going to find out. Well, Jimmy Carter supposedly saw a UFO. He did. He said, I'm going to find out. I'm going to tell you. Never talked about it again afterwards, after he became president. (1:49:28)

Wonder what his briefing looked like. And then – so many presidents have tried because they're like us, man. They're curious. However, this information, from my understanding, which is an informed understanding, is so compartmentalized. Yeah. That makes sense. But listen, is there anything else? Just one thing. I want to make sure to brief you on Storm because I still blame you for it a little bit. (1:49:50)

Can I do that? It's not my idea. No, no. It's not my idea. Can I just give your audience a quick break now? Okay, so check this out. I made a movie, Bob Lazar, Air 51, and Flying Saucers. Joe blows it up. I go on a show with Bob Lazar, which was awesome. Thanks for letting Bob tell everybody what happened. My pleasure. And then the world lit on fire. (1:50:07)

Now, from a sociological, pop culture standpoint, what happened on that day is huge. And I don't want it to be missed on anybody. So a kid watches your podcast, watches the movie, puts up this Facebook page, Storm Air 51. Oh, my God. That's a big problem, right? So I ended up talking to the kid and all this and trying to help him navigate. (1:50:26)

Kid went left. He should have gone straight. Anyway, vent went down. Rachel, Nevada, where Area 51 is where the access points go up. We all went out there, right? But really, Rachel, nobody wanted people to come. It's a town of 52 people, one business. The residents... I live in Pioneer Town, California. It's tiny. You don't want your whole town taken over by potentially dangerous millions of people that are signing up for this on Facebook, right? (1:50:53)

So it's this huge phenomenon that happened because of going on... What happened? So here's what actually happened because the media has completely lied to you. They said 150 people showed up. Yeah, it's a total fabrication out of the footage to prove it. We had an event in... I participated in an event in Heiko, Nevada, which is safely 50 miles away from Rachel, where they didn't want us. (1:51:14)

And on the fly, 3,000 plus. To me, it's a huge win. 3,000 plus people, even though they were scared to come because they were told to be scared to come out there. That it's going to be a riot. Okay. And they peacefully assembled and enjoyed this thing I had. But what happened? There's nothing. They just got together, 3,000 people. Yeah, but everybody came with the idea that they're curious about this. It engaged a whole new audience of people. (1:51:42)

We had Dave Foley talked. We had Paul Oakenfold, some famous guys. (1:51:46)

People talked? Yeah. Do you have a microphone set up? Yeah, I set it up. I brought in speakers. Dave, did you avoid this? Yeah, I'm a military guy. I'm not storming a government. That's about the stupidest thing ever. We're just like, hey, let's all jump the White House fence. I'm like, are you wacky? That's the dumbest idea on the planet. Yeah, I didn't understand the benefit of getting all those people together. (1:52:10)

No, no, people were going. And so my point was, well, let's at least bring people who can talk about it and have a civilized, fun time and see what people want to do. So my point is, it's amazing anybody came out to begin with and nobody went crazy. So what is the 150 people that were reported? Where'd they go? Maybe at the gate itself to go see. (1:52:28)

So that's probably what would have happened if someone like you didn't come along and organize something else. Yeah, I didn't organize it, but I definitely advocated for safety. And it worked. And it was a success. So they just got together and talked. 3,000 people got together and talked. Well, it was spread out all throughout. The Rachel community didn't want people. There was an event there, though, in Heiko, where I was, was the event with the stage and the fun stuff we all did. George Knapp was there as well. (1:52:50)

How'd you promote this? Well, they did the event. They promoted it because people were already coming. Did you promote it on social media? Oh, sure. I said, if you're going to go somewhere, that's where I'm going to be. And it's going to be safe and sane. My point is this. You have so many people that are curious now. And don't underestimate what happened when someone watched your podcast and that happened. Boom, you've got all these new people who are interested in it. (1:53:12)

And I think that's important because this UFO phenomenon is real. You've got fighter pilots that engage them. It represents a non-reactionary propulsion system. And that's a physics that would change the world. So the more people that come together and say we're interested, the louder the voice we got. I think it's cool. And I had some alien Budweiser. It's great. Well, I don't know if there's really any benefit to people physically getting together. But I do think that there's a lot of benefit. I'm glad you had a good time. But I do think there's a lot of benefit to this discussion. And I really think there's a lot of benefit to hearing the stories from people like you because that's the only thing that matters to me. (1:53:50)

It's like I need to know the person who's telling me the story isn't full of shit. So when I get it from someone like you, I really, really appreciate it. So that's it. Thanks for being here. Thanks for telling your story. Thanks for being you. Thank you, Jeremy, for setting this up. And thanks for your documentary on Budweiser, which really like fucking turned me around. That was the one. All right, that's it. Bye, everybody. (1:54:14)

(2025-07-02)

前置き​

目次​

音声対話​

情報源 : Youtube 動画(1:54:26)​

米海軍パイロットによるUFO遭遇に関する詳細ブリーフィング​

結論​

タイムライン：未確認航空機とUFO遭遇

1940年代頃​

1952年​

1989年​

時期不明（おそらく数年前）​

2004年10月半ば​

2004年11月〜12月​

2004年11月14日 (推定)​

事件後​

2017年​

2019年 (情報が提供されたポッドキャスト収録時)​

現在（ポッドキャスト収録以降、継続中）​

主要登場人物：未確認航空機とUFO遭遇

証言者 (氏名不明: (*: 実際は David Fravor のこと。AI は映像を見ていないゆえ判断できなかった))​

Trevor Burrus​

Jason Kuznicki​

Aaron Ross​

Paul Mueller​

僚機パイロット (女性、氏名不明)​

ウィザード (武器システム操作員、氏名不明)​

USSプリンストン管制官 (氏名不明)​

海軍ヘリコプターパイロット (氏名不明)​

ルー・エリゾンド (Lou Elizondo)​

ボブ・ラザー (Bob Lazar)​

ジャック・ヴァレ (Jacques Vallée)​

ビル・クリントン (Bill Clinton)​

ジミー・カーター (Jimmy Carter)​

ミック・ウェスト (Mick West)​

前置き

目次