In part two of our wide-ranging conversation with Luis Elizondo, we delve deeper into the scientific and intelligence perspectives surrounding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena/Unidentified Flying Objects (UAP/UFO). Elizondo, the former director of the U.S. government’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, discusses the sophisticated methods used to analyze UAP sightings, from radar data to molecular analysis. He also touches on the mysterious brain changes observed in UAP experiencers, theories about polarizable vacuums that enable UAP movement, and the potential for water to serve as a fuel source. Throughout the interview, Elizondo emphasizes the need for the scientific community to take UAPs seriously, urging for a systematic, unbiased approach to studying these phenomena.
Elizondo’s new book, Imminent: Inside the Pentagon’s Hunt for UFOs (William Morrow) is on sale now.
Bringing our discussion to more recent times, like the footage from the U.S. Navy, postintel debriefing—what happens on the scientific end?
It depends on what you have. For example, the sightings in 2004 included eyewitness testimony, electrooptical data (including gun camera and FLIR footage), and radar data from both airborne radar (like the E2 Hawkeye) and seaborne radar (from vessels like the USS Princeton, a Ticonderogaclass vessel). This data is used for initial analysis and assessment.
These objects were observed at 80,000 feet, then dropping down to about 50 feet over the water, and then popping back up again at incredible velocities. The acceleration and speeds are off the charts. We have five fundamental observables that help us analyze this from both an intelligence and scientific perspective, making the technology compelling.
So, these things have been spotted almost as long as humans have been flying, right?
Yes, exactly.
Especially in more recent times, if you know something’s out there, why not go out there with more than just radar to get analytical data?
We do, but it’s a problem. It’s very classified, and I can’t discuss it openly. We have capabilities that are very persistent and accurate, but they’re highly sensitive to the U.S. government.
Beyond videos, biological specimens, crashed pieces—what other sources of hard data are collected and analyzed?
Hard data is the gold standard. When you find an object, there’s a three-level scientific analysis:
1. Physical Analysis: Weigh it, test electrical conductivity, hardness, softness, see if it’s hollow or solid.
2. Molecular or Chemical Analysis: Examine the relationships between molecules to determine composition.
3. Atomic or Nano Analysis: Look at atomic arrangements, isotopic ratios, and molecular structures to see if they are naturally occurring or engineered.
If something appears engineered, we consider the temporal context. For example, finding a fully assembled, functioning 747 jet in King Tut’s tomb would not make temporal sense, as that technology didn’t exist in ancient Egypt.
Moving on, in your book, you discuss MRI scans of the brains of UAP experiencers. Can you elaborate on that?
Sure. The scientists conducted MRI scans on leading experts like Gary Nolan. The scans showed specific morphologies—damaged or enlarged parts of the brain—from before and after UAP encounters. We don’t know why, but it could result from some directed energy causing changes in that part of the brain. It’s similar to people waking up from accidents with sudden abilities, like becoming a piano virtuoso or speaking foreign languages without prior experience. These are perceived superhuman abilities resulting from traumatic brain injuries. We don’t fully understand the brain, so these changes remain mysterious.
And you mentioned a realization about Native American descendancy. Can you discuss that?
I did not make that observation; it was done by medical scientists. However, there seems to be enough information to suggest some sort of relationship. What that relationship is, I cannot tell you. It’s just a very interesting finding.
Another part that stood out was your discussion on polarizable vacuums—the theory underlying the bubble around UAPs. Can you explain how that theory solves many of the problems posed?
Yes. Let me simplify it. People often think this is about gravity, but it’s actually an effect of gravity. Gravity warps spacetime around a localized area due to mass or energy. For example, the Earth warps spacetime, keeping us on its surface. The more massive an object, the more it warps spacetime, like a neutron star or black hole.
According to Einstein’s equation \( E = mc^2 \), mass and energy are interchangeable. You can warp spacetime with a lot of mass or a lot of energy. The prevailing theory is that UAPs have a source of energy in the middle that, with a specific frequency, interacts with the craft’s skin, creating a bubble that alters the spacetime inside compared to the outside environment. Inside this bubble, spacetime is fundamentally different, allowing for phenomena like instantaneous acceleration and hypersonic velocity.
This explains the low observability of UAPs. Similar to how a black hole bends light and warps spacetime, the bubble around a UAP bends light and electromagnetic signals, making it difficult to detect with traditional radar. The signal might experience a Doppler shift, deceiving radar systems by appearing spoofed or jammed.
Furthermore, this bubble could cancel out the effects of Earth’s gravity, allowing the UAP to move without relying on traditional technologies like wings or thrust. This was a significant revelation for our scientists, although the detailed mathematical formulas are beyond my expertise. The scientists handled that part entirely.
That explains how UAPs can transition between air and water seamlessly.
Correct—the transmedium travel aspect. This is harder to explain, but scientists like Eric Davis and Hal Puthoff have produced extensive research documents on warp drives and bending spacetime. These documents detail how UAPs manipulate spacetime to achieve their movements.
You also mentioned that water plays a specific role, suggesting the Earth could essentially be a gas station for UAPs. Can you elaborate on that?
Yes. Consider the energy release when converting water to steam. It occupies 1,700 times its volume as steam due to the molecules pushing away from each other. The Chinese realized in the 11th century that breaking apart a molecule in an exothermic reaction yields a significant energy release, expressed in tons of TNT.
In the 1930s and early 1940s, we discovered that splitting a hydrogen atom releases even more energy, leading to the hydrogen bomb. As matter gets smaller, the energy release becomes exponentially higher, as seen with CERN’s Large Hadron Collider approaching energy levels sufficient to create micro black holes in the laboratory. Scaled up, this concept suggests that UAPs could utilize water as a fuel source by extracting hydrogen from water, making it a highly efficient fuel.
People tend to go to war over fuel and food. You speculate that UAPs might want to ensure their fuel sources remain accessible? You also mentioned nuclear energy. Are they monitoring our advancements?
Yes. If we currently live in a resource-starved paradigm, with competition for resources at global, national, and individual levels, UAPs might have similar motivations. If they live in a post-resource-competitive environment, having evolved beyond the need to compete for resources, their intent might differ.
Human motivation is often anthropomorphized—we assign human values and intentions to everything. This is why we name pets with human names and see human faces in constellations. However, UAPs might not share our motivations or intentions. If they observe us nearing the technological ability to manipulate spacetime, they might be monitoring us to assess how we handle such technology, similar to a zookeeper watching a gorilla that might escape if it gains intelligence. Given humanity’s current global conflicts and potential for violence, UAPs might be concerned about how we handle advanced technologies and the potential threats we pose.
Finally, in your opinion, what role would you like to see the scientific community play in investigating UAPs?
I believe the National Science Foundation, national laboratories, universities, and international scientific organizations should engage in investigating UAPs. We need to have a Nobel Prize category for science in this field and establish coalitions to study this advanced technology. It’s real and present, so ignoring it doesn’t help.
We need to approach this scientifically, removing the prefix “para” from everything and stopping society from dictating what is normal and what isn’t. This conversation should be conducted in a scientific manner, free from societal taboos.