Jake Barber and James Fowler Reveal the UAPs the Government IGNORES

Summary

In this episode of The Chris Cuomo Project, Chris Cuomo delves into the mysterious world of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs) with guests Jake Barber and James Fowler. Both men share their intricate experiences and observations related to UAPs and explore the complexities surrounding government transparency on the issue. They highlight the challenges faced by professionals in revealing anomalies while maintaining a poignant criticism of bureaucratic secrecy and its implications. Crucially, they emphasize the potential safety risks posed by unidentified objects in airspaces and stress the need for public awareness and governmental accountability.

Highlights

• Jake Barber and James Fowler expose the truth about UAPs. 👽
• Did you know the government's hiding information on UAP incursions? 🤯
• SkyWatcher Technologies is on the case to find out more about these mysterious occurrences. 🕵️‍♂️
• Safety first! Unidentified flying objects pose a real threat to public air safety. ✈️
• NewsNation plays a vital role in pushing for disclosure and transparency. 📰

Key Takeaways

• UAPs aren't about little green men but large-scale security breaches. 🚀
• The government's transparency (or lack thereof) on UAPs is questionable. 🤔
• There's a call for a public-private collaboration to better understand UAPs. 🤝
• SkyWatcher Technologies is pushing the boundaries of airspace surveillance. 🛰️
• The potential threats from foreign entities using advanced tech in US airspace are significant. ⚠️

Overview

The latest episode of The Chris Cuomo Project dives into the elusive and often controversial topic of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs), featuring expert insights from Jake Barber and James Fowler. Both men have unique backgrounds that provide a fascinating perspective on the government's secretive dealings with UAPs. The discussion unfolds with Jake and James narrating their firsthand experiences in observing these enigmatic objects, some of which demonstrate advanced technology not known to the public.

Jake and James passionately argue the need for transparency from the government. They voice concerns about the potential risks associated with these unknown entities, which have reportedly intruded into secure airspaces. The narrative they present is one of caution and urgency, given the possible implications of these occurrences, whether they are domestic creations, foreign threats, or something entirely otherworldly. Jake and James emphasize the pivotal roles played by both public and private sectors in tackling this ongoing mystery.

Furthermore, the episode explores the technological advancements made by SkyWatcher Technologies in monitoring these phenomena and enhancing airspace safety. Through a mix of personal anecdotes and expert opinions, Chris Cuomo steers the conversation towards the dire need for governmental openness. The show underscores the importance of public engagement and awareness in navigating the opaque waters of UAP-related activities.

Chapters

• 00:00 - 01:30: Introduction and Framing the Issue The chapter begins with Chris Cuomo asserting that it's undeniable our government is aware of unidentified aerial phenomena, whether referred to as UFOs or UAPs. The primary issue is the lack of transparency surrounding these occurrences. Cuomo introduces the chapter's focus on expert guests who have direct knowledge of these events and transparency issues.
• 01:30 - 06:30: Jake Barber's Experience and Insights The chapter titled 'Jake Barber's Experience and Insights' explores the practical realities behind unexplained aerial phenomena. Contrary to sensationalized theories involving extraterrestrial life, the narrative clarifies that these events are a matter of significant financial resources and numerous unexplained incidents. Key figures such as Jake Barber and James Fowler, who possess experience in both military and civilian sectors, are involved in various projects and observations. The chapter discusses their roles in liaising with government and political figures, emphasizing an understanding of aerial occurrences and their origin.
• 06:30 - 14:30: James Fowler's Perspective on UAPs In this chapter titled "James Fowler's Perspective on UAPs," the conversation opens with a casual greeting as the participants gather to discuss Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP). The host, eager to delve into the topic, invites Jake to start by sharing his personal experiences and insights on UAPs, emphasizing the significance of firsthand accounts in understanding these mysterious occurrences. Jake begins to recount his experiences from the past three decades, setting the stage for a detailed exploration of his encounters and observations related to UAPs.
• 14:30 - 23:00: Government and Private Sector Dynamics The chapter titled 'Government and Private Sector Dynamics' begins with the narrator discussing their extensive experience working with the government. Initially, they were an enlisted member of the United States Air Force before moving on to work within the broader intelligence community as a contractor. Throughout their career, they have undertaken a variety of roles, predominantly focusing on security and transportation. The narrator's work has been characterized by diversity and specialization in these areas, highlighting the dynamic between government roles and private sector capabilities.
• 23:00 - 38:30: Challenges in Government Transparency The chapter titled 'Challenges in Government Transparency' discusses the complexities of government transparency, especially in the context of defense and research sectors. It mentions activities in the California desert involving the U.S. government and private partners working on research and development, weapon systems testing, and transportation. The narrator, part of specialized teams and task forces like recovery teams, highlights the delicate balance in operations concerning transparency and confidentiality.
• 38:30 - 42:00: Conclusion and Call to Action The chapter discusses the purpose and setup of crash recovery teams. These teams are established not specifically for exotic materials, UFOs, or UAPs, but to manage any objects that forcibly interface with the ground. Their mission emphasizes proper handling and recovery of such items.

Jake Barber and James Fowler Reveal the UAPs the Government IGNORES Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 I can prove to you it is no longer a close call that our government knows that there are things in the air that shouldn't be there. I'm Chris Cuomo. Welcome to the Chris Cuomo Project. I don't care if you call them UFOs or UAPs. The difference in nomenclature is just a distraction from the fact that the transparency is not there. And I've got two guys who know what they've seen, who know what's going on, and who know what you aren't being told. And here is
• 00:30 - 01:00 a spoiler alert. It ain't about little green men, and it doesn't need to be. It's about billions of dollars and thousands of incursions that have not been explained. Jake Barber, James Fowler, military, civilian, both sides, projects, observations, dealing with government, dealing with politicians. They know the deal of what's in the air and from where
• 01:00 - 01:30 it comes. And I wanted their perspective. Do you? Let's get after it. Hey fellas, how you doing? Good. Good morning. Well, how are you? Jake, if you want to start just in terms of laying out uh why you know what you know, what have you seen, what have you experienced? Okay. Yeah. So, uh for the past 30
• 01:30 - 02:00 years, I've been involved with the government both in an official and unofficial capacity, you could say. uh starting as an enlisted man in the United States Air Force and then transitioning to the broader intelligence community as a contractor shortly thereafter and um was uh put to work in a number of different uh ways. My work was very diverse and uh specialize in security and transportation and specifically uh spent
• 02:00 - 02:30 a lot of time in the California desert working on the range and a number of test facilities where the US government and its private partners uh play with all their research and development and test weapon systems and resilience to weapon systems uh transportation a number of uh things. Um and so uh I became part of a couple of several specialized uh teams and task force um namely uh recovery teams, crash
• 02:30 - 03:00 recovery teams. And uh the mission of the crash recovery team was not specialized or you wouldn't you wouldn't set up a team like that just to go out and get exotic material or UFOs or UAPs. uh you set up a cost recovery team for anything that might interface with the ground forcibly and handle with it, handle it appropriately. um and and be able to handle it. Uh and
• 03:00 - 03:30 take into account all the variety of uh scenarios that might be presented when a number of things hit the ground from both a hazmat perspective, a security perspective, and u uh sensitive information or classified uh perspective. And so, um, we did a lot of work, recovered a lot of things. And, um, we saw a lot of interesting things in the sky working out there. And, um, you know, the the two cases that I
• 03:30 - 04:00 brought forth that, uh, that I'm comfortable talking about, that I think are of interest and of import to both the public and the government, um, are what most people know now as the egg and the egg gone. And um those were the probably the two most interesting and compelling experiences that uh lead us to that other category where it doesn't seem man-made. Um it's not uh
• 04:00 - 04:30 it's not US military and it's not adversarial that we can detect. Um and it's just weird, man. It's just anomalous. So, um the those two objects were things that our team was dispatched on and recovered. Um I had very very limited experience with it. Um just from a transportation standpoint, um flew in with a helicopter at night, picked it up, uh flew it about, you know, 20 miles,
• 04:30 - 05:00 dropped it off at another location, and then my work was done. the interesting work uh takes place after that. And uh so um both the egg and the Agon were things that were covered uh in in that setting. I had a very emotional, surprisingly emotional and uh spiritual experience with uh with the eight gone that um I've
• 05:00 - 05:30 told that story publicly a couple times now and um I really don't like going into the details of it cuz it's I wouldn't say traumatizing, it's just kind of emotionally exhausting. But um that that particular incident uh changed my life. Um, and I I feel like things have been different ever since then. Personally, there's something about that evening that uh that had a spiritual impact on
• 05:30 - 06:00 me and uh uh has been a challenge. At first, it was quite a challenge cuz I carry so much responsibility. I have a lot of practical responsibilities uh to both my my local mission of operating helicopters and communications and then just to my team at large for being able to um conduct myself in a pressure uh uh uh professional and levelheaded way and you know during dealing with things that are um otherworldly and having them
• 06:00 - 06:30 touch you personally. Um it's not the not typically not the right headsp space when you're focused on practical matters in dealing with things in a very objective and uh uh when you're trying to rely on your training which is more of your professional reflexes when you're doing work. So that led me down a path you know my I never really had a like the moments themselves were uh because you're in that mindset. I get
• 06:30 - 07:00 the question a lot like, you know, what was it like to realize we're not alone or did you have an aha moment? And um I that aha moment is something that's evolving. It's a it's a sloping um experience. It's not a a switch that got flipped for me. And we're still exploring that. And um yeah, so that was that's how I ended up becoming a voice and
• 07:00 - 07:30 um realizing later when the disclosure movement really kicked off 2017 2018, we were tracking that movement trying to figure out uh to what extent we should be involved if at all and uh was paying very close attention to the movements in Congress and uh the testimony given by people like David Gush and Lou Alzando and trying to figure out what play to make and what the riskreward ratio and situation was for
• 07:30 - 08:00 us coming forward. And that still is something we're trying to calculate. Um it's not uh it's not an easy thing to really put your finger on, but it's something we try and keep a pulse on as to the riskreward scenario for coming forward. And part of what makes that very challenging is the lack of guidance and oversight on the topic as a whole because uh you know as a patriot um I consider myself altruistically patriotic
• 08:00 - 08:30 and altruistically concerned with national defense and that means even in cases where there isn't clear guidance or oversight I still take that to heart and try to figure out what the right move is. Um and that can be difficult at times. Why do you think that what you learned, what you believe you now understand that you didn't before because of your experiences limits what you say my responsibilities
• 08:30 - 09:00 to be in the moment and to use my skill set? Why hasn't it just made you um richer and u you know more expansive let's say in your understanding? Why why is it a limitation? I would say in the moment when you're doing something that is as demanding as operating a helicopter at night, you're running three radios at a time. Every foot in hand is doing something different and
• 09:00 - 09:30 you are you are relying on a combination of motor skill um as well as processing information. Like the headsp space there has to be one that's very clear, pragmatic and focused. uh things that can distract you from that. You know, actually it's it's a standard procedure for pilots and anyone operating sensitive equipment. We do what's called a hazardous attitude inventory before we operate. And it's basically like a pre-flight checklist for yourself, for
• 09:30 - 10:00 your for the human factor, which is one of the most important parts of any system. Let's call this system an aircraft. Uh, everyone, I'm sure understands that before you fly, you kick the tires and check the oil and make sure the aircraft is airworthy. Well, uh, but most people don't think about, um, the importance of making sure the pilot, the human is airworthy. And so, a hazardous attitude inventory test is is one place where we take into
• 10:00 - 10:30 account what are known as those psychological or aeromedical factors. And there's a number of classic cases there uh or classic categories within your your personal inventory that you take into account. And so the last thing you want to do is be spiritually emotional in any any regard. You don't want to be overly emotional. Um you don't want to have any emotion that pulls you from your center.
• 10:30 - 11:00 Um, and you certainly don't want to be having some transformative like interdimensional borderline metaphysical experience while you're sitting in the seat of of an aircraft. And so it limits me in that localized incident where you're out operating. Like you want to make sure you're you're wellfed, you're well slept, you don't have to pee, um you're not hung over, you're not sick. I mean all those things are things that would uh would make you unair worthy for
• 11:00 - 11:30 a particular operation. And so having one of the most emotional and spiritual experiences in my life while sitting in the seat of a helicopter flying in the mountains at night alone you fly a helicopter that's usually uh most circumstances you have two pilots on board. I wasn't. I was a single pilot operating a twin engine complex helicopter. And so you know you you you need to have uh clarity in that moment. And so it just localized in that
• 11:30 - 12:00 instance. Um it was very challenging. Now that being said in all other aspects of my life I don't think that experience has proven to be enhancing rather than degrading. And uh um that certainly has been a benefit as opposed to a limitation. That is a very good and wholesome answer my brother. Thank you very much for it. James, are you still there and awake? I am and listening to the enthralling story there. So, uh yeah, nice to meet
• 12:00 - 12:30 you, Chris and team. Uh so happy to be here. So, uh James Fowler uh is my name. I was uh in the military for a long time. Spent most of my time uh uh in SOCOM, retired in 2020 as a sergeant major. uh really got after a lot of different things, deployed to a lot of crazy places, but I never did anything with UAPs or anything on this topic whatsoever in my military career. That actually separates me a little bit from Jake and other folks that you may speak with. And that all my information has been gleaned and learned and understood
• 12:30 - 13:00 as a civilian, as a contractor to the government or on my own uh without any government interaction whatsoever. Um, so, uh, in 2021, I was running a war game for the US government. And at that war game, I had, uh, 10 tens of millions of dollars of defensive equipment and tens of millions of dollars of offensive equipment. That equipment included government and commercial classified unclassified systems. And we are arrayed in a force on force war game for uh, two weeks at a time to a month at a time. So
• 13:00 - 13:30 uh in during the course of that initial war game in 21, we had some sightings of some anomalies uh we were convinced that perhaps those anomalies were related to the IC, the intelligence community or the government. So we treated it as such. We're very careful with that information. Uh we kept it very quiet, which is why you've never heard from me before and never seen this before. uh between 21 and 22 we decided you know what if actually we thought to ourselves
• 13:30 - 14:00 what if this isn't a US government capability what if this is an adversary or another capability so between 2021 and 2022 we did a lot of open source research a lot of analysis introspectively thinking through what did we do in 21 to bring this attention to us and can we replicate it in 22 and can we enhance the attraction that we get in 2022 and the answer was yes So in 2022, we ran another war game. We've owned one every year. Uh more than one sometimes. And in 22, we had uh much
• 14:00 - 14:30 more uh exotic uh uh display of technology from whoever's flying and operating these these craft. Uh in 21, we only had seven that we saw in one sort or one formation. In 22, we saw over 250 UAPs in varying sorties from 1 to three uh uh up and upwards. Um, so that started the effort. Uh, again, we kept this very quiet because we thought perhaps we're at a war game, maybe they're wargaming us. Uh, but the
• 14:30 - 15:00 trouble with that is we couldn't figure out what the feedback mechanism would be. In 2023, we started sharing our data openly with the government. Uh, in fact, uh, uh, in 2024, we were contracted by the government to collect UAP data. Uh you should note that uh in commercial and uh government spaces you will never be contracted for anything to do with UAPs. It's just not the way it works. Uh from Jake's story talking about other things, other contracts than UAPs. The same thing went for my team. We were not contracted for UAPs. We were contracted
• 15:00 - 15:30 for other activities with UAPs being the actual desire but uh there were other inputs as well. Uh so so we have uh nine classes of UAPs we've identified. These classes include signals intelligence. They include radar cross-sections, air speed, altitude, uh times of day when they appear, and also uh visual observations and multiple bands. So, we use electro optical or daylight cameras. We lo we use infrared uh middlewave and and shortwave infrared cameras. And with these tools, we're
• 15:30 - 16:00 able to attract the UAPs with a custom capability that we've enhanced over the last 5 years. We have a 100% success rate. That doesn't mean that when we use the dog whistle that pooch or you know uh phto comes and sits at our lap and wags his tail and waits for us to talk. No, when we use a dog whistle we have to wait a certain amount of time after we start using it continuously use it over over a certain amount number of hours or days and then the UAPs will be there uh at a certain time after we begin the
• 16:00 - 16:30 operation. We have tested done blind testing in terms of used uh the same equipment without the dog whistle and had no reaction by UAPs. no observation uh for over a week. We did that uh more than once. So we we are very we're extremely confident that our dog whistle is responsible for calling in the UAPs. Um, so in 2024 was our last event that we did for the government and the word Skywatcher actually was the cover term for our
• 16:30 - 17:00 technology that we developed between 2022 and now that we began when we were frustrated with the military-industrial complex status quo, you know, pre golden dome concepts of air defense and air intelligence. So we started designing our own uh technology that's actually overengineered. It's designed to detect things that cannot be seen in the sky, namely UAPs. And as a byproduct, you actually detect stealth, hypersonic, supersonic, uh, and regular threats to the airspace. So, SkyWatcher technology
• 17:00 - 17:30 is actually a technology inspired by UAPs that we wouldn't have even thought of or thought to build without UAP observations. And we've taken those lessons learned and distilled them down to a new product, and new capability that will revolutionize air defense and air intelligence systems. Uh so in in 2025 we uh started our company Skywatcher Technologies Corporation. Jake and I are are both founders and partners there. And at SkyWatcher we continue with the same events I used to
• 17:30 - 18:00 run for the government except these are commercially run now. We run one event per month and at those events we continue to uh get more data. The difference is that now we have a helicopter and we have other tools. So we can chase the UAP. I personally have chased about 15 UAPs and approximated two one within about 200 meters last month. So that's that's what I know. We have definitive data. We have definitive knowledge. We have no clue who who or what's flying these. I'm really on the fence between which entity we are
• 18:00 - 18:30 observing when we observe it. But I'm firm in my belief that there's a a blue bucket probably made in America. There's a red bucket maybe made in China or Russia. And there's another bucket that we don't know where they're from. And I'm confident that we're viewing all three of those in our airspace. And one key thing to note here, Chris, is these observations occur in broad daylight in the middle of US air traffic. So some of the videos we've released, we purposefully put air traffic in the
• 18:30 - 19:00 background so people can understand this isn't happening where there's no airplanes or no commercial aviation anywhere. So this is happening in broad daylight right next to national international air corridors sometimes in them. So we've observed from being at altitude with these UAPs that we cannot see them from the from the air. And so it's our belief that these things are commonly around commercial aviation. In fact we have photos and videos of UAPs in proximity to commercial aviation from our first sighting in 21. Uh and that
• 19:00 - 19:30 continues. So uh whoever is operating these if it's blue is highly illegal. they are not squawking ADSB. They're not adhering to international norms of air traffic. Uh and if it's red, we should be terrified because that would mean that one of our adversaries has impunity in our airspace and can enter airspace at their discretion at their time and at their location of choosing. And not only don't our forces detect it, they don't counteract it. And I will tell you, I am in constant communication with our government. I've sat with our government
• 19:30 - 20:00 for the last 5 years in skiffs and asked them, "Give me an NDA, tell me to shut up, tell me that this is ours and I will I'm a patriot. I'll protect national security and I will stop." Nobody has taken me up on that offer. With the same breath, I've told them, "Don't tell me anything because I'm going to talk about this one day and I don't want to be tied down by NDAs to the government unless unless you have something you want to share." Um, but uh so my mind is polluted. I'm free to pontificate and think through things because I hold no
• 20:00 - 20:30 oath to secrecy on this topic and I will tell you that from my observations I don't believe our government has a clue who this is and if they do know it fits into the red or the other category def I would say almost certainly the observations we have if they are blue they are very limited support comes from one skin now I am a 54 year old guy who's got to look as good as they can. I got to do the most with the little that God gave me.
• 20:30 - 21:00 And I'll tell you what doesn't help. Signs of age, wrinkles, creping of skin. That's why you use One Skin. One Skin is the first and only skin longevity company to target cellular scinessence. Okay, that is aging at the cellular level. And what they have is a proprietary peptide, okay, OS01. And the science shows that it
• 21:00 - 21:30 decreases lines and wrinkles. How? I have no idea. I just take it and it works. And I know a lot of other people share the same experience. One Skin is the world's first skin longevity company. By focusing on the cellular aspects of aging, One Skin keeps your skin looking and acting younger longer. You can get started today just like me with 15% off using code quuomo at
• 21:30 - 22:00 onskin.co. 15% off if you go to onskin.com.co and use the code quuomo. Now they're going to ask you where you heard about them. Please say you heard about them from me on the Chris Cuomo project. Especially now with summer upon us, you got to take care of your skin. They've got a whole line of products that will help you reduce the effects of the sun without all the grease and the nastiness and the overwhelming
• 22:00 - 22:30 fragrances that come on so much of the stuff that we use in the summertime. One skin, your future self will thank you. So, let's drill down on this third bucket. Um, when you say you don't know who they are, uh, Jake, the third bucket, I'm assuming you agree see now this is your partner in terms of the analysis of the bucket structure. What is the definition of the
• 22:30 - 23:00 third bucket for you? Um, well, you know, we've all heard Lou talk about the five observables. That's a good place to start. Uh and it's it's actually something pretty significant which is um you know it's a good way to think about it as rungs on a ladder. As we're ascending this ladder to discovery uh our first rung or the first thing we're trying to achieve uh through our discovery framework which is our scientific framework uh starting at a
• 23:00 - 23:30 low level and then proceeding to uh a level of scientific discovery where we can identify what this is. Um, that first rung is to prove that it's truly anomalous. And that's no small thing. We don't throw that term around. It's like a as a broad brush to paint across everything in the sky that's not an airplane or helicopter. So, some very some things um, you know, right away is, you know, are they showing up? Is there radar cross-section or signature something that's interesting? How does
• 23:30 - 24:00 it look? What does it look like to the visual eye? What does it look like to the to all the different styles and types of sensors we have? And is there disparage is there are there disparities between what the visual eye picks up and what the instrumentation picks up? I mean, you start to rule out things pretty quickly. um you can start moving towards that other bucket pretty quickly when you look at uh things that are only show up in one or let's just say not all
• 24:00 - 24:30 of the observation means because any conventional uh aircraft that would fit in the other two buckets should should at least show up. You should be able to see it with your eye and you should be able to see it on radar. You should be able to see it in thermal uh EO IR. And some of the things uh when we start moving towards that bucket, some of the first things we observe are uh it looks different or it's not even visible. Um a
• 24:30 - 25:00 lot of the times there are things that will show up on radar that you can't see with the naked eye because it's moving too quickly. And this is part of our challenge when we look to uh get any type of imagery on these on these objects is where do you point the camera? Um and then most of the camera or observation equipment, you start with a pretty uh broad field of view. Um and at the range and speed some of these objects move, if they are objects, and some things are more just like lights,
• 25:00 - 25:30 we don't know if they're tangible objects or not. um they're hard with that broad view. You have to be able to pick them up and then you have to be able to zoom and concentrate your observation equipment to a smaller space to get more pixels on target is a term we use. And uh when they move quickly um or they're not visible to the naked eye, it's hard to it's hard to advance your observation equipment or to
• 25:30 - 26:00 get more refined data. Um uh speed is another one. So things that move um at speeds that are supersonic or hypersonic that don't make a sonic boom. Um things that move uh in in contradiction to what the laws of gravity and classic physics would allow us to do um is something that can get you put in that bucket. But even something that just looks weird. I
• 26:00 - 26:30 mean that we should be able to define with this team. Uh with the experience we have, the equipment we have, and the processes we have, we should be able to identify things in the sky pretty quickly. So it's actually uh exciting to at least label something uh unidentifiable um or even anomalous. That's that's the first step. Origin and who it is, is it red, blue or other? um is not something it's not a conclusion we we jump to. Um we're excited when we
• 26:30 - 27:00 can actually find something in the sky with any of our equipment and then not be able to define what it is. That's a big deal for for this group. James, what do you think the ratio is with government transparency in terms of what they don't know versus what they don't want to show? That's a really hard question, Chris. And I'll kind of lay it out for you. Um, and let me start actually from a from a
• 27:00 - 27:30 from a super macro view before we go in to a tight zoomed in enhanced view. If you look at how many US national labs there are, there's over 375. There's close to 400,000 civilians working for the US government uh in national labs, whether they're Uarks, FFRDC's or other other labs doing work for the government and classified projects. Their budgets are approximately $90 billion a year. I
• 27:30 - 28:00 would ask what are these labs doing? Are these labs developing new advanced technology? For me to believe that the UAPs are observing are man-made of human origin long ago, I came up with the conclusion that they would have to had to have started many years ago, probably in the 40s or 50s. Perhaps they could have taken the scientists uh and engineers from the Manhattan Project and from Operation Paperclip when the United States squarely owned the most smart people in the world, if you will, the
• 28:00 - 28:30 most intellectually capable group of men and women in existence were here. and then they form the national labs from there. I would offer what we're observing are technologies that are at least one generate one generation ahead ahead of anything we have. So if you're looking at propulsion, telemetry, uh uh cloaking technology, stealth technology, it's all well ahead of what's observable or known in the public sphere. And I can tell you I'm an ISR expert and the methodologies being used
• 28:30 - 29:00 don't match anything I would know to be viable for a technology use in a deployment scenario. Meaning the UAPs that fly past us uh and approximate us don't don't uh uh don't use traditional ISR tactics. There's never an orbit. There's never a a uh obvious tactic that we would use against our enemies. uh as per normal tactics. So having said that uh it's really hard to believe that that
• 29:00 - 29:30 it's ours. So the the the the disparity between how much is ours or how much is man-made, how much is other is really hard to see through. Uh but for certain there's there's probably all three categories in play here. I' I'd like to add real quick too. I mean, beyond that, if if our government, if we're going to, you know, put them in one giant bucket and assume they're some cohesive and cooperative uh entity, which they aren't, they wouldn't be spend they wouldn't be setting out
• 29:30 - 30:00 programs like OSAP. The Office of Arrow, if you look at the mission statement of Arrow, it's actually very similar to ours and Skywatcher. Like they OAP was specifically set up to study UFOs. And I'm going to go back to that classic acronym because it's just just as good as UAP. And at the time, that was the acronym. I mean, the government wouldn't be spending money and hiring uh uh experts and putting out uh requests for proposals for folks that could help look into the subject matter of what the heck
• 30:00 - 30:30 is going on in the sky. um you know arrow specifically is it was set up to look in to investigate the UAP and um provide a mechanism for reporting UAP and taking a rigorous science scientific approach to discovering what it is. So you know the spirit of the office of arrow is quite exciting for guys like us because that mission is something we're passionate about and capable of looking into. Um, but there's there's a lot of challenges that have become clear the
• 30:30 - 31:00 last couple years since Arrow has been stood up, which is why we feel strongly that the private sector and autonomous organizations like ours um stand a good chance to actually be uh the method for ushering in this new era when it comes to disclosure. And we have to have the government involved because for better or worse um our institutions and uh our offices within government are those who we pay to be responsible and who we vote
• 31:00 - 31:30 to be responsible for handling issues like this when it from a security uh standpoint and a public safety standpoint. Um so again the fact that the government uh at large has invested a lot of money and recruited a lot of talent to specifically look into the subject matter of UAP and UFO which is that other bucket is evidence itself because you would have to ask yourself what would be an alternate explanation for for standing up uh those offices and
• 31:30 - 32:00 and issuing funding through contracts to the private sector if they knew what was going on. So, so can can I add to that real quick, Chris, before we leave the stop stream, cuz there's something I left out of mine, which is uh as I told you, I've met with the government many times and many skips for many different agencies on this topic, bringing them data, briefing them, showing them powerpoints, giving the government data. I I I've given the government over a terabyte and a half of UAP data specifically and explicitly for these
• 32:00 - 32:30 classes of UAPs. This includes radar data, imagery data, signals, intelligence. All the above has been given to the government. When I have gone to offices who are whose core mission is UAP studies, it's really hard for me to discern if they are uh purposefully being incompetent or if there's a big bureaucratic problem uh uh you know uh blockage in the way stopping them from being effective. I have been to national labs who are supporting this effort and the same thing that I find in
• 32:30 - 33:00 the DC region is folks asking the wrong questions not studying this not taking it seriously and if they are taking it seriously again I don't I'm not quite sure if it's masked or or purposeful incompetence or true incompetence I have a hard time believing it's it's purposeful because the people are very smart and very capable apparently but um when I tell the government I have a terabyte and a two terabytes of data to give you. A lot of times they can't even
• 33:00 - 33:30 take it. They're like, "Hey, how do we get this in a skiff? Hey, can you send me a link?" Um, you know, they ask all the silly questions about how they can even ingest our data. Um, and it's been extremely frustrating. We have we have recognized from the beginning this this has to be a public private partnership. This cannot be done by the commercial sector and clearly it can't be done by the government sector. So it has to be a pairing uh for authorities with the FCC and FAA to collect the data and run operations to uh the government bringing
• 33:30 - 34:00 bespoke tools. There are things that we need in a relationship to proceed and be successful here. And I would offer it's extremely frustrating when we see people publicly in public hearings stating they want this data that they want this information and then we go to meet with them. We put on a suit and tie and show up at Capitol Hill and we get met with well this staffer was interested so he came but the other staffer wasn't so they didn't. Um we get a lot of back and forth and him hawing and no true actual sit down and discussions even in an unclassified format to share and help
• 34:00 - 34:30 them understand uh what's unfolding in our country. Support comes from Shopify. When I started the podcast man it's scary. I'm not entrepreneurial by nature. I started to have ideas of how I wanted to monetize ideas and products and find ways to crowdsource contributions, get money together. And I realized once I started to have my own challenges, I looked around at the marketplace of what
• 34:30 - 35:00 I was using when I shopped online. And more and more I found a familiar coincidence. more and more of the businesses that I chose to use because of the efficiency and kind of the whole sell through process were using Shopify. So turn your big business idea into kaching Shopify on your side. Sign up for your $1 a month trial and start
• 35:00 - 35:30 selling today at shopify.com/chrisc. Go to shopify.comrisc. What is it? shopify.comrisc. Why? Because it's not just about your business. It's about the business behind your business. And what you need to do is to help people who come to you get all the way through to checkout. And that's where Shopify
• 35:30 - 36:00 excels. Okay. So then we have the moment where President Trump comes in, says enough of this no transparency stuff. We are going to tell you what we know. And his lady comes out and says the same that Biden's lady said. What does that tell you, James? It tells me we have a problem in our in our bureaucracy. That it takes a presidential candidate saying something extreme that apparently probably was not able to live up to. We will see. We have
• 36:00 - 36:30 three and a half more years I think to find that out. But uh why does it take the president saying that or trying to make efforts? Why does it take an executive order when we have a bureaucratic process who's mandated to expose to the public what is going on here and that has not occurred? So something is is very wrong with our country if that is the case that we have to rely upon one individual to see through the the smoke mirrors. Well, what is the chance Jake that the answer is? Oh, it's all explainable. They're
• 36:30 - 37:00 all just this uh exploding corporate and uh consumer and individual drone market helicopters and fixed wings and some um some careful editing by folks at home to drive superstition. Yeah, I would say the first answer to that is because it's a public it's a public safety issue and there are laws being broken. So especially when we get
• 37:00 - 37:30 into some of the incursions we experienced. I know New Jerseyy's gotten a lot of spotlight, but there's there's been a lot of that going on for years prior to that over military bases that James and I are keenly aware of. And just from to make it real simple like these craft are not a lot of the times are not operating in compliance with uh federal aviation regulations which uh which have to do with the FAA. um they're they are not reporting they are not um in in
• 37:30 - 38:00 communication they're not under the command and control of air traffic control centers and so collision avoidance it's a real simple thing there the FAA and our airspace is very organized and very well managed for good reason and I mean it's still surprising uh I think to everyone to to say something like you know flying in planes is the safest means of travel it's scary to people because we're we're flying, right? But it's safer than driving your
• 38:00 - 38:30 car down the road. And that's because our airspace is very well managed through the FAA. So, when you when you have objects or phenomenon, which is a a broader category, uh in the air that aren't being reported to pilots that are operating, they're sometimes general aviation like uh civilian-owned aircraft, um you've got a problem. And not only is it a problem for the the public which is operating their privately owned aircraft, but if there is a collision now that's a problem for
• 38:30 - 39:00 everyone on the ground because gravity takes over. Now you have things crashing and uh causing damage to people and property which at its core is a is a public safety issue. Um and so there are laws being broken. And so when laws get broken in the FAA, the FBI should step in and open a case and begin uh investigations. And we don't see a lot of that happening either, which is very strange. Is it strange though? See, that's my point is it can't be that
• 39:00 - 39:30 they're spending this much money working with special operators and don't know what's flying over military bases. Can't be. So, it has to be one of two things. they know and don't want to say or they don't know and know how bad that looks so they don't want to say. It can only be one of those two things. So Chris, if I may on that, um, if you take the Jersey drone problem for example, um,
• 39:30 - 40:00 the government I think is really at a crossroads where if it's read, which is my personal belief that the majority of sightings in New Jersey have been probably Chinese uh, drones and maybe even Chinese UAPs, right? um they they are operating with impunity in our airspace and if they are being operated by Chinese military officials or government officials most would most would consider that an act of war. So I think our government is really torn in
• 40:00 - 40:30 the fact that if this is red that's operating in our territory if it is China or Russia or somebody else and they know it and they talk about it publicly then they have to react otherwise admit that others are in our airspace and we are not stopping them. Conversely, if it's other, we have the exact same problem. Hey, we cannot protect you. We are not able to alert you or deter this. Uh, it's in our airspace. So, I would offer that the government's really in a a rock and a hard place. If they come out and speak
• 40:30 - 41:00 about what's going on publicly directly, then they are shown to be uh incapable and it shows the limits of our capacity to defend ourselves. Um, and I would offer uh perhaps the tariffs that are going on aren't just about tariffs in trade. Perhaps we are seeing an escalation at the beginning of a cold war because our government cannot say this publicly. Perhaps instead they using policy to deter on the front while in the back they're having private conversations explicitly laying out go
• 41:00 - 41:30 no-go areas. You know guys, we we had a moment uh last month or um if you if people were paying attention, I haven't seen many conversations on this, but we had a moment when Zalinski was speaking to Trump and they were letting the cameras roll. Vance was there. It was a very raw moment that uh was interesting to say the least. But during that conversation, if you notice, there was a point where I saw Trump get most irritated and agitated. And that's when
• 41:30 - 42:00 uh Zalinski was pushing back a little bit and um speaking to one of our greatest attributes as a nation, which is simply our geography. Like our geography has been a big part of what has kept us safe um for forever. And uh there was a moment because of our oceans and our and our skies. um those those two domains are becoming
• 42:00 - 42:30 a liability for us. There was a moment there where Zalinsky said, you know, well, you're protected by your oceans, but we know that's a problem. Something to the effect that that that's not that's going to be a problem for him. You know, that's you you're no longer safe uh when it comes to your oceans and airspace. And Trump got really heated and cut him off and told him to shut up. So, um, that that told me that there there is some insecurity with that that at least Zinsky and probably everyone else
• 42:30 - 43:00 is is aware of and that might be speaking to some of the things that uh folks are talking about. Now, there's an article that came out this week uh about the Chinese submarines that can release drones from underwater. So there might really be things going on like that where um our leadership is not wanting to uh want not wanting us to know that they don't have a handle on this and they don't want to uh have mass panic.
• 43:00 - 43:30 I don't know, James. I I have a hard time believing that Trump would be that deep into something like this and not be talking about it. Uh, I know people talk about it's not about exposing you guys to political analysis, but the idea of he's playing 4D chess or whatever it is. It's not been my experience. My experience is that he is very obvious about what's going on. And if he had something to say about this, I don't think he would be so quiet so long. We've never seen him practice that in
• 43:30 - 44:00 anything else. Yeah. So, that's really hard to say. Uh, I'm not inside the administration. And I have no insights into what's going on behind closed doors and everything I have right now is opinions and observations based on the knowledge we have and the conversations we've had. What what I can say is the technology we are seeing does not fit anything that is publicly known to exist. And when I say publicly known to exist, I'm talking about propulsion, stealth, cloaking, um,
• 44:00 - 44:30 uh, uh, fuselage technology. uh everything we're seeing is is impossible to exist with with today's current public knowledge of technology. So, is disclosure more about disclosing secret physics like Eric Weinstein says, or is disclosure more about little green men? And I tend to lean on disclosure right now, especially from our government, is probably going to be more about physics. And the reason why is one plausible explanation for why we have been exposed
• 44:30 - 45:00 to this technology so that we can expose the fact that the physics supports these capabilities. thus starting a new age in physics publicly and new technology developments in physics leading to uh an improvement in in our current status quo. So perhaps our role here at SkyWatcher is frankly to observe and report uh and to begin the reverse engineering of what is being seen. But I would offer if that is the case, we're going to be 50 years behind any government because that activity had to
• 45:00 - 45:30 have started at least in the 50s or 60s and progress to what we're seeing now, probably in the '90s, early 2000s. So, uh perhaps that's what's going on is disclosure is to softly show the world that this technology uh exists by disclosing to us that the physics behind it exists because what we're seeing, as I said, is completely unexplainable. I don't think, you know, Trump did sign an executive order that uh that led us to the Golden Dome initiative and near
• 45:30 - 46:00 the end of the things, one of the last things they speak to that we're trying to get a handle on with that effort is defense against other next generation attacks. So, uh to me that speaks to another bucket from their perspective. um and they're leaving that pretty wide open. And I think uh that is the Trump administration um and everyone that's been put to task since uh since he took office is taking
• 46:00 - 46:30 this seriously and is admitting that there is another category. Uh listen, I I think there has to be another category and it has to be that he has been informed of what the restrictions and barriers are and he has determined that it's just there's just not enough in it for him and I don't mean that as a criticism but that all right fine whatever you know let me this is not why I was elected this is not what I'm into anyway and they just moved on and his
• 46:30 - 47:00 person came out and said oh yeah all those things are fixed wing aircraft and other kinds of drones and stuff and it's exactly what the Biden people said. So he is one guy I we the president has to trust everyone below him in the executive br. We have to trust everyone else to be doing their job. So I can't imagine uh it for it to be something that we're going to rely on Donald Trump to wake up and think about every day. I can't imagine uh all the things he has to
• 47:00 - 47:30 consider. Um and to give this attention to for him to be the primary responsible party for dealing with this just doesn't make sense. So I think he's delegating and trusting that uh everyone else whose job it is to look into this is going to be responsible for it. Uh I think it's more that than it is him keeping secrets. I don't think it's him keeping secrets at all. I think that there's just there's nothing in it for him right now to buck what he's being told. And
• 47:30 - 48:00 you know, same thing with the disclosure of the Kennedy stuff and the King stuff and the Epstein stuff is that he's got other people doing it. They are not primary concerns for him. So he doesn't buck the system. But if we were to get hit by a drone, guess what would change? All of it. So, I wonder if we're just an attack away from this culture of secrecy
• 48:00 - 48:30 and non-transparency changing because of a horrible situation. So, so Chris, I don't think we're one attack away. We're one mishap from an aircraft away from this being exposed. If this is, you know, no matter which bucket it fits into, blue, red, or other, if if a craft crashes and is picked up and is observed and it has Chinese writing on it, um there's that's going to be a big deal. And if it's picked up and it has weird characteristics nobody can explain and fits the other category, again, it's
• 48:30 - 49:00 going to be a big deal. No matter how you cut the cake, uh one, we are one mishap away from this being a very public, acknowledged, and discussed in every home conversation. uh and and so I really hope we're able to get ahead of that. Uh we have told the government when we met with them, look, we want a public private partnership. We want to expose you to our technology. We expose you to our findings in the immediiacy of collecting it. Um and thus far, we've had very limited success in those conversations. And we've told the government, you can
• 49:00 - 49:30 either be part of the solution as we unravel this or you can read about it in the newspapers when it happens. And we've invited them and we continue to invite. We have that open invite now that we'd love to work with the government to secure our airspace, understand what is going on, and help unravel and expose the red or the other category if that's what needs to happen. Support comes from American financing. I got to tell you, prices been high, still high. Credit card debt
• 49:30 - 50:00 all-time high. And a lot of us are getting trapped here, even in America. American Financing can help, especially if you're a homeowner, and they can help you by paying off highinterest debt by using the most solid thing in your life, your home's equity. Their mortgage consultants are salarybased. What does that mean? There's no incentive for them to upsell you or to put you in a loan that doesn't make sense. Their customers
• 50:00 - 50:30 save an average of $800 a month when they call and let American Financing help them. You may be able to close in as fast as 10 days. You may be able to delay up to two mortgage payments if you create more savings upfront. They've helped hundreds of thousands of homeowners create meaningful savings and is reflected in their reviews on Google. Just take a look. So, call today 866889-4242. 866889-4242 or you can go to
• 50:30 - 51:00 americanfinancing.net/quromo nmls182334 ww.nlsconsumerac.org. Do you think that all this reporting that NewsNation has been doing has really made any difference? And the reason I ask is, you know, we're doing it because we think there's a responsibility and that government transparency matters and is a
• 51:00 - 51:30 very communicable um issue and infection in government that if they're not transparent about one thing, they're not going to be transparent about anything. But when I look at the people who are on the commission uh the committee about this, I don't see any real players in Congress. There's none of the leadership. Uh and I feel like they still don't take this seriously. Jake, they see it as like kind of a freak show. I think News Nation has been vitally important. I think you guys would be
• 51:30 - 52:00 surprised to learn how many people in government on Capitol Hill are on their phones watching podcasts, watching the news. There's a bit of like uh you know are they're like closet fans of the subject matter. That has been my experience. Uh there's a lot of conversations, lots of people having beers in and around Capitol Hill, having conversations about it, and they are paying attention to this. 100% they are. And they're just uh it it's also
• 52:00 - 52:30 NewsNation is I think has the same opportunity and responsibility we do at Skywatcher is we are autonomous. We are free from the constraints of bureaucracy and politics and distraction. Um and when people when people don't have the safety and security um you know for us this this goes back to like the riskreward ratio for any whistleblower coming forward or anybody wanting to touch the topic. Um unless there is financial protection, legal
• 52:30 - 53:00 protection, and physical protection, uh when when any of those core things in any situation are threatened for a human being, they're not going to touch it with a 10-ft pole. And it can be one or any combination of those three things. And um for us, we're in a unique position now with Skyatcher where we're financially independent. Um we feel reasonably physically safe. if men and black haven't showed up as James has talked about. No one is telling us to
• 53:00 - 53:30 stop right now. Um, and then legally, you know, it'd be nice to have more protection, but we do feel, you know, legally uh covered in what we're doing, and News Nation is the same. And so I think we our autonomy should not be taken lightly. Um, and so some of the other news platforms don't seem to have the autonomy in those three categories that News Nation and Skywatcher have. Can can I add on to that real quick, Chris? Um, it's it's important also to
• 53:30 - 54:00 understand that uh because of our autonomy, we have the best of both worlds. We're able to go sit in a skip with the government, present them information, findings, get their feedback to a limited degree, and then go out in the field and continue. At the same time, we're able to operate with industry, industry experts, scientists, academia, physicists, and have them review what's going on and in real time give us updates on what they think we're seeing and why it matters. Um, our hands are not tied and we can operate in these
• 54:00 - 54:30 circles in this manner that the challenge we have is, you know, this is a very risky taboo topic, right? uh this this was not what I was doing full-time until very recently and even now it's not not full-time it's it we're growing into it um but before now uh I inherited nothing but risk by even talking about this um risk to government contracts risk to commercial contracts and my businesses uh uh personal risk and angst of am I saying the right things am I
• 54:30 - 55:00 talking to the right people am I doing the right thing um so that's a lot of risk and I think that corporate entities these other uh media outlets uh view the same thing as this is just risk and with such risk why should we continue well something is violating our airspace daily probably year round with impunity I'd say that's a very big deal and I think that we have to address it and I think that trumps any kind of risk to one's personal reputation or corporate
• 55:00 - 55:30 entity to understand what that means and quantify the risk to to our nation I appreciate you fellas I am always a call away uh to help advance understanding and push for transparency and I appreciate the work you're doing. Likewise, Nick, nice to see you out there. Nice to see you got a podcast now. I think these long form discussions are important and that NewsNation is is important. Look, I don't know why the government
• 55:30 - 56:00 isn't telling us all it can, but I know it isn't. And I don't think it's about having a Martian in a room. I think it's about what they believe they need to do as a duty to you and what they believe you don't deserve to know. And I don't accept that. So now you are armed with more information and perspective that should be driving your demand, your insistence for more transparency. That's the issue for me. The high priests of journalism and in politics can laugh it
• 56:00 - 56:30 off. You're worried about Martians? No, I'm worried about billions of dollars that go into programs that you feel you don't have to explain and yet you tell me there's nothing to know. That's Thank you very much for subscribing and following here. Thank you for wearing your independence and getting your free agent gear. Thank you for joining my Substack if you don't want the podcast with uh advertisements. And if you want all of the philosophy,
• 56:30 - 57:00 longcoid understanding and uh techniques for you for your own treatment and your own diagnosis and my fitness journey and what works for me and what doesn't. All for just five bucks a month. Cheap, cheap, cheap. Please subscribe and I'll see you at NewsNation 8p and 11p every weekday night. Let's get after it.