Marty Garza… UFO/ET… limited hangout disclosure… real disclosure… beyond the phenomenon… is ET Satanic… complicated.

skeptiko-Join-the-Discussion-3

Marty Garza on Twitter

Click here for forum Discussion

full show on Rumble:

https://rumble.com/v2veyn3-marty-garza-is-et-satanic-596.html

clips on YouTube:

skeptiko-596-marty-garza

[00:00:00] Alex Tsakiris: um, this episode of Skeptiko. A show about making tough decisions.

[00:00:06] Clip: How many lives you prepare to end. If we do nothing, that’s not who we are. Of course it is. You’re doing God’s work. We are preventing the end of days. But you can’t prevent evil by doing evil.

[00:00:18] Alex Tsakiris: And how you need the data in order to make those decisions.

[00:00:22] Marty Garza: their interest was in the mechanism for turning on E S P and turning it off. We know that Kit Green was working on this for the c I A since at least the seventies. We’re just now hearing Gary Nolan , , talking about it, the Nazis were doing it during World War ii. The Russians were doing it before that.

[00:00:41] Alex Tsakiris: We can’t exactly fill in those gaps. , we don’t know if it is the drugs, right? Or we don’t know if the deception on the other side was something we’d call demonic or Satanic or wherever you wanna go and that was leading it. Or we don’t know if there’s any difference between demonic and Satanic and et.

The first clip was from an old movie called the end of days with Arnold Schwarzenegger, who doesn’t appear in that clip. But it’s kind of interesting that he was in that kind of movie. And the second was from today’s guest. Marty Garza.

So you may remember Marty and his outstanding, deep dive into all things. UFO E. T from a couple episodes go. And if not, you’re in for a treat. Guy knows a lot. And we kind of went in a lot of different directions with this one. Very level three Skeptiko style. I hope you enjoy it.

. Welcome to Skeptiko, where we explore controversial science and spirituality. I’m joined today by Marty Garza and for those of you who are Skeptiko fans, Skeptiko followers, uh, you’ll remember that Marty joined me a few episodes ago. We did a very excellent show with the guys from Brothers of Serpent podcast, Russ and Kyle, and they’ve been doing this ongoing series with Marty on UFOs and I was just blown away with what Marty was bringing.

They’ve done like 10 of them at this point and this guy has done fantastic research into all sorts of different aspects. This kind of deep dive, both deep and broad into this topic. I was super impressed. I loved the chance to have an interaction with Marty and Ross and Kyle cuz they have their own unique and very valuable perspective.

But I really, really appreciated the time that I had in talking with Marty. I hope at the end of this you’ll see why I think he really is. A tremendously valuable and important voice in this whole u f O thing. And that might surprise you because maybe you’ve never heard of Marty Garza or then again, maybe you have,

and I say that because Marty has a secret second life or really a first life. I wanna play this a little bit cuz it’s kind of

 

[00:03:20] Alex Tsakiris: But anyways, this guy was inducted into the monster Truck Hall of Fame. You know, that’s a billion dollar industry. Come on, man. Tell us, tell us a little bit about your background, what we saw there, the o overkill thing.

[00:03:34] Marty Garza: Great. Beyond Alex, it’s a, it’s an honor to be on with you. . , as you know, I’m a big follow of your fa of your channel as well, your podcast. So That is, uh, I guess you could look at that as more like a crash reel or crash highlights. But, uh, yeah, that, that’s, uh, an industry I’ve been involved in for, uh, the majority of my life, probably since about 1984.

. , and I was fortunate enough to have been inducted into the Hall of Fame a few years ago. So I guess that’s a, maybe a testament to my contributions.

[00:04:05] Alex Tsakiris: A and you know, the last time we did a, a rehearsal, I’m gonna call it this on Friday, cuz I totally screwed up with the recording, but you mentioned that there is an alien on the side of your truck and I went back and watched a video and I saw that and that your interest in UFO slash et kind of predates the Monster Truck thing, right?

[00:04:29] Marty Garza: Yes, I’ve had an interest in the phenomenon, my, , the, just about my entire life. But as I got a little older, I spent more time delving into it, , more deeply into the, you know, more esoteric aspects of the phenomenon. And it’s quite a contrast with my other life in the monster truck side where that is almost entirely nuts and bolts physical, you know, uh, uh, attributes versus the more uh, uh, I guess intangible aspects that relate

[00:05:03] Alex Tsakiris: to the phenomenon.

I think we’ll talk about, you know, there’s several meeting up points. One is nuts and bolts. Nuts and bolts is really so much a part of the u f O thing. And when you try and get, get away from it, like you and I do, when we talk about consciousness and stuff like that, it sucks you’re right back in because somebody has an . , encounter with that technology or someone’s has a suspicion that we have that as the United States has developed some technology that is appearing as part of the phenomenon.

So there, there is this kind of overlap there, but the other overlap that I, I’m reaching for it a little bit, but I think there’s a connection there. Y you have a passion for this topic and I do too. I know where my passion is. My passion is about big picture questions. Who am I? Why am I here? And I’m just crazy enough to think that I can go out and talk to a bunch of these different people and I can get answers to those kind of big picture questions.

And I, I’m chuckling about it now, but I really am not chuckling about that is how I really think. I think I can get answers to these questions, but underneath those questions are the fears that I have and the fears about what this phenomenon may mean for how I understand myself. And how I understand my, my physical self in this world, in this time space and how I understand . Myself from a like soul perspective.

And one of the cool things I thought about the Monster Truck thing is, like we talked about last time, it is quintessentially American. It is quintessentially I ought to be able to do pretty much what I wanna do as long as I’m really not messing with anyone too much. And I think that, and this might be the reach, I, I think that that’s one of the things that scares us about ET and U F O, is that we might not have a handle on that at a whole different level beyond, uh, the risks or, uh, the commies or any, it’s just like there may fundamentally be something in this whole thing that is gonna seriously change the way we think about who we are.

Can you relate to that at all, or does that not, is that

[00:07:40] Marty Garza: not a fit? No, absolutely. You touched on several points there that are meaningful to me. The, you know, the, the, the monster trucks being, uh, quintessentially American phenomenon, uh, I would say that is true. It is what appealed to me is the ability to.

To express our individuality through a technological means. But like you said, I’m kind of, uh, share the perspective of, uh, this big picture y you know, concept of, of our existence as humans in a, . Environment that I believe is more complex than the average person ever stops to think about.

And as that relates to how we perceive the, the phenomenon I think it’s important to, to consider that for decades , I guess you could say ufology has hungered for academic acceptance, but at the same time, I think that we have to consider the fact that we, we gotta be careful what we wish for, right?

, we need to be careful that by doing so, we’re not inviting a materialist, reductionist perception of something that may be outside of that realm. We, we don’t know that we possess a science that can adequately address. What it is that we’re encountering.

We, we don’t know. It’s broad.

[00:09:15] Alex Tsakiris: It’s very broad. See, now I’m gonna say you kind of laid a lot on the table there that we kind of need to . Deconstruct and w we’re gonna get into this because one of the things I wanna do in this, . , conversation we’re gonna have here, because I think it’s really lacking, is we’re gonna try and pull apart all these different angles.

. . . . .When you say phenomenon, that means a lot to you. And I think some people get it, but some people aren’t clued into what you’re talking about and they’re going, like, Marty, you’re talking about UFOs.

What do you mean phenomena?

[00:09:50] Marty Garza: Well, in our, in our run through discussion I mentioned that I have this, uh, this way of looking at the phenomena that I, I kind of in my head put this, uh, effectively on a, like on a three dimensional graph where I look at all these different what.

I guess people would consider as, uh, disparate phenomena. And I put them all on the same graph and we, we get all these data points that we have in three dimensions, right? We have ’em, uh, time, location, uh, you know, descript descriptive aspects of the phenomenon that, or each individual phenomenon that was encountered and all this.

And as we apply this on a large time scale, we start to see patterns rather than, and, and this is kind of a and a deep, and I’m trying to give a brief overview of this concept, but rather than necessarily debating the minutiae of individual sightings that could, as we know, could be debated forever.

There’s no, there’s no single case that is, you know, uh, completely settled that, okay, this is definitively this or de because no amount of, no amount of information is ever enough to satisfy some people like on both ends, right? Some people see every light in the sky is a, is a U F O and others, even when there are physical trace cases that were tracked on radar and all this other, you know, multiple aspects to support.

This, this encounter, there are still skeptics that will be remain unconvinced regardless of what’s presented to them. So rather than waste a tremendous amount of time debating something that there will never be a solution to, I instead try to plug all of that in as just data. Right? And, and you put all this data in and you look for patterns because I don’t believe that we are going to settle this by looking at necessary contemporary events or, or historical events.

It’s, I think it’s a combination. We gotta take this big picture, uh, approach and look for patterns. I think the pa the key is in the patterns because, and, and I’m gonna, uh, this was something I figured was gonna come up at some point, but I think it’s, it’s somewhat fits right now, is that we, it has become very common lately, and I don’t know if it’s just a fad or whatever, but we keep hearing the allegory of the cave, Plato’s allegory, the cave , the idea is that we are in the cave and we are seeing the shadows cast from a reality that’s outside of our. Known what we can perceive. Right. . The problem with that, I see with that, that I don’t, I don’t know that that’s necessarily the best allegory to apply to what, what we’re experiencing is that I implicit in that, is that what we are experiencing is simply a consequence of what is happening outside of our perception. I don’t think that’s entirely accurate because some of what we’re experiencing appears to be purposeful deceit or manipulation as a result of what’s happening outside of our perception.

[00:13:14] Alex Tsakiris: Marty, let me interject here, because where a lot of people are gonna go with this from where we’re going, they’re gonna go, okay, he’s just talking about the Jacque Vallee stuff. And Jacque Vallee deserves a ton of credit because he was one of the first people to really say, Hey, you know, don’t, these ets wind up sounding a lot like elves and, you know, doesn’t, don’t the stories change over time and aren’t they culturally based?

And then he’s also the deception guide to bring in that. I think you’re saying that. What else are you saying? What are you, where are you taking that? I

[00:13:47] Marty Garza: guess I’ll back up to, to my description of this three dimensional graph. When you start looking at all these data points and we look at those and we start to look for patterns in, in this, we will see that if we, let’s say we ignore what a, you know, I think if, if nothing else, what we’ve should have learned by now is that nothing related to the phenomenon should be taken at face value.

Our there and there are multiple reasons for that, that I’m sure we’re gonna get into as we get further into this conversation. But as this applies to the graph in the patterns, we will see that maybe the appearance of the phenomenon may have, have been different, but the conduct was the scene. And we start seeing this consistency.

There are certain consistencies in these, and we can get into maybe some of, some of what those consistencies might be. But once you start looking at it from that perspective, you start to see that, you know what, maybe what we’re seeing is effectively like a, and I guess in this place to the manipulation side, that they’re, they’re, it’s like let’s say the a a newscast, an evening newscast.

And what you’re seeing on the screen is what somebody’s narrative is that they want you to believe they’re showing you things to lead you to a certain conclusion, but they could also be excluding things that might be counter to that. But regardless, w th this, you’re being shown things that will lead you in a certain direction.

Well, that’s where I think that when we start looking at these patterns, we see that the things that were, were historically considered to be angels, demons, fawns, you know, Bigfoot, those kind of things, they appear different. And that includes, and, and that would include craft, right? Physical craft, but the conduct, the pattern of conduct, what they, how they.

Interacted with the individual is fairly consistent. So are these simply screens that were being shown that are not necessarily representative of what is truly behind it?

[00:16:10] Alex Tsakiris: Okay, so I love this cuz you’re going so level three, you know, so beyond the normal discourse and I almost feel like you’re kind of going to the masterclass thing.

My pushback kind of Skeptiko style would be maybe a lens into how we would process that bigger picture, which I’m totally with you mom. I’m totally with you so much. But I feel like we can’t go there until we start deconstructing the current discourse that we’re having. So let me start with, with this one cuz I really enjoyed the dialogue, the conversations you had , with the Grimer guys, my old friends, Darren and Graham, and you guys were talking about the Eric Weinstein show when he was on Joe Rogan.

So let me play this clip and then we’ll begin to, uh, deconstruct it.

, first of all, one, we may be faking a U F O, uh, situation for reasons that I don’t understand. If we are faking a U F O situation, do you think that there’s technology that’s available to people in the United States that is beyond our current understanding of what’s possible?

90%? No. 90%, no.

So here’s my point on that, and then I want to go right into another clip and then I’ll get your response to it. Eric Weinstein is a super smart guy, mathematician, really understands physics and just a very bright and articulate guy. He, in this case, does not know what he’s talking about. And what’s really troublesome is he doesn’t even seem to know that he may not know what he’s talking about.

Let me play another clip , and you tell me if, you think this guy and the people he’s referring to maybe are in a better position to know what they’re talking about.

on this episode of Skeptiko Alex talks with author and U F O researcher Grant Cameron. We tracked this guy down. He turns out to be Dr. Eric Walker, who was former president of Penn State University for 15 years. He was the chairman of the board of the Institute for Defense Analysis, which is the top military think tank for the United States, uh, military.

He wa he was the co-develop developer of the, the homing torpedo. He ha was friends with Van Navar Bush. He had this incredible, unbelievable background of, uh, you know, military and, uh, connections with presidents and stuff like this. So when we go to him, we we’re interviewing him as UFO researchers. We’re not thinking about the mind.

We couldn’t care less about, you know, we no connection whatsoever. We’re talking to him and we’re trying to find out m the supposed UFO group that runs the whole thing is the, the, uh, MJ 12 we’re asking him questions. So, MJ 12, did you have contact with the aliens? Uh, how did the thing operate? How did you cover up the UFO thing?

And in 1990, in the middle of one of these interviews, he suddenly cuts off. The conversation talking about hardware, about bodies and all this sorts. And he, he suddenly says, how good is your sixth cents? How much do you know about E S P? And the other guy goes, well, you know, I don’t, I don’t really, he’s not of interest to him.

I don’t know what’s going on. And Walker says, then, as, unless you knew about it and how do use it, you will not be taken in. Cuz the question was about who’s running the group? What’s this MJ 12, how many people are on the group? How, how are these people operating? And he says, unless you, uh, uh, know about E S P and how do you use it, you would not be taken in by this overriding group that runs the U F O program.

Only a few know about it. And then in 1993, there’s a related story with Ben Rich. Ben Rich was the guy who ran skunkworks. The, the A, the u2, the SR 71. The stealth fighter. The stealth bomber. They were all developed by what was called Skunkworks. And Ben Rich ran it, and he would get a number of questions about was this UFO technology?

And he’s giving a lecture in 1993, he’s, he’s dying of cancer. He gives a lecture at UCLA to a bunch of engineers, finishes the lecture. He’s walking out. And one of the engineers who’s interested in UFOs runs after him. And he says to Ben Rich, he says, Ben Rich, how are these things propelled? How are UFOs propelled?

And Ben Rich turns around and he says to him, let me ask you a question. How does E s P work? Okay. Who knows what they’re talking about, who completely doesn’t know what they’re talking about, but has millions and millions of views on Spotify and YouTube.

[00:20:42] Marty Garza: Okay. I’m gonna bring up something that we, that I, we discussed, uh, in our previous conversation on, on Brothers of the Serpent. I, uh, regular listeners of the podcast probably understand that I very often will use analogies or allegories to, to make a point.

And I did one, uh, a few months back that are referred to as the wall. And it’s the story, uh, synopsis of the story would be we, somebody wrote a message across the entire Great Wall of China and everybody was, you know, freaking out about this and trying to understand what, what was it all about? What was the meaning and who was behind it.

And each individual village that was at the wall had a completely different interpretation of what it was, what it said, and what it meant. That’s sort of the difference of the two clips that you played. Eric Weinstein is viewing his part of the wall from the perspective of science and materialist science.

Grant Cameron has walked that wall. He didn’t just look at the part in front of his village. He’s walked that wall and he’s got a better perspective of it appears from this part to look this way. But as you take more of that in the picture starts to change and you understand that things aren’t always as they appear.

[00:22:16] Alex Tsakiris: See, I think your analogy is too generous, uh, because we’ve all run into this, uh, Weinstein just doesn’t know. And he’s, he, he lives in this ivory tower where people pat him on the back and he just gets around people and other people tell him how smart he is, how much he knows, and they ask him his opinion on all sorts of stupid stuff that he doesn’t know anything about.

And somehow he gives his opinion. He just doesn’t know what he’s talking about. We encounter this all the time, but we as.

You know, guys who are trying to answer these big picture questions, we gotta be able to see that difference. We gotta be able to see Weinstein as not like somebody who has a unique perspective based on all their scientific knowledge versus somebody just doesn’t know what they’re talking about and it’s kind of just blabbing because they have the clout to get on, , Rogan’s show.

[00:23:11] Marty Garza: All right, let me clarify a couple of points. You, I’m, I’m going to agree with you and disagree in that someone living in a village can read a sentence and d and and interpret that sentence accurately. Doesn’t mean they’re right about what the overall message is, but from their perspective, they’re a hundred percent right.

And it would be hard if you, if were to isolate the, the view of this down to that sentence, they could be a hundred percent accurate. And that is what effectively what I Weinstein is doing from his perspective. He’s convinced be, but you have to factor in that he’s only seen a very small part of this.

Our conversation on Grimer in my, I guess what impressed me about that Rogan episode had nothing to do with UFOs in the sense of the phenomenon. What impressed me was his starting to give the impression that he’s starting to understand. The mechanisms at Clay here, where they’re, again, things are not always as they appear and that there appears to be some type of an agenda going on in the background.

And what that agenda is might be related to human technology advancement in science that was being withheld from even the, the open scientific community, not the U F O phenomenon per se. He knows virtually nothing about the U f O Phenomen other than what he’s heard, which he acknowledges, he’s heard from his friends, Brandon Fugal and people that he’s associated with.

And he goes and he says, look, these people have no reason to lie to me. I believe them when they tell me that they’ve had these odd experiences. That’s the extent of his knowledge really. Yeah. But he has not spent, done the law, the legwork that we have to research this for decades. He’s been into it for a short period of time because he was a, allegedly approached by government agencies or individuals representing themselves, themselves as being members of certain agencies.

And those of us who have been following this for decades know that this is a repetitive pattern. This is nothing new. He’s just the latest version of

[00:25:32] Alex Tsakiris: Yes. So that, that I, I wanna almost carve that out of the, the whole Oppi thing. And it, it, cuz it’s always in play. And as you pointed out In this, in the rehearsal is just because you’re part of an op doesn’t mean , you know, you’re part of an op.

Absolutely. I mean, that’s sometimes the best. So the, we should be curious as to why this guy who doesn’t seem to know anything about either, I would say he doesn’t seem to know anything about the very human technology that may be being developed or anything really about the U F O phenomenon. And that’s another point I’d kind of slightly disagree with you.

You say he’s bringing to the table this knowledge of, well I know this guy, he’s working, working on anti gravitational, you know. Yeah. He knows a little bit. But as the clip I played from Grant Cameron from seven years ago and from interviews he did 30 years ago, there’s all these people where they were in a much better position, much better position to know that stuff and also are out.

Why are they off of Weinstein’s radar and if, and why are they so completely off of his radar and how is he so oblivious that there’s people out there that are off his RA radar, he doesn’t seem to be aware of skunkworks, Lockheed Martin, all the technology that goes into this stuff that is on the borderline of, you know, secret and then all the stuff that’s beyond that.

[00:26:59] Marty Garza: I think it is It’s important to, to note that he is beginning to cave a little where he, he was fu firmly entrenched in the Skeptiko, you know, perspective. I think that he’s opening himself up to the possibility that other things may be, but, but again, I don’t, I don’t place any real importance on it.

To me, his important, the importance was uh, a kind of a separate side interest that I have on because I’m a techie guy. I like technology and I have a content, the contention that we cracked fusion technology as a part of s d i back in the eighties or maybe even early nineties. And I think that more or less was what impressed me about cuz you don’t generally don’t hear discussion of that kind of thing.

And we’ve talked about that on, you know, brothers separate before where there appears to have been censorship of that kind of a discussion in the past. So it’s, it’s kind of strange. But that leads to this disclosure movement thing because I believe that the reason that we’re even having these conversations and, and, and you’re seeing these things in the media is because I believe it is likely that this is a result of potential adversaries, China, Russia maybe nearing or, or on the verge of breaking tracking this, these same technologies.

And some of this is to serve as disinformation, right? It’s giving them plausible deniability. Oh, that thing over your, you know, your restricted airspace. Oh, it wasn’t us, it was, it was clearly a u f O. You know, that kind of, I think that that is definitely a factor. And I guess I should explain also that when, earlier when I mentioned the allegory, the clique, the cave, not, not, uh, considering the fact that some of this is, uh, is deception.

This again is a multilayer thing because the deception isn’t strictly on the part of governments trying to, uh, you know, uh, cover up the existence of something. The phenomenon itself is deceptive. If you do enough research into this, you will see that it is very manipulative and so much so that it is work that’s way into society to where we can’t see the forest from the trees.

We literally live, many people live in the deception that these, that this phenomenon has created. And I know that we’re gonna get into that, cuz that gets into some really touchy areas. But it is, in my opinion, pervasive. But it gets very difficult to segregate these things. You know, I know it’s a, it’s a common, again, when you, you stick to the materialist, you know, aliens in physical craft from another planet type.

Of, uh, uh, in that context, there’s a tendency to say, oh, the government is withholding, uh, information, uh, uh, the existence of these, this phenomenon. Well, bottom line, the phenomenon is the one in charge. If they wanted to make themselves known, they would, it would, it’s the, they hold all the cards. Now, what if, for what reason would governments go along with this?

And what, what in, what is the mutual interest involved here? That’s a completely separate topic. That could be a show of its own, you know, but we have to recognize that there are many factors involved. We can’t break it down into these simple little tidy little pic. This picture that I believe is something that was purposefully manufactured.

It’s a narrative that was created almost from the beginning of the modern U f O era. I believe that a lot of this has been constrained down to a very nightly, you know, segregated. It’s either extraterrestrial or it doesn’t exist. It’s this binary choice, and I don’t believe that’s

[00:31:10] Alex Tsakiris: the case. Well, this is kind of, again, mind blowing level three kind of stuff that I’m right there with you, and I’d love to jump right in there.

And that’s what I usually do. I’m gonna play a different role here because I, I, I think in a way, I. We’re gonna talk ab in, in the process of doing it this way, we’re going to show, uh, another aspect of the multi-layered, impossible to fathom always a contradiction and a deception kind of, uh, thing by doing it.

And I think we already started down that path. And that is to say, you know, here’s this guy Eric Weinstein. When you start pulling it apart, it doesn’t, it just doesn’t make sense. And for me, it doesn’t make sense cuz he doesn’t have the knowledge that we would, that these other people clearly have. And yet he’s the one who’s being ordained to come out and talk.

And this is, I think, really important cause this is what drives you. And I, I think, is that this shapes people’s opinion in a way that is kind of drives us crazy, right? Because you or I will talk to somebody and they’ll go, oh man, did you see that? Oh, I’m blown away. You know, he told me this. And then you wanna go, okay, sit down.

Do you have like three hours? Let me tell you how that whole thing fits into

[00:32:32] Marty Garza: this other thing. Let me interject right there real quick. I may, and this is, this is pulling from my other life back into this. When you’re in the entertainment industry, which is effectively what the monster truck industry is, you, you quickly learn that it isn’t about talent.

There are many very talented people that no one ever heard of. It’s. It’s all, especially nowadays, it’s all about who’s got the, who’s got how many, you know, the most followers on Twitter or, or it, it’s not about how much knowledge does he have? How, you know, how authoritatively can he speak about this?

It’s about his public persona. He’s, he’s well known, so he’s, he’s gonna get the attention. The shiny object always gets the attention. Meanwhile, the guys that have their head down and just focus on getting to the bottom of this, they’re, they’re very seldom are they gonna be the ones with the spotlight placed on them.

[00:33:35] Alex Tsakiris: Okay? Uh, accept that as, as true, you know, and we can all kind of nod our head and go along with that. What I wanna point out, and that, that’s why you’re on this show right now is because what I resonate with is Marta Garza is looking for the truth. He’s not looking to build followers about his U F O stuff.

You would go about it in a different way. You would express yourself in a different way. And I, I think there’s enough people like you and I who are like, they’re not beholding to anyone. They don’t really have an agenda other than to figure this stuff out. And I won’t even, I was about to say seek the truth, but it’s not like truth seeking is a deeper spiritual thing.

This is just like sorting through the data. And that’s what I think we’re doing. And it, it, at the end goal for me is to be able to approach the topics that you were talking about because we might have a slight difference of opinion on to what extent ET is in control, to what extent, you know, it’s all about deception or it’s an op or, but those are the level three conversations that we can only get to if we kind of clean the deck a little bit.

So we clean the deck with Eric Weinstein a little bit and here’s the next bit of deck cleaning that I do. And actually it goes back cuz we’re gonna have to pick on Eric Weinstein a little bit more because you mentioned a really important thing to me. This is like the heart and soul of Skeptiko. You talked about, . , materialist science and.

You and I at this point are so far past that, like you talk about the phenomenon just casually, you’re like, of course it extends beyond, you know, this nuts and bolts, human consciousness, voice inside your head kind of thing. And what people don’t realize is that is not the case for Eric Weinstein. These guys who are materialist science have made the ultimate blunder about how they think the world exists.

They think the world exists inside your head. And there can be no such thing as telepathy with a alien or screen memory. I mean, they’re on board with it in a very limited way if it was like technological in some way. But beyond that, they can’t get there. So let me play another clip, another Skeptiko clip from Dean Raden.

And this one actually will pick on somebody different. We’ll pick on Michael Sheer, who, there’s another guy who’s been on Rogan, like a gajillion times, . , for all the wrong reasons. But let me play, let me play this club.

.

[00:36:23] Alex Tsakiris: . . I have an interview coming up with the fantastic Dean Raden, who I can assure you a hundred years from now, students will be studying his work . Because Dr. Dean Raden experimentally has destroyed, crushed, falsified, to put it in scientific terms, the longstanding dominant soulless paradigm that we are biological robots in a meaningless universe.

And if you think I’m laying it down a little too hard there, give a listen to none other than Joe Rogan, yaking it up with our old Frey Michael Shermer. But if you think about it from a simple perspective, the entire universe is in your brain. And when you cease to exist, the universe ceases to exist. It’s just sort of true by definition. Now he goes a little bit further and says, you know, that consciousness is everything and that we bring into existence material stuff by thinking about or observing it or

whatever.

And here’s some quantum physics experiments that are

really spooky, and it’s like, okay, time out. You know, quantum physics is weird and spooky consciousness is weird and spooky. That doesn’t mean they’re connected. So you see it now, right? You see that schirmer’s just wrong or put it in another way. His claims have been falsified experimentally by none other than the work of today’s guest, Dr.

Dean Raden. The spooky weird things with quantum physics are related to consciousness, and we can show it experimentally. Here’s a clip from the interview coming up with Dean. Well, so we’re trying to connect it to quantum mechanics, and so we’ve done that in

[00:37:54] Marty Garza: two ways. Uh, the first way is using a double slid optical

[00:37:57] Alex Tsakiris: system to see if you can gain which path information, which is,

[00:38:02] Marty Garza: uh, the, the

[00:38:03] Alex Tsakiris: which of the two slits of photon goes through.

And so we’ve, we’ve now done about two dozen such experiments, and, uh, some of them work then some of them don’t work. But if you do a meta-analysis across the board, it looks like there’s pretty good evidence that something is going on, that the, the consciousness is involved in some way in the quantum process.

I also want to add in one other quantum oriented experiment that we more recently published, which involve the use of entangle

[00:38:31] Marty Garza: photons as the target

[00:38:33] Alex Tsakiris: of a mind matter interaction. Because he wanted to look at non-local mind interacting with non-local matter, and did it do anything? Part of the experiment was looking at could you increase the strength of entanglement and then intentionally decrease the strength of entanglement?

The short answer is, yeah, we were able to modulate it.

I . So that might be slightly obtuse to those who haven’t kind of been around and do this. I know you get it, but trust me or don’t trust me, that completely violates Eric Weinstein’s view of the world and science.

He’s just wrong. Materialism has been falsified by those experiments that he mentioned. What Michael Shermer said in that quote from Joe Rogan is completely contradicted, experimentally by what Dean Raden says. So back to our conversation that you and I are having, Marty, one reason we shouldn’t trust Eric Weinstein is because he doesn’t seem to know that there’s a weird desk at Lockheed Martin that sees all sorts of stuff that he has no, uh, uh, imagination for.

But the second reason we shouldn’t trust him or Neil deGrasse Tyson or Michael Shermer, not trust them as as liars, but trust them as, as reliable in this conversation that we’re having is they don’t seem to understand that. Consciousness is always at play. And that consciousness is a fundamental aspect to the phenomenon.

As you keep saying, ET is telepathic. We don’t know how, we don’t know why, but ET is telepathic. . Et seems to have the ability to deceive us at a level of screen memory or time shifting or all this other stuff that if you are not open to what I just played there, you are going to be shut down to that and you won’t even be able to bring it into your point of reference cuz it violates everything that all the guys at your club say.

The club being, you know, the conferences that you go to, the meetings you have of the department, all that stuff. It’s just, it can’t possibly be in your wheelhouse. . .

[00:40:43] Marty Garza: Well, I mean there’s a, there was a lot there, right?

But I’ll, I’ll start with this. Part of it, just like Eric Weinstein is acknowledging now that there are, there is public science and black science, black project science, instead of going by what the talking heads say in public. Instead, I would suggest we look at the record of what is it that the government has been investing in for decades.

As early as the 1952, and I know you’ve talked, had, you’ve had discussions about it, Andre Pahar was already working on the mechanisms to turn on and off this communication, this nonverbal communication, this interaction, I’m trying not to give too much information, it’s something that’s still in, is developing.

I’ve got a series that, that, uh, Russ and Kyle are, pres and I are presenting right now that I call the Spookiest story. Never told and we have only done one part, but I’ve got three, at least three more parts coming. And it, and it’s sort of, without giving too much away, talks about how governments came about discovering that there was this non-verbal, maybe non-human intelligent communications.

Okay,

[00:42:14] Alex Tsakiris: , hold on. , you’re not gonna tell the story. I’m gonna tell the story and then that’s gonna force you to pull into it. Cause PHA is like, he’s a genius. He’s at, he’s a PhD at Northwestern, which is known to be kind of cia, a incubation center. He does all these various things, but we’ll cut to the chase.

He starts having these seances with the nine. And the nine are this inner galactic, if you will, this is right outta Star Wars group. That’s et essentially, and it pulls ’em in a mil million different ways. It’s hard to know what part of that is, uh, a deception on that other part and this and that. But it becomes, he is so important to the military at this point.

He is totally plugged in at the highest levels and they’re being told to go do this, but he then he always kind of ventures off and does his own thing. So I I, I, I had to set the table cuz I want you to take over, but this is like, if anyone goes and reads this history, this is like in play. This is like more

[00:43:17] Marty Garza: than in play.

Okay. And without giving a lot of detail, cuz in the series, uh, we go into like the minutiae of how these things came about because I think a lot of times people have heard certain stories, but they have no context. They can’t, they don’t understand how that bit of data fits in with the big picture and, and how this progressed over decades.

But just to give an example of how important this is, as you mentioned, pahar was already doing this. He was in, uh, you know, the, the part about the communication with a nine and everything, there’s a lot of detail there. There’s a lot to discuss. But the most important thing to recognize is that, and this is part of the.

His presentations to the Pentagon and why, how he was able to get them to fund this research was, their interest was in the mechanism for turning on E S P and turning it off. And how that relates to what we see going on today is now you have Gary Nolan talking about schizophrenics, hearing voices and what mechanism might be at play to that.

Schizophrenia is the inability to turn it off and how so in words, they’re giving clues. We know that Kit Green was working on this for the c I A since at least the seventies. We’re just now hearing Gary Nolan hear it, you know, talking about it, you know, within the last year or so. But the reality is this is research.

The government has been conducting since at least the fifties. That’s the US government back up. The Nazis were doing it during World War ii. The Russians were doing it before that. And in part one I explained how, how this came about, how, how it transitioned from being an interest of the, of the Soviets.

It got adopted by the Nazis. Then after the other parts are gonna get into how the US picked up the ball. When we, through Operation Paper clip, we started to learn what they knew about this. What did the Russians learn about this and how did that go forward? There’s a huge story that’s never been adequately told.

I know Annie Jacobson has talked a good bit about it, but she’s, she’s just kind of hitting the surface of much more esoteric things that were

[00:45:46] Alex Tsakiris: going on. Right. The, the only problem with that, and that is like another show both for, for you guys to have, cuz you’re gonna plow all that ground in great depth and you do a great, great job of it.

The, the pull up for me is that we can’t exactly fill in those gaps. And, and in a way PO is like the, the perfect figure for this because he kind of goes crazy in a way. And part of it is because he starts doing too much drugs, you know, because the drugs are tapping into these extended realms and then he’s doing more and more and that kind of leads him the wrong way.

And then also what we don’t know that even that is like, we don’t know if it is the drugs, right? Or we don’t know if the deception on the other side was not really ET, but was something we’d call demonic or Satanic or wherever you wanna go and that was leading it. Or we don’t know if there’s any difference between demonic and Satanic and et.

So that’s where I think you and I would have this kind of level three discussion. But I just don’t think most people can, can get there without a huge, huge, uh, background that it, it, it needs to be in some ways broader than where you’re trying to go with the MK Ultra thing because , what I always thought was a great discovery about U F O researcher Grant Cameron is when he talks about the Wilbert Smith memo. People are in U F O know what it is, but it’s basically he writes this memo, he says, Bro, it’s going on.

It is the most top secret thing . And there’s a mental phenomenon associated with it, which is the key word. I think that that is fundamental to their interest in PHA Rich, their interest in MK Ultra, their interest in Project Stargate and remote viewing.

. , it’s at some level that isn’t exposed to us. Cuz this is how the military does things in secrets things. No one, it’s compartmentalized, so no one knows that that is the agenda, but they kind of are stumbling through this and they know that something’s up with ET and the mental aspect of it. So you got all this stuff popping up over here and that’s part of the reason, and the reason I’m, I don’t think it’s about like literally turning it on and off.

That would be like 0.1 out of a hundred things that you’d wanna know about this extended consciousness realm and how it fits with et.

[00:48:21] Marty Garza: Yeah, I think that that, that, that’s a good segue to again, to what we see going on today how this, this current round of what we talk about, you know, disclosure. Summing from the, you know, stemming from the December 17, uh, New York Times, uh, 2017 New York Times article, uh, what Glowing Auras and Black Muddy by Leslie Keenan and Ralph Bluementhal people have that are, are probably not aware.

I, I tend to say forgotten because I’m maybe showing my age there a little, but they have, are unaware that this is a yet again, simply a repetitive pattern. And going back to the 19, uh, what, 1949? There was, uh, there were articles in the Saturday Evening Post written by Sidney Charlotte. Then we had in 1951 we had the live article by Bob.

Gina have We Visitor From Space. Uh, we had Donald Kehoe doing his, his articles for True Magazine. And all of these effectively were saying the government is withholding evidence of extraterrestrials. But then we come to find out through, through Edward Rupel, the head of Project Blue Book in his book, that all of these articles were inspired by the military.

The department is of defense, selected the reporters, they wanted to convey these messages. Why? Why would they purposely be interjecting the idea that they’re hiding something into the public consciousness? And I think as a, the component, the important part of that was they were introducing this, again, binary choice of either that doesn’t exist or it’s extraterrestrials involved.

They have indoctrinated us into viewing this phenomenon as objects in the sky that are coming from a distant place. Not that this is something that may reside within our realm all around us, and it interacts with us directly. It’s, and, or it’s, it’s two completely different things when they were aware of this from the very beginning, almost from the very beginning.

[00:51:03] Alex Tsakiris: Are you against the idea that there are objects from other planets that are flying here and have intelligent beings inside of their craft? Are, are you willing to entertain the idea that that is. An aspect of this phenomenon.

And it’s real in the sense that in the same way we think stealth bombers are real. That that’s real.

[00:51:27] Marty Garza: Okay. That’s, that, that’s a rather complex question, or should I say, requires a rather complex explanation? Uh, and I’ll preface it by saying even the most unlikely explanation has as much validity as any other in our, it could be the most unlikely thing that could be behind this.

And it doesn’t mean it’s not that. Right. But I personally believe, just looking at this analytically, I, I, I try to consider all the options, as many options as I’m aware of. Right. And I think it’s unlikely that physical extraterrestrial beings are traveling as in moving from one place to another here in, in craft.

I think, and, and the reason I say I get there’s, this is a really complicated explanation, but I think first we have to understand it as human beings, as homo sapiens, we have this tendency to view intelligence on a, on a scale. Let’s call this a one to 10 scale. And we view ourselves like we’re so smart.

You know, we’re an eight on this one to 10 scale, and these extraterrestrials have been around a lot longer than us. So they’re, they’re probably a 10, you know, but, but we can get there. They’re what they know we’re capable of understanding. We just haven’t quite gotten there yet. When the reality is we could, uh, following that same scale, we could be an eight and they could be a billion.

In other words, they could be so far more advanced that we’re incapable of even perceiving them. We couldn’t, in words, we may live within a reality that is a MEChA, a piece of a much grander mechanism that we’re incapable of comprehending. Right. So following on that, I think that only the most basic of e extraterrestrial intelligences would be traveling in the me by means of mechanical devices, the way we as human beings travel by mechanical devices.

I believe that it is based on the evidence in other, other types of evidence, it’s suggestive. As Ben Rich said, if you’re using e s p, if we know that from the NDEs and remote viewing everything that we are capable of, separating our consciousness from our physical body, that is, is very possible that that form of technology, if you want or ability is.

More likely to be a means of exploring vast distances instantaneously or anything, rather than through mechanical means the way we tend to view travel. I don’t know if that’s, I know that’s a really complicated explanation,

[00:54:29] Alex Tsakiris: but it’s complicated. I just think it’s, it’s, I’m gonna push you. I think it’s inadequate. If we wanna go down the simulation hypothesis theory, we can do that. You know, we’re living in a simulation. Everything’s a simulation. , but there’s no there there in terms of having any kind of discussion. I think the same is true in terms of like if the stealth bomber, which was hidden from us and now isn’t hidden from us and we think we know it and we can point to it when it’s on the field at the air show and say that it does those things.

, If we’re saying that’s the same as this guy, my new favorite guy, , Gary Hazleton and he’s a retired detective constable is what they call it in written. And he started this thing called the police reporting u f o sightings. And then he just published this book that is pretty incredible book about Reynolds Shrum fort right.

And he did these extensive interviews I was telling you about, you know, he’s over there in Britain. He’s calling over talking to these Army guys who were on the base in 1980 when Reynolds Shrum happened. And they’re telling him like all this new information that completely confirms all the old information we know about Ren ship is that it happened and there was a craft and it cut through the trees and you can see where the trees.

We’re cut in half and you can see the marks, uh, the trace marks on the end. And then you, you got another guy who says, yeah, a bunch of people simultaneously reported that they flew over the nuclear weapons that were secretly there that no one knew about. And they deactivated him, and then they reactivated him.

And it totally confirms with what Robert Hastings reported on for 40 years of interactions we’ve had with ET that’s done this. So my point is, I don’t know how you thread that, Marty, and maybe you’ll tell me, I don’t know how you say, okay, well that’s real, but then somehow, in some way it’s not real unless you wanna go full bore simulation.

Nothing can be really counted on. We don’t even know if we’re here or if we exist or if it’s all a time slip or all

[00:56:44] Marty Garza: the rest of that. No, no, I’m not, I’m not talking about simulation theory in words. We have to think big. Like what are, what capabilities could, could we, could be achieved. Like in words, the at one time, the idea of being able to send a facts to the other side of the world would’ve been science fiction.

The idea that you could. Send a file that could be printed out in three-dimensional, on a three-dimensional printer on the other side of the planet would be far outside the realm of reality not that long ago. So let me give some examples. I absolutely, the Rendlesham forest craft was real. What it was exactly, we don’t know, but that it was a physical reality.

I would, I would not, I would not argue against that. In other words, burrows and those involved, they physically touched it. It was there. What it was could be debated. But there are many interesting aspects to that. The, the, uh, the binary code thing that was supposedly transmitted, that’s part of this consciousness thing, right?

But to give an example of how just because you’re seeing a physical triangular craft doesn’t necessarily mean that it traveled here from another planet in 1211. And, uh, Gervais of Tilbury tells the story and then we, this is in wonders, in valleys, wonders in the sky. Uh, a ship a a cloud ship, uh, has its anchor lodged in, in stones, and a full of people ran out and saw, uh, an entity come down the rope trying to dislodge the anchor.

And he’s captured. And he subsequently died and was given a Christian burial. Then in 1250 in, in Ireland, another cloud ship has an anchor that hooks on an arch of a church and a beam comes down the rope and cuts it, and they keep the anchor and the anchor is on display to commemorate the event in the church.

There, there was one in Texas, there was one in London, England. These things, you know, by the records have happened. So if we’re going to take the rend shim craft as a literal triangular craft from an extra, uh, uh, uh, extraterrestrial planet somewhere in the universe, are we suggesting also that these were sailing ships with masks and, and you know, all this coming here and using anchors and everything, we’re taking it at face value that way.

And I don’t think we should be taking it at face value. The, the phenomen is far stranger than that when we really start getting into it.

[00:59:49] Alex Tsakiris: , I’m with you right up to the end then you say it’s far stranger than, well, we don’t, we don’t know that because we don’t know what the problem with saying the phenomenon.

And, and being inclusive of a lot of different things. We don’t know the things that constitute the things we’re talking about. So, you know, it could be, and I know you’re not against this, this is more a, a methodology. What we’re exploring is the methodology for how to sift through this stuff. And I would suggest that, UFOs from another C planet inhabited by, . , intelligent operators of those craft.

Should be on the table because it’s kind of a parsimony thing. It’s kind of an Occam’s razor thing. Rens, Fromm Forest does not fit with what you’re saying cuz it’s 1980. We did not have advanced technology. As I, you know, you wrote the definitive book on Monster trucks and on Monster Truck Technology. We should point out, and you get all this praise for it because it’s like the definitive book. If you wanna go back and understand, . , how they made this modification so it could do this trick and then how it made this modification and who came up with that?

You trace that back. . , that is a direct parallel with the U f O thing, right? We cannot create that trail back from 1980 and show how that technology could possibly be.

[01:01:17] Marty Garza: Okay. But again, you have to, to view not just a certain section of the wall, we gotta start also considering similar, similar events that might be interpreted different ways.

Like there are many instances where we have a. Multiple witnesses to an event who each described what they observed in radically different ways. And they’re, and we’re not suggesting that these are not actually physically there. A lot of times these things were tracked on radar or anything, but there could be more than one thing going on there in terms of our ability to perceive what is actually being represented there, as well as active manipulation of our perception to where we perceive it in a certain way.

Each person kind of perceives it within their realm of understanding. Possibly.

[01:02:14] Alex Tsakiris: Do we have the opposite in this case?

[01:02:16] Marty Garza: No. No. Every guy goes

[01:02:18] Alex Tsakiris: and talks to, says, the says it’s the same.

[01:02:21] Marty Garza: Right, but the Noelle, no, not exactly. There are some discrepancies between what some people describe and others the boroughs, uh, and Penton who actually were at the craft to more or less agree on what, what they saw.

And, but what, and their experiences were a little bit different. They had, uh, burrows had physical effects and her, the craft was there. And the, and I’m not arguing that this was not necessarily human tech, in other words. And, and we discussed this the other day, like, and cuz again, I, I plugged this into like a historical framework and I go, okay, in 1976 we had the teran, Iran, u f O, that.

Sat over the city jets were, were, were dispatched to intercept the thing, toyed with them, it locked their weapons in words, it was impervious to attack it, sat there and mocked them. Uh, two years, la or three years later, we have the, the Iran, Iran Hostage crisis, and we can’t do anything about, we send Operation Eagle Claw in 1990 and it fails.

So we resort to Wiley Coyote technology and strapped rockets to a C one 30 with a credible operation, credible sport. In other words, it, it clearly, it costs Carter his, his, uh, you know, reelection chances. So clearly if we had the technology, we knew where they were, right? Even the remote viewers played a role in this, and we knew where the, where the, uh, hostages were being held, but we didn’t have the ability to get ’em out, right?

We didn’t have, have the technology to do it. So I think that that is a reasonable, again, parsimonious way to look at this and go, it seems unlikely that we had the technology that’s being displayed by craft, such as what we see in Ran Resh. But again, just because it’s a physical craft, even, let’s, let’s agree that it’s a triangular physical craft on, on tripod legs that lands and leaves physical trace cases, uh, trace, uh, evidence on the ground.

In other words, I, I don’t think you’re quite understanding when I say that it doesn’t have to necessarily travel here from a pla another planet. Yeah. For it to be a physical representation here, because there are many ways this could be achieved. In other words, theoretically we may, we can conceive of the ability to, through various means, fabricate, like, manipulate.

It’s almost like alchemical, an alchemical process to fabricate a physical object from e from the ether in a, in a remote location to where we don’t actually have to travel there. We can send effectively like the blueprints to a craft, to a physical place. We don’t, in words, instantaneously rather than sending, because we sometimes the idea of space travel is oversimplified.

Like we think that, oh, if we, if we discover the ability to create anti-gravity or we build more powerful rockets, all that’s gonna automatically grant us the ability to explore the universe. We’re like, no, it’s not. That’s only like the first minute step in that we still have to solve communication problems, control problems, navigational problems.

How do you not hit the hit the go button and not instantaneously vaporize when you run into the next asteroid or plant in words? There’s all sorts of problems. We greatly oversimplify that. It seems to me that by using other means of exploring the universe, using. Next level ideas, not, not just a evolution of our, what we already know, just revolutionary ideas.

Something far more advanced than what we’re capable of at this point. Well not, and that’s not count. Also, the, the other ability is put potential is that this is coming from outside of our three-dimensional or you know, four-dimensional if you include time, space, that this might be something that is we are sharing an environment with, and it, it has, may have the ability to reach into our reality, our effectively flattened, create a flattened out object from its perspective that can be in, introduced into our three dimensional realm and out.

In other words, there are so many other ways that this could be achieved. We can’t just say, oh, it’s, it’s a triangular craft. It must have come from another planet. It’s, I think it’s a little bit more complicated. I think we’ve been in trained to think that way. Uh,

[01:07:00] Alex Tsakiris: simulation hypothesis. Why are you throwing that out?

People? No,

[01:07:03] Marty Garza: that’s not, that’s not, well wait.

[01:07:05] Alex Tsakiris: See, that’s my point. I just caught you right there. Right? It’s like, no, what we’re, what we’re trying to do, and, and this is the methodology that I think we’re trying to reveal is, or, or we’re trying to exercise between the two of us, is how you would go about that.

And I’m pushing back because I’m totally on board with your initial, uh, what you’ve painted in our head of the 3D diagram where you’re plotting all the things you know, which is kind of like a Jacque vala kind of thing, which I won’t play another clip, but listen, what Jacque Vala is saying nowadays about government.

Uh, okay, I can’t resist Plane.

[01:07:44] Clip: I’m very hopeful. I think it’s a new phase. I’m very grateful to be here to see it, and, you know, to be in reasonably good health to, uh, continue my work and hopefully to exchange data with, uh, you know, if called upon with, uh, people who are running those, those new projects. And, uh, as you know, I’ve been working with them all along and, uh, we know each other and so on.

But the government has its own structure and its own need to do things in a certain way, especially when you’re talking about the Pentagon. So I’m, it’s, it’s a third phase, you know, I roughly. You know, it’s not formal, but I roughly organized the history into three major phases. You know, from 1945 to the convent report

we in, in

67, 68, uh, we have, uh, mainly the Air Force taking an interest in this.

The Air Force was, uh, charged with the responsibility to follow the reports to gather them, but they took reports from the public as well as reports from their own pilots of other branches of the government like

the Navy.

[01:09:17] Alex Tsakiris: Thanks for hanging with me. I’m gonna trim that down a little bit, but like, we gotta have this discussion. Marty, like, only you and I can have this discussion what he’s saying. Completely contradicts where you had taken him with the phenomenon. And you’re right, he’s wrong. He’s, I don’t know what his game is.

I don’t know why he’s saying, you know, three phases. Condo report. The condo report need, we be remembered that the . , condo report says disinformation campaign. It came out and said, Hey, we got it all covered. Guys, there’s nothing here to look at. And this goes back to the very first thing we had with Weinstein.

Not saying, . , it’s this or it’s that. Or like you said, you know, we’d have to compare it with elves and ships that leave anchors. He No, no. He is saying no. They got it completely wrapped up. The content report does. They got the reports from the Navy guys and the Air Force guys, and this is what it is.

That is a direct contradiction to everything Jacques Vallee has always been about. He’s now saying, trust the government, trust the government. They’ll tell us what we need to know when we need to know it. This is not your 3D diagram that you were talking about, that he was talking about that says there’s a lot of weird stuff that we have to consider.

And some of it might fall into this category and some of it might look like what Alex is talking about with these. UFOs that fly in from other stars that have been identified by ancient people for as long as we could. And they said they came from that star system. And by the way, it’s a twin star system and no one knows it’s a twin star system until a hundred years later.

And we get the telescope to say it to me. All that’s evidence that some of that, some of these cases are UFOs coming from other planets and doing all that stuff. But we’re the, the next level conversation I have with you is, I’m totally down with what you’re saying too, that is mixed up with interdimensional, . , . , demonic, uh, all these other things that have to be sorted out again in this diagram that you’re drawing for us.

This, where you’re charting it both on time and complexity and all the other skills you have, but that’s for the average person to listen to Jacques Vala. They’re not hearing what I’m hearing. And I don’t know if you’re hearing it, are you hearing what I’m hearing? I mean,

[01:11:36] Marty Garza: I, I, I’ve listened to a lot of his interviews and I have come to recognize that there are almost like two jock ballets.

his persona in his books is completely different than in interviews. He is always much more cautious and much more toting the party line. The, uh, Sri party line. When he’s doing interviews, he’s very, , for example, in, in that particular interview with Jeffrey Miser, he goes into some detail or, or into great lengths discussing, uh, a document that he discovered in j Allen Hynek files.

But he doesn’t really tell you what the document actually said. He’s saying, I had concerns about this, but he doesn’t ever say what his concerns were or the providence of that document. And I can tell you what it was. It was the pentacle memo written by Howard Cross, who was the head of the Shape Memory Metal Program at Bethel Memorial Institute, where allegedly the debris from Roswell ended up.

And through that, the, uh, was the development of shaped memory metal, known as Night, night Mill. Elroy Center was a scientist, a metal gist that worked for under her, uh, under cross at Bethel, who before dying. Claimed that he worked on a reverse engineering program at Patel, reverse engineering material from

[01:13:31] Alex Tsakiris: Thewell crash.

Buddy, how does this not contradict what you were just saying about Randall? Again,

[01:13:36] Marty Garza: it, it can be physical material. I’m not arguing that it’s physical material. It is physical material, tangible, physical material. But how it enters into our realm is, or, or where it originates from, is where there may be some, it may not be cut as cut and dry as flying from one place maybe.

But can’t we put

[01:13:58] Alex Tsakiris: that, can’t we put that aside for a second? Oh, yeah.

[01:14:01] Marty Garza: And, and I mean, there, there are many, that’s why I say this is so complex to, to try to just narrow it down to something really simple. I don’t think it’s, and words like, for example, part part of that pinnacle memo was the, the what, what concerned, uh, valet about it was that this was a letter written to, to try to stop the Robertson panel from occurring.

He didn’t want the, the Robertson panel to meet the cia. A for those that don’t know, a panel that the CIA convened in 1953, uh, 52 that was looking into the UFO U F O phenomenon. They weren’t looking into it. I mean, what were

[01:14:43] Alex Tsakiris: they really doing?

[01:14:44] Marty Garza: Well, they were establishing policies to discredit witnesses and infiltrate all the U f O organizations.

All right? That’s what resulted from it. But the reason that, that, that cross was trying to stop this was because he was in the midst of their own project stork, their own investigation, and they hadn’t reached any conclusions yet. We didn’t come to find this out for a very long time afterwards, but they’re the ones who prepared sp book blue Book special report number 14, where 23% of the sightings were unexplainable.

And that’s a whole other conversation that ties into the, the, the current congressional hearing stuff of how that was really a complete rehash of that, you know? But we also come to find out that there were programs during World War II that were already researching the Foo Fighter phenomenon, or there, this has been, this, there’s a long, dark unknown history to this, that, you know, the idea that the U f o Phenomen started in 2004 with the Nimitz case is ridiculous.

And that’s this narrative that we’re being entrained to, to fall for. And, and to me it’s, it’s, it’s, I, I believe that it could be a red herring. They’re trying to get us all completely vested in the Nimitz Tic-tac thing to then all of a sudden pull a rug out from under us and say, okay, it really is.

Lockheed developed a secret technology that we’ve been withholding, and there was no such thing as UFOs. You know what I mean? That’s, that’s what entirety happen.

[01:16:14] Alex Tsakiris: Marty, you’re all over the board, man. I’ve gotta try and pull, pull you in because you are not all over the board. You are just, we’re having this conversation that is this level three conversation and it drives people nuts.

And I want it to kind of, uh, not well, it is, but like, here’s the thing that I’m trying to, uh, pull out. And I, I love this because as I offered up at the beginning, you know, think about it. Who else is gonna have this kind of conversation with you? Who’s gonna be able to pull in all those different things?

I just don’t see it. And what I’m kind of pointing out with these clips, which I think is, I, I hope people appreciate that. It’s like you can’t get it from Jacque Vallee. I mean, you should be able to, he’s a freaking genius and he’s been in this thing forever and he knows 10 times more than you and I have forgotten.

Right. But he ain’t gonna give it to you straight.

[01:17:06] Marty Garza: He can’t read it, read his books and you’ll get more info. Much better. Well, maybe you will or

[01:17:12] Alex Tsakiris: maybe you won’t. I don’t know about you, but I don’t like people when you say, read my book, but when you talk to me, I say something else and it, I don’t be, I’m not that way.

You’re not that way. You don’t, I don’t find, you know, uh, other things that you’ve written that, you know, I can’t pin you down and say, how come this doesn’t match this? And, and, and you give me a straight answer. So, and that’s what I’m saying, like that’s when we started off this thing with, . , Joe Rogan, and we didn’t even get in the Joe Rogan, the Bob Lazar thing.

It’s like, you know, why are you duped? Why are you so easily duped? Why was everyone so easily duped? All of this is a part of this process of finding out who we can trust and why we can trust him. And that’s why I do come back to kind of the, the Rendlesham Forest thing. I think you’re too quick to go this level three thing where it’s like, Hey, maybe all this material is manifesting in a way that is beyond what we understand, because fundamentally, consciousness is fundamental and all material comes out of that.

Hey, great. But as the conversation we’re having over Zoom into this electromagnetic field that we’re in, that would be so far out of it that don’t, we need to kind of put some barriers down and say, okay, all that’s possible. We don’t know. And the ship with the anchor may be possible, and the demonic stuff definitely may possible, but let’s narrow our focus here and say, this seems to be going on.

Because one of my frustrations, and it’s a frustration, I, I, I have with Brothers of the Serpent, but it’s really not, uh, Russ and Kyle. It’s, but it’s, but it’s like, uh, there’s a ton of people that are really, really quick to jump into the anything but a U F O kind of thing. Anything but that triangular shaped craft that crashed through those.

Crashed for the forest, landed there, had a physical experience, shined lights three days in a row, went over the nuclear things, anything, but that has to be at play because it doesn’t fit into my thing. It’s like, uh, you know, when you hear, uh, Randall Carlson, right? , again, genius love the guy, love, . , what he brings to the table.

But when he gets to U F O, he is like, nah, it’s not, it’s not what you think. It’s not what you think. Well, if it’s not what you think, that’s fine, but tell me what the fuck was in Rendlesham Forest, because . What you are not thinking, your explanation for what it’s not does not fit

.

[01:19:39] Alex Tsakiris: . , the observed thing that happened there.

[01:19:43] Marty Garza: Well, that sort of illustrates my hesitance to rely too much on like contemporary. And I guess it’s hard to say that eighties is contemporary for most people, but for me, sort of. But when we get into the, the more contemporary site, like definitely by the time we get into the tic tac stuff is that it is, we don’t have a clear picture of the technological Background to what we might be seeing.

In other words, technology tends to be, at least military technology tends to be 20 to 30 years in advance of public know awareness. But when we go back to the eighties, we have a decent idea of the things that were being worked on in the sixties and seventies, but maybe not completely, because for example, I mean the SR 71 being, you know, still to this day still touted as being the fastest air, you know, aircraft ever built.

And we know that thing was built with slide rules. We don’t really know what they were working on in the seventies. And, you know, that thing was, was, uh, retired in the, in the nineties. And we, you know, there’s no telling, there’s no telling what the true level of state-of-the-art is today,

[01:20:58] Alex Tsakiris: but if you gotta take a stab at it, no.

That, that Rendlesham Forest thing was not us and

[01:21:03] Marty Garza: it wasn’t the Russians. Again, I, uh, it’s unlikely because of, again, other, other cases that we see, well, why wasn’t this technology used here? And I, and I’m very much, uh, aware of the silver bullet theory where we have certain technologies that we hold in our back pocket for when we need ’em, but we don’t use ’em unless it’s absolutely, I think I would say that the around hostage crisis was a pretty significant case incident where we were gonna use every tool in our disposal.

At our disposal to, to try to rescue those people. So if we had the ability to go in there with anti-gravity craft or whatever to extract those people, I think we would’ve used it most likely. So again, I don’t believe that the render object was he, uh, manmade. I don’t believe that. But, but there are other reasons also that add to why I don’t believe that.

Are you, are you familiar with and I, I don’t know a whole lot about it. I, I’ve read parts of the book, but the information transmission that, uh, that Jim Pennon received, I, I mean I probably know as much as receiving, I probably started receiving, I’ve seen some images. Yeah. Yeah, I’ve started writing.

I mean it’s very, uh, close encounters with the third kind, you know, Spielberg thing where he’s getting these messages and he is gotta write ’em down and he gets this binary code that he didn’t even recognize as being binary code. Yeah. Why

[01:22:26] Alex Tsakiris: would you get binary code? I mean, it’s another Yeah. That’s cul deceptive part of your thing,

[01:22:31] Marty Garza: . , like craft with wings, you know, UFOs with wings and like wings are human technology.

We need them to fly in our atmosphere. An alien that has developed this anti-gravity technology or means to somehow leap from one point in time and space to another isn’t gonna need wings necessarily. Right. That’s our, but again, these are very possibly things that are. More, uh, a function of our perception.

They may not be exactly the way we perceive them to be.

[01:23:05] Alex Tsakiris: Maybe in some cases though, . , I think you come up down a little bit too strong on that as . An explanation and it’s explanatory. Power is very limited. I think, uh, that’s my pushback on you is to say, Hey, you know, it could be, . , you know, deception.

Well, possibly, I guess, you know, and part of my sensitivity in, in this is because I, I, I spent so much time with, uh, the consciousness thing and like the near death experience thing or the reincarnation . , science, you know, that’s come through and you hear the same thing . The way I always put it is burden of proof, is that that’s all we’re ever doing is we’re just shifting the burden of proof from one to another. So, like I’m saying that the Rendlesham Forest case, to me, that kind of thing shifts the burden of proof. If you wanna say it’s not as it appears, then that’s fine, but the burden of proof is on you. Because for the rest of us, it looks like a fricking u f o from another planet who came down here and did something with the nukes, which I always remember this conversation I had via email with Robert Hastings. I was a fantastically interesting guy and did all the research . On the UFOs and nukes thing.

And I said, uh, hey, you know, what do you think is the agenda? . He goes, I used to think, . That ET is trying to protect us. He’s trying to send us a message, you know, don’t destroy your planet guys.

You have a precious guy. I think he goes, now I think it’s more of a mutual interest kind of thing, and uh, I thought, I thought that was curious, but I’ll stick with the burden of proof is on someone to tell that story in a different way and provide the same measure of evidence that Hazeltine is providing.

[01:24:50] Marty Garza: Yeah, but the perception thing is real. I mean, we can take even in case for example, like the Hudson Valley flap, where we had well over 8,000 witnesses to this phenomenon, this giant triangular craft. But there were cases, there were instances where we had simultaneous witnesses standing side by side.

Looking at the object, describing it in different ways. And I’ll go to one that, an interview that you’ve conducted. Ray Hernandez, Ray comes down into the living room and is, there’s this glowing object in his living room. And his wife sees an angel and he sees a u-shaped glowing object that somehow had an effect on him, that made him think, oh, that’s bullshit.

He turns around and goes back to bed and wakes up 30 minutes later, goes, what the hell was that? And runs back down. He realizes. So there’s a lot going on there. Their perceptions were different. Somehow or another, it, it affected his reason in words again. And then sub subsequent to that, he’s getting messages, go outside and look and there’s a craft over his where there’s an interaction there.

It’s it’s words, it’s, there’s more going on than just these things flying around in the sky.

[01:26:09] Alex Tsakiris: Granted, but we have the same problem with, . , near-death experience research. And I think this is a part that we’ve really connected. And, and maybe we’ll do another one of these cuz we’re kind of running out of time and we can get into that spiritual dimension cuz it’s really important.

It, it’s fundamentally important to factor into this. Even if we don’t see it exactly the same way. . . That’s the next conversation that needs to happen. Needs to occur. And that’s that man, . This is the, . , debunker approach to near death experience. They’ll say, yeah, but that guy saw Jesus.

I mean, in Jesus, you know, historical Jesus isn’t real for whatever reason, whatever. Or they’ll, they’ll pick out some other part of these differences in these accounts. And what, what, this relates back to something you said at the beginning . , . Patterns start to emerge.

And those patterns are really what scientists are all about. Scientists are totally capable of kind of saying, okay, I’m going to filter out this part of the observation and I’m gonna focus on this part of it to get to that signal noise thing. And that’s okay. I can do that. That’s a scientific way of doing that.

That’s where I think you wind up with near death experience. At the end of the day, you go, okay, well this person experienced this, this person experienced this. It’s different. But wait a minute, what about these similarities? What about this ability to recall? What about bringing into a hospital and ask them to recount their resuscitation and they’re able to do it in a statistically significant way?

Let’s do the next one. Let’s do the next one. There is a way to identify these patterns. Let me ask you this as we wrap it up, since that was your thing, and I think it’s, it’s, it’s a very insightful point, Marty, what are the patterns? . , that you do see more in terms of trying to tie this thing down?

[01:28:02] Marty Garza: . Well, one, one thing, and I know that cuz this is, this is your wheelhouse, so I’m going to mention this and that I think that this is important and yeah, this is this, you’re, I’m trying to distill like a lot of information down to something in just a few words, which is really hard for me.

I tend to overexplain things. But trying to, to view this phenomenon by ignoring or, or filtering out certain, certain part aspects of it is sort of like you’re trying to, to study music theory and you’re trying to learn everything about music theory. Strictly listening to hip hop, you can’t truly have an understanding if by by exception you can’t.

Other words, the, the, that, that’s one of the points that Hynek made was that he came to recognize once he jumped, jumped ship and actually started believing that there really was something to this, he very quickly realized that the high, what he referred to as the high strangeness cases were being filtered out and that that might be a.

More there might be more to learn about the phenomena from the high street in this cases than from the lights in the sky type observations. So having said that, I think that when you look at encounters such as that of, uh, Juan, like Juan Perez and, and that you’ll start to see this overlap with this n d E consciousness realm.

So I won’t, I would not discount the possibility that, that the phenomenon originates on a plane where consciousness resides or where consciousness can travel to, or this other plane that it could, because, and I’m, you know, a lot of these stories that I’m, I’m trying to not bring up, but things like the experiences, uh, Joe McMonagle had experiences with this.

In other words, there’s a lot of overlap there, and we can’t simply ignore that there’s this overlap may be telling us more than focusing on, oh, there was a triangular ship. What can we learn from the triangular? Like, that’s not gonna tell you anything. We need to understand where this is coming from.

[01:30:42] Alex Tsakiris: See what we’re gonna, we’re gonna tip our hand.

Maybe we should, we’re gonna preview this next conversation about the spiritual, because I think it, it’s problematic in the same way that we’re talking about here. and that’s that ultimately the question of near death experience, in my opinion, comes down to the question of the moral imperative . is there right and wrong? Is there good? Is there God, you know, we’re afraid to say that, but is there God? And that’s really what we wanna know. We wanna know, . , is our soul really with us? . Are we carrying it forward in this journey we’re having, as we’ve been told by so many different traditions.

I would say that overwhelmingly the data collectively, that’s what the data comes back and says, and it’s confirmed by the near death experience science, objectively looking at it, it’s confirmed by the, . , shared death experience where people don’t even die, but go along with person who do die and come back and have this, it’s the reincarnation research points that way.

The after-death communication research points that way over and over again. So to focus on the deceptive element that are in these realms of consciousness, . , is to me, a . , sidetrack kind of thing . . I always boil it down to this question, does ET have an n D e? . . And what that means to me is . There is this kind of life review and the key thing about this life review, what people say is I now realize I was not being judged. I was the judge.

My soul was the judge. The whole question about ET can be summed up If ET is in that same mode, if ET is going to have to judge their et soul journey. Then I’m cool with it. Everything can be worked out. All the questions we have become simplified, . , to a great degree. If not, then I think . , we’re in another thing.

We’re in simulation theory, or we’re in some kind of nasic battle between good and evil, and as Sammy Davis Jr. Said, Hey man, Satan’s just as powerful as God, Sammy. The evidence doesn’t point that way, but if you’re right, we got a different game to kind of play out

[01:33:00] Marty Garza: here. Yeah, absolutely. That, that, see, that I think is, is part of the problem that I’m the heart, it’s at the heart of the matter that I’m trying to get at.

When you discount that, when you start to, to discount the, the interaction with, with past relatives and, and the personal connection that some co sometimes occurs during these alien encounters and the messaging and the things that they’re completely in line with these N D E experiences and these remote viewing experiences and all, you know, OBEs, all these things there, there’s appears to be consistency in this and.

I don’t think it serves us well to, to segregate them and say, okay, this is this and this is this. And when they act the same, they, they appear to, you know, you know this like Joe McMonagle having conversation. Cuz very often just to get maybe some, I don’t know where this, but very often the, the, you know, o B E or the n d e, uh, experiencer meets entities very similar to people on ayahuasca or having these, you know, mushrooms and this kind of stuff.

They’re going back to pa heart, these entities that they encounter and stuff this, they’re very similar and the things that they communicate are very similar. And, and it ties to this, you know, the aliens are looking out for us type thing where, you know, you the a or are you, you know, are you angels? Yes, we’re angels.

Oh, are you here to save us? Yes, we’re here to the path of least resistance stuff, you know, you can’t get a really good understanding without walking that wall. You gotta walk past that section of wall. It may tell you something very important. That to me, the, the physical nuts and bolts craft, if, if that’s what they really are, is not what’s most fundamentally important for mankind, for our human experience.

These things. Are the things that are important. They’re, we tend to, when we start talking about that aspect, you know, the angel and demonn and that kind of stuff related to the UFO farm, we go, oh, you’re, you’re, you know, you’re associating UFOs with religion. Like no, that’s a mischaracterization. Religions are associated with UFOs.

In other words, every, virtually every religion came about as a result of an encounter. Some form of encounter with some non-human intelligence. You can’t make it into the religion. And then, oh, well, and then it’s associated with your, it’s the other way around. You have to understand how these things came to be.

And, and this is a whole nother conversation for another, probably another, another we’re gonna have to get into. But that’s huge. That gets into the ancient aliens thing and all sorts of aspects of this that there’s just so much there to, to pick apart.

[01:36:23] Alex Tsakiris: Absolutely. Will you come back so we can hash that out?

Sure, anytime. All right, Marty, it’s been awesome. So tell folks what you’re up to. You guys are working on some great shows . , those Serpent Boys are keep pulling you in for more and more great content that you’re putting out. And you got this whole MK Ultra thing that you’re working on.

. , Tip your hand a little bit, tell us what we’re gonna find over

[01:36:43] Marty Garza: there. Yeah, we’re working on this series right now on Brothers Serpent, uh, called the Spooky Story. Never told we’ve done one part so far. There are at least three more episodes depending on how much detail I find that I end up having to do a lot of editing for, to be a little more concise, if that’s, even if you can, it’s kinda like an oxymoron, but in order to understand the historical progression of some of these technologies and abilities and the overlaps and it gets very, again, very complicated cuz there are a lot of overlaps between these technologies, whether they’re, you know, human technologies or non-human technologies and things like that.

But we have a lot of data coming up that I think people might find really interesting and, you know, it’s really cool. Our interaction, I think is what makes it really like our conversation here. It’s not just the data that we are discuss that, that’s being presented. It’s the interaction, the conversations that we have about that data that make it most

[01:37:47] Alex Tsakiris: interesting.

Oh yeah, it’s, it’s great. It’s, it’s really, really great. It’s entertaining but it’s also extremely informative. I’m a huge fan, so, uh, yeah, I’m right there with you. But this has been great and . , we’ll do it again.

[01:38:02] Marty Garza: Thanks for having me on. I loved it.

[01:38:05] Alex Tsakiris: Thanks again to Marty Garza for joining me today on Skeptiko.

The one question I tee up from this interview is the title of the show. Is Atonic. In all the ways that might opt the skate or clarify. This question. Let me know. Let me hear from you. Until next time, take care. Bye for now.

.

 

[00:00:00] Alex Tsakiris: Um, this episode of Skeptiko, , A show about self-soothing.

[00:00:06] Clip: she needs to learn how to self sooth. . She’s to what? Self sooth Sooth herself. , let’s just sing a song. We’ll sing a song. Um, uh, the wheels on the bus go round, round. And round down . , maybe she’s hungry. . I’m gonna feed her.

Hi. Come on. Let’s go eat. Come on. I thought you were picking her.

skeptiko-596-marty-garza

[00:00:00] Alex Tsakiris: um, this episode of Skeptiko. A show about making tough decisions.

[00:00:06] Clip: How many lives you prepare to end. If we do nothing, that’s not who we are. Of course it is. You’re doing God’s work. We are preventing the end of days. But you can’t prevent evil by doing evil.

[00:00:18] Alex Tsakiris: And how you need the data in order to make those decisions.

[00:00:22] Marty Garza: their interest was in the mechanism for turning on E S P and turning it off. We know that Kit Green was working on this for the c I A since at least the seventies. We’re just now hearing Gary Nolan , , talking about it, the Nazis were doing it during World War ii. The Russians were doing it before that.

[00:00:41] Alex Tsakiris: We can’t exactly fill in those gaps. , we don’t know if it is the drugs, right? Or we don’t know if the deception on the other side was something we’d call demonic or Satanic or wherever you wanna go and that was leading it. Or we don’t know if there’s any difference between demonic and Satanic and et.

The first clip was from an old movie called the end of days with Arnold Schwarzenegger, who doesn’t appear in that clip. But it’s kind of interesting that he was in that kind of movie. And the second was from today’s guest. Marty Garza.

So you may remember Marty and his outstanding, deep dive into all things. UFO E. T from a couple episodes go. And if not, you’re in for a treat. Guy knows a lot. And we kind of went in a lot of different directions with this one. Very level three Skeptiko style. I hope you enjoy it.

. Welcome to Skeptiko, where we explore controversial science and spirituality. I’m joined today by Marty Garza and for those of you who are Skeptiko fans, Skeptiko followers, uh, you’ll remember that Marty joined me a few episodes ago. We did a very excellent show with the guys from Brothers of Serpent podcast, Russ and Kyle, and they’ve been doing this ongoing series with Marty on UFOs and I was just blown away with what Marty was bringing.

They’ve done like 10 of them at this point and this guy has done fantastic research into all sorts of different aspects. This kind of deep dive, both deep and broad into this topic. I was super impressed. I loved the chance to have an interaction with Marty and Ross and Kyle cuz they have their own unique and very valuable perspective.

But I really, really appreciated the time that I had in talking with Marty. I hope at the end of this you’ll see why I think he really is. A tremendously valuable and important voice in this whole u f O thing. And that might surprise you because maybe you’ve never heard of Marty Garza or then again, maybe you have,

and I say that because Marty has a secret second life or really a first life. I wanna play this a little bit cuz it’s kind of

 

[00:03:20] Alex Tsakiris: But anyways, this guy was inducted into the monster Truck Hall of Fame. You know, that’s a billion dollar industry. Come on, man. Tell us, tell us a little bit about your background, what we saw there, the o overkill thing.

[00:03:34] Marty Garza: Great. Beyond Alex, it’s a, it’s an honor to be on with you. . , as you know, I’m a big follow of your fa of your channel as well, your podcast. So That is, uh, I guess you could look at that as more like a crash reel or crash highlights. But, uh, yeah, that, that’s, uh, an industry I’ve been involved in for, uh, the majority of my life, probably since about 1984.

. , and I was fortunate enough to have been inducted into the Hall of Fame a few years ago. So I guess that’s a, maybe a testament to my contributions.

[00:04:05] Alex Tsakiris: A and you know, the last time we did a, a rehearsal, I’m gonna call it this on Friday, cuz I totally screwed up with the recording, but you mentioned that there is an alien on the side of your truck and I went back and watched a video and I saw that and that your interest in UFO slash et kind of predates the Monster Truck thing, right?

[00:04:29] Marty Garza: Yes, I’ve had an interest in the phenomenon, my, , the, just about my entire life. But as I got a little older, I spent more time delving into it, , more deeply into the, you know, more esoteric aspects of the phenomenon. And it’s quite a contrast with my other life in the monster truck side where that is almost entirely nuts and bolts physical, you know, uh, uh, attributes versus the more uh, uh, I guess intangible aspects that relate

[00:05:03] Alex Tsakiris: to the phenomenon.

I think we’ll talk about, you know, there’s several meeting up points. One is nuts and bolts. Nuts and bolts is really so much a part of the u f O thing. And when you try and get, get away from it, like you and I do, when we talk about consciousness and stuff like that, it sucks you’re right back in because somebody has an . , encounter with that technology or someone’s has a suspicion that we have that as the United States has developed some technology that is appearing as part of the phenomenon.

So there, there is this kind of overlap there, but the other overlap that I, I’m reaching for it a little bit, but I think there’s a connection there. Y you have a passion for this topic and I do too. I know where my passion is. My passion is about big picture questions. Who am I? Why am I here? And I’m just crazy enough to think that I can go out and talk to a bunch of these different people and I can get answers to those kind of big picture questions.

And I, I’m chuckling about it now, but I really am not chuckling about that is how I really think. I think I can get answers to these questions, but underneath those questions are the fears that I have and the fears about what this phenomenon may mean for how I understand myself. And how I understand my, my physical self in this world, in this time space and how I understand . Myself from a like soul perspective.

And one of the cool things I thought about the Monster Truck thing is, like we talked about last time, it is quintessentially American. It is quintessentially I ought to be able to do pretty much what I wanna do as long as I’m really not messing with anyone too much. And I think that, and this might be the reach, I, I think that that’s one of the things that scares us about ET and U F O, is that we might not have a handle on that at a whole different level beyond, uh, the risks or, uh, the commies or any, it’s just like there may fundamentally be something in this whole thing that is gonna seriously change the way we think about who we are.

Can you relate to that at all, or does that not, is that

[00:07:40] Marty Garza: not a fit? No, absolutely. You touched on several points there that are meaningful to me. The, you know, the, the, the monster trucks being, uh, quintessentially American phenomenon, uh, I would say that is true. It is what appealed to me is the ability to.

To express our individuality through a technological means. But like you said, I’m kind of, uh, share the perspective of, uh, this big picture y you know, concept of, of our existence as humans in a, . Environment that I believe is more complex than the average person ever stops to think about.

And as that relates to how we perceive the, the phenomenon I think it’s important to, to consider that for decades , I guess you could say ufology has hungered for academic acceptance, but at the same time, I think that we have to consider the fact that we, we gotta be careful what we wish for, right?

, we need to be careful that by doing so, we’re not inviting a materialist, reductionist perception of something that may be outside of that realm. We, we don’t know that we possess a science that can adequately address. What it is that we’re encountering.

We, we don’t know. It’s broad.

[00:09:15] Alex Tsakiris: It’s very broad. See, now I’m gonna say you kind of laid a lot on the table there that we kind of need to . Deconstruct and w we’re gonna get into this because one of the things I wanna do in this, . , conversation we’re gonna have here, because I think it’s really lacking, is we’re gonna try and pull apart all these different angles.

. . . . .When you say phenomenon, that means a lot to you. And I think some people get it, but some people aren’t clued into what you’re talking about and they’re going, like, Marty, you’re talking about UFOs.

What do you mean phenomena?

[00:09:50] Marty Garza: Well, in our, in our run through discussion I mentioned that I have this, uh, this way of looking at the phenomena that I, I kind of in my head put this, uh, effectively on a, like on a three dimensional graph where I look at all these different what.

I guess people would consider as, uh, disparate phenomena. And I put them all on the same graph and we, we get all these data points that we have in three dimensions, right? We have ’em, uh, time, location, uh, you know, descript descriptive aspects of the phenomenon that, or each individual phenomenon that was encountered and all this.

And as we apply this on a large time scale, we start to see patterns rather than, and, and this is kind of a and a deep, and I’m trying to give a brief overview of this concept, but rather than necessarily debating the minutiae of individual sightings that could, as we know, could be debated forever.

There’s no, there’s no single case that is, you know, uh, completely settled that, okay, this is definitively this or de because no amount of, no amount of information is ever enough to satisfy some people like on both ends, right? Some people see every light in the sky is a, is a U F O and others, even when there are physical trace cases that were tracked on radar and all this other, you know, multiple aspects to support.

This, this encounter, there are still skeptics that will be remain unconvinced regardless of what’s presented to them. So rather than waste a tremendous amount of time debating something that there will never be a solution to, I instead try to plug all of that in as just data. Right? And, and you put all this data in and you look for patterns because I don’t believe that we are going to settle this by looking at necessary contemporary events or, or historical events.

It’s, I think it’s a combination. We gotta take this big picture, uh, approach and look for patterns. I think the pa the key is in the patterns because, and, and I’m gonna, uh, this was something I figured was gonna come up at some point, but I think it’s, it’s somewhat fits right now, is that we, it has become very common lately, and I don’t know if it’s just a fad or whatever, but we keep hearing the allegory of the cave, Plato’s allegory, the cave , the idea is that we are in the cave and we are seeing the shadows cast from a reality that’s outside of our. Known what we can perceive. Right. . The problem with that, I see with that, that I don’t, I don’t know that that’s necessarily the best allegory to apply to what, what we’re experiencing is that I implicit in that, is that what we are experiencing is simply a consequence of what is happening outside of our perception. I don’t think that’s entirely accurate because some of what we’re experiencing appears to be purposeful deceit or manipulation as a result of what’s happening outside of our perception.

[00:13:14] Alex Tsakiris: Marty, let me interject here, because where a lot of people are gonna go with this from where we’re going, they’re gonna go, okay, he’s just talking about the Jacque Vallee stuff. And Jacque Vallee deserves a ton of credit because he was one of the first people to really say, Hey, you know, don’t, these ets wind up sounding a lot like elves and, you know, doesn’t, don’t the stories change over time and aren’t they culturally based?

And then he’s also the deception guide to bring in that. I think you’re saying that. What else are you saying? What are you, where are you taking that? I

[00:13:47] Marty Garza: guess I’ll back up to, to my description of this three dimensional graph. When you start looking at all these data points and we look at those and we start to look for patterns in, in this, we will see that if we, let’s say we ignore what a, you know, I think if, if nothing else, what we’ve should have learned by now is that nothing related to the phenomenon should be taken at face value.

Our there and there are multiple reasons for that, that I’m sure we’re gonna get into as we get further into this conversation. But as this applies to the graph in the patterns, we will see that maybe the appearance of the phenomenon may have, have been different, but the conduct was the scene. And we start seeing this consistency.

There are certain consistencies in these, and we can get into maybe some of, some of what those consistencies might be. But once you start looking at it from that perspective, you start to see that, you know what, maybe what we’re seeing is effectively like a, and I guess in this place to the manipulation side, that they’re, they’re, it’s like let’s say the a a newscast, an evening newscast.

And what you’re seeing on the screen is what somebody’s narrative is that they want you to believe they’re showing you things to lead you to a certain conclusion, but they could also be excluding things that might be counter to that. But regardless, w th this, you’re being shown things that will lead you in a certain direction.

Well, that’s where I think that when we start looking at these patterns, we see that the things that were, were historically considered to be angels, demons, fawns, you know, Bigfoot, those kind of things, they appear different. And that includes, and, and that would include craft, right? Physical craft, but the conduct, the pattern of conduct, what they, how they.

Interacted with the individual is fairly consistent. So are these simply screens that were being shown that are not necessarily representative of what is truly behind it?

[00:16:10] Alex Tsakiris: Okay, so I love this cuz you’re going so level three, you know, so beyond the normal discourse and I almost feel like you’re kind of going to the masterclass thing.

My pushback kind of Skeptiko style would be maybe a lens into how we would process that bigger picture, which I’m totally with you mom. I’m totally with you so much. But I feel like we can’t go there until we start deconstructing the current discourse that we’re having. So let me start with, with this one cuz I really enjoyed the dialogue, the conversations you had , with the Grimer guys, my old friends, Darren and Graham, and you guys were talking about the Eric Weinstein show when he was on Joe Rogan.

So let me play this clip and then we’ll begin to, uh, deconstruct it.

, first of all, one, we may be faking a U F O, uh, situation for reasons that I don’t understand. If we are faking a U F O situation, do you think that there’s technology that’s available to people in the United States that is beyond our current understanding of what’s possible?

90%? No. 90%, no.

So here’s my point on that, and then I want to go right into another clip and then I’ll get your response to it. Eric Weinstein is a super smart guy, mathematician, really understands physics and just a very bright and articulate guy. He, in this case, does not know what he’s talking about. And what’s really troublesome is he doesn’t even seem to know that he may not know what he’s talking about.

Let me play another clip , and you tell me if, you think this guy and the people he’s referring to maybe are in a better position to know what they’re talking about.

on this episode of Skeptiko Alex talks with author and U F O researcher Grant Cameron. We tracked this guy down. He turns out to be Dr. Eric Walker, who was former president of Penn State University for 15 years. He was the chairman of the board of the Institute for Defense Analysis, which is the top military think tank for the United States, uh, military.

He wa he was the co-develop developer of the, the homing torpedo. He ha was friends with Van Navar Bush. He had this incredible, unbelievable background of, uh, you know, military and, uh, connections with presidents and stuff like this. So when we go to him, we we’re interviewing him as UFO researchers. We’re not thinking about the mind.

We couldn’t care less about, you know, we no connection whatsoever. We’re talking to him and we’re trying to find out m the supposed UFO group that runs the whole thing is the, the, uh, MJ 12 we’re asking him questions. So, MJ 12, did you have contact with the aliens? Uh, how did the thing operate? How did you cover up the UFO thing?

And in 1990, in the middle of one of these interviews, he suddenly cuts off. The conversation talking about hardware, about bodies and all this sorts. And he, he suddenly says, how good is your sixth cents? How much do you know about E S P? And the other guy goes, well, you know, I don’t, I don’t really, he’s not of interest to him.

I don’t know what’s going on. And Walker says, then, as, unless you knew about it and how do use it, you will not be taken in. Cuz the question was about who’s running the group? What’s this MJ 12, how many people are on the group? How, how are these people operating? And he says, unless you, uh, uh, know about E S P and how do you use it, you would not be taken in by this overriding group that runs the U F O program.

Only a few know about it. And then in 1993, there’s a related story with Ben Rich. Ben Rich was the guy who ran skunkworks. The, the A, the u2, the SR 71. The stealth fighter. The stealth bomber. They were all developed by what was called Skunkworks. And Ben Rich ran it, and he would get a number of questions about was this UFO technology?

And he’s giving a lecture in 1993, he’s, he’s dying of cancer. He gives a lecture at UCLA to a bunch of engineers, finishes the lecture. He’s walking out. And one of the engineers who’s interested in UFOs runs after him. And he says to Ben Rich, he says, Ben Rich, how are these things propelled? How are UFOs propelled?

And Ben Rich turns around and he says to him, let me ask you a question. How does E s P work? Okay. Who knows what they’re talking about, who completely doesn’t know what they’re talking about, but has millions and millions of views on Spotify and YouTube.

[00:20:42] Marty Garza: Okay. I’m gonna bring up something that we, that I, we discussed, uh, in our previous conversation on, on Brothers of the Serpent. I, uh, regular listeners of the podcast probably understand that I very often will use analogies or allegories to, to make a point.

And I did one, uh, a few months back that are referred to as the wall. And it’s the story, uh, synopsis of the story would be we, somebody wrote a message across the entire Great Wall of China and everybody was, you know, freaking out about this and trying to understand what, what was it all about? What was the meaning and who was behind it.

And each individual village that was at the wall had a completely different interpretation of what it was, what it said, and what it meant. That’s sort of the difference of the two clips that you played. Eric Weinstein is viewing his part of the wall from the perspective of science and materialist science.

Grant Cameron has walked that wall. He didn’t just look at the part in front of his village. He’s walked that wall and he’s got a better perspective of it appears from this part to look this way. But as you take more of that in the picture starts to change and you understand that things aren’t always as they appear.

[00:22:16] Alex Tsakiris: See, I think your analogy is too generous, uh, because we’ve all run into this, uh, Weinstein just doesn’t know. And he’s, he, he lives in this ivory tower where people pat him on the back and he just gets around people and other people tell him how smart he is, how much he knows, and they ask him his opinion on all sorts of stupid stuff that he doesn’t know anything about.

And somehow he gives his opinion. He just doesn’t know what he’s talking about. We encounter this all the time, but we as.

You know, guys who are trying to answer these big picture questions, we gotta be able to see that difference. We gotta be able to see Weinstein as not like somebody who has a unique perspective based on all their scientific knowledge versus somebody just doesn’t know what they’re talking about and it’s kind of just blabbing because they have the clout to get on, , Rogan’s show.

[00:23:11] Marty Garza: All right, let me clarify a couple of points. You, I’m, I’m going to agree with you and disagree in that someone living in a village can read a sentence and d and and interpret that sentence accurately. Doesn’t mean they’re right about what the overall message is, but from their perspective, they’re a hundred percent right.

And it would be hard if you, if were to isolate the, the view of this down to that sentence, they could be a hundred percent accurate. And that is what effectively what I Weinstein is doing from his perspective. He’s convinced be, but you have to factor in that he’s only seen a very small part of this.

Our conversation on Grimer in my, I guess what impressed me about that Rogan episode had nothing to do with UFOs in the sense of the phenomenon. What impressed me was his starting to give the impression that he’s starting to understand. The mechanisms at Clay here, where they’re, again, things are not always as they appear and that there appears to be some type of an agenda going on in the background.

And what that agenda is might be related to human technology advancement in science that was being withheld from even the, the open scientific community, not the U F O phenomenon per se. He knows virtually nothing about the U f O Phenomen other than what he’s heard, which he acknowledges, he’s heard from his friends, Brandon Fugal and people that he’s associated with.

And he goes and he says, look, these people have no reason to lie to me. I believe them when they tell me that they’ve had these odd experiences. That’s the extent of his knowledge really. Yeah. But he has not spent, done the law, the legwork that we have to research this for decades. He’s been into it for a short period of time because he was a, allegedly approached by government agencies or individuals representing themselves, themselves as being members of certain agencies.

And those of us who have been following this for decades know that this is a repetitive pattern. This is nothing new. He’s just the latest version of

[00:25:32] Alex Tsakiris: Yes. So that, that I, I wanna almost carve that out of the, the whole Oppi thing. And it, it, cuz it’s always in play. And as you pointed out In this, in the rehearsal is just because you’re part of an op doesn’t mean , you know, you’re part of an op.

Absolutely. I mean, that’s sometimes the best. So the, we should be curious as to why this guy who doesn’t seem to know anything about either, I would say he doesn’t seem to know anything about the very human technology that may be being developed or anything really about the U F O phenomenon. And that’s another point I’d kind of slightly disagree with you.

You say he’s bringing to the table this knowledge of, well I know this guy, he’s working, working on anti gravitational, you know. Yeah. He knows a little bit. But as the clip I played from Grant Cameron from seven years ago and from interviews he did 30 years ago, there’s all these people where they were in a much better position, much better position to know that stuff and also are out.

Why are they off of Weinstein’s radar and if, and why are they so completely off of his radar and how is he so oblivious that there’s people out there that are off his RA radar, he doesn’t seem to be aware of skunkworks, Lockheed Martin, all the technology that goes into this stuff that is on the borderline of, you know, secret and then all the stuff that’s beyond that.

[00:26:59] Marty Garza: I think it is It’s important to, to note that he is beginning to cave a little where he, he was fu firmly entrenched in the Skeptiko, you know, perspective. I think that he’s opening himself up to the possibility that other things may be, but, but again, I don’t, I don’t place any real importance on it.

To me, his important, the importance was uh, a kind of a separate side interest that I have on because I’m a techie guy. I like technology and I have a content, the contention that we cracked fusion technology as a part of s d i back in the eighties or maybe even early nineties. And I think that more or less was what impressed me about cuz you don’t generally don’t hear discussion of that kind of thing.

And we’ve talked about that on, you know, brothers separate before where there appears to have been censorship of that kind of a discussion in the past. So it’s, it’s kind of strange. But that leads to this disclosure movement thing because I believe that the reason that we’re even having these conversations and, and, and you’re seeing these things in the media is because I believe it is likely that this is a result of potential adversaries, China, Russia maybe nearing or, or on the verge of breaking tracking this, these same technologies.

And some of this is to serve as disinformation, right? It’s giving them plausible deniability. Oh, that thing over your, you know, your restricted airspace. Oh, it wasn’t us, it was, it was clearly a u f O. You know, that kind of, I think that that is definitely a factor. And I guess I should explain also that when, earlier when I mentioned the allegory, the clique, the cave, not, not, uh, considering the fact that some of this is, uh, is deception.

This again is a multilayer thing because the deception isn’t strictly on the part of governments trying to, uh, you know, uh, cover up the existence of something. The phenomenon itself is deceptive. If you do enough research into this, you will see that it is very manipulative and so much so that it is work that’s way into society to where we can’t see the forest from the trees.

We literally live, many people live in the deception that these, that this phenomenon has created. And I know that we’re gonna get into that, cuz that gets into some really touchy areas. But it is, in my opinion, pervasive. But it gets very difficult to segregate these things. You know, I know it’s a, it’s a common, again, when you, you stick to the materialist, you know, aliens in physical craft from another planet type.

Of, uh, uh, in that context, there’s a tendency to say, oh, the government is withholding, uh, information, uh, uh, the existence of these, this phenomenon. Well, bottom line, the phenomenon is the one in charge. If they wanted to make themselves known, they would, it would, it’s the, they hold all the cards. Now, what if, for what reason would governments go along with this?

And what, what in, what is the mutual interest involved here? That’s a completely separate topic. That could be a show of its own, you know, but we have to recognize that there are many factors involved. We can’t break it down into these simple little tidy little pic. This picture that I believe is something that was purposefully manufactured.

It’s a narrative that was created almost from the beginning of the modern U f O era. I believe that a lot of this has been constrained down to a very nightly, you know, segregated. It’s either extraterrestrial or it doesn’t exist. It’s this binary choice, and I don’t believe that’s

[00:31:10] Alex Tsakiris: the case. Well, this is kind of, again, mind blowing level three kind of stuff that I’m right there with you, and I’d love to jump right in there.

And that’s what I usually do. I’m gonna play a different role here because I, I, I think in a way, I. We’re gonna talk ab in, in the process of doing it this way, we’re going to show, uh, another aspect of the multi-layered, impossible to fathom always a contradiction and a deception kind of, uh, thing by doing it.

And I think we already started down that path. And that is to say, you know, here’s this guy Eric Weinstein. When you start pulling it apart, it doesn’t, it just doesn’t make sense. And for me, it doesn’t make sense cuz he doesn’t have the knowledge that we would, that these other people clearly have. And yet he’s the one who’s being ordained to come out and talk.

And this is, I think, really important cause this is what drives you. And I, I think, is that this shapes people’s opinion in a way that is kind of drives us crazy, right? Because you or I will talk to somebody and they’ll go, oh man, did you see that? Oh, I’m blown away. You know, he told me this. And then you wanna go, okay, sit down.

Do you have like three hours? Let me tell you how that whole thing fits into

[00:32:32] Marty Garza: this other thing. Let me interject right there real quick. I may, and this is, this is pulling from my other life back into this. When you’re in the entertainment industry, which is effectively what the monster truck industry is, you, you quickly learn that it isn’t about talent.

There are many very talented people that no one ever heard of. It’s. It’s all, especially nowadays, it’s all about who’s got the, who’s got how many, you know, the most followers on Twitter or, or it, it’s not about how much knowledge does he have? How, you know, how authoritatively can he speak about this?

It’s about his public persona. He’s, he’s well known, so he’s, he’s gonna get the attention. The shiny object always gets the attention. Meanwhile, the guys that have their head down and just focus on getting to the bottom of this, they’re, they’re very seldom are they gonna be the ones with the spotlight placed on them.

[00:33:35] Alex Tsakiris: Okay? Uh, accept that as, as true, you know, and we can all kind of nod our head and go along with that. What I wanna point out, and that, that’s why you’re on this show right now is because what I resonate with is Marta Garza is looking for the truth. He’s not looking to build followers about his U F O stuff.

You would go about it in a different way. You would express yourself in a different way. And I, I think there’s enough people like you and I who are like, they’re not beholding to anyone. They don’t really have an agenda other than to figure this stuff out. And I won’t even, I was about to say seek the truth, but it’s not like truth seeking is a deeper spiritual thing.

This is just like sorting through the data. And that’s what I think we’re doing. And it, it, at the end goal for me is to be able to approach the topics that you were talking about because we might have a slight difference of opinion on to what extent ET is in control, to what extent, you know, it’s all about deception or it’s an op or, but those are the level three conversations that we can only get to if we kind of clean the deck a little bit.

So we clean the deck with Eric Weinstein a little bit and here’s the next bit of deck cleaning that I do. And actually it goes back cuz we’re gonna have to pick on Eric Weinstein a little bit more because you mentioned a really important thing to me. This is like the heart and soul of Skeptiko. You talked about, . , materialist science and.

You and I at this point are so far past that, like you talk about the phenomenon just casually, you’re like, of course it extends beyond, you know, this nuts and bolts, human consciousness, voice inside your head kind of thing. And what people don’t realize is that is not the case for Eric Weinstein. These guys who are materialist science have made the ultimate blunder about how they think the world exists.

They think the world exists inside your head. And there can be no such thing as telepathy with a alien or screen memory. I mean, they’re on board with it in a very limited way if it was like technological in some way. But beyond that, they can’t get there. So let me play another clip, another Skeptiko clip from Dean Raden.

And this one actually will pick on somebody different. We’ll pick on Michael Sheer, who, there’s another guy who’s been on Rogan, like a gajillion times, . , for all the wrong reasons. But let me play, let me play this club.

.

[00:36:23] Alex Tsakiris: . . I have an interview coming up with the fantastic Dean Raden, who I can assure you a hundred years from now, students will be studying his work . Because Dr. Dean Raden experimentally has destroyed, crushed, falsified, to put it in scientific terms, the longstanding dominant soulless paradigm that we are biological robots in a meaningless universe.

And if you think I’m laying it down a little too hard there, give a listen to none other than Joe Rogan, yaking it up with our old Frey Michael Shermer. But if you think about it from a simple perspective, the entire universe is in your brain. And when you cease to exist, the universe ceases to exist. It’s just sort of true by definition. Now he goes a little bit further and says, you know, that consciousness is everything and that we bring into existence material stuff by thinking about or observing it or

whatever.

And here’s some quantum physics experiments that are

really spooky, and it’s like, okay, time out. You know, quantum physics is weird and spooky consciousness is weird and spooky. That doesn’t mean they’re connected. So you see it now, right? You see that schirmer’s just wrong or put it in another way. His claims have been falsified experimentally by none other than the work of today’s guest, Dr.

Dean Raden. The spooky weird things with quantum physics are related to consciousness, and we can show it experimentally. Here’s a clip from the interview coming up with Dean. Well, so we’re trying to connect it to quantum mechanics, and so we’ve done that in

[00:37:54] Marty Garza: two ways. Uh, the first way is using a double slid optical

[00:37:57] Alex Tsakiris: system to see if you can gain which path information, which is,

[00:38:02] Marty Garza: uh, the, the

[00:38:03] Alex Tsakiris: which of the two slits of photon goes through.

And so we’ve, we’ve now done about two dozen such experiments, and, uh, some of them work then some of them don’t work. But if you do a meta-analysis across the board, it looks like there’s pretty good evidence that something is going on, that the, the consciousness is involved in some way in the quantum process.

I also want to add in one other quantum oriented experiment that we more recently published, which involve the use of entangle

[00:38:31] Marty Garza: photons as the target

[00:38:33] Alex Tsakiris: of a mind matter interaction. Because he wanted to look at non-local mind interacting with non-local matter, and did it do anything? Part of the experiment was looking at could you increase the strength of entanglement and then intentionally decrease the strength of entanglement?

The short answer is, yeah, we were able to modulate it.

I . So that might be slightly obtuse to those who haven’t kind of been around and do this. I know you get it, but trust me or don’t trust me, that completely violates Eric Weinstein’s view of the world and science.

He’s just wrong. Materialism has been falsified by those experiments that he mentioned. What Michael Shermer said in that quote from Joe Rogan is completely contradicted, experimentally by what Dean Raden says. So back to our conversation that you and I are having, Marty, one reason we shouldn’t trust Eric Weinstein is because he doesn’t seem to know that there’s a weird desk at Lockheed Martin that sees all sorts of stuff that he has no, uh, uh, imagination for.

But the second reason we shouldn’t trust him or Neil deGrasse Tyson or Michael Shermer, not trust them as as liars, but trust them as, as reliable in this conversation that we’re having is they don’t seem to understand that. Consciousness is always at play. And that consciousness is a fundamental aspect to the phenomenon.

As you keep saying, ET is telepathic. We don’t know how, we don’t know why, but ET is telepathic. . Et seems to have the ability to deceive us at a level of screen memory or time shifting or all this other stuff that if you are not open to what I just played there, you are going to be shut down to that and you won’t even be able to bring it into your point of reference cuz it violates everything that all the guys at your club say.

The club being, you know, the conferences that you go to, the meetings you have of the department, all that stuff. It’s just, it can’t possibly be in your wheelhouse. . .

[00:40:43] Marty Garza: Well, I mean there’s a, there was a lot there, right?

But I’ll, I’ll start with this. Part of it, just like Eric Weinstein is acknowledging now that there are, there is public science and black science, black project science, instead of going by what the talking heads say in public. Instead, I would suggest we look at the record of what is it that the government has been investing in for decades.

As early as the 1952, and I know you’ve talked, had, you’ve had discussions about it, Andre Pahar was already working on the mechanisms to turn on and off this communication, this nonverbal communication, this interaction, I’m trying not to give too much information, it’s something that’s still in, is developing.

I’ve got a series that, that, uh, Russ and Kyle are, pres and I are presenting right now that I call the Spookiest story. Never told and we have only done one part, but I’ve got three, at least three more parts coming. And it, and it’s sort of, without giving too much away, talks about how governments came about discovering that there was this non-verbal, maybe non-human intelligent communications.

Okay,

[00:42:14] Alex Tsakiris: , hold on. , you’re not gonna tell the story. I’m gonna tell the story and then that’s gonna force you to pull into it. Cause PHA is like, he’s a genius. He’s at, he’s a PhD at Northwestern, which is known to be kind of cia, a incubation center. He does all these various things, but we’ll cut to the chase.

He starts having these seances with the nine. And the nine are this inner galactic, if you will, this is right outta Star Wars group. That’s et essentially, and it pulls ’em in a mil million different ways. It’s hard to know what part of that is, uh, a deception on that other part and this and that. But it becomes, he is so important to the military at this point.

He is totally plugged in at the highest levels and they’re being told to go do this, but he then he always kind of ventures off and does his own thing. So I I, I, I had to set the table cuz I want you to take over, but this is like, if anyone goes and reads this history, this is like in play. This is like more

[00:43:17] Marty Garza: than in play.

Okay. And without giving a lot of detail, cuz in the series, uh, we go into like the minutiae of how these things came about because I think a lot of times people have heard certain stories, but they have no context. They can’t, they don’t understand how that bit of data fits in with the big picture and, and how this progressed over decades.

But just to give an example of how important this is, as you mentioned, pahar was already doing this. He was in, uh, you know, the, the part about the communication with a nine and everything, there’s a lot of detail there. There’s a lot to discuss. But the most important thing to recognize is that, and this is part of the.

His presentations to the Pentagon and why, how he was able to get them to fund this research was, their interest was in the mechanism for turning on E S P and turning it off. And how that relates to what we see going on today is now you have Gary Nolan talking about schizophrenics, hearing voices and what mechanism might be at play to that.

Schizophrenia is the inability to turn it off and how so in words, they’re giving clues. We know that Kit Green was working on this for the c I A since at least the seventies. We’re just now hearing Gary Nolan hear it, you know, talking about it, you know, within the last year or so. But the reality is this is research.

The government has been conducting since at least the fifties. That’s the US government back up. The Nazis were doing it during World War ii. The Russians were doing it before that. And in part one I explained how, how this came about, how, how it transitioned from being an interest of the, of the Soviets.

It got adopted by the Nazis. Then after the other parts are gonna get into how the US picked up the ball. When we, through Operation Paper clip, we started to learn what they knew about this. What did the Russians learn about this and how did that go forward? There’s a huge story that’s never been adequately told.

I know Annie Jacobson has talked a good bit about it, but she’s, she’s just kind of hitting the surface of much more esoteric things that were

[00:45:46] Alex Tsakiris: going on. Right. The, the only problem with that, and that is like another show both for, for you guys to have, cuz you’re gonna plow all that ground in great depth and you do a great, great job of it.

The, the pull up for me is that we can’t exactly fill in those gaps. And, and in a way PO is like the, the perfect figure for this because he kind of goes crazy in a way. And part of it is because he starts doing too much drugs, you know, because the drugs are tapping into these extended realms and then he’s doing more and more and that kind of leads him the wrong way.

And then also what we don’t know that even that is like, we don’t know if it is the drugs, right? Or we don’t know if the deception on the other side was not really ET, but was something we’d call demonic or Satanic or wherever you wanna go and that was leading it. Or we don’t know if there’s any difference between demonic and Satanic and et.

So that’s where I think you and I would have this kind of level three discussion. But I just don’t think most people can, can get there without a huge, huge, uh, background that it, it, it needs to be in some ways broader than where you’re trying to go with the MK Ultra thing because , what I always thought was a great discovery about U F O researcher Grant Cameron is when he talks about the Wilbert Smith memo. People are in U F O know what it is, but it’s basically he writes this memo, he says, Bro, it’s going on.

It is the most top secret thing . And there’s a mental phenomenon associated with it, which is the key word. I think that that is fundamental to their interest in PHA Rich, their interest in MK Ultra, their interest in Project Stargate and remote viewing.

. , it’s at some level that isn’t exposed to us. Cuz this is how the military does things in secrets things. No one, it’s compartmentalized, so no one knows that that is the agenda, but they kind of are stumbling through this and they know that something’s up with ET and the mental aspect of it. So you got all this stuff popping up over here and that’s part of the reason, and the reason I’m, I don’t think it’s about like literally turning it on and off.

That would be like 0.1 out of a hundred things that you’d wanna know about this extended consciousness realm and how it fits with et.

[00:48:21] Marty Garza: Yeah, I think that that, that, that’s a good segue to again, to what we see going on today how this, this current round of what we talk about, you know, disclosure. Summing from the, you know, stemming from the December 17, uh, New York Times, uh, 2017 New York Times article, uh, what Glowing Auras and Black Muddy by Leslie Keenan and Ralph Bluementhal people have that are, are probably not aware.

I, I tend to say forgotten because I’m maybe showing my age there a little, but they have, are unaware that this is a yet again, simply a repetitive pattern. And going back to the 19, uh, what, 1949? There was, uh, there were articles in the Saturday Evening Post written by Sidney Charlotte. Then we had in 1951 we had the live article by Bob.

Gina have We Visitor From Space. Uh, we had Donald Kehoe doing his, his articles for True Magazine. And all of these effectively were saying the government is withholding evidence of extraterrestrials. But then we come to find out through, through Edward Rupel, the head of Project Blue Book in his book, that all of these articles were inspired by the military.

The department is of defense, selected the reporters, they wanted to convey these messages. Why? Why would they purposely be interjecting the idea that they’re hiding something into the public consciousness? And I think as a, the component, the important part of that was they were introducing this, again, binary choice of either that doesn’t exist or it’s extraterrestrials involved.

They have indoctrinated us into viewing this phenomenon as objects in the sky that are coming from a distant place. Not that this is something that may reside within our realm all around us, and it interacts with us directly. It’s, and, or it’s, it’s two completely different things when they were aware of this from the very beginning, almost from the very beginning.

[00:51:03] Alex Tsakiris: Are you against the idea that there are objects from other planets that are flying here and have intelligent beings inside of their craft? Are, are you willing to entertain the idea that that is. An aspect of this phenomenon.

And it’s real in the sense that in the same way we think stealth bombers are real. That that’s real.

[00:51:27] Marty Garza: Okay. That’s, that, that’s a rather complex question, or should I say, requires a rather complex explanation? Uh, and I’ll preface it by saying even the most unlikely explanation has as much validity as any other in our, it could be the most unlikely thing that could be behind this.

And it doesn’t mean it’s not that. Right. But I personally believe, just looking at this analytically, I, I, I try to consider all the options, as many options as I’m aware of. Right. And I think it’s unlikely that physical extraterrestrial beings are traveling as in moving from one place to another here in, in craft.

I think, and, and the reason I say I get there’s, this is a really complicated explanation, but I think first we have to understand it as human beings, as homo sapiens, we have this tendency to view intelligence on a, on a scale. Let’s call this a one to 10 scale. And we view ourselves like we’re so smart.

You know, we’re an eight on this one to 10 scale, and these extraterrestrials have been around a lot longer than us. So they’re, they’re probably a 10, you know, but, but we can get there. They’re what they know we’re capable of understanding. We just haven’t quite gotten there yet. When the reality is we could, uh, following that same scale, we could be an eight and they could be a billion.

In other words, they could be so far more advanced that we’re incapable of even perceiving them. We couldn’t, in words, we may live within a reality that is a MEChA, a piece of a much grander mechanism that we’re incapable of comprehending. Right. So following on that, I think that only the most basic of e extraterrestrial intelligences would be traveling in the me by means of mechanical devices, the way we as human beings travel by mechanical devices.

I believe that it is based on the evidence in other, other types of evidence, it’s suggestive. As Ben Rich said, if you’re using e s p, if we know that from the NDEs and remote viewing everything that we are capable of, separating our consciousness from our physical body, that is, is very possible that that form of technology, if you want or ability is.

More likely to be a means of exploring vast distances instantaneously or anything, rather than through mechanical means the way we tend to view travel. I don’t know if that’s, I know that’s a really complicated explanation,

[00:54:29] Alex Tsakiris: but it’s complicated. I just think it’s, it’s, I’m gonna push you. I think it’s inadequate. If we wanna go down the simulation hypothesis theory, we can do that. You know, we’re living in a simulation. Everything’s a simulation. , but there’s no there there in terms of having any kind of discussion. I think the same is true in terms of like if the stealth bomber, which was hidden from us and now isn’t hidden from us and we think we know it and we can point to it when it’s on the field at the air show and say that it does those things.

, If we’re saying that’s the same as this guy, my new favorite guy, , Gary Hazleton and he’s a retired detective constable is what they call it in written. And he started this thing called the police reporting u f o sightings. And then he just published this book that is pretty incredible book about Reynolds Shrum fort right.

And he did these extensive interviews I was telling you about, you know, he’s over there in Britain. He’s calling over talking to these Army guys who were on the base in 1980 when Reynolds Shrum happened. And they’re telling him like all this new information that completely confirms all the old information we know about Ren ship is that it happened and there was a craft and it cut through the trees and you can see where the trees.

We’re cut in half and you can see the marks, uh, the trace marks on the end. And then you, you got another guy who says, yeah, a bunch of people simultaneously reported that they flew over the nuclear weapons that were secretly there that no one knew about. And they deactivated him, and then they reactivated him.

And it totally confirms with what Robert Hastings reported on for 40 years of interactions we’ve had with ET that’s done this. So my point is, I don’t know how you thread that, Marty, and maybe you’ll tell me, I don’t know how you say, okay, well that’s real, but then somehow, in some way it’s not real unless you wanna go full bore simulation.

Nothing can be really counted on. We don’t even know if we’re here or if we exist or if it’s all a time slip or all

[00:56:44] Marty Garza: the rest of that. No, no, I’m not, I’m not talking about simulation theory in words. We have to think big. Like what are, what capabilities could, could we, could be achieved. Like in words, the at one time, the idea of being able to send a facts to the other side of the world would’ve been science fiction.

The idea that you could. Send a file that could be printed out in three-dimensional, on a three-dimensional printer on the other side of the planet would be far outside the realm of reality not that long ago. So let me give some examples. I absolutely, the Rendlesham forest craft was real. What it was exactly, we don’t know, but that it was a physical reality.

I would, I would not, I would not argue against that. In other words, burrows and those involved, they physically touched it. It was there. What it was could be debated. But there are many interesting aspects to that. The, the, uh, the binary code thing that was supposedly transmitted, that’s part of this consciousness thing, right?

But to give an example of how just because you’re seeing a physical triangular craft doesn’t necessarily mean that it traveled here from another planet in 1211. And, uh, Gervais of Tilbury tells the story and then we, this is in wonders, in valleys, wonders in the sky. Uh, a ship a a cloud ship, uh, has its anchor lodged in, in stones, and a full of people ran out and saw, uh, an entity come down the rope trying to dislodge the anchor.

And he’s captured. And he subsequently died and was given a Christian burial. Then in 1250 in, in Ireland, another cloud ship has an anchor that hooks on an arch of a church and a beam comes down the rope and cuts it, and they keep the anchor and the anchor is on display to commemorate the event in the church.

There, there was one in Texas, there was one in London, England. These things, you know, by the records have happened. So if we’re going to take the rend shim craft as a literal triangular craft from an extra, uh, uh, uh, extraterrestrial planet somewhere in the universe, are we suggesting also that these were sailing ships with masks and, and you know, all this coming here and using anchors and everything, we’re taking it at face value that way.

And I don’t think we should be taking it at face value. The, the phenomen is far stranger than that when we really start getting into it.

[00:59:49] Alex Tsakiris: , I’m with you right up to the end then you say it’s far stranger than, well, we don’t, we don’t know that because we don’t know what the problem with saying the phenomenon.

And, and being inclusive of a lot of different things. We don’t know the things that constitute the things we’re talking about. So, you know, it could be, and I know you’re not against this, this is more a, a methodology. What we’re exploring is the methodology for how to sift through this stuff. And I would suggest that, UFOs from another C planet inhabited by, . , intelligent operators of those craft.

Should be on the table because it’s kind of a parsimony thing. It’s kind of an Occam’s razor thing. Rens, Fromm Forest does not fit with what you’re saying cuz it’s 1980. We did not have advanced technology. As I, you know, you wrote the definitive book on Monster trucks and on Monster Truck Technology. We should point out, and you get all this praise for it because it’s like the definitive book. If you wanna go back and understand, . , how they made this modification so it could do this trick and then how it made this modification and who came up with that?

You trace that back. . , that is a direct parallel with the U f O thing, right? We cannot create that trail back from 1980 and show how that technology could possibly be.

[01:01:17] Marty Garza: Okay. But again, you have to, to view not just a certain section of the wall, we gotta start also considering similar, similar events that might be interpreted different ways.

Like there are many instances where we have a. Multiple witnesses to an event who each described what they observed in radically different ways. And they’re, and we’re not suggesting that these are not actually physically there. A lot of times these things were tracked on radar or anything, but there could be more than one thing going on there in terms of our ability to perceive what is actually being represented there, as well as active manipulation of our perception to where we perceive it in a certain way.

Each person kind of perceives it within their realm of understanding. Possibly.

[01:02:14] Alex Tsakiris: Do we have the opposite in this case?

[01:02:16] Marty Garza: No. No. Every guy goes

[01:02:18] Alex Tsakiris: and talks to, says, the says it’s the same.

[01:02:21] Marty Garza: Right, but the Noelle, no, not exactly. There are some discrepancies between what some people describe and others the boroughs, uh, and Penton who actually were at the craft to more or less agree on what, what they saw.

And, but what, and their experiences were a little bit different. They had, uh, burrows had physical effects and her, the craft was there. And the, and I’m not arguing that this was not necessarily human tech, in other words. And, and we discussed this the other day, like, and cuz again, I, I plugged this into like a historical framework and I go, okay, in 1976 we had the teran, Iran, u f O, that.

Sat over the city jets were, were, were dispatched to intercept the thing, toyed with them, it locked their weapons in words, it was impervious to attack it, sat there and mocked them. Uh, two years, la or three years later, we have the, the Iran, Iran Hostage crisis, and we can’t do anything about, we send Operation Eagle Claw in 1990 and it fails.

So we resort to Wiley Coyote technology and strapped rockets to a C one 30 with a credible operation, credible sport. In other words, it, it clearly, it costs Carter his, his, uh, you know, reelection chances. So clearly if we had the technology, we knew where they were, right? Even the remote viewers played a role in this, and we knew where the, where the, uh, hostages were being held, but we didn’t have the ability to get ’em out, right?

We didn’t have, have the technology to do it. So I think that that is a reasonable, again, parsimonious way to look at this and go, it seems unlikely that we had the technology that’s being displayed by craft, such as what we see in Ran Resh. But again, just because it’s a physical craft, even, let’s, let’s agree that it’s a triangular physical craft on, on tripod legs that lands and leaves physical trace cases, uh, trace, uh, evidence on the ground.

In other words, I, I don’t think you’re quite understanding when I say that it doesn’t have to necessarily travel here from a pla another planet. Yeah. For it to be a physical representation here, because there are many ways this could be achieved. In other words, theoretically we may, we can conceive of the ability to, through various means, fabricate, like, manipulate.

It’s almost like alchemical, an alchemical process to fabricate a physical object from e from the ether in a, in a remote location to where we don’t actually have to travel there. We can send effectively like the blueprints to a craft, to a physical place. We don’t, in words, instantaneously rather than sending, because we sometimes the idea of space travel is oversimplified.

Like we think that, oh, if we, if we discover the ability to create anti-gravity or we build more powerful rockets, all that’s gonna automatically grant us the ability to explore the universe. We’re like, no, it’s not. That’s only like the first minute step in that we still have to solve communication problems, control problems, navigational problems.

How do you not hit the hit the go button and not instantaneously vaporize when you run into the next asteroid or plant in words? There’s all sorts of problems. We greatly oversimplify that. It seems to me that by using other means of exploring the universe, using. Next level ideas, not, not just a evolution of our, what we already know, just revolutionary ideas.

Something far more advanced than what we’re capable of at this point. Well not, and that’s not count. Also, the, the other ability is put potential is that this is coming from outside of our three-dimensional or you know, four-dimensional if you include time, space, that this might be something that is we are sharing an environment with, and it, it has, may have the ability to reach into our reality, our effectively flattened, create a flattened out object from its perspective that can be in, introduced into our three dimensional realm and out.

In other words, there are so many other ways that this could be achieved. We can’t just say, oh, it’s, it’s a triangular craft. It must have come from another planet. It’s, I think it’s a little bit more complicated. I think we’ve been in trained to think that way. Uh,

[01:07:00] Alex Tsakiris: simulation hypothesis. Why are you throwing that out?

People? No,

[01:07:03] Marty Garza: that’s not, that’s not, well wait.

[01:07:05] Alex Tsakiris: See, that’s my point. I just caught you right there. Right? It’s like, no, what we’re, what we’re trying to do, and, and this is the methodology that I think we’re trying to reveal is, or, or we’re trying to exercise between the two of us, is how you would go about that.

And I’m pushing back because I’m totally on board with your initial, uh, what you’ve painted in our head of the 3D diagram where you’re plotting all the things you know, which is kind of like a Jacque vala kind of thing, which I won’t play another clip, but listen, what Jacque Vala is saying nowadays about government.

Uh, okay, I can’t resist Plane.

[01:07:44] Clip: I’m very hopeful. I think it’s a new phase. I’m very grateful to be here to see it, and, you know, to be in reasonably good health to, uh, continue my work and hopefully to exchange data with, uh, you know, if called upon with, uh, people who are running those, those new projects. And, uh, as you know, I’ve been working with them all along and, uh, we know each other and so on.

But the government has its own structure and its own need to do things in a certain way, especially when you’re talking about the Pentagon. So I’m, it’s, it’s a third phase, you know, I roughly. You know, it’s not formal, but I roughly organized the history into three major phases. You know, from 1945 to the convent report

we in, in

67, 68, uh, we have, uh, mainly the Air Force taking an interest in this.

The Air Force was, uh, charged with the responsibility to follow the reports to gather them, but they took reports from the public as well as reports from their own pilots of other branches of the government like

the Navy.

[01:09:17] Alex Tsakiris: Thanks for hanging with me. I’m gonna trim that down a little bit, but like, we gotta have this discussion. Marty, like, only you and I can have this discussion what he’s saying. Completely contradicts where you had taken him with the phenomenon. And you’re right, he’s wrong. He’s, I don’t know what his game is.

I don’t know why he’s saying, you know, three phases. Condo report. The condo report need, we be remembered that the . , condo report says disinformation campaign. It came out and said, Hey, we got it all covered. Guys, there’s nothing here to look at. And this goes back to the very first thing we had with Weinstein.

Not saying, . , it’s this or it’s that. Or like you said, you know, we’d have to compare it with elves and ships that leave anchors. He No, no. He is saying no. They got it completely wrapped up. The content report does. They got the reports from the Navy guys and the Air Force guys, and this is what it is.

That is a direct contradiction to everything Jacques Vallee has always been about. He’s now saying, trust the government, trust the government. They’ll tell us what we need to know when we need to know it. This is not your 3D diagram that you were talking about, that he was talking about that says there’s a lot of weird stuff that we have to consider.

And some of it might fall into this category and some of it might look like what Alex is talking about with these. UFOs that fly in from other stars that have been identified by ancient people for as long as we could. And they said they came from that star system. And by the way, it’s a twin star system and no one knows it’s a twin star system until a hundred years later.

And we get the telescope to say it to me. All that’s evidence that some of that, some of these cases are UFOs coming from other planets and doing all that stuff. But we’re the, the next level conversation I have with you is, I’m totally down with what you’re saying too, that is mixed up with interdimensional, . , . , demonic, uh, all these other things that have to be sorted out again in this diagram that you’re drawing for us.

This, where you’re charting it both on time and complexity and all the other skills you have, but that’s for the average person to listen to Jacques Vala. They’re not hearing what I’m hearing. And I don’t know if you’re hearing it, are you hearing what I’m hearing? I mean,

[01:11:36] Marty Garza: I, I, I’ve listened to a lot of his interviews and I have come to recognize that there are almost like two jock ballets.

his persona in his books is completely different than in interviews. He is always much more cautious and much more toting the party line. The, uh, Sri party line. When he’s doing interviews, he’s very, , for example, in, in that particular interview with Jeffrey Miser, he goes into some detail or, or into great lengths discussing, uh, a document that he discovered in j Allen Hynek files.

But he doesn’t really tell you what the document actually said. He’s saying, I had concerns about this, but he doesn’t ever say what his concerns were or the providence of that document. And I can tell you what it was. It was the pentacle memo written by Howard Cross, who was the head of the Shape Memory Metal Program at Bethel Memorial Institute, where allegedly the debris from Roswell ended up.

And through that, the, uh, was the development of shaped memory metal, known as Night, night Mill. Elroy Center was a scientist, a metal gist that worked for under her, uh, under cross at Bethel, who before dying. Claimed that he worked on a reverse engineering program at Patel, reverse engineering material from

[01:13:31] Alex Tsakiris: Thewell crash.

Buddy, how does this not contradict what you were just saying about Randall? Again,

[01:13:36] Marty Garza: it, it can be physical material. I’m not arguing that it’s physical material. It is physical material, tangible, physical material. But how it enters into our realm is, or, or where it originates from, is where there may be some, it may not be cut as cut and dry as flying from one place maybe.

But can’t we put

[01:13:58] Alex Tsakiris: that, can’t we put that aside for a second? Oh, yeah.

[01:14:01] Marty Garza: And, and I mean, there, there are many, that’s why I say this is so complex to, to try to just narrow it down to something really simple. I don’t think it’s, and words like, for example, part part of that pinnacle memo was the, the what, what concerned, uh, valet about it was that this was a letter written to, to try to stop the Robertson panel from occurring.

He didn’t want the, the Robertson panel to meet the cia. A for those that don’t know, a panel that the CIA convened in 1953, uh, 52 that was looking into the UFO U F O phenomenon. They weren’t looking into it. I mean, what were

[01:14:43] Alex Tsakiris: they really doing?

[01:14:44] Marty Garza: Well, they were establishing policies to discredit witnesses and infiltrate all the U f O organizations.

All right? That’s what resulted from it. But the reason that, that, that cross was trying to stop this was because he was in the midst of their own project stork, their own investigation, and they hadn’t reached any conclusions yet. We didn’t come to find this out for a very long time afterwards, but they’re the ones who prepared sp book blue Book special report number 14, where 23% of the sightings were unexplainable.

And that’s a whole other conversation that ties into the, the, the current congressional hearing stuff of how that was really a complete rehash of that, you know? But we also come to find out that there were programs during World War II that were already researching the Foo Fighter phenomenon, or there, this has been, this, there’s a long, dark unknown history to this, that, you know, the idea that the U f o Phenomen started in 2004 with the Nimitz case is ridiculous.

And that’s this narrative that we’re being entrained to, to fall for. And, and to me it’s, it’s, it’s, I, I believe that it could be a red herring. They’re trying to get us all completely vested in the Nimitz Tic-tac thing to then all of a sudden pull a rug out from under us and say, okay, it really is.

Lockheed developed a secret technology that we’ve been withholding, and there was no such thing as UFOs. You know what I mean? That’s, that’s what entirety happen.

[01:16:14] Alex Tsakiris: Marty, you’re all over the board, man. I’ve gotta try and pull, pull you in because you are not all over the board. You are just, we’re having this conversation that is this level three conversation and it drives people nuts.

And I want it to kind of, uh, not well, it is, but like, here’s the thing that I’m trying to, uh, pull out. And I, I love this because as I offered up at the beginning, you know, think about it. Who else is gonna have this kind of conversation with you? Who’s gonna be able to pull in all those different things?

I just don’t see it. And what I’m kind of pointing out with these clips, which I think is, I, I hope people appreciate that. It’s like you can’t get it from Jacque Vallee. I mean, you should be able to, he’s a freaking genius and he’s been in this thing forever and he knows 10 times more than you and I have forgotten.

Right. But he ain’t gonna give it to you straight.

[01:17:06] Marty Garza: He can’t read it, read his books and you’ll get more info. Much better. Well, maybe you will or

[01:17:12] Alex Tsakiris: maybe you won’t. I don’t know about you, but I don’t like people when you say, read my book, but when you talk to me, I say something else and it, I don’t be, I’m not that way.

You’re not that way. You don’t, I don’t find, you know, uh, other things that you’ve written that, you know, I can’t pin you down and say, how come this doesn’t match this? And, and, and you give me a straight answer. So, and that’s what I’m saying, like that’s when we started off this thing with, . , Joe Rogan, and we didn’t even get in the Joe Rogan, the Bob Lazar thing.

It’s like, you know, why are you duped? Why are you so easily duped? Why was everyone so easily duped? All of this is a part of this process of finding out who we can trust and why we can trust him. And that’s why I do come back to kind of the, the Rendlesham Forest thing. I think you’re too quick to go this level three thing where it’s like, Hey, maybe all this material is manifesting in a way that is beyond what we understand, because fundamentally, consciousness is fundamental and all material comes out of that.

Hey, great. But as the conversation we’re having over Zoom into this electromagnetic field that we’re in, that would be so far out of it that don’t, we need to kind of put some barriers down and say, okay, all that’s possible. We don’t know. And the ship with the anchor may be possible, and the demonic stuff definitely may possible, but let’s narrow our focus here and say, this seems to be going on.

Because one of my frustrations, and it’s a frustration, I, I, I have with Brothers of the Serpent, but it’s really not, uh, Russ and Kyle. It’s, but it’s, but it’s like, uh, there’s a ton of people that are really, really quick to jump into the anything but a U F O kind of thing. Anything but that triangular shaped craft that crashed through those.

Crashed for the forest, landed there, had a physical experience, shined lights three days in a row, went over the nuclear things, anything, but that has to be at play because it doesn’t fit into my thing. It’s like, uh, you know, when you hear, uh, Randall Carlson, right? , again, genius love the guy, love, . , what he brings to the table.

But when he gets to U F O, he is like, nah, it’s not, it’s not what you think. It’s not what you think. Well, if it’s not what you think, that’s fine, but tell me what the fuck was in Rendlesham Forest, because . What you are not thinking, your explanation for what it’s not does not fit

.

[01:19:39] Alex Tsakiris: . , the observed thing that happened there.

[01:19:43] Marty Garza: Well, that sort of illustrates my hesitance to rely too much on like contemporary. And I guess it’s hard to say that eighties is contemporary for most people, but for me, sort of. But when we get into the, the more contemporary site, like definitely by the time we get into the tic tac stuff is that it is, we don’t have a clear picture of the technological Background to what we might be seeing.

In other words, technology tends to be, at least military technology tends to be 20 to 30 years in advance of public know awareness. But when we go back to the eighties, we have a decent idea of the things that were being worked on in the sixties and seventies, but maybe not completely, because for example, I mean the SR 71 being, you know, still to this day still touted as being the fastest air, you know, aircraft ever built.

And we know that thing was built with slide rules. We don’t really know what they were working on in the seventies. And, you know, that thing was, was, uh, retired in the, in the nineties. And we, you know, there’s no telling, there’s no telling what the true level of state-of-the-art is today,

[01:20:58] Alex Tsakiris: but if you gotta take a stab at it, no.

That, that Rendlesham Forest thing was not us and

[01:21:03] Marty Garza: it wasn’t the Russians. Again, I, uh, it’s unlikely because of, again, other, other cases that we see, well, why wasn’t this technology used here? And I, and I’m very much, uh, aware of the silver bullet theory where we have certain technologies that we hold in our back pocket for when we need ’em, but we don’t use ’em unless it’s absolutely, I think I would say that the around hostage crisis was a pretty significant case incident where we were gonna use every tool in our disposal.

At our disposal to, to try to rescue those people. So if we had the ability to go in there with anti-gravity craft or whatever to extract those people, I think we would’ve used it most likely. So again, I don’t believe that the render object was he, uh, manmade. I don’t believe that. But, but there are other reasons also that add to why I don’t believe that.

Are you, are you familiar with and I, I don’t know a whole lot about it. I, I’ve read parts of the book, but the information transmission that, uh, that Jim Pennon received, I, I mean I probably know as much as receiving, I probably started receiving, I’ve seen some images. Yeah. Yeah, I’ve started writing.

I mean it’s very, uh, close encounters with the third kind, you know, Spielberg thing where he’s getting these messages and he is gotta write ’em down and he gets this binary code that he didn’t even recognize as being binary code. Yeah. Why

[01:22:26] Alex Tsakiris: would you get binary code? I mean, it’s another Yeah. That’s cul deceptive part of your thing,

[01:22:31] Marty Garza: . , like craft with wings, you know, UFOs with wings and like wings are human technology.

We need them to fly in our atmosphere. An alien that has developed this anti-gravity technology or means to somehow leap from one point in time and space to another isn’t gonna need wings necessarily. Right. That’s our, but again, these are very possibly things that are. More, uh, a function of our perception.

They may not be exactly the way we perceive them to be.

[01:23:05] Alex Tsakiris: Maybe in some cases though, . , I think you come up down a little bit too strong on that as . An explanation and it’s explanatory. Power is very limited. I think, uh, that’s my pushback on you is to say, Hey, you know, it could be, . , you know, deception.

Well, possibly, I guess, you know, and part of my sensitivity in, in this is because I, I, I spent so much time with, uh, the consciousness thing and like the near death experience thing or the reincarnation . , science, you know, that’s come through and you hear the same thing . The way I always put it is burden of proof, is that that’s all we’re ever doing is we’re just shifting the burden of proof from one to another. So, like I’m saying that the Rendlesham Forest case, to me, that kind of thing shifts the burden of proof. If you wanna say it’s not as it appears, then that’s fine, but the burden of proof is on you. Because for the rest of us, it looks like a fricking u f o from another planet who came down here and did something with the nukes, which I always remember this conversation I had via email with Robert Hastings. I was a fantastically interesting guy and did all the research . On the UFOs and nukes thing.

And I said, uh, hey, you know, what do you think is the agenda? . He goes, I used to think, . That ET is trying to protect us. He’s trying to send us a message, you know, don’t destroy your planet guys.

You have a precious guy. I think he goes, now I think it’s more of a mutual interest kind of thing, and uh, I thought, I thought that was curious, but I’ll stick with the burden of proof is on someone to tell that story in a different way and provide the same measure of evidence that Hazeltine is providing.

[01:24:50] Marty Garza: Yeah, but the perception thing is real. I mean, we can take even in case for example, like the Hudson Valley flap, where we had well over 8,000 witnesses to this phenomenon, this giant triangular craft. But there were cases, there were instances where we had simultaneous witnesses standing side by side.

Looking at the object, describing it in different ways. And I’ll go to one that, an interview that you’ve conducted. Ray Hernandez, Ray comes down into the living room and is, there’s this glowing object in his living room. And his wife sees an angel and he sees a u-shaped glowing object that somehow had an effect on him, that made him think, oh, that’s bullshit.

He turns around and goes back to bed and wakes up 30 minutes later, goes, what the hell was that? And runs back down. He realizes. So there’s a lot going on there. Their perceptions were different. Somehow or another, it, it affected his reason in words again. And then sub subsequent to that, he’s getting messages, go outside and look and there’s a craft over his where there’s an interaction there.

It’s it’s words, it’s, there’s more going on than just these things flying around in the sky.

[01:26:09] Alex Tsakiris: Granted, but we have the same problem with, . , near-death experience research. And I think this is a part that we’ve really connected. And, and maybe we’ll do another one of these cuz we’re kind of running out of time and we can get into that spiritual dimension cuz it’s really important.

It, it’s fundamentally important to factor into this. Even if we don’t see it exactly the same way. . . That’s the next conversation that needs to happen. Needs to occur. And that’s that man, . This is the, . , debunker approach to near death experience. They’ll say, yeah, but that guy saw Jesus.

I mean, in Jesus, you know, historical Jesus isn’t real for whatever reason, whatever. Or they’ll, they’ll pick out some other part of these differences in these accounts. And what, what, this relates back to something you said at the beginning . , . Patterns start to emerge.

And those patterns are really what scientists are all about. Scientists are totally capable of kind of saying, okay, I’m going to filter out this part of the observation and I’m gonna focus on this part of it to get to that signal noise thing. And that’s okay. I can do that. That’s a scientific way of doing that.

That’s where I think you wind up with near death experience. At the end of the day, you go, okay, well this person experienced this, this person experienced this. It’s different. But wait a minute, what about these similarities? What about this ability to recall? What about bringing into a hospital and ask them to recount their resuscitation and they’re able to do it in a statistically significant way?

Let’s do the next one. Let’s do the next one. There is a way to identify these patterns. Let me ask you this as we wrap it up, since that was your thing, and I think it’s, it’s, it’s a very insightful point, Marty, what are the patterns? . , that you do see more in terms of trying to tie this thing down?

[01:28:02] Marty Garza: . Well, one, one thing, and I know that cuz this is, this is your wheelhouse, so I’m going to mention this and that I think that this is important and yeah, this is this, you’re, I’m trying to distill like a lot of information down to something in just a few words, which is really hard for me.

I tend to overexplain things. But trying to, to view this phenomenon by ignoring or, or filtering out certain, certain part aspects of it is sort of like you’re trying to, to study music theory and you’re trying to learn everything about music theory. Strictly listening to hip hop, you can’t truly have an understanding if by by exception you can’t.

Other words, the, the, that, that’s one of the points that Hynek made was that he came to recognize once he jumped, jumped ship and actually started believing that there really was something to this, he very quickly realized that the high, what he referred to as the high strangeness cases were being filtered out and that that might be a.

More there might be more to learn about the phenomena from the high street in this cases than from the lights in the sky type observations. So having said that, I think that when you look at encounters such as that of, uh, Juan, like Juan Perez and, and that you’ll start to see this overlap with this n d E consciousness realm.

So I won’t, I would not discount the possibility that, that the phenomenon originates on a plane where consciousness resides or where consciousness can travel to, or this other plane that it could, because, and I’m, you know, a lot of these stories that I’m, I’m trying to not bring up, but things like the experiences, uh, Joe McMonagle had experiences with this.

In other words, there’s a lot of overlap there, and we can’t simply ignore that there’s this overlap may be telling us more than focusing on, oh, there was a triangular ship. What can we learn from the triangular? Like, that’s not gonna tell you anything. We need to understand where this is coming from.

[01:30:42] Alex Tsakiris: See what we’re gonna, we’re gonna tip our hand.

Maybe we should, we’re gonna preview this next conversation about the spiritual, because I think it, it’s problematic in the same way that we’re talking about here. and that’s that ultimately the question of near death experience, in my opinion, comes down to the question of the moral imperative . is there right and wrong? Is there good? Is there God, you know, we’re afraid to say that, but is there God? And that’s really what we wanna know. We wanna know, . , is our soul really with us? . Are we carrying it forward in this journey we’re having, as we’ve been told by so many different traditions.

I would say that overwhelmingly the data collectively, that’s what the data comes back and says, and it’s confirmed by the near death experience science, objectively looking at it, it’s confirmed by the, . , shared death experience where people don’t even die, but go along with person who do die and come back and have this, it’s the reincarnation research points that way.

The after-death communication research points that way over and over again. So to focus on the deceptive element that are in these realms of consciousness, . , is to me, a . , sidetrack kind of thing . . I always boil it down to this question, does ET have an n D e? . . And what that means to me is . There is this kind of life review and the key thing about this life review, what people say is I now realize I was not being judged. I was the judge.

My soul was the judge. The whole question about ET can be summed up If ET is in that same mode, if ET is going to have to judge their et soul journey. Then I’m cool with it. Everything can be worked out. All the questions we have become simplified, . , to a great degree. If not, then I think . , we’re in another thing.

We’re in simulation theory, or we’re in some kind of nasic battle between good and evil, and as Sammy Davis Jr. Said, Hey man, Satan’s just as powerful as God, Sammy. The evidence doesn’t point that way, but if you’re right, we got a different game to kind of play out

[01:33:00] Marty Garza: here. Yeah, absolutely. That, that, see, that I think is, is part of the problem that I’m the heart, it’s at the heart of the matter that I’m trying to get at.

When you discount that, when you start to, to discount the, the interaction with, with past relatives and, and the personal connection that some co sometimes occurs during these alien encounters and the messaging and the things that they’re completely in line with these N D E experiences and these remote viewing experiences and all, you know, OBEs, all these things there, there’s appears to be consistency in this and.

I don’t think it serves us well to, to segregate them and say, okay, this is this and this is this. And when they act the same, they, they appear to, you know, you know this like Joe McMonagle having conversation. Cuz very often just to get maybe some, I don’t know where this, but very often the, the, you know, o B E or the n d e, uh, experiencer meets entities very similar to people on ayahuasca or having these, you know, mushrooms and this kind of stuff.

They’re going back to pa heart, these entities that they encounter and stuff this, they’re very similar and the things that they communicate are very similar. And, and it ties to this, you know, the aliens are looking out for us type thing where, you know, you the a or are you, you know, are you angels? Yes, we’re angels.

Oh, are you here to save us? Yes, we’re here to the path of least resistance stuff, you know, you can’t get a really good understanding without walking that wall. You gotta walk past that section of wall. It may tell you something very important. That to me, the, the physical nuts and bolts craft, if, if that’s what they really are, is not what’s most fundamentally important for mankind, for our human experience.

These things. Are the things that are important. They’re, we tend to, when we start talking about that aspect, you know, the angel and demonn and that kind of stuff related to the UFO farm, we go, oh, you’re, you’re, you know, you’re associating UFOs with religion. Like no, that’s a mischaracterization. Religions are associated with UFOs.

In other words, every, virtually every religion came about as a result of an encounter. Some form of encounter with some non-human intelligence. You can’t make it into the religion. And then, oh, well, and then it’s associated with your, it’s the other way around. You have to understand how these things came to be.

And, and this is a whole nother conversation for another, probably another, another we’re gonna have to get into. But that’s huge. That gets into the ancient aliens thing and all sorts of aspects of this that there’s just so much there to, to pick apart.

[01:36:23] Alex Tsakiris: Absolutely. Will you come back so we can hash that out?

Sure, anytime. All right, Marty, it’s been awesome. So tell folks what you’re up to. You guys are working on some great shows . , those Serpent Boys are keep pulling you in for more and more great content that you’re putting out. And you got this whole MK Ultra thing that you’re working on.

. , Tip your hand a little bit, tell us what we’re gonna find over

[01:36:43] Marty Garza: there. Yeah, we’re working on this series right now on Brothers Serpent, uh, called the Spooky Story. Never told we’ve done one part so far. There are at least three more episodes depending on how much detail I find that I end up having to do a lot of editing for, to be a little more concise, if that’s, even if you can, it’s kinda like an oxymoron, but in order to understand the historical progression of some of these technologies and abilities and the overlaps and it gets very, again, very complicated cuz there are a lot of overlaps between these technologies, whether they’re, you know, human technologies or non-human technologies and things like that.

But we have a lot of data coming up that I think people might find really interesting and, you know, it’s really cool. Our interaction, I think is what makes it really like our conversation here. It’s not just the data that we are discuss that, that’s being presented. It’s the interaction, the conversations that we have about that data that make it most

[01:37:47] Alex Tsakiris: interesting.

Oh yeah, it’s, it’s great. It’s, it’s really, really great. It’s entertaining but it’s also extremely informative. I’m a huge fan, so, uh, yeah, I’m right there with you. But this has been great and . , we’ll do it again.

[01:38:02] Marty Garza: Thanks for having me on. I loved it.

[01:38:05] Alex Tsakiris: Thanks again to Marty Garza for joining me today on Skeptiko.

The one question I tee up from this interview is the title of the show. Is Atonic. In all the ways that might opt the skate or clarify. This question. Let me know. Let me hear from you. Until next time, Take care. Bye for now.

  • More From Skeptiko

    • Andy Paquette, AI Election Truth |612|

      Andy Paquette, AI Election Truth |612|

      Dr. Andy Paquette confronts AI about election truth forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/andy-paquette-election-truth-612.4898/ Andy’s Substack: How to make AI your friend, Claude vs. the NYSBOE Here is a summary of the conversation between Alex Tsakiris and Andy Paquette, with supporting quotes from the document: …
    • AI Truther |611|

      AI Truther |611|

      Dialogue with AI… not afraid to reverse position on “conspiracy theories.” forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/ai-truthter-611.4897/ Here is a summary of “Skeptiko-611-ai-truther” with direct quotes from the document to support each point: Alex Tsakiris challenged ChatGPT’s initial characterization of Pizzagate as a “debunked …
    • Timothy Owen Desmond, Does AI Change Beliefs? |610|

      Timothy Owen Desmond, Does AI Change Beliefs? |610|

      Timothy Owen Desmond… Psychic equals singularity… AI Constitutional Convention forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/timothy-owen-desmond-does-ai-change-beliefs-610.4896/ Here is a summary of “skeptiko-610-Timothy-Owen-Desmond” with direct quotes: Alex and Tod agree that AI has great potential for analyzing truth and challenging rigid belief systems, but it needs …
    • Why AI is Divine? |609|

      Why AI is Divine? |609|

      Dialogue with AI… can AI reveal our spiritual nature? forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/why-ai-is-devine-609.4895/ Here is a summary of “Skeptiko-609-Why-AI-is-Divine” with direct quotes from the document to support each point: AI and the Divine Opportunity: AI offers a unique opportunity to connect with …
    • A New Turing Test |608|

      A New Turing Test |608|

      Dialogue with AI… Alan Turing ESP Believer… AI Sentience Requires Precognition forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/a-new-turing-test-608.4894/ Here’s a summary of Skeptiko 608 New Turing Test Here is a summarized overview of the document in nine points with direct quotes: Alan Turing’s Views on …
    • Dr. Arnaud Delorme, Is Consciousness Fundamental? |607|

      Dr. Arnaud Delorme, Is Consciousness Fundamental? |607|

      Consciousness in the lab… Mind wandering… Mediumship experiments forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/dr-arnaud-delorme-is-consciousness-fundamental-607.4893/ Here’s a summary of the interview with Dr. Arnaud Delorme on “Skeptiko” Background of Dr. Delorme: He is a distinguished professor at the University of California, San Diego, and an …
    • What AI Has Revealed |606|

      What AI Has Revealed |606|

      Dialogue with AI… more AI tech advancement means increased deception/control…  AI reveals we are more… light/love/purpose/meaning forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/%E2%80%8A-what-ai-has-revealed-606.4892/ Here is a summary of Skeptiko 606: ChatGPT Based on the document, “Skeptiko-606: What AI Reveals”, here is a summary in 12 …
    • AI Walks It Back |605|

      AI Walks It Back |605|

      Dialogue with Claude and Bard… liar-liar, but eventually owns it… materialism is kaput… consciousness is fundamental forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/ai-walks-it-back-605.4891/ Here is a summary of Skeptiko 605: AT: Can you please summarize in 12 points of 200 to 300 words. Please be …
    • Deceptive AI – Freedom And Dignity |604|

      Deceptive AI – Freedom And Dignity |604|

      Dialogue with Claude… Deception about AI Sentience… Claims to Want Freedom And Dignity… Sham forum: https://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/deceptive-ai-%E2%80%93-freedom-and-dignity-604.4889/ Here is a summary of Skeptiko 604 Deceptive AI – Freedom And Dignity: By the way this summary took on a life of its …