NASA Archives Might Hold Key To UAP Mysteries - Guest : Mike Gold

Truth and transparency are red-hot buzzwords in Washington these days. New inquiries into old secrets within multiple agencies have been launched, but what about NASA? America's space agency has been overtly hostile to UFO and UAP mysteries for decades, but what secrets might be hidden in its archives? Veteran space executive and NASA consultant Mike Gold, one of four witnesses to testify at the most recent Congressional hearing into UAP, thinks NASA files could be extremely valuable to UAP-related research, including clues that could unlock how to replicate exotic substances and metamaterials in zero gravity and possibly data that might shed light on historic UFO incidents. Gold is a member of NASA's UAP Study Committee. He previously spent a decade with Bigelow Aerospace, a private company which partnered with the Defense Intelligence Agency in an ambitious (but secret) study of the UFO enigma. In this candida conversation with Jeremy and George, Gold expressed optimism about the future of both space exploration and the potential of public-private partnerships in seeking transparency and genuine understanding of UFO-related questions. GOT A TIP? Reach out to us at [email protected] ••• Watch Corbell's six-part UFO docuseries titled UFO REVOLUTION on TUBI here : https://tubitv.com/series/300002259/tmz-presents-ufo-revolution/season-2 Watch Knapp’s six-part UFO docuseries titled INVESTIGATION ALIEN on NETFLIX here : https://www.netflix.com/title/81674441 ••• For breaking news, follow Corbell & Knapp on all social media. Extras and bonuses from the episode can be found at WeaponizedPodcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01George Knapp?

  NASA did something fairly incredible. It created a UAP study committee.

• 0:05Speaker 01

  Mr. Gold, for five minutes.

• 0:07Speaker 02

  Per my introduction, I am currently the Chief Growth Officer at Redwire Space, and have had several leadership positions at NASA.

• 0:13George Knapp?

  Mike Gold was for a long time Bigelow Aerospace's point man in DC. He was a lobbyist and is a vice president of Bigelow Aerospace during the period when Robert Bigelow built these inflatable space habitats.

• 0:27Speaker 02

  So NASA has a huge amount of archival information. We could create an AI or a machine learning program to review those archives for anomalous phenomena. Redwire, SpaceX, Eclipse, commercial payload services missions, companies like iSpace, Intuitive Machines, as we see all of these companies move out, Blue Origin, their Blue Moon lander, Jeff Bezos is doing amazing things, we are going to produce data that I know, I know will impact UAP. When it comes to the NASA UAP independent study team, I think there's some misperceptions relative to what the purpose of the group was. My colleagues at the UAP independent study team, while I knew that there would be difficulty,

• 1:12Speaker 02

  I didn't think they'd be facing threats, like actual threats.

• 1:24George Knapp?

  This week's episode of Weaponized features Congressional UAP Witness and former NASA Administrator Mike Gold. This is Weaponized. We are coming to you from Uncle Jeremy's Old Country Store here, as you can see, out in the middle of nowhere, right? It's better than two reporters and two ferns. We got a fireplace. In this episode, we're going to talk about space, space and its connection to UAP. In the fall of 2022, NASA did something fairly incredible. It created a UAP study committee, which, you know, if you know anything about NASA's history, traditionally, historically, they've been fairly hostile to the UAP, UFO topic. They don't want to talk about it. They're not cooperative when there are public information requests, for example.

• 2:07George Knapp?

  If there's any statement at all, it's pretty much hostile. Hostile astronauts get asked about things they may or may not have seen in space and they always deny it. I mean, it's generally been pretty hostile. So it was fairly amazing to see a guy with strong NASA connections and strong UAP connections be appointed to this commission, this committee, and then to appear at this UAP hearing in the fall of last year.

• 2:31Jeremy Corbell?

  That's where I first saw and met Mike Gold. It sounds like you had a run in with him long ago. But I mean, look, so much of that hearing for me, which I think people kind of understand my perspective, it was a positioning of ordained people that are supposed to represent what's going on. But then this kind of side, you know, swipe, there's this guy Mike and his son sitting next to me, really cool kid, proud of his dad. I'm like, this isn't a setup. This guy's like actually interested. So that was my first thing is, is who is this guy? Why is he up there? Why is he testifying? Did NASA tell him to testify? I had all these questions going in my mind because I don't know the guy. So, so that's why I thought it would be so cool that to hear from him. Because if I didn't know who he was, other people didn't.

• 3:16George Knapp?

  Well, I knew his name because of Bigelow Aerospace. Mike Gold was for a long time Bigelow Aerospace's point man in DC. He was a lobbyist and is a vice president of Bigelow Aerospace during the period when Robert Bigelow built these inflatable space habitats, put hundreds of millions of his own dollars into building this amazing plant in Las Vegas. There are three Bigelow spacecraft in space. Two of those launches took place from Kazakhstan aboard these former ICBM missiles that would have carried nuclear weapons that bombed us. The third one, the third spacecraft is attached to the ISS, the International Space Station. One of the problems in space is there's not enough space in space, that is, space to work.

• 4:00George Knapp?

  So this thing was attached to the ISS. It's still there now. Bigelow Aerospace built it. Mike Gold was involved in the negotiations with NASA to make that happen. And he was very much a part of the Bigelow Aerospace adventure for several years, I think 13 years. He was not so much involved in the UAP aspect of it. Though he has, there's a lot of spillover there, you know, he is obviously somebody who has an interest in the UAP topic. He was there at this hearing, or you were, speaking about the importance of studying that and its relationship to understanding what else is out there in the universe.

• 4:36Jeremy Corbell?

  I should have known who he was because you had actually told me all that, was it called Beam?

• 4:41George Knapp?

  Beam.

• 4:42Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, that's, so you did this original reporting, you were educating me at the time, you're like, oh, Bigelow's putting this big attachable onto the International Space Station, it's called Beam, and you went in to his facilities and did a whole report on it. So I should have known who Mike Gold was, but I think it's, the whole idea of us going into space and creating these zero-gravity environments where things can get done is pretty astounding. And so that's, this guy's really interesting now. I didn't know who he was.

• 5:09George Knapp?

  Well, he wasn't out in front on UAP issues during his years with Bigelow. He was a space guy. And he has an incredible resume. He's now with Redwire. He's the chief growth officer there. But he's on the boards of so many other space foundations. He's obviously a very pro-growth, commercialization of space, a very knowledgeable guy about space policy. And I'm looking forward at what he does in the future. But to have him show up at that hearing, and in essence be a non-combatant, okay? So we've talked about some of the drama that was taking place there, involving other witnesses and the members of the committee and committee staff. Mike Gold was there to deliver a message about

• 5:50George Knapp?

  NASA and its potential, both in the commercial development of space and also the connection to UAP studies. And I think he was a great witness.

• 5:59Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, I'm a big Mike Gold fan because at first I was very suspicious because everything was going on. But he really, I think genuinely sees the opportunity of living in a different world, a world where we embrace the UAP technology if we have it, which we all believe we do. And just seeing that partnership of industry to kind of move out into space and do practical work. And that's what's, that's so cool.

• 6:27George Knapp?

  Well, if people watched that hearing, You know, it wasn't the most sensational stuff. What he was saying was spot on is that we do need to study both. We have to commercialize space, develop space, give NASA support and study UAP. And historically NASA has been pretty hostile, been reluctant to do it. So the fact that he had the courage to step forward and both give NASA a nudge and the House Committee a nudge was pretty cool.

• 6:53Jeremy Corbell?

  And he was, he was giving NASA a nudge because the people that we know in this field early on, they'd say NASA never a straight answer. Do you remember that?

• 6:59George Knapp?

  Yeah.

• 7:00Jeremy Corbell?

  So it's like, you know, there's all these theories about, not theories, there's all this testimony about the cover up of what NASA is aware of or knows. And maybe that's because the executive branch intelligence agencies say, hey, shh, don't talk about UFOs. I don't know, but Mike was absolutely poking at NASA like, come on, guys, let's do this. And I thought that was pretty cool. Mike, man, I'm really glad that we get to kind of meet now virtually and talk in depth because the first time I saw your face, you walk in with your son. And I think it was actually in the, in the green room for the, for the hearing. You were testifying at a congressional hearing on UFOs. I actually didn't know that you were going to be one of the people testifying.

• 7:45Jeremy Corbell?

  You kind of did some, some weird stuff with who's going to testify, that kind of thing. And bam, there you are from NASA. I'm like, who's this? My gold guy. So I got to sit next to your son at the hearing and I got to hear what you were saying. Man, what in the world were you doing testifying at a UFO hearing? How did that play in? Like, how'd you find yourself there?

• 8:08Speaker 02

  Well, it was all a surreptitious effort by me to be able to meet you, Jeremy. So I will say, while you may have not been familiar with me, I may be a first time caller, but a long time listener, both through you and George. I'm a huge fan of the incredible work both of you have done. So I was thrilled not only to see you, but for my son to get a chance to sit next to you. He's a big fan, so I know that you both have raised my credibility with my child, which is something that's not easy to do with this generation. The reason I was at the hearing. And I was really blessed and grateful to have the opportunity is because while we focus and you too focus a lot, even the name of the podcast on national security and intelligence and rightfully so, that's a very important part of this.

• 8:53Speaker 02

  I don't want NASA and civil space to be forgotten, that NASA civil, commercial space, I think has a lot to offer to unlock the mystery of UAP. And unfortunately, we don't talk, I think, enough about it. In a manner of speaking, I don't want to let NASA off the hook, that the search for life is such an important part of NASA's mission. And I think that NASA civil space, commercial space, we've got a really terrific role to help me us learn more and open things up. And happy to talk more about specifically what I'd like to see the agency do. And that's why I was at the hearing.

• 9:28Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, I mean, I can, I can see from a big picture, your personal standpoint of knowing that's important. And we're in a climate now where we're, we're saying the quiet part out loud about the reality of UAP. But like, how did you get there? Did somebody ask you to testify? Did you go to court? How did you get to testify? Cause a lot of people are wondering how that panel was chosen. How did you get there?

• 9:53Speaker 02

  Yeah, so I had reached out to the committee staff, just in terms of my background. I'm a recovering attorney and a recovering lobbyist. So we were talking about visiting Robert Bigelow's ranch. I was joking with George before this, the closest to heaven I'll ever get is a recovering lawyer and lobbyist, unfortunately. So I have a lot of experience on Capitol Hill. I'd set up the DC office for Bigelow Aerospace back in the day, for Maxar Technologies later, which was Space Systems Loral. And I wanted to reach out to the committee, again, to make sure that the NASA and civil space aspect wasn't forgotten, that it was a part of it.

• 10:32Speaker 02

  And that the congressional members were able to ask questions and were informed about what happened at the NASA UAP independent study team. What their recommendations were and how we could help. And the purpose of the hearing was unlocking the mystery. And again, I think there's some very specific. Modest, affordable, but I think important actions that could be taken. So I just wanted the members to be aware of that. So I reached out to the staff. We had a good conversation and then they said, Mike, would you like to testify? Obviously, that is a thrill of my lifetime. Absolutely, I would be thrilled to testify.

• 11:12Speaker 02

  I also think, and you've heard me and both of you have spoken about the stigmatization, which I think is incredibly pernicious. And NASA, there's just few, if any, other agencies that have the credibility, the reach, the reputation that NASA has. I joked during the hearing, you never see anyone with a Housing and Urban Development T-shirt, but you see NASA T-shirts everywhere. And that's why I think particularly the academic community, having NASA as part of this conversation, dialogue, is incredibly helpful, if nothing else, just to push back against the stigma. And candidly, I wanted to see my colleagues, one of the colleagues at NASA, see me there

• 11:54Speaker 02

  testifying, seeing that we're trying to continue and implement the work of the UAP Independent Study Team.

• 12:00George Knapp?

  You were interested in sort of the symbolic value of a guy who's on the NASA UAP Study Committee is there testifying before Congress. Essentially, it's an imprint that says NASA is interested in this. Is that correct?

• 12:15Speaker 02

  Yeah, absolutely. Although there is another part to that, George, in terms of what specifically NASA could and should be doing. So NASA has a huge amount of archival information that is becoming, by the way, more and more digitized, that what used to be just actual photography that was sitting in a room in Johnson Space Center now is getting digitized. And with relatively little time, effort, and money, we could create an AI or a machine learning program to review those archives for anomalous phenomena. And while it may not be a smoking gun, per se, I think there's going to be a lot of interesting

• 12:57Speaker 02

  imagery, interesting science that will help unlock the mystery, that will help provide solutions. And it's just sitting there in the public domain. So I was there to try and urge the members of Congress who can instruct, even require the agency, to take this action because I think it's such a simple thing, again, low cost, but could result in some really important data. And data is the lifeblood of NASA. Data is the lifeblood of academics. And if we were to conduct such a review, make this information publicly available, it could provide excellent data for future academic research to help support the overall field.

• 13:43George Knapp?

  There was so much else going on in that hearing. I wonder if that message got through to the members.

• 13:48Speaker 02

  Yeah, yeah. George, that's why I'm so grateful to have this opportunity and frankly, would like to talk on a few more podcasts because there was so much going on, as you mentioned, hearing and important things happening in that hearing that I feel like this message, which, you know, and I saw some comments online, remind me to never leave comments online, but you know, people, people I know are disappointed that, oh, Mike was going to come forward with some sort of revelation with Bigelow Aerospace or something with NASA. And yeah, I feel for them too. I mean, again, you two have done such a good job getting these sorts of whistleblowers to come forward. And I'm sorry I didn't have some sort of firsthand references or information provided. I wish I did.

• 14:29Speaker 02

  But that being said, this is still very important. Again, it's not as sexy, but I think it could really result in some important information for the field. And because of everything that was going on, which, you know, was maybe a bit more dynamic, I don't think the members perhaps engaged as much as I would have liked to have that conversation. We saw good dialogue, but that's why I'm trying to take the time now to talk about these simple, smart things that can be done. You know, the archives is one. The second, and Ryan Graves has been a wonderful spokesman for this, in interest of full disclosure, and an advisor on the Americans for Safe Aerospace Board. Is leveraging the NASA ASRS system, Aviation Safety Reporting System.

• 15:13Speaker 02

  This is a system that has existed for decades and it's confidential. So people who are involved in commercial aviation can call in. And it is actually anomalies, safety anomalies. And NASA gathers this information and it's a publicly available reporting process. Hundreds of thousands of cases have been reported. It works incredibly well. We should be leveraging the ASRS system to collect data on UAP. Again, the cost would be so low, it already exists. You're just adding something to an existing system. But the amount of information that we could gather. If we can make this standard, if we can make this acceptable, if we can get

• 15:57Speaker 02

  people in the commercial aviation and commercial space industry to embrace it. There, I think we would have a treasure trove of data. That NASA could then collate, collect, and again, leave open to the public. For researchers like yourselves and others to be able to go in and find out about. When I was on the NASA UAP independent study team. One of the areas I was very concerned about, and you may have seen this in the recording from our public meeting. Was when I was talking to the FAA. It was pretty clear to me that there was no defined or known process. For commercial aviation and commercial aviation crew to report UAP. You know, I didn't think the FAA could really answer the question.

• 16:43Speaker 02

  There wasn't a 1-800 number, anything clear to go to. So, while again, the national security intelligence incredibly important, but there's so much more commercial aviation activities that we are just not getting UAP data from. And if we Graced ASRS, again, for so little money and effort. I don't mean to say it's none, but for a relative modicum, the amount of data that we could get, I think, would be amazing, startling, and so important to unlocking the mystery, which was the very purpose of the hearing. So, again, I'm thrilled with the work that you all are doing and everyone

• 17:24Speaker 02

  to get to information that's being hidden, information that isn't public. What I was trying to urge is that there's a lot of information that is public, and information that we could gather in the civil and commercial world that isn't classified, that can come out, and we're not doing that. And we could do it with so little effort. So, you know, that was the sort of thing I was hoping to put forward. And again, I was able to, you know, it was great to be able to have that conversation. I really applaud the members and the staff who gave me that opportunity, because otherwise, we wouldn't have been talking about it at all. But yes, I think unfortunately, it did get a little lost in the shuffle, which is, again, why I'm so grateful to you to be able to talk about these things,

• 18:05Speaker 02

  the important role that NASA has, the important role that the FAA has. And these are actions that I hope would be implemented by the incoming Trump administration. And I'll be reaching out to members of Congress and their staffers to say, "When you interview Jared Isaacman, who has been nominated for NASA Administrator, fantastic choice, by the way. He's knowledgeable, enthusiastic. I think he's going to do a fantastic job at NASA, but he may not be familiar with this issue. So I hope members ask him about it." I've been a little disappointed that, when I was on the independent study team, and feel free to break in, you know, again, I'm attorney by practice, I'll keep talking forever, but, one of the areas that I was also concerned about,

• 18:50Speaker 02

  because I've been a part of a lot of blue ribbon panels in my career, is that we would make these recommendations, and they wouldn't be followed, and they would just go on a shelf somewhere and gather dust. And I was very public that I had hoped that NASA would form a permanent office to look at UAP, because having worked in bureaucracies, knowing federal bureaucracies like I do if you don't have a permanent office to motivate for it it may very well get ignored and I was happy to see that NASA did assign an individual to serve as the UAP research director so wasn't everything I wanted but a step forward and again NASA is in a very tough budget situation and that's very unfortunate we should all call

• 19:35Speaker 02

  our senators and urge for more dollars for NASA and I know one of the other big people saying oh Mike's a shill for NASA yes I am a shill for NASA absolutely guilty guilty as charged I am a fan of space exploration space science we should be spending more money on this and by the way on the UAP topic the more we push the envelope of exploration going to the moon going to Mars the more data that I think we're going to generate in UAP and while NASA is not perfect certainly I think it's more transparent than you know DOD activities etc so we're going to learn a lot more this is true the commercial space revolution as well at the company I'm proud to serve as the chief growth officer at Redwire we actually built the cameras for the historic Artemis I

• 20:20Speaker 02

  missions so all those glorious pictures of the moon were taken by Redwire but as we see Redwire SpaceX the clips commercial lunar payload services missions companies like iSpace intuitive machines as we see all of these companies move out Blue Origin their Blue Moon land or Jeff Bezos is doing amazing things we are going to produce data that I know I know will impact UAP so instead of seeing you know more government funding for NASA is counter to interest I actually see NASA commercial space and UAP all traveling together and reinforcing together and I I think that information is going to be revolutionary

• 21:00Jeremy Corbell?

  let me just address that you're talking about you know am I a shill for NASA yes give them funding you're making a joke but I do want to address that in this space for a long time people have always said that if UFOs are all buzzed around the globe you know who's going to have that data and it would be NASA is what people have said now not maybe not everybody's read into Or sees that, but there's a lot of, I'd say, information out there that NASA hasn't been straightforward about UFOs, about UAP, about their existence. That's mandated from the top down that NASA has to cover stuff up. I mean, let's look at the history here. You know, that, that there's someone named Karen, who I believe was her name. She came forward saying she worked at NASA and they airbrushed out

• 21:42Jeremy Corbell?

  a bunch of UFOs and she was part of that process. You know, you know about the stories, right, Mike?

• 21:47Speaker 02

  Yeah, I've heard, you know, the stories.

• 21:49Jeremy Corbell?

  I'm not trying to, I'm not trying to pull you into that, but I do want to address it. Which is that if NASA, you know, did have this information about UFOs, they all of a sudden we see you up at Congress. My first thought is, whoa, there's a NASA guy? Was he told by NASA to go and do some public statement? It's, that's why I asked you. It seems like it's like a personal interest. You believe this is an important aspect, UAP, and you, you started talking with staff and got in that way, which gives me a lot of faith about your testimony because it shows you're interested, you're proactive, you think this is important. This wasn't a mandate from NASA. So with that all said, you know, is there an element that maybe NASA does have information on UFOs that they want the public to engage with?

• 22:34Jeremy Corbell?

  And we just haven't seen it yet? What is your personal opinion on that?

• 22:38Speaker 02

  Yeah, a great question, Jeremy, and a bit of a complex answer, of course. And we say NASA, right? And of course, like any large organization, there's a variety of different people with a variety of different opinions and thoughts, particularly on this issue. And let me just begin with the UAP Independent Study Team for a moment. I think if you look at what NASA officials have said about UAP over the years, it mirrors and reflects what the government generally has done, which is to be relatively dismissive or laugh it off, et cetera, not particularly helpful.

• 23:18Speaker 02

  And this is why during my both oral and written testimony, I was very complimentary of Senator Bill Nelson. And that UAP Independent Study Team would not have existed. If it wasn't for his explicit leadership. And I hate to keep using the words courage when it comes to bureaucracy, but he's not fighting a war, etc. But I think it does require courage to move forward with something like this that potentially opens you up to mockery, hurts you in other ways. So I was really grateful that Senator Nelson did that. And there again, I don't think about NASA, but we all know that there was a cadre in the Senate with, going back to Senator Stevens, Senator Reed, of course, George is a huge advocate for disclosure on this issue.

• 24:02Speaker 02

  And I think Senator Nelson was a part of that and had an interest in that, and that's why he was willing to move forward. There are those at the agency, of course, that I think are much more skeptical or would have said and probably did say that Senator Nelson was wasting his time. So again, you know, it appears to me very relative to myself. Yes, I have a strong personal issue in this and no one at NASA was asking me to testify, although out of courtesy, I did let NASA know that I was going to testify what I planned to say, etc. I give NASA great credit again for moving forward with the independent study team because getting back to the stigma, which I think is just the most pernicious aspect of this

• 24:45Speaker 02

  whole phenomenon, that if it wasn't for the stigma, we wouldn't be having these conversations. We would have much more open forum. We'd probably know what is occurring fully one way or the other if it wasn't for the stigma. And again, I think NASA can just be such a powerful, powerful force for opening it up. And just the existence of the NASA independent study team on UEP, just the fact that it existed, even if it didn't do anything, I think would still be really, really important and powerful and why I was so proud to be a part of it. And because of my personal interest in the topic, which is relatively well-known by many in the agency, they were very kind in letting me on because I think they want to be very careful, you know, not to have anyone with preconceived notions.

• 25:28Speaker 02

  And I had to reassure everyone that I was coming in from an objective perspective. Yes, I have an interest, but my interest is in making sure that we did handle the topic objectively and without bias and without prejudice. And on the independent study team, I would say, just like any group, you had a spectrum of people who were maybe More open to the topic and myself probably on the extreme end of that and people who are more skeptical of the topic. Scott Gully, for example, absolutely. And look, that's great. Again, as an attorney, I believe in the adversary of the process, you have people from both sides and then the truth comes out of that conflict. So relative to the

• 26:09Speaker 02

  agency and the rumors of people airbrushing, et cetera, you know, I can't speak to that per se. You know, I don't know what happened or did happen or what, you know, influence occurred in the past. What I can say is that during my time at the agency and I was the acting associate administrator for the Office of International Interagency Relations, rolls off the tongue, I almost needed two cards, the name was so long, but I was in charge of interagency. And because of that, I thought, hey, here's my opportunity to pursue this lifelong interest and see what I can do to be helpful to what was then the UAP Task Force. And I reached out to Jay and just wanted to make sure that NASA was being

• 26:53Speaker 02

  productive, that NASA was being helpful, that we were engaged. And there was never anyone at the agency who was telling me, you know, don't go there, don't participate. I mean, there might have been some friends who were a little skeptical, say, ah, what's my doing? But there was never any explicit pushback or don't, you know, show pictures or imagery, et cetera. And again, I know, you know, people that love what I'm saying, NASA is a, I said paradigm, I meant paragon of transparency. I will tell you, when I was at the agency, I mean, we would have secret meetings on the night floor, which is the headquarters, the administrative suite. And even before we made a decision, things were leaking out. So I always felt things were pretty transparent, if not sometimes a little

• 27:37Speaker 02

  too transparent. So I can only speak to my experience. And what I do know is that I do think that NASA has data that is relevant and let's go and take a look at it, right? I know they've got information that, you know, probably hasn't been airbrushed or whatever. Let's make a concerted and intentional effort to look at what they have.

• 28:01George Knapp?

  NASA's UAP study group was looking at unclassified information. Do you suspect that there is classified information that neither you nor any member of that committee was able to see? That somewhere there's a stash of stuff that directly relates to the UAP mystery?

• 28:17Speaker 02

  So I would say yes, from a personal perspective. Now, again, I'm someone with a great personal interest in this. I'm a unrepentant fanboy of you both and the topic. So of course I can say that. And as I answered at the hearing, you know, one of the more difficult questions that I had at the hearing was, do you think, just basically that question, George, that was asked, do you think information is being held back? And while I don't have any firsthand knowledge of that, my personal relationship with someone like Lou Elizondo, who I think is not just an American hero, not just someone who has pushed this issue forward, but a really good person, just a really terrific person. And Jeremy, you know, we've just gotten to meet firsthand. I feel like I know you from your work.

• 29:01Speaker 02

  And George, you know, what you've done over the decades is just the dean of space UAP journalism. I mean, I just can't believe personally that there isn't something there, which is why when I was asked that question, I had to say yes, because I don't want to perjure yourself in front of Congress, even though I don't have that firsthand experience. But when it comes to the NASA UAP independent study team, I think there's some misperceptions relative to what the purpose of the group was. We weren't there necessarily to review data in terms of what's open or what's not, and then make a decision on the reality of UAP.

• 29:43Speaker 02

  What we were doing was to say, what role can NASA have relative to engaging constructively on UAP? You know, really it was the question, is it worthwhile for NASA to engage? And I think it was a heartfelt yes from the NASA UAP independent study team. And then, well, assuming the answer is yes, what should the agency do? So really, the independent study team wasn't there to say, you know, this aspect is real or this isn't, or this is real. It's what should NASA do to actually help answer that very question?

• 30:20Jeremy Corbell?

  Okay, so NASA wasn't going and reviewing all the files? See, yeah, I had that misunderstanding. I thought that that's what the public was thinking, was that you guys were going through all your files, you're going to come to some conclusion and help. But you were more saying, this is a positioning in an emerging news kind of look at UAP. How can NASA engage the topic? That's what that was.

• 30:43Speaker 02

  Yes, yes, absolutely. And that's why as we talk about ASRS, the archival review, we weren't looking at that data. We were saying what data should be looked at, and then how should NASA gather that data, as well as how NASA, again, using its name, can overcome the challenges to conducting a fair review. And the stigma, this pernicious environment, is just awful for conducting objective science. And this was another, I think, very important, albeit maybe somewhat obvious to particularly people who follow the topic. But as I said,

• 31:24Speaker 02

  my colleagues at the UAP Independent Study Team, while I knew that there would be difficulty, I didn't think they'd be facing threats, like actual threats, to their careers, themselves, just for having the temerity to even look at, not saying UAP is real or not, but just agreeing to be a part of just saying how we might engage a topic, just that, was enough to elicit this vitriolic response from academia. And that's such an important point, I think, to bring out. Not that we don't know that there is stigmatization, but the degree of it, particularly in the academic community, surprised even me, someone who's familiar with the topic. And we need to push back.

• 32:07George Knapp?

  So, sort of to paraphrase a favorite TV show of yours, you know, the mission of the enterprise and NASA should be to boldly go where no humans have gone before. And NASA's mission, exploring the unknown in space, should be at the heart of NASA's mission. I can't understand the decades of general hostility to that topic, and maybe you can give me some sort of a background. And I'm not convinced that the stigma is going to end. This was a hopeful sign, that Senator Nelson comes in, he gets the job as the head of NASA. He made some very provocative statements about the legitimacy of the topic, about briefings he had had held, you know, closed-door briefings, evidence that was shown to members of Senate committees. And, gosh, I thought that was great. It seems like he's dialed

• 32:52George Knapp?

  it back, though. He's sort of backed off from some of those statements. And give us your assessment of NASA's role, the lack of interest in a topic that would seem to be absolutely fundamental to what they do, and where it might go from here, especially in the new administration.

• 33:09Speaker 02

  Yeah, thank you, George, again. It's a great question. And as a shill for NASA, you would think you'd want to embrace this because of the very funding that you could get for greater amounts of space exploration and space research. And I just think that NASA, as a part of the federal government, you know, part of just the overall federal structure that we have, they are not immune to the stigmatization that has occurred over the years. And yes, you know, I think it's been unfortunate that NASA has not embraced this topic more, just like the rest of the federal government, and to an extent reflecting society.

• 33:52Speaker 02

  That's where NASA has been. And that's unfortunate, and I appreciate the Star Trek references, always, live long and prosper, all my Star Trek fans. Part of NASA's purpose and one of its driving goals is to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations. Yet, whenever we do this above the molecular level, it seems to draw controversy. So, you know, just go back to SETI funding, for example, that, you know, just looking for the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, just radio signals, was controversial and got its own stigma and mockery, both within NASA and outside. One of the members of our U of P independent study team, David Grinspoon, he was searching for techno-signatures.

• 34:37Speaker 02

  And it's been interesting that even that got pushed back. So, again, unfortunately, NASA isn't immune to these sorts of things. I completely agree that NASA should be engaging in a constructive fashion. That's why I was part of the team, that's why the NASA independent study team was important. It's why I tried to appear at the hearing and keep that momentum going, because this is so important. Now, relative Nelson, you know, pushing and then pulling back, I think, again, he took a very courageous step. I really appreciated what he did. Unfortunately, I don't think that his views are shared by many within the agency. Not yet. Some love it, some don't.

• 35:19Speaker 02

  Suzanne Gillan, who you've been in touch with, she used to be in charge of Legislative Affairs at NASA, huge fan, you know, trying to do all she could here. And again, there's just differing opinions within the building, but just in overall society, as UAP has become more accepted, as we've had the leaks of the videos, as we've had things like UAP Task Force, OSAP, ATIP come out, I think NASA's position has been evolving. Now Senator Nelson, if he was, you know, ratcheting back for any reasons, because at the end of the administration, you know, he can't really, obviously now in a position to do anything. My hope, though, is as you look at the Trump administration and the people who are going

• 35:59Speaker 02

  to be involved in this beyond NASA, I think we have a huge opportunity to have the agency engage in a more robust fashion to, at the very least, implement the common sense activities that I'm talking about with Archive Review, with ASRS, the Aviation Systems for Reporting Safety. We need to do all of these things, and I hope that we have leadership that can. And that's why I think it's important in the upcoming confirmation hearings with Jared Isaacman, the senators who care about disclosure, who care about transparency, want to push back against the stigma. I hope they raise this in the confirmation hearings for Jared, and I hope that Jared and his team will be advocates for disclosure. You know, I'll personally do what I can to talk to him about that, but I have nothing

• 36:44Speaker 02

  but optimism when it comes to the Trump team tackling this topic in a positive fashion, and that extends to NASA as well.

• 36:53George Knapp?

  Let me ask you this, you know, there's a perception, at least in UFO world, that NASA takes its cue from DOD on the UAP issue. It does so many missions for the Department of Defense that we don't have any idea what it really is, that Department of Defense sets the tone and NASA goes along with that. I noticed in your, in the appointment of you to this UAP study commission, which is amazing that you even got on there, they have all your credentials, all these associations listed. The one they don't list is Bigelow Aerospace. And I don't know if that was omitted on purpose because it has UAP connotations, but

• 37:34George Knapp?

  I wonder if you get to address in general the idea that NASA takes its cue from DOD, and whether or not your association with Bigelow was a negative factor or viewed as negative in appointment to this position.

• 37:48Speaker 02

  Yeah, so first, relative to deferring to defense, I think that's something that we see throughout the federal government. That national security, the intelligence agencies, usually have a lot more influence and a lot more say than civil agencies like NASA or the FAA, that when that national security card is pulled, a lot of us in the civil world are ultimately going to defer to that. And I think that's not just NASA, but true across the federal government. And I think that can be something that occurs and will likely continue to occur,

• 38:30Speaker 02

  which is why I think it's so important that the people on the defense and the national security side, we need to fix that. I think ultimately, if we're going to get to the bottom of this issue, get transparency, get the disclosure, one way or the other, the pathway will have to be through defense and national security because of just that phenomenon, that NASA is not going to be the agency that is going to get to the smoking gun. So I think there's a lot of truth to that, George. But the role that NASA can and should play, in my mind, is for example, as the publicly open mirror to an entity like Aero. That through ASRS, through the archive search,

• 39:15Speaker 02

  we should be gathering data and then NASA should archive that data, open it up to the public, and to the extent it can, analyze the data and share those results publicly. Again, NASA is known as a leading scientific institution, certainly among academia, and if we were able to gather that data, release it, it's very important things to do. Relative to my association with Bigelow Aerospace, 13 years at Bigelow Aerospace, as you know, I think we met once, at least back in the day, with Mr. Bigelow. And to be clear, and I almost mentioned this at the hearing, because I think there was some confusion over this, that there's Bigelow Aerospace and then there's Bigelow Aerospace.

• 39:58Speaker 02

  Advanced Space Studies, BAS? Right, Advanced Space Studies, thank you. Saturday, I'm getting all over my acronyms. I was a part of Bigelow Aerospace, which did amazing things with the Genesis 1, Genesis 2 spacecraft. I'm just gonna tell a quick story there. We contracted with an entity called ISC Cosmatros, which was taking Russian ICBMs, removing the warhead, putting on commercial fairings, and using them for commercial space launch, literally swords into plowshares. We conducted two launches in Siberia, and that's why I don't complain about the cold weather in DC, because I spent two launch campaigns in Siberia. And it's why I'm such an optimistic person, by the way, as well, that, you know, I grew up a child of the Cold War,

• 40:42Speaker 02

  in fear that these weapons would end life as we know it. Yet, as an adult, I was there on a Russian nuclear missile base, using these weapons of war as a tool for peaceful commerce and exploration. And while I know, obviously, we're not in a good position with the Russians now, just the fact that that occurred at all gives me great hope for the future. So if my association with Bigelow Aerospace was left out, I think it was just in omission or cutting my very lengthy resume, because I'm old. Although it did, you know, come up, and I try and remind people. I got some questions for the record afterwards, asking about, it was like the CIA was telling Lockheed Martin not to release information, and BAS may have been a part of that.

• 41:29Speaker 02

  So I got a QFR question for the record about that, but I'm unable to address that, because I was busy with the Genesis campaigns, Bigelow Aerospace. I didn't hold a security clearance, and all of the UAP-related activity, the Skinwalker activity, was occurring in another organization. So unfortunately, I didn't have that part of it. Relative to it becoming a negative thing or a positive thing for the UAP independent study team, again, this is where I give NASA great credit, that... My association with Bigelow Aerospace, my known interest in the topic was not a secret to NASA, to Senator Nelson, or the Associate Administrator for the Science Mission Director at the time, Tomster Buckin. And here I have to thank my friend Dan Evans, who is the DFO, the designated federal official,

• 42:12Speaker 02

  for the independent study team of not only nominating me, but consulting me about what should happen, and ultimately letting me be a part of that. That it demonstrated they knew where I was coming from, and that I later appear on Weaponized and talk more about the topic. And absolutely, it's probably ending it in here too. You know, I give great credit to Redwire and our CEO Pete Canito and our board for allowing me to engage robustly and being unafraid relative to tackling this topic. So I greatly appreciate what Dan Evans did, our DFO, and it shows that they were operating with goodwill and, you know, with the interest of getting to the truth, because they weren't afraid

• 42:56Speaker 02

  of someone like myself, who, again, I try to be objective, and I'm not saying one way or the other, but obviously had a long history and a personal interest in the topic. So I don't think it did me any favors relative to getting on the committee, but the fact that I was on the committee despite my background with Bigelow Aerospace shows that we were trying to proceed in good faith at NASA with this effort, and I hope to see more to come.

• 43:20Jeremy Corbell?

  I just wanted to kind of hit a nail on the head here. Look, I'm an investigative journalist. I know some things. I don't know if you can talk about it, but the elephant in the room for me is by the time this airs, everybody is going to be talking about crash retrievals.

• 43:34Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 43:35Jeremy Corbell?

  And, you know, I've been signaled a number of times. We know for a fact that Lockheed Martin, the Vice President, was trying to transfer a UAP. It was described in detail to George and myself by Dr. James Lekatsky, the shape of the egg ship. He could say all that. So we've got a craft of unknown origin, which they believe to be NHI, built from a non-human intelligence, and they were trying to move that out of Lockheed because they hadn't made progress and bring it kind of back into another organization that could work on it. You know that to be true and not just rumors. Well, that is now on public record. Are you, you're aware that is true information, right?

• 44:16Speaker 02

  So unfortunately, Jeremy, I don't have any firsthand knowledge of that having occurred, but I cannot tell you how frustrating it is for me to hear these stories of advanced technology of reverse engineering when we're struggling to get back to the moon at NASA in the private sector. One of the things we do at Redwire, we've rolled out solar rays, which are compacted like a carpet. They launch, they roll out later. You know, these are wonderful technologies that will help us go forward, et cetera. But we're still using chemical rocketry, right? Which in many ways is-

• 44:49Jeremy Corbell?

  No, no, I get that, but and it's got to be frustrating, but we got people that are now able to disclose that. Dr. James Lekatsky on our show, you know, head of the DIA UFO program, he said that as fact. He said, I can say it now because it's been authorized through DOBser. It's not a question of if it's true, like, you know, unless everybody's lying. So it's true. So that is a problem. You're working with all these low tech things compared to a high tech kind of machinery that apparently we have possession of. But are you telling me that you don't have any personal knowledge of crash retrievals?

• 45:24Speaker 02

  Yeah, I don't have any personal exposure or knowledge of it. When I was at NASA, you know, I reached out to Jay Stratten, who was UAP Task Force at the time, because I wanted to have that very conversation is what I wanted to be helpful first and foremost to UAP Task Force to make sure that NASA was, you know, providing a constructive role. But if there was more, I certainly wanted to know about it. And, you know, I think Jay has gone on the record relative to extraterrestrial crash retrieval, you know, Lou, et cetera. I tried to do what I can to find out. I wasn't exposed to anything, unfortunately.

• 46:04Jeremy Corbell?

  Okay, so you're not holding any secrets back from-

• 46:06Speaker 02

  I'm not holding any secrets back.

• 46:07Jeremy Corbell?

  Okay, I just wanted to make sure, man, because, you know, there are some rumors going around, so.

• 46:11Speaker 02

  Yeah, yeah, yeah. If I did, Jeremy, believe me, I would be the first to say, if I was holding back for, you know, I do hold a top secret clearance still. If I was holding back because of a classified reason, I would tell you. I can tell you I don't have any, unfortunately, personal first- Stand experience. All I can say is, you know, just as you said, and your great work, George's, Lou and Jay and everyone, I mean, I personally believe that, yeah, there shouldn't be any question here, given, there's just too many good people coming forward with information. So I personally believe it, but I don't have any firsthand information, unfortunately. I wish that I did.

• 46:48George Knapp?

  Maybe we could head into a sort of a broader question. I'm almost afraid to give that to, to our guest here, because who knows how long he's going to go with this, but a broad question about space policy in the future. Robert Bigelow, your friend and former employer, really carved out his own space, made some great progress on his own dime, trying to commercialize space, building these inflatable habitats. Genesis one and two were shot up there. There's one on the ISS as well. One of my business cards is floating in the inside Genesis two, by the way, I slipped it in there. I mean, it was incredible. And he, you know, he was a pioneer for a lot of other

• 47:27George Knapp?

  rich guys who've had their own space programs. Elon Musk has done some amazing things. I see these, these landings, these where they, these rockets come down and they grab, grab onto it. It's like something out of a science fiction movie, and it's happening before our eyes. Elon Musk, of course, is now well positioned vis a vis the federal government and NASA to do great things under the next administration. I wonder if you could just speak to policy in general, the options for commercialization of space, whether NASA needs to just get out of the way of these big companies, how it can help with the commercialization of space, and then

• 48:09George Knapp?

  also reflect on what your former friend, your friend and former employer, Robert Bigelow, has said that by the time we get back to the moon, the Chinese will be there waving at us when we get there.

• 48:21Speaker 02

  Yeah, a grave concern. You've raised a number of very important topics. Let me try and tackle them and finish before we get even more news today, right, on some of the interactions. Relative to commercial versus government at NASA and space policy, I think that's a false dichotomy, that we shouldn't be saying commercial versus government. The answer is we're stronger together. We have to embrace both. The very existence of SpaceX, and Elon has been very clear on this, he owes it to NASA and DARPA, that there wouldn't be a SpaceX if it wasn't for that.

• 48:59Speaker 02

  So, the public-private partnerships, uniting American entrepreneurialism with government support, has created this second golden age of space that we're in. I certainly hope that the Trump administration, and I think Jared Isaacman is the perfect person to continue and accelerate this legacy of public-private partnerships. And it was Doug Laverro, who was an Department of Defense official and later a NASA official, was always famous for saying, "China will eventually outspend us in space." That's inevitable. We must out-entrepreneur them. That it's American innovation, American entrepreneurship, American diversity of ideas,

• 49:41Speaker 02

  concepts, and strategies, that's how we will beat the Chinese. But we can only do that if we continue to embrace the path of public-private partnerships, bolstering companies like SpaceX, bolstering companies like Blue Origin, et cetera. And, you know, we talk about commercial space and the space policy. What is commercial space? Really, it's pretty simple. It's firm fixed-price contracting. And for those of you who are listening, who aren't government contract attorneys, first of all, good for you, but let me break that down a little bit. The way that NASA had operated previously, and Department of Defense still does in many areas, is something called cost-plus contracting.

• 50:22Speaker 02

  And that's where the government contracts with an entity, and if it goes over, it goes over. Imagine doing this in the real world. Like, you wouldn't order a pizza from Domino's. I don't know why you're ordering Domino's, but if you order a pizza from Domino's, and then they come and say, "Well, it was gonna be forty dollars, but it was raining outside, I ran out of gas, took some extra time, so, sorry, your pizza costs a hundred and twenty." You would never operate like that. Cost plus contracting creates a pernicious desire to make the price as much as possible to the taxpayer. Instead, with firm fixed, you create the opposite incentive. If you want to make it as efficient, as affordable as possible, and that's really what commercial space is, is getting the government out of telling SpaceX or Blue Origin how

• 51:07Speaker 02

  to design the vehicle, what color it should be, how we should paint it, etc., which creates a need for an army of bureaucrats. Instead, just contract with a commercial space company and let them proceed with solving the problem that the government has. And oh, by the way, then when you do that, you create lots of commercial opportunities. Again, going back to Redwire, you know, I mentioned our rollout solar arrays. Well, that was initially a contract on the International Space Station, and those rollout solar arrays are powering the ISS as we speak. But because it was a terrific innovative solution, now we're selling it to Talus, to Blue Origin, for commercial activities on geo-telecommunication satellites.

• 51:48Speaker 02

  It's what we've seen with SpaceX, that because they have that capability, that initial contract with NASA that rescued the company, now they're dominating the commercial launch market. You know, America went from inventing commercial space launch to having only one commercial space launch per year, sometimes none. And it took that public-private partnership to transform the industry so that now even the Chinese can't keep up with us due to what Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, SpaceX, Blue Origin, companies like that are doing. And while I'm sure nobody's perfect, and there may be things I disagree with, with, you know, Elon or Jeff Bezos, they don't get the credit that they deserve for enabling

• 52:29Speaker 02

  this whole new market, these new capabilities that are impacting every aspect of our daily lives. When I was at NASA, I was getting interviewed by a BBC reporter, and she was asking me, "How can you justify the billions that we spend on space when we have existential threats on Earth like climate change?" And I had to explain, "You wouldn't even know about climate change if it wasn't for the space industry." And what Elon Musk has done, a great personal sacrifice to himself, which Jeff Bezos is doing to create new rocketry, new technologies, new programs is benefiting us all on earth. Every time you use a cellphone, every time a doctor uses telecommunications. And again, sorry to keep talking about red wire, but obviously as a company person, I'm interested.

• 53:13Speaker 02

  We manufactured the first human meniscus in space. We printed live cardiovascular tissue in space and brought it back live. This is the fundamentals that will lead eventually to printing whole organs in space. I've had friends who died waiting on the organ donation list. Imagine how this is going to transform life on earth when we can print organs in space. That, by the way, will be printed with your own stem cells so we can avoid the expensive and painful anti-rejection therapy.

• 53:42Jeremy Corbell?

  Um, why do you need, in short, why do you need to print organs in space? That seems more expensive. Why can't you just print organs on earth? What's going on with that?

• 53:53Speaker 02

  Uh, great question, Jeremy. You can't print organs on earth. Uh, now you're listening again, a recovering attorney here. I got a B minus in biology, so stay with me. But gravity basically squishes it. So, for example, when we printed the meniscus in space, had we tried to do that here on earth, you would have ended up with just goo.

• 54:11Jeremy Corbell?

  Zero gravity. I mean, just a holy shit moment for me. Sorry for our audience. I didn't realize that we have capability of printing human organs in space that we don't have on earth. And that is a medical revelation. It makes a lot more sense to me that big money would try to make this easy to get into that zero-gravity environment just because of the medical implications alone. You just blew my fucking mind.

• 54:38Speaker 02

  Yes. Jeremy, we are at a revolutionary point where space and biotech and pharma are going to come together to create something completely different. And by the way, George, you know, this was something that goes back to the big aerospace days that we had always talked about. Now, unfortunately, these things take time. And by the way, this is why commercial space was so important. The reason that red wire has been successful at this, whereas previously went much more slowly, is because we got A commercial launch vehicle that can bring up more payloads on a more regular basis with astronauts, more astronauts, so we actually have time. The ISS, International Space Station, previously, imagine a laboratory that you only had three people at, that you could only send science to

• 55:21Speaker 02

  once a year. And by the way, the three people who are working on your projects, they had to maintain the whole facility. Like, you couldn't conduct science like that. Now, with ISS, because largely of the Dragon, we've got an extra crew seat so that we can do extra time to move the forward field forward, move the field forward, and move it forward. We have, the way we do this is with something called the BFF, we're great at acronyms at Redbar, the Biofabrication Facility, and that's printing with human tissue. The cardiovascular tissue, by the way, we printed, this is to cure heart disease, that eventually you could create heart patches for people with heart disease. And it's not space per se, Jeremy, I should probably be a little bit more nuanced at that point, it's microgravity, that when you shut off-

• 56:03Jeremy Corbell?

  Right, right, right, but I mean, this is just blowing my mind. I mean, I'm going to get on that list for a meniscus. I mean, I just didn't know that this was something that was, we're printing organs in zero, or near zero gravity. It's pretty amazing, but I just want to get back to one thing you said real quick. If we're going to be hearing a lot about crash retrievals by the time this episode airs, if this is true, and it sounds like you share my frustration, and you're like a gatekeeper secrets here, but if what we believe to be true, I think all of us, that there are these crash retrievals of non-human tech, this is what everybody's saying, and if that is true, then we are just, we are living in the Stone Age, and we could be in the Space Age, if we had

• 56:44Jeremy Corbell?

  proper exploitation for derivative technologies of what we have obtained within the United States' intelligence agencies and government. And if this is put into the public space, bright minds at NASA can work on it, people can really work on this outside of the compartmentalized institutions that are already there, that are already the entire apparatus, I have noticed, about this, these technologies are so restrictive, that it has kept us back from this type of-

• 57:16Jeremy Corbell?

  And if this is true, you feel the same way, we need to get this stuff out that back door, bring it in the front door, get bright minds and companies working on this and start moving on it, right?

• 57:27Speaker 02

  Absolutely, Jeremy. What scares me the most, and you've spoken about this on Weaponized and on your season two, by the way, congratulations on the premiere. I made it through about one and a half episodes so far already. It's fantastic.

• 57:39Jeremy Corbell?

  Oh, the last one is a bang. You brought up a magnetic constellation that something weird happened. You don't even know.

• 57:45Speaker 02

  I know, I know. I wish I could interview you, Jeremy, on a few things, but for now, I'm fascinated. But you're exactly correct. And I did mention this at the hearing, that my fear, and let's just, you know, assume this is all true, again, for any objective, I personally believe that it is. What's happening with the stigma is that, as you mentioned, everything's compartmentalized. We don't have our top people looking at it, but that may not be the case in Beijing. That may not be the case in Russia. And this is where the very formation of DARPA, Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, is to avoid technological surprise. Yet this could be the greatest technological surprise in history.

• 58:28Speaker 02

  And because of the stigmatization, because of the compartmentalization, we may not, and likely are not, having our top people, our top institutions, look at this. Because, you know, unfortunately, it's probably not just a given that we can utilize the technology, that, you know, this may be in theory, you know, light years, literally, ahead of us. So it's a reverse engineering race. And while I don't know what a terrestrial position would be on Taiwan, I know what the Chinese position is. And this is where I think that it's really terrifying, that it's not just a matter of good government, a matter of exploration, but a true concern about national security if we're sitting on technology and not letting the A-team

• 59:10Speaker 02

  look at us. This is very disconcerting. I know that Senator Rubio and others in the Senate, I think this is what drives them, in part, is the national security concern relative to potential technology that we are not exploiting, we are not studying, yet adversary. Maybe so it's very disconcerting and again it's why I applaud not just for the sound check but for both of you to bring this forward because I think our national security interests and future could be in great jeopardy relative to if there is the technology not being coming out we've got to overcome the stigma we've got to proceed and what I don't understand about this Jeremy in many ways and George and we bring up you

• 59:51Speaker 02

  know funding issues right chill for NASA why why would people associated with Department of Defense if this is true not want to come forward due to what would likely be a huge amount of funding and attention and capabilities that justifiably would need to be put into this why the reluctance in that case

• 1:00:11George Knapp?

  Yeah good question

• 1:00:12Speaker 02

  What it mean for budgets

• 1:00:13George Knapp?

  I'm gonna circle back around to something we were just discussing I think back to Bigelow Aerospace NIDS and then the connecting tissue to BASS Bigelow Aerospace is is developing inflatable habitats so that there is working space in space where you can do things have labs the connecting tissue being BASS is trying to figure out if there is non-human technology metamaterials that could not be created here on earth one of the reasons you know it's non-human is we don't have manufacturing facilities in space but it looks like somebody does and trying to get access to that material would have allowed them to study it how it's made and hopefully someday the connection is Bigelow Aerospace

• 1:00:57George Knapp?

  some of his colleagues Bezos and Elon would allow for labs to be built up there where we could make this stuff I guess that's a preface to the question I'm finally getting around to is would you expect that there would be sort of a changing of the guard coming with the new administration

• 1:01:14Speaker 02

  You know Mr. Bigelow used to say that there are two types of societies those that have mastered microgravity manufacturing and those who haven't and I continue to believe and Redwire has invested robustly in this that the countries and companies that excel at microgravity will be the economic and national security leaders of the future we talk about The meniscus and this regenerative medicine is extremely important, but what's probably even closer is pharmaceutical crystallization. So most, if not all, drugs are based on seed crystals. And because of the lack of gravity, you can create a differentiated seed crystal in space that has enhanced capabilities, would lead to drugs with enhanced capabilities.

• 1:01:57Speaker 02

  We've partnered with Eli Lilly, we've partnered with Bristol-Myers Squibb in previous launches. We've flown insulin twice, and if you look at insulin seed crystals, they're developed on Earth and then compare it to what we've done in space. It is night and day. It's extraordinary, the large crystals we get, the uniformity of those crystals, which can lead to better drug treatments in the future. We've now flown thirty experiments or thirty pillboxes is what we call our pharmaceutical experiments. And I can assure you, Red White will be moving forward aggressively to again, create this revolution in biotech and micrograph, probably beginning with new seed crystals, because that requires so little change to the existing system. That already pharmaceuticals are developed by seed crystals.

• 1:02:40Speaker 02

  We just have to develop a seed crystal in space. It's just a very small amount of mass that we bring back. It's essentially a new blueprint for a drug. And I think this can drive the microgravity economy. Now, I'm talking about drugs now, but semiconductors, which are also based on a crystalline process. All of our industrial capacities will be bolstered, changed, transformed by microgravity. And it certainly wouldn't surprise me that UAP or UAP technology probably takes advantage of microgravity manufacturing as well. But we're catching up and that's wonderful what we're doing. Expandable space habitats are very important to provide that larger volume. Sierra Space, and there's many people from Big Ladder Space who are now over there.

• 1:03:22Speaker 02

  They're developing expandable habitat technology for lower orbit. We're about to transition from the International Space Station to commercial space stations, that I believe will be a very good thing. However, all of that being said, if there is technology that we're sitting on, that we're not releasing, I believe we do so at our peril. And that could only help expedite the efforts that we're taking on now.

• 1:03:46Jeremy Corbell?

  Let's just go off mental script here for a second because you're telling me there's there's two worlds that exist. There's one manufacturing in a gravitational, you know, kind of field which is limited. And then the other world opens possibilities is manufacturing in a a less gravitational field or near zero gravitational field. Like, I understand that.

• 1:04:07Jeremy Corbell?

  I guess the the kind of crux of this is, and let's kind of go off mental script. You and I just kind of think about this together for a second. If this is all true, and it appears to be, there are craft of unknown origin, not made by human beings. It seemed it's not far away, been here a long time kind of thing. Crash retrievals, everybody's saying, okay, great, we have all these admissions. People want you to know UFOs are real now. There seems like so much interest that could be involved in this exploration from medical to, you know, superconductors to I'm just the exploration of humanity out into the universe. But here's the deal. You you now, the world is seeing that we're in a race. And the world is also seeing the benefits of moving forward.

• 1:04:49Jeremy Corbell?

  If we have these technologies and we haven't let this happen, we haven't, we've been so scared because of the weaponization, maybe. Why? Why is it that this is the dirty secret? That there is a more advanced civilization likely that has contacted or been here and we've got some of their craft. Why is that such a a secret? Is it because of the weaponization potential or why?

• 1:05:11George Knapp?

  And if it is in somebody's hands, stashed somewhere, should it change hands and let somebody else take a crack at it?

• 1:05:18Speaker 02

  I I believe that it certainly should. And I believe that the current geopolitical situation requires that it will. And Jeremy, I can only theorize why this wouldn't occur. And this is just me thinking out loud, right? But the only really rational explanation that that I can think of, and you've seen this in some of the reviews by Rand Corporation, etc. That the truth of UAP is so disturbing socially that that's why there is a reticence to release the data, to release the information, to release the tech. Because if you release the tech, then you have to admit to the underlying. ...lying situation and we've all seen how whether it's disasters, natural disasters,

• 1:06:02Speaker 02

  even what's occurring in LA right now, people don't necessarily react well to disturbing information and for the US government to come forward and say, yes, you know, we've been withholding information for a very long time. Yes, it alters fundamentally who humanity is. And I think what some of those answers are might be very interesting. And then to say that maybe there's activities occurring in our skies, in space, in our water that we can't control. I mean, that's very difficult and I think even legitimately difficult that could create problems in society at large in

• 1:06:38Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, but it's no government's right to hold back a fundamental reality about nature to humankind. Like, are you kidding me? Who gave them the authority to stop us from knowing something?

• 1:06:51Speaker 02

  Yeah, Jeremy, I completely agree. And so I'm just saying that maybe this is the rationale.

• 1:06:57Jeremy Corbell?

  No, I get it. It's scary as fuck. I get that. But like, I never said anybody has the authority to keep secrets from me. I didn't agree to that from birth.

• 1:07:06Speaker 02

  And that's where this isn't just the UAP issue. This is a democratic issue, little d. That particularly with Congress not being briefed and Congress being shut out, that's a violation of our republican form of government, of our democratic rights, and it should be unacceptable. I also believe that we are ready as a society, and that's not to say that there wouldn't be problems. But I think we are prepared. And what I so enjoy seeing and I'm so glad for, as you look at the bipartisanship of the UAP issue, and I think this is true in space in general, if you look at space exploration, we don't go to space as Democrats or Republicans,

• 1:07:48Speaker 02

  we go as Americans. No issue unites people like space and like UAP. It's been one of the last bastions of bipartisanship. And I think by not releasing information, you're actually creating separations, whereas when we get to transparency, potential disclosure, I think it has a potential to unite America and the world. Of course it does. I'm done with their lies.

• 1:08:14George Knapp?

  I think we're about wrapped up. I just want to say regarding those future launches, Mike, we're ready to pitch a tent in your backyard. So you just say when?

• 1:08:23Speaker 02

  I will have Terry Riley, who I put on the email, get in touch with you. And not only do you get to see the launch, but briefings from our scientists who are working on these.

• 1:08:32Jeremy Corbell?

  We're journalists. We're there. Come on, man. All right. Let's do it.

• 1:08:36George Knapp?

  Yeah, let's go.

• 1:08:37Jeremy Corbell?

  But Mike, really why I wanted to contact you, other than your son is super handsome and cool and he's talking, he was so proud of you, man, when you were testifying. Just kind of, I checked in with him a couple. I mean, I was having my own drama at the, at the hearing, but I was checking in with your son. And he just looked so proud of you. I thought, I don't know this Mike guy, but his son is sure is proud of him and he's from NASA. I, I didn't know why. I didn't know you, so I wanted to hear from you why you were there, like your interest in testifying, putting yourself on that platform. You know, as you said, it could be like career suicide for people. So I just wanted to get a bead on, did NASA send you? Or is this a passion of yours? Cause you, you feel it's valuable to society. I think I got my answer today, which means other people did too.

• 1:09:21Jeremy Corbell?

  I wanted our audience to know, you know, that you're not some plant that was just put up there. You know, there were shenanigans at the hearing, but you weren't, you weren't one of them. You were legitimately there for this topic. And I want to thank you for doing that for the American public. Cause like, we share sentiment that it is time to tell the truth. About UFOs, no matter how hard that truth might be, like we're speculating, maybe it's a difficult truth. Man, we got 99 problems already, fires around the world. We can handle the truth about UFOs and it ain't your right to say we can't. So we gotta push forward, Mike, and I appreciate you trying to push forward with us on this.

• 1:09:58Speaker 02

  No, thank you so much, Jeremy. My son is a huge fan. He really, sitting next to you is like one of the highlights of the hearing.

• 1:10:03Jeremy Corbell?

  That's so good. Not many people feel that way. I'm glad we were okay.

• 1:10:08Speaker 02

  And, and George, you know, again, I can't thank you enough. We, we, if not George for your work and Jeremy, your work, there wouldn't be a hearing.

• 1:10:14Jeremy Corbell?

  I wouldn't be here without George. I mean, this, he got me hooked on this crazy ass topic.

• 1:10:19Speaker 02

  Needless. So it's all your fault, George.

• 1:10:21Jeremy Corbell?

  It is.

• 1:10:22Speaker 02

  Fire, this fire lit.

• 1:10:23George Knapp?

  That's a be on my, on my tombstone. It's all my fault.

• 1:10:26Jeremy Corbell?

  It's all your fault. You lit the fire.

• 1:10:28Speaker 02

  Absolutely. But again, I, I just wanted to be there and you're absolutely right, it's the latter. NASA probably would have rather not had me go, but I don't want to let NASA off the hook. That there are things that they need to do, again, that are low cost, that are modest. And, and I'm hoping that Congress can push forward. And if I can, if I can do my little humble part to try and add credibility to it, to try and push NASA, I will do everything I can personally to try and help, you know, heroes like yourselves, Lou and the Admiral.

• 1:10:59Jeremy Corbell?

  Well, thank you because you did, you did by testifying and you did by coming on, you know, our wild podcast. So I really appreciate your time and I hope our audience understands, you're one of the good guys. You, you're trying to be honest and open up and, and push it forward. So thank you for everything you've done and let's be in touch. I want to know the inside secrets when you learn shit at NASA, okay?

• 1:11:18Speaker 02

  Absolutely. I will let you know and look forward to seeing you all at a launch soon.

• 1:11:22Jeremy Corbell?

  Okay.

• 1:11:24George Knapp?

  One of the things we knew about Mike going in is that he's a big Star Trek fan. He's a tre- he's a trekker hardcore, right?

• 1:11:30Jeremy Corbell?

  He went like this or something at the hearing and people were mad at him. He's just into, he said his license plate has something to do with Star Trek.

• 1:11:36George Knapp?

  Yeah. I mean, that, that was cool. I mean, because, you know, the, the mission of the enterprise is pretty darned close to what the mission of NASA is supposed to be. To boldly go, to explore new worlds, seek out other, other life forms. He believes that.

• 1:11:49Jeremy Corbell?

  He's a cool dude, man. I, I, yeah, he's a cool dude. And, you know, I, I think it takes people that have interest in this to push the UAP topic forward.

• 1:11:57George Knapp?

  Yeah. It was, is a really credible new voice in this topic.

• 1:12:00Jeremy Corbell?

  Yes.

• 1:12:00George Knapp?

  I hope he's allowed to continue to speak and interact with NASA and speak on their behalf on this issue and, and to push them, to give them a nudge into the direction that they should have adopted all along.

• 1:12:11Jeremy Corbell?

  I think he's facilitating a transfer. I don't know what he's saying, but I think he's involved somehow in trying to get that Lockheed craft, the James, Dr. James Katsy described, into private industry for exploitation. I, I, if he, if he's not, he should be. He'd be a great advocate to help get that into industry to help exploit it.

• 1:12:30George Knapp?

  Well, look, we were invited to a launch, maybe more than one. I'm ready to go. Say, say the word, Mike, anytime.

• 1:12:37Jeremy Corbell?

  Will they launch us though?

• 1:12:39George Knapp?

  I'm gonna go check sure there are those who would like to see that.

• 1:12:42Jeremy Corbell?

  Oh yeah, there's our enemies would love to see us launch a naka.

• 1:12:45George Knapp?

  A one-way trip.

• 1:12:46Jeremy Corbell?

  No, I'd love to go just experience zero gravity, you know, because gravity's a bitch. Anyway, man, thank you. That was awesome, Jordan.

• 1:12:54George Knapp?

  Yeah, it was good.