Canner get it man for what we got going on tonight. Welcome back to Calling All Beings. I'm your host DJ, back from Austin, t X, where our special guest is from, and we are here have a very special episode one month waiting, and I'm gonna tell you this one's gonna be
worth waiting for when you see who we've got. And I know because you're here, I know you know you got so before we do any of that, let's introduce the executive producer and technical director of Calling All Beings, My man, my brother, the co conspirator in fun, entertaining and interesting UAP talk Monee. Nathan. What's up everybody? How's everybody doing? Happy Monday? Very excited for this one. Like you said, I've been waiting a
little bit to have this show, but we've made the impossible possible. We've got the right guest for that tonight, so dripping with irony. I love it. Right there, just below Nathan is the money Nathan. Right there is the researcher and soul and keystone of CAB, the one, the lovely, the talented, the one and only Debs. How are you, Debs? I'm doing great. I'm happy that we can update the archive. There's
another one. I love it. I love it. And you know, Debs is kind of like a Brazilian barbecue man because she's always bringing something to the table always, and you know what she brought this time. She done brought this homegirl right there working on her own PhD O DOUBLEG. Really smart and we call she is. You know, she's our prospect right in this one percent cab gang. She's our prospect and she is none other than Courtney Connected. Hi, Hi, everybody, thanks for having me back. I'm
excited about being here on the panel tonight with doctor Jeffrey Kreipel. She just announced that the man himself, the chair of Religious Studies and Thought at Rice University, the man who is the caretaker, the curator of the archives of the mostly impossible but possibly possible, the man himself, doctor Jeffrey Criper Man, Doctor Cripel, I am so not as cool as you all are. Oh you are so much cooler man. Oh no, no, I am
boring compared to you all. You know what, you're our friend, James I and Doley is like this guy, doctor jeff you know you've got to have him on. I was like would you like give us like, would you like give us like the go ahead, you know, would you tell Jeff we're okay? And he's like yeah, I was like, dude, done. After the talk, I'm like, yes, we definitely want him on calling all beings. And last time you were amazing. In this time,
I know you'll be equally amazing. And that kind of, like Jeff kind of brings me to like the first thing, which is for those of you who are PhDs in this topic, it's sort of there's a lot of pressure. You know, people have you on their show and they want answers. They're sort of doing the Jack Nicholson you know kind of thing. They want the truth, you know, all this kind of stuff, and they want you to unlock these mysteries of the unexplained. And I thought of you
the other day. Actually, I was in the in the grocery store and I sort of bought that Dave's Natural bread and I came home and I was thinking of you, and it it begat the first question, and the question was you know, you you you have this sort of organic bread and you you take the little white thing off after you untie it, and then you can never find that that fastener. So I'm wondering what happens to that fastener. Jeff, I don't I don't know. I really don't explain it.
No, No, I don't know. Something's happening to it, and we just we just don't know. Maybe Sean Kirkpatrick, like the sock Dyer, it just it just disappears. Yeah, it's gonna yeah, I'm gonna tell you one for real, Jeff, all kidding aside, I sleep with a mouthguard obviously to keep my teeth from grinding. And if I don't put it in a mouthguard case it I've had two of them literally disappear, and I have three cats in the house. Full disclosure, I do not know what's
happened those mouth guards. So now it goes in the case every day. So anyway, all right, let me turn you over to Money Nathan for a serious question while I kind of regather myself here. Okay, all right, that was that was incredible. I just want to say thank you for that. So, Jeff, it's great to have you back with this. So we really had a great time with you last time. I wondered kind of how you're doing right, So the more that you've been out there in
the space. The more that you've been talking about, you know, the impossible things that clearly do happen in the human experience, you're probably hearing more impossible things, the more impossible sounding things. How are you navigating kind of the probably the deluge of information that you're dealing with now in that space.
Not well. I mean, my sense is that it's overwhelming that you know, people, people are people have these experiences all the time, and when you speak about in public, and when you try to try to do this in public, then people write you, of course, and I get all of these long emails and I can't answer them, Nathan I. And it's not that I can't answer them, it's just that there's not enough time in
the day. So my feeling is that we're in this ocean of impossible experience and there's no capacity to really deal with it and to create a community at least yet. Well, and I'm curious too, And you're in the academic community that you're a part of. Have you heard from more academics who have said, oh, you know, Jeff, you're kind of given me a chance to tell you about this story that I haven't told anybody before. Yeah, no, I think I think academics are First of all, I love
academics. I think intellectuals are really cool. I and I think they want to talk about these things and they know that they happen. They don't want to do is sound like the tabloids, and so they're looking for a voice, or they're looking for language to talk about things that they know happen all the time. And maybe they've had the experience, maybe their brothers have,
maybe their mothers have, maybe their grandmothers have. But there's someone in their family, there's someone in their immediate network, who have had these kinds of experiences, and they actually have the tools. And this is sort of my message to them. They have the tools to talk about these things. And particularly this is going to sound silly, but if they have tenure, I don't know why they're not talking about it. I really don't. I tell
my graduate students not to talk about it. I don't let them do this in a dissertation. Frankly, I don't because I want them to get a job. I want them to get employed. But once they're employed, they're safe, and the academy is a pretty friendly place for these sorts of questions. But you have to you have to be in it, unfortunately to do this. And but once you're in it, you're in it and you can do it. So to do it, that's my message. Love it.
Yeah, So, first of all, I hope you're archiving all of those emails, just like Waitly did with the letters he got. So, I guess I was wondering what would be next for the archives? Is there going to be an evolution because of the diluge of contact and interest? What will be the next stage for the archives? Yeah? So dev the archives.
I mean, so I've been on sabbatical all year and I've spent a lot of time months really in the archives and the sense that I get from them is a kind of hopelessness or maybe humility maybe is the better way to put it. There's just so much in there. I don't know how any one person can possibly absorb all of that. I mean, there are fifteen collections now in the archives. There's well over a million documents, well over a million, and so any one person who comes to them, I think is
going to be overwhelmed with just the amount of data. And so we're kind of in this process of anonymizing and digitalizing and applying some kind of AI to the archives that to to sort of, you know, get some sort of data out of them that can be useful. So it's it's frustration, I guess is probably what you're hearing dem or kind of humility or just a sense of awe in the sense of the vastest of it all. I will say
I felt the same when I saw all the government documents. There are so many, and they're, by the way side note more than people realized, because the CIA, for instance, was clever and not putting all of them
in their designated folders. So yeah, I understand. Yeah, I mean, so some of our archives are actually declassified, and they were originally you know, classified documents the government, I mean, the intelligence communities have their own reasons for classifying things, and but those are also public documents that eventually become public and become available. But just becoming available doesn't mean that somehow some
kind of secret is dumped. You know, the secret is is embedded in the documents, in the data, but it's not a pair really to any particular I mean, you can't just go in into a letter or a series of letters and suddenly find the secret of the universe. It just it just doesn't work like that, Homegirl. So, I don't know if you've met have you met Courtney already? Yes, we have met a couple of times. Actually, one at the Archives of the Impossible on the street as you
were getting out of your car. I don't know if you remember that or not, but no I don't. It was wonderful. I mean, there was a gathering of us, all these high level people walking in together. It was quite amazing. And then we also we also met again at the Soul Symposium. Okay, yeah, you'll remember her as the sort of UFO interested researcher who should be donating hair to her host and a colleague meet so and by the way, also, I'm sorry, doctor Craipel, I just
I have a just a quick follow up question for you. Nothing you know, major in huge depth. But I remember at the Archives of the Impossible, Jacques Fallet gave his wonderful presentation. He talked about his experience with UFOs and he talked about his collection that was coming into the archive. But I remember there was some parameters around it that they weren't going to be public just
yet. What was the date again where they were going to be public and what actually was going to be in his archives if you could just refresh our memory. Yeah, so actually Jacques's collection is what initiated the archives. And please just call me Jeff Courtney. It's okay. I'm a casual person, you know Jacques really well. Jock approached me in twenty fourteen in Berkeley actually, and he was asking about how if I could help him with some kind
of university archive. And his interest was basically that yes, his collection could go up on the antiquarium market and fetch a certain amount of dollars, but it would just disappear, you know, the into the ether as it were. If it came to an archive, it would be preserved and then future researchers could look at it and come to their own conclusions. But you know, Shaq was really concerned about, I am sure, the information in his
archive and also his own mortality. I don't want to speak for him, but he put a ten year moratorium on the collection. And the collection came in. It's come in in four different parts, three parts and in the near future or fourth part, and each of those collections have a ten year
moratorium on them, So it's complicated to explain. The first moratorium is up in twenty twenty eight, by the way, and then twenty thirty and you know, twenty thirty two or twenty thirty four, whatever the whatever, the ten year moratorium is. So it's it's complicated that that particular collection is complicated. The other thing that we have to do, because it's the university archive, is we have to take it through something called IRB, which means Institutional
Review Board. And the IRB is set up really for medical records and for chemistry and biology and these sorts of disciplines, but we also want to follow it very rigorously, and because some of the archives involve personal information, including medical information, we have to be really careful with some of the collections, the John mac collection, which is our most recent collection. So it's complicated,
Courtney. That's all I'm going to say. Although it won't be complicated for the far future or the I guess the near future, it's just complicated for us right now. I you know, before I get to my own question, I just want to follow up on Courtney's because you made me think. Both of you made me think of a tangent here that may be interesting given that there's several, as you said, you know, different iterations. I'm assuming that you have had a chance to see. Okay, so personally,
what is the most compelling for you? With full knowledge that everyone in this panel may be compelled by a different a different work, or a different aspect of it, but what's the most compelling to you that moves you? I think the experiencers. I think the it's hard, it's hard to locate a particular file or a particular document, but just the experiencers who have had these encounters and have been ontologically shocked by them is deeply moving to me.
I take the experiencers seriously, which means I think that what they're reporting actually happened to them. But I don't take their experiences at face value. I think whatever is whatever they're experiencing, and they're experiencing in a kind of code.
So there's a kind of I don't want to say deceptive quality to the phenomenon, but there's a kind of camouflaged quality to the phenomenon that really strikes me as as a as a historian and a humanist, and the integrity of the experience answers, you know, combined with this sort of deceptive or camouflage quality of what they're experiencing is really what strikes me the most. I think. I think that's what compels me most about the topic as well. Yeah,
and I wasn't expecting like a specific case. You answered it exactly the way I just you know, the tangent of it, which genre of it. My my personal question for you is do you think that an opportunity exists where perhaps yourself and some of your colleagues like Diana and others that are from their religious studies community, if you will, could possibly engage with leaders of organized religion in search for a message that they could sort of convey to their
what would you call them, Nathan, their their individual churches. So I know there's a the believers basically the religious of any different terms for yes, So by Diana, I assume you mean Diana Pasoka, Yes, sir, that yes, sir. Yeah. So Diana's a good friend and a colleague, I you know. So there's this conversation in the study of religion on whether the religions can essentially handle what most people would call disclosure. And there's
sort of the far spectrum over here. I guess over here now is that because of this vertical dimension that the religions possess, that they're capable of handling disclosure. But there's also this this position over here on the left I guess, or the right whatever that is to you, that they can't handle it, and that the metaphysical or the ontological shock is so great that it's it's not it's not translatable into any of the particular religions. I'm actually more of
the latter camp. You know, Diana is more of the former camp. I think Diana is more inclined towards the position that the religions can handle it. I'm more inclined to the position that they can't handle it. And so you're Colonel jessp back to the Colonel esp metaphor. Yeah, I don't know if I'm right, but I'm deeply I guess I'm deeply suspicious of the religions
themselves. I'd like this vertical dimension. I think they're correct that there's some kind of transcendence or some kind of other reality that's breaking into the human reality. So in that sense, I think the religions are really useful, but their content or their specific revelations I think are largely incompatible with what the UFO or the ua P phenomenon is suggesting, and so I guess I'm more skeptical
of whether they can handle the full, the full brunt of disclosure. And of course, disclosure presumes that this is going to get down a rabbit hole. But disclosure presumes that somebody knows the secret, and and so we're going to disclose the secret. I actually don't think anybody knows the secret. I
agree. I think that the government and the military and the intelligence community and the religions, I think they're all essentially hiding their own ignorance around And so I'm much more of that camp than than I am of the Oh, it'll be okay, you know, we'll we'll absorb the revelation. I'm like, no, you won't, No, you won't. To support your point,
not that you need my support. But Jim semi Van, who apparently was much higher up in the CIA than I was aware, like operations officer, you know, like at that level of like you know, operations command if you will, he said as much. He said, they don't, they don't know what this is. They can't explain it to you, because they don't know that, and they don't like to try to explain things they can't
explain, which is consistent with what I know about government. So I mean, so, I know, I've met Jim, and I've spent some days with Jim as well, and my own feeling about the intelligence community and the military and the government is that they have particular tasks that they're concerned about, and this this ain't one of them. And so when you know, when they say this is not our our prerogative or this isn't in our so I
believe them. I think they're correct about that. I think this is a kind of shock to the system, the sort of this sort of reality system that people in habit. And I don't think it's the job of the government or the military or their intelligence to negotiate our reality as it were. Not in the mission statement, Nathan, go for it, brother, No, I doubt there is so, Jeff, I come from a religious background.
I was in seminary, got the Samary degree, left the church a long time ago, but I grew up with the historical critical method of analysis of the text. I grew up in a progressive you know, Christian heritage and
for those of who don't know what that means. It means, you know, kind of looking at the text religious text with a very critical eye, trying to understand the context of the day and situate that text within the context and the and the cultural context of the time, so that you kind of try to view it from how the people of the day when it was written may have understood the text, rather than taking our sort of current cultural position and imposing it upon the text. And you know, the found that to
be fairly useful. But that approach also, at least when I was growing up, really discarded a lot of the more phenomenological aspects of religious text. Here, we are now kind of at a place in the twenty first century where we're beginning to re examine some of these accounts and I think take them with a little bit more seriousness than we may have in the past. So do you see the way forward kind of reclaiming some of this, you know,
some of the parts of ourselves that we've discarded. What does it look like as we move forward here? So, Nathan, what kind of seminary were you in? I was in a so my professors were ex Southern Baptists, let's put it. Okay, yeah, okay, So I was trained in that tradition as well. I mean, I it was the Roman, it was a Roman Catholic seminary, but it was very much the historical critical
method. You know, the way the historical critical method works is it basically throws out miracles, right, It throws out all the strange stuff, and it focuses on the stuff that it can understand historically and and textually. I think what you're what you're getting from this phenomenon, certainly what you're getting from me as a kind of third space. It's not the it's not the Southern Baptist belief system. I'm not I'm not asking anyone to believe anything. But
it's also not the historical critical debunking or contextualization. I think that basic religious beliefs are are based on actual human experiences, and so there's a there there, But it's a there there that doesn't stay faithful to any particular religious content
or any particular religious scripture. And that's difficult for people to hear. It's difficult for the religious believer to hear, but it's also difficult for the skeptical or secular person to hear, because I think there really is something being communicated that is not historical, that is not social, but it's not even natural,
that's intervening in our world. But I don't happen to believe the content of this scripture or that scripture, or this faith or that faith, because I think those are all historical deposits of other people's religious experiences which made sense to our ancestors but simply don't make sense to us anymore. So there's a kind of there's a kind of paradox here. There's a kind of affirmation of the religious inbreaking, but there's a deep skepticism around the traditional interpretations of that
in breaking, I guess, is what I'm trying to say. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to me. And I find that we we sort of forget that we should be applying a historical critical method to our own methodology of analysis, right, so we tend to think that we've kind of escaped that somehow. You know, my my joke, my joke is why are your why were your advices in graduate school omniscient? Why? Why were they gods? You know? Why? Why are the critical theorists whom you
happen to to think or believe. Why why are they right about everything? And why can't we apply the same historical critical methods to their thought that we apply to everything else and and be skeptical of our own worldview? And I think that us, what we're being called to do is is sort of step out of our worldview or our belief system and sort of question it. And
again that's hard because people want answers. They want me to tell them what X, Y or Z is, and I'm like, no, I actually don't know what X, Y or Z is, and neither do you, by the way, So let's let's be honest about that. And that's a difficult position to be in for sure. Thank you. Yeah, So I had to comment before I asked my question. When you were talking about the AI, what flashed through my head was Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. And
I feel like you are striving to find the answer to the universe. And I think that that is a ridiculously lofty goal. And if you do get the answer A forty two when you have the AI, run let me know. But I don't think that you should put that much pressure on yourself. That robot took thousands of years to give the answer forty to you. So I wanted to switch to you talked about worldview, and a lot of people may not have picked up on the fact that you are paying attention to the
phenomenon as a global issue, and it's really important to me. I'm really trying to talk about that as much as possible. I was wondering if you've noticed any patterns in looking at the phenomenon that way that people are missing because they get so caught up in their country and one group of countries. Yeah, I mean, so one of the common mistakes people make is they think it's an American phenomenon, you know, they think the UFO, Oh,
it's just an American obsession. And what they're of course doing is they're confusing the Hollywood reception and interpretation of the phenomenon with the total phenomenon, or with the total total UFA or up reality. And what you see if you look at this is that it's a global phenomenon and that it happens everywhere, and that it's always been happening actually, and it gets picked up my different cultures and it gets translated into religions or nation states. Today in a particular sort
of way. But those ways it gets picked up are just as much reflections of us as they are of the phenomenon itself. And I think that's what you really take away from the global picture, is that the individual interpretations are cultural and historical and they're not absolute. So that's what, at least what I take away. I'm very much a comparativist step. I think that things
come partably. I think if things cross culturally, I don't. I don't think that this is just an American obsession or or or an American military concern. I think this is something that's been happening for a long long time all over the world. And what would you say? The biggest pattern is like that's that was the big big part of it is the pattern. So the pattern that I so there's a couple, there's there's a number of patterns I see. One is that it looks a lot like US, but it's not
US. So it's sort of like US, but not US. If you gave me enough beer or enough alcohol, yes I'm sorry, the podcasters would set me back packs of beer. If you give enough alcohol, I would probably say, I think it's a future US. I think I think it's us. And the reason I say that is, first of all, it communicates with us, and it looks sort of like us, but it doesn't look like us, looks like me more than you. Actually, Yeah, it looks like dj No, but it and and so that's a pattern I
see. The other couple patterns I see is one, is it somehow involved sexuality. There's a lot of sexuality and gender and and orgasm and sexual fluids going on, and genetics and you name it. There's a lot of stuff going on there. And the other pattern I see is trauma. I see a lot of people who are opened up to this this reality through through their own personal trauma. And that might be physical trauma. That might be emotional trauma, that might be sexual trauma of them. It might be a lot
of different forms. But I do see a kind of traumatic pattern here. And I don't and I don't say that reductively, deb I'm not reducing it to the trauma. I think the trauma somehow opens people up. It just it puts a hole in people and they can be we can be impinged upon them more easily. I like to think of it as the aperture gets opened for survival reasons. Yeah, Courtney Europe. Okay, So I'm going to try to tie a couple different ideas together. I had one, but a
couple other came up as we all got talking. So I remember at the Archives of the Impossible you said something. It was one of my biggest takeaways
was that. And I might be saying this wrong, so correct me, but you had you had said, well, the future has already happened because we were talking about retrocausality, we were talking about the White Night sure and statistics and all these different things, and that was like one of the overarching things that you said that I was like, wow, he said it.
And then one of the other things that I saw was that there were a lot of experiencers there that had needs that they had, like palpable needs for answering up questions, and that really wasn't the right venue for it, but there was the self culture of people there talking about their experiences. And so one of the other things I was thinking about asking you coming into this was
I come from the humanistic approach as well in psychology. I didn't have religion, but cross culturally, you know, you explore a lot of that and art and other wonderful things. And so I wanted to ask you about those experiencers that are searching and also their self awareness. And it's a concept I've been exploring for a little while, Like when experiencers have these experiences and they're
using self awareness to understand what it is. What advice do you give experiencers when they run across that camouflage or that that interface of some thing other that they don't necessarily know how to interpret. We have heard that there's some type of conditioning when they are faced with that. How do you help them with their self awareness to move through it in the best possible way? I mean,
like, what would be your advice? Yeah, yeah, I touched your heart and I don't want to put you on the spot, but like, have you seen things that work? No, it's okay. First of all, the experience has challenge me. I'm not I don't present myself as an authority over these things. I really want to think out of their experiences. That's in a very collaborative way. My sense is is that the experiences push us towards a kind of physical reading of a lot of these events that
goes against my own training. You know, we want to. In the study of religion, we want to read things psychologically or spiritually or imaginally, to use a fancy word. But the experienceers push us to see these things more physically, and I want to hear that, and I want to be challenged, and I don't want to present myself as some kind of authority. On the other hand, I want to authorize their experiences, and this is
really important. I think the most important thing we can do is frankly listen and take their experiences seriously, by which I mean not reduce them to our worldview. So when I listen to an experiencer, I'm not going to say, oh, well, you experienced X, Y or Z, or you know this was because of your own religion, or this was because of your let's see your emotional history or whatever. I like. No, no, no, do not reduce what is being challenged here to something that is comfortable
to you, the something you already know. And I think it's that act, Frankly Courtney, that is so powerful to people, because, for better or for worse, they do perceive me as an authority. I think that's a mistake, by the way, but they do, and they perceive the
research university as authorizing a particular form of inquiry. And I think that's correct, actually, and that's what I most want to do, and what I most want to help with is essentially mainstream this inquiry inside inside an academic box, as it were, not because the academic box is perfect, or because academics are somehow smarter or something. It's because that's a place in our culture where we can take things seriously and we can integrate them over many, many
generations. And so that's what I most want to do is I want to make this thing intergenerational. It isn't about Jeff, it's not about Courtney. It's about our children and our children's children, and this inquiry over many generations until we can change our worldview and change the story that we live in in a way that I think is being called for here. And really that's how I see a lot of these experiences and a lot of these impossible events.
I think they're deep, deep shocks to our stories. And by our stories, I mean our cultural stories, I mean our sense of reality. I mean what we really think is real and what we most value, and I think we're being called out of that. And I know people you know who suffer because of those stories, and they need another story. And I think we're not there at the moment. And maybe maybe we don't. We're never there, you know, maybe human beings are always in the process of telling
new stories. And I'm sure the new stories we tell our great great grandchildren are going to say, well, that sucks. You know, that's a stupid story. You know, Let's let's tell a difference. Okay, tell a different story, be a different person, be a different human being. But you know what, your grandkids are going to think, you suck too. And and so that's the process that I want to encourage and authorize. And I just I happen to be in the academy. So okay, that's
what I do, Courtney. It's it's not that it's perfect. I think filmmakers and novelists and graphic novel writers. I mean, there's all kinds of people who can do this in a way that's more effective, I think. But I'm not in those worlds, so I don't. I can't do that those things. Actually, my contemporaries now think my story sucks, so I can only imagine when we get twenty thirty years down the line. I mean bring to me like, not only didn't I want to hear I really really
don't want to hear it now. So anyway, doctor Jeff again, I just want to reiterate your shirt is outstanding and we may have to compare notes on our clothiers offline. But Jeff, I wanted to let me frame this up for you before I asked for your reaction. So this is Staff Sergeant
Dan Sherman. Former. He was an ELNT specialist trained as an Eland Specialist Electronics Intelligence in the Air Force. He wrote a book called Way Above Black, which you may or may not be familiar with, and it's a very short, to the point sixty page book of him going to read in to He was a police security police in the Air Force going to ELIN and when he got taken to ELIN School, which was a top secret program, he was pulled aside and said, we want to read you into a grape program
which is umbrellaed by the Black program. So people in the Air Force know about the Black program. Nobody but a very select group is going to know about this gray program. We want you to be an intuitive communicator with extraterrestrials. And the reason that we want that is because your mother was abducted in nineteen sixty and then she was abducted again in sixty three when she was pregnant with you, and you were let's call it enhanced, and he was, Oh, my god, am I a hybrid? Am I? This?
Am I that? And They're like, no, You're just having attenuated ability that all of us have essentially. So I watched an interview with him that's quite old, probably from the early two thousands, and I read his book and I want to just get your reaction to the sentence about religion and God. And this came up because I heard you say on a podcast God is Us and I'd love that quote. I wrote that quote down. So if you will just indulge me for a second here, I'm going to put on
my glasses on my glasses, Okay. Being brought being brought up in the Christian faith, I naturally had quite so he finally figured out how to communicate with these ets on a higher level that was not the information that they were asking him to communicate about. And so religion is the subheader here. And he says, one question I remember quite clearly was when I asked if they the ets had a soul, as was usually the case, His answer was
quite curious. Perhaps someone reading this will be able to understand it better than I. He said that any entity that realizes its own existence has intellect and therefore must have a soul. We meaning us and them. The ets have been created from the same oneness parenthetical my interpretation, and out of that creation came intellect and non intellect. There are only forms of life in the universe.
They are the only forms of life in the universe. We are both them and us, along with many other parts a part of the intellectual aspect creation. When asked if there was a God, he said something like the question you ask answers it's He said, he's not qualified to answer that question, but he said something like the question you ask answers itself. So there you go, is that how does God is us playing into that? And do you agree that maybe there was this one power that created us and them?
So that's a bit, that's a big question. It's a guest. I mean, we don't know. It's just a well, okay, so first of all, we know that there are a lot of traditions in the history of religions that deal with different forms of intelligence all the way up to God. And we know that there are systems of human beings becoming God that are what we call apothatic, that you know, they say away or they
deconstruct notions of some kind of objective or some kind of personal God. What I hear in a lot of the extraterrestrial talk is what we would call demonology or angelology and a kind of Christian theological context if we were living in a medieval worldview, and I don't hear what I don't hear a lot is what I would call mystical literature. In other words, human beings who are affirming their own divinity and who are affirming their own deification, but in an apathetic
or a non saying or deconstructive mode. And so I worry, frankly, I worry about people who are I was going to say, naively. They're naively imposing a kind of religious framework on what is essentially a demonology or an angelology, and they're not aware of these mystical traditions in which human beings are
essentially identical to cosmic unity or deity. And what I really think dj is that we're selling ourselves short, and that we're not aware of our own, our own godness as it were, that if we were aware of this, and if we listened, if we actually what This is going to sound self serving, but what I most want these people to do is listen to historicians
of religion. Just stop it, just stop it, Stop talking like you know what religion is when you really don't, and listen to people like Nathan here who actually know something about it and who can tell you all about it and so. And sometimes you do see that, like Matthew Roberts for example. I don't know if you've had Matthew of course, oh no, but we know him. Yeah, yeah, Well Matthew is very explicit that what you really need to do is talk to scholars of religion and scholars of the
psychology religion in particular. If you really want to understand what's going on, go talk to them. Don't go talk to the physicists or the rocket scientists or the chemists. Talk to the historian or the psychologist or the philosopher. And I just happen to think that's correct. And we haven't done that culturally. I mean, I can tell you in all certainty that our culture has dismissed people in the humanities, in the history and history and philosophy, and
because we don't know anything. And I say that with sarcasm. Of course we know all sorts of things, but they don't want to listen to us. And so let me let me give you an example. So when NASA puts a panel together to study the potential of extraterrestrial intervention, guess who they put on it. They put on a bunch of scientists. Okay, well, where's the humanist, where's the historian? Where's the answer is there is none, So of course they're not going to understand what's going on, you
know. And so that's what I think needs to happen, is we need to stop listening to the And I love physicists, and I love chemists, I loved I'm not dismissing these people, but please stop listening to them and start listening to the historians of science and to the philosophers, the humanists who actually knows something about what's going on, and and then we will get somewhere.
But we're not going to get somewhere until we do that. So if they would have added like DJ Nathan Debs and Courtney, they would have been exponentially more prepared to understand what's going on. Yep, Yeah, I mean I can't really disagree with that. I'm just kidding me good money, that's actually what I'm saying. Yeah, well, it seems, you know, Jeff, we've for the longest time now, we've really located reality outside of
ourselves. We have we have detegrated our own experience in favor of what's taking place outside of it and trying to say that that's, you know, all that there is. In the process, we've kind of reduced ourselves to do a non player in the story. Right. So for me, that that's the power of this subject. It's the power of this really the encounters that
I have with experiencers. I'm not an experiencer, but in a sort of coming at their truth, you know, from a place of seriousness, as you would say, you know, it really does I think re enchant or resituate reality away from what we all have I think been ingrained in. And that's this kind of very strongly materialist worldview. And so you know what's odd to me about that. I want to get your comment on this is how refreshing that is to the human experience, right, it's if you count of
encounter people who are doing this, it's incredibly refreshing to them. They are energized by this process of re examining their own experience, and in a way, the phenomena seems to be giving us permission to kind of do that again, or invite us. It's more of an invitation, let's put it that way, to do that again. Have you found similar response from people that you have really engaged on this topic and come to it with that kind of
earnest and fresh perspective. I think what you find this is a general comment, Nathan, but I think it's fair. I think what you find if you talk to the people who really engage the phenomenon is that it ultimately leads back to consciousness. And by consciousness, I don't mean Nathan or Jeff or deb or Courtney or DJ. I don't mean the ego. I mean some other realm or some other dimension of mind that is vastly superior to our individual
selves. But what you find over and over again is that the phenomenon is responding to whatever consciousness or to whatever awareness is brought to it, and it has this kind of you know, diologic or kind of backwards sort of or loopy nature to it that I think is very difficult for science minded people because science is really good at explaining everything except us. You know, it actually leaves out consciousness entirely. And it does that so that it can explain everything.
Okay, you can explain everything, but you can only explain everything because you got to determine what everything is. And if everything includes consciousness, then suddenly you don't. You can't explain everything, and there's a huge hole in your model of the universe called us called called called consciousness or line that just finds no place in this objectifying, quantifying, replicating method. And and again
that's not to dismiss science or technology. It's just to say it's really good at doing certain things, but it's really horrible or bad at doing other things. And I think the excitement people feel around the UAP or the UFO experience is that it brings consciousness back into into the the picture again in a pretty dramatic way. That is baffling to to this materialist or scientific picture of things, but it is very familiar to those of us who have who have you
know, spent our lives living and working and interpreting other religious worlds. We covered last time, you know, some of the extra things that humans are doing that the phenomenon can't do. We talked about Courtney's Dutch apple crump pie at Thanksgiving. We spoke about Deb's hamburger helper. We spoke about Nathan splitting wood in the backyard. And actually, I haven't come up with anything that I can do that they can't do yet, but still, I'm just kidding.
I never hear about UFOs that look like motorcycles. That's true. Now. Actually, one thing I did think of that that just popped into my head this week was kind of how they would look at us. And I
thought about a navy ship. I thought about. I think I was listening to maybe Richard Dolan's accounts of naval ship encounters with craft, whether they be aircraft carriers, destroyers, or the like, and I thought, if I were a non human intelligence, and I had my censors were picking up this enormous power that is generated by the either the nuclear reactor or other form of
propulsion that a lot of these ships have. And I decide to hover close and examine it, and all of a sudden, I'm getting shot at yeah, and you know what I mean, all of a sudden, the failing system is going off and I'm seeing you know, twenty millimeters rounds, you know, headed my way. And it's very interesting that they how must they interpret how aggressive that we are, that just appearing is enough for them to be targeted and shot at. Have you ever thought about no, sure,
no, no, of course. I mean there's a couple thoughts there. One is, I don't think these are threats, because I think if these were true threats, we've been toasted a long time. You know. I think it's obvious that whatever we're dealing with is so vastly superior to us that it's it's it's not even close. So the whole idea of threat just it
makes me laugh. And but if I were, if I were interested in my own species past, I would be very concerned about the development of nuclear power, for example, because it's essentially a bunch of monkeys juggling chainsaws that are going It's it's really dumb. And I also, you know, the other thing that I think about a lot is well, you know, we have this metaphor of AI now because well, AI is in the news, and we think of AI. If I were visiting the tribe of a of
a of a previous species, I would go in myself. I'm going to get thrown against the fucking wall, and the monkeys are violent. I am not going into that. But I'll send the machine in. You know, that's fine. You know. So I think the whole language and metaphor of AI or the machine or the or the robot as we used to call it, is actually quite intuitive to to what what a what a future human would how a future human would actually interact with with a present human, which is
very carefully and you know there are stars. There are Star Trek episodes on this, right, I mean the prime director. I mean, we have imagined this. It's not like this is outside the narrative our of our imagination, but we have imagined. And what we know from the history of colonialism, by the way, is it's bad. When one civilization interacts with another and it's technologically superior, it does not go well. Okay, it goes
really badly. So if you are a technologically superior civilization, you do not want to intervene in the development of of a of a technologically inferior civilization. Okay, So you just don't. I mean, that's just that's just history. That's history. One oh one. So I think there are a lot of again, good reasons that we see what we see, and there are a lot of good reasons that we don't see what we don't see, like this, you know, this silly notion of landing on the white House lot.
Why in the hell would they land on the white House lot? I mean, that's crazy, that's crazy talk. And so there are a white house, what's the white House to them? You know? Yeah? Well? And also why, yeah, why why? Why? Why would the farmer show up and talk to the pigs and the goats and the cows too. I mean, it's just crazy talk. And it assumes a kind of anthropost centrism that we're somehow the superior species in the universe, and I just
seriously doubt that. And I think that's one of the shocks of this this phenomenon is that it really shows that we're not. Yeah all that. I mean, I don't know if these phenomenon could necessarily produce led Zeppelin and things like that, but anyway, I don't. Probably not, I mean probably not. But again, what's what's led Zeppelin to in the greater picture. I don't know. Well, we would have to see what ets would think of that music. I mean, you know, we would have to see
what their reaction is. But anyway, we don't want to keep any longer because we have hit you one hour mark and that way, you know when we ask you to come back for a third time, you won't be like, oh, those guys kept me for too out for an hour and a half. So let's go with Cabby goodbye, Starting with Courtney connected. It was wonderful having you, wonderful seeing you again. Thank you for answering my
questions so articulate and eloquent. And for the future, I just want you to know that I'm refamiliarizing myself with the flip and I just have this burning desire to talk with you in the future about cosmic mindedness. Yeah sometimes, yeah, Courtney, thank you for coming to Rice and for stopping me and I you know, I always apologize. It's it's it's not my Preedmadonna's status.
It's just being overwhelmed with a lot of guests and a lot of a lot of details that I always am, and so so thank you for coming. Yeah. Luckily I was with Mike Clellan. So he was like, oh, yeah, come over, come over and meet him. Because I was like, oh no, no, I don't. I don't want to impose upon him. He's like, oh, it'll be fine. So he was I leading Mike's school. Yeah it's cool. Thank you, Like I
said, Courtney connected, go ahead, Debs. I wanted to say while we've been talking, I just keep thinking of all these things I'd like to talk to you about like that. That's just how interesting the conversation has been, you know. And I wanted to say also that there are resources that are available for those experiencers that are reaching out to you. Maybe you could just like add Opus's linked to their website to your signature when you respond to
people or something like that. So don't put all of it on yourself. After all, your AI is not going to tell you for thousands of years that the answer is forty two. And there are there are other humanitarian efforts out there, like the people here that want to help. So if you need help, just let us know. But we very much appreciate everything that you do. You have put yourself as a figurehead and a noble effort. Thank you very much. Yeah, no, I'm well aware of those networks
and and they're all they're all wonderful. Thank you, Thank you for doing what you're doing. Jeff. It's been a real pleasure having you back with us. And you've got a book. I'm gonna plug your book that's coming up in July. It's called how to Think Impossibly. To get that title correct, Yeah, and I heard that the forward was going to be written by Philip ball Is that is that right? Or he has a common Philip wrote a blurb to it. Now there's no forward. There's no forward to
it. If he wrote a forward to it, that's news to me. Nathan, Okay, perfect, great, Well, for those who don't know, Philip ball is I think one of the editors of the journal Nature. He's a science writer. So that's a pretty notable blurb to write for your book. Looking forward to that it comes out in July twelfth, I think, yeah, yeah, yeah, that sounds right. Actually, yeah,
excellent. Well, best of luck with that and the rest of your sabbatical well deserved, and hopefully we'll have you back with us again in the future. So I hope so you guys know how to get a hold of it, and thank thankfully you answer us. And by the way, so Cabby's what we're going to say. I'm going to say goodbye to Jeff here. We're gonna let him go, and then we're gonna stay on air and promo
our new network, the Untold Radio Network. So but Jeff, before we do that, I want to say, thank you so much for being willing to come on. I know how many podcasts contact you, and we love your work and your positive nature. We'll never forget what you did for our Cabby Matt last time, because boy, some of the paranormal stuff that he has dealt with I've heard even since that show that he shared is quite traumatizing. And the way that you handled that, I know made him feel better
and I'm deeply appreciative of that. So yeah, please let us know. We will promo your book even though you if you're not on, we are still going to throw it at up at the beginning of our show what we're starting with a new network on May nine. But thank you, so yes, sir, we're very excited about it, and thank you very much for coming and sharing your thoughts and being such a good sport. Right. No, it's a pleasure really and I mean that it's not it's not a duty
or a or a performance. It's it's genuine. I'm really glad. I'm really glad. We had so much fun and you can laugh with us. So well, we will invite you on for a Jeff Kreipel part three, kind of like Jaws three, but it'll be better than that. Was all right. I saw Jaws, by the way, I remember Jaws in the seventies. I didn't see Jaws three, so must not go there. Yeah, we're close in age. I saw Jaws in the theater Star Wars as a ten year old. That'll give you an idea how old. And so
thank you so much, brother. We'll talk to you soon. Okay, take care bye. All right, Cabby's great, great job, guys. I just figured we would uh promo the network. So May ninth, the only place that you guys will be able to find CAB is on untold Radio network. Nathan, do you have anything cued up we can throw up there? I do not. I have nothing, Okay, we will. We will get it for the uh for the next show. We'll get something. We'll get that that tile up there so we can show you the logo and
we can have the link and so forth. Jewels, you know you, you'll find all of us there. Jewels will be there, everybody will be there. Hello and on, Welcome, Welcome back. And this is Horselama somebody the name in the tent. But yeah, so Untold Radio Network, there is a slew of Bigfoot shows, paranormal shows. I'm gonna bring it up real quick, just so I can, just so I can. I
think this sit right here, Untold Radio AM. I'm gonna put on my spectacles, okay, and next week they're going to be working on our stuff. So boy, here's the show. They have a coffee time down South, Phenomenalies to discover Sasquatch, Grasping Sasquatch, Monsters on the Edge, Mysterious Library, Pine Island Research, Paranormal Spectrum, Talking Weird, the Bigfoot influencers, Sasquatch outposts, Jim. I really want to get Jim on from Colorado.
He's amazing, grew up in Zimbabwe. I think Untold Radio AM and Weird Encounters a wide open research and it says Calling All Beings Archive, so Calling All Beings is already being listed on their site. And they also are owners of Hangar one Publishing where you can find books on UFO's Bigfoot Paranormal. So they're kind of into the same things that we're into. But take it away, Nathan, Yeah, we're very excited about this opportunity to partner with
and the Cat. The Cat's back there is, so we're very excited about that. One of the things that's going to allow us to do is to record some of the shows and then we'll be able to be in the audience and chat while the show premiere. So that'll be a fun way for us to interact with folks that we don't normally get a good chance to interact with while the show is happening. So a huge shout out to our listeners and followers. It's been great to kind of get to this point and hopefully we'll
deepen the Cabby network further and grow the Cabby community. Yeah, on Debs, I wanted to add that as far as I know, we will be able to link our videos to the show to the YouTube channel that we currently have, so no one's gonna have to go where they go where they go. We're still going to be out there. I'm excited to be with so many people who are seasoned and talking about the phenomenon. So that's one of
the things I'm really looking for. Two, we're gonna be connected to a lot more people who are interested in you know, Bigfoot ghost and we're gonna be one of the only UFO people. But you know, we've got our stuff together. We're good, so it's gonna be great. Well, the UFO love That's what I was gonna say. Court. They're basically they're looking to plus up their UFO content. Uh. And that's why I think they were interested. They they've been on with us or Doug high check, Doug
high Check. Sorry, man, Harrah's gonna take I think this is Ka punishing me by sending her Hara the Destroyer in here, because she truly is the disruptor in the house. But anyway, and she's gonna callaw me here in a second. But Doug is the producer of Monster Quest those of you who remember that, he's also done work for nat Geo uh and other networks. Uh and legend me at Science too, which this is the twenty twenty three. He starts shooting, Oh now she's got the microphone. It's so
funny. But Doug starts shooting Legend Meat Signs two ten years after the first one, so he started shooting in twenty twenty three. He's not finished yet. But yeah, it's a great group of people and I think it'll it'll work out really well. You know, then, what do you think We're going to bring more UFO content to the big Foot people's homie. I'm all about it. You know, I'm a big UFO researcher and you know, kind of a nut really, so I'm excited about expanding horizons, especially being
with calling all beings. With this partnership, It's going to be pretty fascinating and lovely to see what takes hold and people that are going to find it find the content. Yeah, well well, adeb as you were saying, we'll kind of figure out the links, but I think they're going to be able to click on that and come to ours often get with We'll get get
into some meetings effect Doug. I spoke with Doug today. He's gonna contact Nathan next week about some of the creative aspects of it that he's asking me stuff today. I'm like, Man, if it does doesn't have to do with content, don't ask me. I don't know anything. I don't have anything to do with it. That's Nathan, So but he'll get with you on that. I'll talk with Alex Hicheck, his son about the mechanics of it. And but basically that's where you're gonna find us on YouTube and on
podcasts on Untold Radio network. So we'll Nathan and I kind of will figure out how to make sure we leave that message out there that everybody can can find it on podcasts, et cetera. But essentially you'll have to just subscribe. Now this is not a paid subscription. Okay, you can go on your your whatever, your podcasts app and just subscribe or follow our show and you're gonna get CAB every week. It's just that it won't be on the
current CAB feed anymore. But it's not still not going to cost you anything to watch or or listen to CAB on pod. Yeah, all right, what'd you think, man, doctor Jeff Cripel's best? How can you not like Jeff Crepel's amazing court? What'd you think? He's just such a groovy guy, and he's you know, he's thoughtful, he's careful, he's considerate, very insightful. I mean, he's just lovely. He's a lovely man.
I couldn't agree more. He's just such a kind person. I mean, he is probably getting requests on the level that Gary Nolan is and and he said yes to us, and it's well, you know, maybe not Gary maybe getting you know, because he's on TV a lot as well. You know, he's on news programs. He's probably getting even more. But we really and we did have Gary once. We really appreciate it. Debs. Did we get anything wrong tonight? And how did it go? Oh?
I thought it went well. I feel like he really just makes you want to think about so many other things, you know, and you just want to be that person that tells him your experience for some reason. Like and his shirt was phenomenal, it was so cool. I know, I'm so jealous man. Yeah, And I'm going to send him the book from Dan Sherman and see what he thinks. But I think I don't know if he believes that our government has been in contact with him, which I also,
as you guys know, have said it on CAB. I didn't believe it. And now is everybody in Unison that they believe that? Now? Are we going in different camps? On this, I'm in a different camp. So I don't think it's the government. I think it's people who are connected maybe to the government, who have some of the skills, some of the resources. But I don't think that this organization that is doing this stuff
is so much the government anymore. Well, what I'm referring to as the Dan Sherman narrative about being trained by the government, it was a joint I don't know if it was NSA or CIA and Air Force program, just to
learn how to communicate with them. Yeah. Yeah, So I think my thing is, and I think I've said this previously, is if you broad in your perspective of what that means to be the government, right, if you brought in it to understand that those people may have been trained by the government, may still be working there, may still have some connection, but are actually working outside of the government. I think that's where some of this really lies. Well, what he was saying was I was trained to Fort
Meade. So if he's saying that, he's giving he changed the names of the people, but he's using ranks, and he's talking about the programs, and he showed a set of orders. So he's talking about This definitely was a if you believe it, I mean, you don't need to believe this. Well, it was a and what it is now I don't know. I've haven't the slightest idea and I don't have an idea of what happened.
Then. All I know is what he said and the way that he speaks about it lines up with I believe that he's telling the truth, but I don't have any knowledge of it. So so his experience wasn't direct contact though, right, it was. It was communication, So that's different. What I'm talking about is the people who are saying that the government is having like a direct contact, and I don't think that's happening. I think it's a
different group. I think so like he wasn't the first person to come out and say, I've, you know, worked for the government and then we worked with you know et essentially, right, I think that there is another group that's doing that work, the physical contact, the like you know, and you hear these stories like that there's a space in a base, it's not always area fifty one, and it just seems to be like there's a pattern. But I just feel like maybe because of liability, even it wouldn't
be directly the government, that's all. Yeah, and and Court, did you do you remember lou Elezando sort of retweeted somebody that said, oh, I'm trying to figure out what Harr's doing. Now. She's trying to open a little close plastic She's trying to get in the drawer, a plastic container drawer and pull it open hatred, but there's something blocking it, so she's
trying hard to All right, Court, do you remember Andrew something? Lou Alezondo retweeted, Hey, you should listen to this or take this seriously. Do you guys remember, Yeah, Andrew Scott he had one of the largest UH buyout deals. I think it was by I don't know if it was by HarperCollins, but it was by one of the big publishers last year, and then we hadn't heard much about it. And then Ross Coltheart also covered it. Luelzando and Sean a couple of different people covered that story. And
so I haven't heard anything more about the book. To your point though, about the belief system and whether you believe we're contacting them, I just think it's so fascinating how you think. No. Right, But then as you get exposed to all this material, then you start wading in and you're like, oh, I have to accept this and I have to accept this.
Well, today I was reading this really in depth article. It was written by Richard Dolan and it was Kit Green, and he was having him go on the record, and Kit Green says multiple times that there's a secret space program, that he knows it, that he encountered it, he encountered it on multiple occasions. I'm like looking at that, just going are you kidding me? Like, I can't set that. I can't accept that right now. I'm just going to store it, put a pin in it, and
you know, encounter that later. But it comes in waves where you kind of you can't refuse certain things after a while after you see it enough in the research money. Yeah, I mean it's very complicated, right, So, I mean, Accordingly makes an excellent point there, and of course Dyved Grush make claims about agreements between elements of the government and some aspect of whatever this is. So you know, I do think that in time we will
know more. But there's a mountain of seemingly amountain of evidence in the record about you know, sort of hinting that there is something to this and some type of contact. I don't know how extensive it is, how how active it is, but there does seem to be at least elements within the government or private and or private industry that have had some degree of contact what that looks like. And you know, I have no idea. You know,
it's certainly interesting to speculate about. For sure, it definitely yeah, I mean I don't know either. I told I didn't believe it at all, I said, I don't I told Nathan, I don't believe this is true. And then three things have happened. One was reading this book and then uh finding that that interview that Courtney's familiar with from the early two thousands, probably more than a decade after he wrote this book. And then there's a
friend of mine who you guys are familiar with. It's friends with David Grush, that's in the intel community. And that guy told me that he has in an environment read reports about these beings that were held in what kind of things that they experienced, and what he read was disturbing as a human. So when he you know, he sent me, he sent me that book, and he's sent and I don't think he sent me the interview. Someone else did. That might have been deb that sent me the interview. Somebody
else sent me the interview. But he sent me the book. And then he told me that, and I said, okay, yeah, there must be something to this. That they were training people to contact them in the probably late eighties, and who knows how long how far it dates back. Because the thing that makes him really believable is how he doesn't embellish on what. He doesn't tell you what he thinks. There's nothing in this book about what he thinks, only what he knows. He doesn't know how far back
he goes. He doesn't know how many intuitive communicators there were. He only knew the people in the program that were read in. And when he went to see mental health, he never heard from anybody. Again, closed, done, after accounts closed, don't come here, don't show up, blah blah, blah, blah blah. When he asked about what the information was, where it would go, that he would type into a box and hit
send. He has no idea, don't know where it went, only that when I figured out what I thought, they were coordinates, and it corroborated that there were abductions associated with that, I said, I'm out of this game. That's a done, done deal over So, but all the things that you would ask him in an interview, what about this, what about that? And what do you think this? He wouldn't tell you anything about what he thinks. He just tells you what he knew to be true based
on his experience. And that was very powerful, especially you know, you know, before we go, I mean, we could take nine minutes here. But the religious aspect, going back to this, if everybody wants to let me put on the spectacles again, an entity, perhaps an entity that realizes its own existence, has intellect and therefore must have a soul, anybody,
you know. So here's the thing, right, I've been down the rabbit hole of what counts as intelligence, and I think that we get really caught up in what we think of it in our terms, human terms, right, So that part I'm not so attached to. But I do think if you break things down, things that have DNA probably have a soul. And you know, some spiritualities would disagree with that. They think their spirits
in everything. So I have to give a NodD to that. But I do have a feeling that DNA is a key to the soul, and every living thing on this earth shares majority of our DNA. Meaning yeah, and not to be like rough on humans too much, but if you look at how even bacteria interact, you could be describing humans all the like. It goes from that's the smallest form of DNA on our planet. The interactions are
pretty much the same across all species. So although some of them do a little better than we do, like the fungus, they're pretty much in the cooperative mood for the most part, trying to help each other out, work on communication. I wish we were a little bit more like fungus than bacteria sometimes, but yeah, that's my perspective. I'm a pretty fun guy. That book DJ I went and looked it up. It's Simon and Schu had the bidding more over the book and the writer's name of the memoir was Scott
Andrews. I just wanted to I just wanted to circle back on that because we transposed the name. Yes we did, thank you, thank you. Yeah, that was uh. And when Lou said that, and he tells a very similar story of the Air Force telling him that his history wasn't what he thought, and then I'd have to go read that tweet again. I don't know if anybody finds it, or if anyone knows is that a similar narrative or am I conflating the two. We don't know. I think it's
similar. But what's weird is how often that narrative comes out right and then if you dig into it, there really are special schools for gifted children that you have to like be invited to essentially after applying. Sometimes there's yeah, and actually a good example is I think the guy who created Facebook was in one of those Hopkins Zuckerberg. Yes, well, there's the whole thing about Gordon Cooper. He was on the record about it. I mean, he
was famously quoted talking about the special schools for the star kids. So there's other there's other literature that documents this interesting. Well certainly supports that, uh, Nathan, we we have been created from the same oneness and out of that create creation game intellect and non intellect. Yeah, it's that kind of language. I mean, it's it's a little bit loaded to certain degree, but you know, it does I think have parallels with non duality, that
you know that we're all sort of a part of the same thing. We're sort of consciousness exploring itself. So you see those themes popping up pretty often in the sort of experiencer encounter literature, you know, kind of like Jeff said, you know, we we are there, they are us. You know, God is us, or there's this very holistic perspective to all all of life. I'm not so certain that there's maybe kind of this this stark dualism between uh, you know, things that are conscious and things that are
not conscious. I don't know that i'd necessarily take that perspective. Also when it comes to the language of the soul, and that's a very loaded term, and so it's you know, you can take that for what you want, I suppose, but I don't necessarily adhere to the language of the soul and the kind of the in the traditional sense of the term. You know, there's this sort of like heavenly realm where souls reside that is, you
know, kind of distinct and apart from reality itself. So yeah, it's interesting, though, interesting to kind of get that in the record, and I think that those exchanges are fascinating. You know, we have people that claim to have spoken with with these beings and ask these types of questions, and the responses we get are often kind of cryptic in that way, but they're also, I think, to a certain degree, interpret heavily interpreted.
Right. So Dan Sherman and that example, is heavily interpreting what he's getting, because I think he described the method by which he gets communications necessarily like it's words per se. It's almost like imagery that he's kind of deciphering in his own words to make sense of it all, which adds adds to his credibility, right, because he could say that this is what he told me, but he's telling you it's only his interpretation of all of that imagery into
then putting it into English, which what could get lost in there? Oh I'm sorry, go ahead, ma'am. I just wanted to share something. I don't normally talk about this too much, but you know, when I was doing meditation, which essentially because it was just too weird, but one thing that happened was I was like shown that we all have within us God essentially like but they didn't call it God. And then I say they because
in my experience there were entities there. They said that we all have the source, the God source inside of us, and I took that to mean perhaps it is really literally ingrained in our DNA and that's what connects everything. So I just wanted to explain that a little further. Like there, it's like a cosmic universe, right, it's an internet, so to speak, So we are all a part of that. We're all like little nudes. But that's just I was just a meditation thing. So but other people said
it too. I think that's dope. And it's also leads to where we program with this sort of propensity to argue, fight, kill to keep the population of the planet under control, because obviously, if everybody was trying to help everybody, I mean, who knows what would have happened to the population and what the planet could support. I don't know if that's something that's been
there. But let's let's let's take what Julie's had to say here. I was in a gifted program called Project Up, So Jules, you'll have to tell us about that. But let me go to your next point. And okay, here it is, okay, not even sure, well one of you guys can read, I don't put on these glasses again. Look like
I'm in a drive in theater. I'm not even sure why they had it, but they gave us a pass that we could go on our own chill out space with the stereo and bay window and stuff when we were done in regular class with nothing to do. So she's talking about the program to give to the program. It sounds like a good party to me. Yeah,
Jewels, you ought to tell us a little more about your program. I know Jules is from Indiana, so I don't know where where this where this was at, but but yeah, I'd like to hear more about that. Jules will have to have a call. But anyway, it's time to cut the Cabby's loose out this joint from after Cab. But I just figured we could talk about Untold Radio network. We'll have some graphics for our next show, and we'll be ready to party with. Who do you we got coming
up next? Nathan? Are we partying with? Next calendar? I just went away on the intelligence yes, ma'am, please, I didn't get to but I think trees and other forms of being that might necessarily not have DNA, I would consider them intelligent. Interesting. Wait DNA? What does it have DNA? I need to know, like obviously we know Rocks, right, they don't. But but yeah, let me know if you want to pass that information on to me, Courtney, I need to know, Okay,
So Bob Pluskin. Yeah, so yeah, we will have x Oh look at this Danny Danny Danny Smith of the Story of podcast. We're going to have those guys on. He's just messaging me that episode's going to drop tonight, which means you all probably won't want to listen to it because I'm on it. Uh but talking Bigfoot. But these guys are really cool and
we'll have them on on CAB. So yeah, Sean Munger, who is a man you want to talk about, a passionate, fiery government person that is an advocate of Oh well no, that is an advocate of the phenomenon that is Sean Munger. And I would not want to be Sean Kirkpatrick in a room alone with Sean Monger anyway. So thanks a lot, guys, any any parting shots before we sign out? Yeah, I wanted to say, and it's funny that Courtney used the term the program and that that came
up. I think that when we are talking about the actual government working with UAPs, the term the program is what they tend to use, which is really interesting. It's like that's the code for it. Yeah, it was also a sports movie back in the early two thousands about steroid use, but that's besides the point. Thank you money, Nathan, any party shots before we go. You know, I just had a great time in the show today. Great having good jump back with us, and also great being with
all of you guys. Looking forward to the next one, and yeah, looking forward to being part of the Untold Radio network. Also, thank you everyone for listening and watching and following along with our show as we've been on this journey with you. And if you like the show, I want to hear more, please do give us a like and subscribe. It does help the show. I know we are transitioning to a new network, but it does help us stay in touch with you until we do so. Courtney Connected.
I loved learning about learning more about everyone, Like Nathan. I didn't know about your theological history and seminary and everything. It was nice to learn a little bit about your background and your perspective of where you're coming from. And it's always just nice to be involved with the Cabby crew learning and growing and being part of the crew. It's very it's very enlightening in many ways, just to have these conversations. It's an honor and pleasure to have you.
We do it a little bit differently, but we do it. So, Julie, thank you so much for being in the chat tonight. I'm sorry we didn't get to more. We had some very long winded answers. I had a whole back I had a couple more follow ups because you guys asked such great questions that I wanted to follow up on more of them than just Courtney's. But I was like, man, I gotta gotta keep passing
the baton, baby. So for Courtney, connected for Tubs, and for Nathan, this is djay is saying peace out, one love, We'll see you down the road. And as always, we're wondering what's up around the Bend.