 Discussion today as I think this is going to be a really interesting one folks want to let you know If it's your first time here to modern day debate I'm your host James and our goal our vision here is to basically give everybody from every walk of life an equal Shot to make their case on a level playing field So we're really excited to have to distinguish guests here today It's gonna be a lot of fun want to let you know a couple of housekeeping things for the channel first Then we'll talk about the format and then introduce our guests first is if you have not heard We are very excited modern day debate has invaded the podcast world So if you can't find us on your favorite podcast app Just let us know we'll work hard to get on there for you Also very excited if you love debate folks And if this is your first time here consider hitting that subscribe button as we have many more debates to come We are very excited about for example the resurrection debate this Friday between Matt Dillahunty and Dr Jonathan McClatchy, so that should be a lot of fun folks and with that want to start talking about the details for today's Discussion so what we're going to have is a pretty flexible five to ten minute opening statement from each side And we'll start with dr. Ross, and then we'll kick it over to Tom jump and also after that We're gonna have mostly open Conversation followed by Q&A so if you happen to have a question for the question and answer session Just shoot it into the old live chat, and if you tag me with at modern day debate It makes it easier for me to get every single question in that list Also super chat is an option which you could either ask a question or make a comment to which of course the guests We get a chance to respond to and it'll push your question or comment to the top of the list for the Q&A We also ask as always as you be your regular friendly selves We appreciate that as we really do appreciate these guests there. I mean this is a quality discussion I'm really excited for this one you guys, but they're doing it just because they love to do this And so we really do want to show them our appreciation and with that We're going to get into the introductions Tom jump is no stranger to the channel pictured on the right Tom has thousands of followers on his YouTube channel which regularly hosts debates between scholars from all walks of life as well So want to remind you that both Tom jump and dr. Hugh Ross are linked in the description folks So if you want to hear more, what are you waiting for? What better time to click on their links down below to get to learn more about them and their arguments? And so also want to let you know very excited as With dr. Hugh Ross, I have to let me show you this guys I just I'm so excited because this is a book I had read about 10 years ago And dr. Ross dr. Ross was actually one of the co-authors on this and so he and some colleagues had written this book on This topic of the debate today. We highly encourage you to check it out it's a really good read really fun and Very excited to give you this formal introduction for dr. Ross as well as as an astronomer and best-selling author Hugh Ross travels the globe speaking on the compatibility of advancing scientific discoveries with the timeless truths of Christianity his organization Reasons to believe is dedicated to demonstrating via a variety of resources and events that science and biblical faith are Allies not enemies. So this is going to be a really fun one folks. We are going to kick it into This actual discussion or debate today with Hugh Ross taking the lead on his opening statement Thanks again, dr. Ross for being with us. The floor is all yours Well, thank you. And as you mentioned, I'm one of the three authors on this book lights in the sky I'm little green men Subtitle a rational Christian look at UFOs and extra terrestrials People can get a free chapter of that book at reasons.org slash Ross And that book will give you in detail my position. I'm just going to be brief here You know as an astronomer I believe that it's not possible For physical aliens like us to engage in interstellar space travel In fact, my latest studies indicate that even interplanetary space travel is out of the question So ours little green men like us. No, I don't think that's an option But I've been studying UFOs since I was 16 years of age Every university where I served they made me the fellow that had to deal with all the people claiming to have had counters with UFOs And I can tell you that about 99% of what people reported to me as UFOs Either as a natural explanation It's a human phenomena Typically some military Secret spacecraft a kind of event or it's a hoax, but there's a 1% residual And what's interesting about the 1% residual is that we actually have evidence that it generates real effects Where you actually go to the crash sites and see the effects, but there's no debris There's no artifacts when they go through the atmosphere. They violate the laws of physics Which indicates we're dealing with something albeit real is not physical And so I take the same position as a half dozen other You know phd level physicists who have dedicated more than 10 years to studying the database Namely we're dealing with something that is interdimensional We're dealing with You know phenomena That's coming to us from dimensions beyond the physical dimensions and the laws of physics of the universe Now I had Carl Sagan as a professor when I was at the University of Toronto briefly And he backs basically dismissed UFOs, but that's because he had the world view There's no such thing as non physical reality And you know as a Christian I believe that God has created both in the physical realm and the non physical realm So I'm willing to entertain the possibility of non physical reality And we described in this book as a correlation between The level of the occult involvement And people who are experiencing Encounters of UFOs Particularly the close encounters And again, if anybody wants to look at that You know We have the physicist Alan Heineck who basically developed these categories of the kinds of encounters But it's been my experience at the level of these what I would call the real UFOs Not the 99% Is that the level of incidence is extremely low in the 48 states Quite a bit higher in hawaii and alaska And very much higher when you go to certain regions of france If you go to equatorial brazil Or if you look at what was going on in the soviet union Before the collapse of the communist government I've been back to russia since and the level of these experiences is literally plummeted But it's plummeted in direct proportion To people walking away from the occult So then the nutshell is where i'm coming from I'm not an expert in abductions My co-author ken samples He's a cult expert and so he wrote the chapters on alien abductions But I have taught the people who claimed to have been abducted And again, I take a skeptical approach The vast majority of people have come to me claiming to have been abducted by UFOs They really haven't been abducted They're dealing with some kind of psychological thing something that they really desire But again, I find a small residual That I think has legitimacy And basically talk about in this book is how we can put these kinds of ideas To a rigorous scientific test It's the only book I know on UFOs That takes a kind of scientific approach Absolutely thanks so much for that dr. Ross We will kick it over to tom for his brief opening as well And then we'll go right into that open conversation tom. Thanks for being back and the floor is all yours Yeah, so i'm gonna keep it pretty brief too My understanding is I pretty much agree with you that 99 of all the claims of UFO abductions have been shown to be just Natural phenomenon and there is definitely like a one percent that hasn't but that's just like in anything in science There's always a one percent of something that can't be explained in every field I don't think that gives us License to imply that it's a supernatural thing in any way unless there is like a scientific way to demonstrate it So i'm really interested to hear what this scientific Uh methodology you're proposing is to demonstrate the supernatural cause of UFOs. That'll be really interesting You bet with that we'll kick it right into open conversation. Thanks gentlemen Well, first thing I wanted to know was you said you debated with Carl Sagan earlier No, I had him as a professor at the university of Toronto and he talked about extra thresholds I mean, you're probably aware. He was a real fan of the idea that there were extra threshold beings like us And I was a graduate student Basically saying, you know, I don't think so And then he talked briefly about UFOs and said, you know Uh, since there's no such thing as non physical reality, they can't be real And if I agreed with his worldview, I would agree with him That if indeed there's no such thing as non physical reality, then there can't be any truth to the UFO phenomena Well, I mean, I don't think his conclusion was based off of that as a presupposition I think it's a conclusion based off the evidence. We have no evidence of the supernatural Therefore that suppose that something is supernatural would be an unreasonable conclusion So I think that I don't think it was because of his worldview that he rejected I think it was because of the evidence that he rejected I don't think there is any evidence that the supernatural could you tell me a little bit about your scientific proposal to demonstrate The UFOs are supernatural in some way Well, Carl never really looked at the evidence You know people like Alan Heineck did people like Jacques Malay have Excuse me. I have a little bit of asthma. I'm dealing with But uh, what I document in lights in the sky and little green men Is every phd level physicist has devoted a minimum of 10 years to studying the UFO phenomena as Come to the conclusion we're dealing with something that's real But we're dealing with something that violates the laws of physics Which is why you've got people like Jacques Malay saying we're dealing with something interdimensional I could broaden that to say maybe we're dealing with something trans dimensional Uh, but what all these physicists are agreeing on We're dealing with a phenomena that doesn't fit within the physical constraints of our universe And so and basically they well the other thing they all agree on They all agree that what we see in this residual the one percent Is a one to one correspondence with what we see in the occult and witchcraft And i'm the only one of these authors that is a christian The rest of them are agnostics or atheists And they say well, whatever is behind the occult and witchcraft is also behind These residual UFO phenomena mainly because they document That zero percent of it is beneficial. It's a hundred percent deleterious People have actually gotten injured and died from these phenomena Uh and in terms of The physical evidence that they cite It's basically those 2000 plus incidences Where you have multiple observers Watching the UFO go through the atmosphere Where they can do triangulation Determine the velocity And you know one reason why they say we're dealing with something outside of the physics of the universe When you track the velocity, it's 18 to 25 000 miles per hour And yet there's no sonic boom and there's no heat friction As the so-called object goes through the atmosphere And then when you have have witnesses where they see it crashing into the earth You go to the impact site and there's many clay places where you can see a crater as much as a foot deep crater If there's snow, the snow is melted. If there's vegetation, they can document radiation damage to the vegetation And yet in a hundred percent of those cases, there's no debris. There's no artifacts If it was a spaceship crashing into the earth, there would be debris. There would be artifacts But a hundred percent there's nothing there to show physical evidence of this event Uh, but mainly what I've done with my co-authors. I got Mark Clark He's a national security expert And basically he wrote the chapters on you know, there's our government covering up evidence I mean that's recently come in the news That our government indeed is covering it up And as someone who has spent two decades in national security He basically says we're overestimating the capacity of our us security system. It's not that good There's no way that they could cover up actual physical evidence And then ken samples he basically works with me to make the point That what's really interesting if you look at alan hynix classification system The only individuals that have the close encounters Where they're within 500 feet of the event Where they're actually claiming to get communications through automatic writing Or where they're injured by the event That it only happens to people that are deeply involved in the occult And where I close the book off is by saying those individuals that shut down their occult activity The ufo phenomena goes away 100 of the time If they divorce themselves cut themselves off from their occult activities No more ufo incidences And the reverse is also true If they open themselves up to the occult in a significant way They will have these experiences And I saw that personally when I was speaking to scientists in the soviet union In the 1980s and early 1990s I mean that was a time when the soviet union was giving generous grants to universities To physics departments to study occult physics hoping to develop weaponry they could use against the west And consequently many of these professors had these close encounters But now that they've stopped funding occult research that has disappeared And so the number of people in russia who claim to have ufo encounters has plummeted But it's in direct proportion to the plummeting of their involvement in the occult So that's kind of the bottom line And so I kind of end the book by saying this is happening to you. This is how you can get out Because basically we spend a lot of the book pointing out this is not something you want to pursue It has 100 of the time you're going to have very unpleasant consequences The best you're going to come away with is recurring terrifying nightmares Okay, I've got a few questions about that first would be the breaking the laws of physics Like I don't think anything you describe technically breaks the laws of physics For example, we can get Shadows and beams of light that can go faster than 25,000 kilometers per second and have no airwaves because it's it's light It doesn't have any mass So we can just have certain kinds of visual effects where like light can bend due to hot air or cold air And it can cause things to appear to see like they're moving at 25,000 kilometers per second And yet they're just not it's just no light doing it So that doesn't seem like it would break the laws of physics Unless you assume there was actually a physical thing there, which I don't think no I would agree with that In other places like the the debris you mentioned also that would also not necessarily break laws of physics because essentially you could have a Asteroid or something that would be falling through the atmosphere at a tremendous speed And it would be breaking apart and dissolving because of the pressure And it would essentially break apart to the point where it's just a tiny rock at the point where it hit the ground But it would still create enough of an impact to leave some Resulting effect with no debris so that also I don't think would break any laws of physics That's where I would disagree because I mean As an astronomer if you've got some kind of asteroid or comet striking the earth You will find something You're going to get isotope evidence. You're going to find tiny pieces of it I mean a good example of that is a Beringer crater in Arizona You know blew out a crater almost a mile across Yet the biggest piece we have Is only a couple feet across and most of them are just tiny pebbles But the best evidence we have is you get an iridium isotope signature. It tells you Or causing the vegetation to be damaged the way it is It's something non-physical Well, to me it seems like it could perfectly well be physical if it was just a smaller asteroid Like the Beringer crater was created by a big asteroid So obviously it broke up into lots of pieces and there's lots of residual stuff We could measure but if it was a small asteroid it would be very hard to measure any of that If you go even a small one that you're going to find something I mean if you've got some kind of Damage effect on the earth You're going to find something I mean, that's what happens every time people see a bolide coming through the atmosphere And people realize it actually hit the earth They send a team there and they always find evidence Even with the smallest ones Well, like for example, it's the ones in Russia Which essentially just evaporated in the atmosphere and just used a sound wave Which broke lots of windows and trees that left an impact, but there was no crater or anything So that created an impact on earth where we didn't find any parts to it at all necessarily No, but you do find isotope evidence Where because it didn't it didn't hit the ground It didn't hit the ground But I mean, uh, you're going to have stuff that's falling down at the molecular level And if you search that ground area, uh, you will see the isotope signature That tells you it was this kind of comet or this kind of asteroid And that's what they did with these events in Russia They were actually able to determine what kind of object Had that shock effect in the atmosphere Because of the isotopes they were able to analyze If you got isotopes that tells you it's something physical Well, I don't think it'd be true that necessarily anything physical would produce those isotopes That's I don't think that would necessarily be the case Well, I mean If you've got something coming through the atmosphere it impacts the atmosphere You're going to get again heat friction. You're going to get a sonic boom And yeah, you might get the shock wave that knocks on all these trees But you're going to get a follow-up from it. That's basically what they do They may not have any pebbles from the event But they will be able to see You know the the isotopes of the the follow-up that tells them what was really going on So you don't actually have to find Chunks and pieces of the Object to determine what kind of object or even what size and that's what's interesting by the amount of isotope Abundance they see there they can determine how big it was and you know exactly what happened to it Okay, so what do you mean by isotopes? I suppose isotopes just like two different forms of matter, right? So when you say they measure the isotopes, what are they measuring? What they're measuring Is the difference? I mean iridium is one of the ones they look at especially because that's one of the easiest ones to look at Where they basically say okay, do we see A different iridium isotope ratio than we do for stuff that we know is strictly terrestrial so That's how they determine not only whether it was an asteroid or a comet But they can actually determine what kind of asteroid Struck because they're very interested for example in finding these metal asteroids And they'll have the slightly different signature And iridium is just one. I mean there's several things we can look at They also look for example at the what they call the highly ciderfill elements Because if you got one of these metal asteroids striking the earth It's going to have a high abundance of platinum and gold and osmium. So they'll look for that But isn't it true that some asteroids would not leave a significant difference in isotopes It's not necessarily the case that any of them would all necessarily do this The only exception would be if you for example had a meteorite strike the earth somewhere else Eject earth material and that earth material fell back to the earth In that case you would get the isotope signature of earth material But I don't even know if that's ever ever been done because obviously the vast majority Are not going to fit into that category What is interesting is they can actually determine Whether a meteorite came from the moon or from the mars or from the asteroid belt or came from the kuiper belt Again the isotopes tell them the origin Of the of the object or the debris that they found or the molecular Evidence that they have there So it doesn't necessarily break the laws of physics It's just not within the known ones yet, but that doesn't seem like it violates laws of physics in any way Well, it violates the no one laws of physics In other words, we're dealing with something that violates the law of gravity law of electromagnetism uh, you know, so Thermodynamics is being violated Well, I mean if it like the example you gave of something hitting the earth and it being ejected from earth I mean that doesn't violate any of those and it doesn't leave an isotope mark So it's definitely possible that something can do this without violating the laws of physics So it doesn't it seems like the cases you're listing are things we just haven't been able to explain yet Which is happens all the time in science But I don't think it's any real demonstrable evidence of it literally breaking the laws of physics I think that would be really cool if it did but it's just I think it actually does in the sense that you know to try to claim that these 2000 plus incidences are all fallback of The results of collision events elsewhere that brought back earth material I mean the statistical probability of happening that is basically zero 2000 2000 plus events you mean like what what are these 2000 events like crop circle kind of events? No, no, I mean you're talking about the residual ufo database It's upwards around a hundred million But if you're talking about cases where you got observers that are actually able to see the thing go through the atmosphere Where they can determine where it hit the ground Where they go to the site and they can actually see that there's a crater there Damage vegetation melted snow, you know those kinds of things where you got substantial observations and physical evidence That database is a little bit beyond 2000 separate incidents and all of small database And all these have been confirmed scientifically There's been scientists that have been going out there measure the isotopes to confirm that these don't have any and verify that these are true Well, there have been a number of physicists You know like jock vele and john keo and alan heineck who basically devoted their lives to saying You know i'm skeptical Let's actually check out the evidence And they were shocked just how much evidence there really was and basically have us our conclusion We're not dealing with something we can sweep under the carpet. There's just way too much evidence And that's one reason why we had uh Jimmy carter when he was elected president one of his campaign promises was You know if i'm elected i'm going to get to the bottom of this ufo phenomenon And so the first thing he did one of the first things he didn't became president He contacted nasa and said i want you to study this nasa gave him a very interesting response If you can provide physical tangible evidence with real artifacts will investigate it But if you can't we won't And that's what stopped it because in the ufo database there are no artifacts There is no debris That you can and that's one reason why i say we're dealing with something that's non physical If it was physical There would be debris there would be artifacts so i'm with nasa nasa's mission is to study the physical and since this is outside that realm They said get somebody else to look at it. We're not doing it So for example, it couldn't be caused by for example an illusion or a delusion or just a refraction of light in the sky Which they saw and they calculated the impact crater and the impact crater was there But it wasn't caused by any so it was just caused by something on earth And it happened to be the case that they saw a delusion that made it look like this impact crater And they assumed it was created by some their delusion Well, I agree with you that the vast majority what people report as ufo's falls in that category after all We're looking at a hundred million separate reports Uh, so as I told you at the very beginning in my own investigations 99 percent I'll follow that category But you know to claim that this crater was made by something physical and terrestrial within the laws of physics We would expect to find debris. We would expect to find artifacts We'd expect to hear a sonic boom. There'd be heat friction and we see none of that Well, just assume it wasn't a meteorite Assume it was something that started on earth like a guy who just put some tnt there and blew it up or something Like there could be lots of different human based ways to create craters that don't involve anything in space So someone saw an illusion that they thought something was coming from space And some guy just just plowing his field and hit a gas line or something and could that cause the crater Like aren't those natural things? Definitely are But when those kinds of uh explosions take place You got tangible evidence at the site I mean, that's the distinction There's no evidence of tnt residue All you see is this crater. You see melted snow. You see damaged vegetation But that's it And you know, that's what's caused that people like Jacques Palais to say we're not dealing with something physical here We're not dealing with some because its first response was it's like the crop circles We're dealing with hoaxes that people are pulling off, but he says this doesn't fall in that category Are you're saying they tested for every possible natural naturalistic explanation that we know of on earth In every single one of these cases not in every single one of the cases I mean in each case they go there and they say We can't find any debris We've gone to the site. We've scoured the place. There's nothing there Except for the fact that we got a crater We got melted snow. We got damaged vegetation And moreover when they look at the damaged vegetation They see that it has what several of physicists have said We see the signature of radiation damage But we don't see any isotopes that tell us whether it's done by cosmic rays It looks like radiation damage, but it looks like radiation damage That's unlike any radiation effect we've ever observed And again, that's one reason I conclude we're dealing with something outside of the laws of physics Because the fact that we can't identify the kind of radiation That brought about this damage of the vegetation I think is quite interesting So You say it's outside of the laws of physics, but obviously it's Inside of some of the laws of physics and having a physical interaction with things like radiation So it's being very selective with the laws of physics that's going outside of So wouldn't it be reasonable to conclude that maybe it is actually just an Unknown natural thing in the law of physics that we just don't know about yet Since it does seem to be in many of the laws of physics just not a few of them Well, you know, I come from a christian worldview perspective and in that perspective we have god creating two different species of intelligent beings intelligent beings that are physical like us and constrained by the laws of physics where we can't leave the physics of this universe But the bible also says that god created angels And says that they live in a completely different dimensional realm than we do But unlike us they have the power to come into a realm and leave our realm We can't enter their realm, but they can enter ours And so that's one reason why we've brought the book out because coming from a christian worldview perspective I think we can go a little bit further than the other books written by physicists where they just say You know, we see a correspondence with the occult We see a correspondence a one-to-one correspondence with witchcraft But that's outside of our area. And so they stopped there Or you got people like joc valet saying, you know, this is not our physics It's some other kind of physics It's physics that points to the fact that there must be an interdimensional realm And so that's been you know, he's devoted six decades to this Basically saying we got an overwhelming case That we are dealing with something That's affecting us from other dimensions There's many many scientists who have interesting theories on their own that are not taken seriously by the consensus Because there isn't enough support and evidence even though the individual scientists may think that it's very well supported. So I definitely Don't want to discredit any of his work and just say he's a crackpot or anything I think he's perfectly he may be perfectly reasonable to believe what he has found as evidence But it hasn't done much to convince the rest of the scientists because as far as I can tell we have an unknown phenomenon We can't explain and you propose the hypothesis that it's Demons of some kind non-physical things and I'm proposing an alternative hypothesis. It's just an undiscovered physical force of some kind Why would we prefer what would indicate the supernatural? Explain that basically deal with these kinds of questions And so it's been publishing articles for gee three decades now But basically making the point that scientists who actually do engage with us. We really do see a consensus As you're probably aware most scientists say hey, I'm only going to deal With physics if it's outside of that, I'm not interested But the journalist scientific exploration basically was founded. Okay. We're scientists Let's actually look at these kinds of possibilities And I just just see we come up with and what's interesting there is You see that Jacques Valais is in the mainstream He's not outside the mainstream And if you look at people like Alan Heineck and Jacques Valais They have very high credibility That's one thing our u.s. Government noted We can't say this is just crackpot stuff because look at all these physicists that have such high integrity And credibility and all of them are saying that this is something outside of our physical realm But again, the military is basically saying is outside our physical realm. We're not going to worry about it Yeah, I mean I would agree it's outside of the known physics for sure But when you mention that the people who work in the field see positive results Well, that's true of every pseudoscience too like people who devote their lives to homeopathy Usually tend to believe homeopathy or people who devote their lives to christianity or judeism or Islam or the archaeology and Hinduism they always seem to find positive results for their personal belief system regardless of whether or not It's true if you invest your world You invest your life into a worldview or an ideology you tend to find positive results for that ideology And which is why we require that peer reviewed consensus process to Filter out those kinds of personal biases So I can totally understand why people who devote so much effort and time would find positive results Just as a part of human psychology But the fact that they can't produce like an artifact or something something that would actually Be an indication of their the Alien hypothesis Then it just seems to be here's an unknown event. We can't explain And i'm going to come up with an explanation for it and anybody can do that anybody can just say I'm going to come up with a different explanation for it than yours and and now we have two equally Seems like they're on equal footing alternate explanations And we want to see well, which one of these isn't imagine which one is real and right the scientific community says If you want to do that you got to make like testable predictions Give me some kind of actual real evidence to support this not just the fact that you come up with an explanation Because anybody can come up with an explanation. And so what reason do we have to support? This explanation that you've come up with as opposed to just anything else we can come up with Well, that's why this journal was founded basically saying, you know, okay As something outside of understood physics We shouldn't just let it drop there. We need to pursue this and actually figure. Okay What kind of cause that we don't yet understand can explain this phenomena And that's where you see this back and forth pure Review going on in this journal. I mean, I'll be honest with you They're proposing dozens of different explanations For this phenomena, but what I like about the journal, they're actually pursuing this scientific approach Okay, these are different speculations of people are raising Based on the database, which one actually is comprehensive and explain the phenomena we're observing And this is where people like Alan Heineck and Jacques Ballet are saying All of all these different explanations that people have popped up I mean, they come up with things as strange as maybe we're seeing something at the quantum level And an arena where there's different laws of the physics There's lots of papers in that journal basically saying we think this is attributed to as yet undiscovered laws of physics And some have even proposed maybe we're overlooking an anti-law of thermodynamics What they call the fourth law of thermodynamics Where there's some strange phenomena going on where thermodynamics goes in the opposite direction Wait, are there already four laws zero one two three four? Well, I'll call it a fifth law then as there's three laws of thermodynamics that you'll see in textbooks Wasn't there I'm pretty sure there's a zero flaw of thermodynamics too. I saw that in a textbook But yeah a zero first second and third. So if you want to squeeze a fourth out of that But when they talk about the fourth law in the scientific literature They're really referring to something where entropy goes backwards So instead of things decaying they they improve So so I definitely understand the perspective that people are arguing for their their preferred hypothesis. That's totally fine. I mean I can find A climate scientist who deny climate change and they're arguing for their preferred hypothesis saying the evidence indicates that But what actually is there that can actually indicate this? What evidence do they say makes that hypothesis more plausible just the fact that they read the journal or published in the journals or argue for It doesn't give me anything to work with it's just this is what they're saying But why are they saying it? What evidence do we have to support that conclusion? All the evidence is what I've talked about already the fact that we've got these crash sites We've got these multiple observers. It's not a small database. It's a big database And where are these uh physicists? I think have really developed a consensus It's really interesting that these kind of close encounters are only experienced by people that are deeply involved in the occult And when they leave the occult the experiences go away And they enter the occult they come And also explains why we see so much more of this in certain nations and others I mean I've spoken on this throughout the us and I encounter people like you all the time We were highly skeptical, but when I spoke to physicists in Russia in the late 1980s and early 1990s It was exactly the opposite. They said we're experiencing this all the time. We know it's real And you know and once they got out of their research on occult physics Suddenly these experiences went away And actually saw this when I was on the faculty of caltech There were a couple of physicists there who said hey the russians are doing this Let's do this as well And then they regretted it because of the effects and then there's the astronomer peter sterik He was one of the founders of this journal of scientific exploration He surveyed astronomers all over the world because you know what they found in the database Is that ufo's are most frequently experienced at 3 a.m. In the morning on lonely country roads And peter made the observation was where we astronomers hang out That's when we're outside making observations and all of our telescopes are by lonely country roads So he surveyed all the astronomers and was shocked by how many of them had claimed that they had these encounters I saw that myself when I was at the university of toronto There's there were two astronomers Every time they went on the telescope. They had an encounter with a ufo And there are a couple of us who are basically logging 1500 hours on the telescope per year Going on for five six seven years None of us saw a thing Those two astronomers they were getting maybe two to three hours of observing time a year Every time they went on the telescope. They had one of these encounters However, as I got to know those astronomers both of them were deep into the occult So that to me explained why those of us who are logging 1500 to 2000 hours a year We're seeing nothing and they were seeing them all the time And what seems to be pretty well explained by psychology is that if you have people who have more gullible personalities or into more Supercitious kind of beliefs then they will most likely have more superstitious kind of interactions with what they believe in so for example As a christian you have interactions with god when you pray and you talk to him and You see him acting your life and then if you become an atheist well all those things kind of stop It's not because necessarily because god isn't there anymore. It's just Because your understanding your worldview has changed that you don't see those events as having some kind of connection to The thing you're connecting them to anymore So the fact that people who are into the occult would be more prone to seeing UFO experiences seems very reasonable from a psychological standpoint Just like if you're a hindu you're going to have more interactions with drama We make sense from a psychological standpoint. So I don't that's that's what interested peter stirrick He says, you know, I can understand this with people who don't have a strong physics background But these are people who are tenured at universities And they're not gullible They're very skeptical and they're in their way. They live their lives And so that's what got his attention is that you know, it's not just the kooks out there in the fringe These are people that are psychologically well balanced. They're not gullible They're very thorough in their research and yet they're having these kinds of experiences and so he's published extensively on this and Again, I can back up what he said. I mean I I didn't talk to the astronomers. He did but I did talk to those In places like france and the soviet union and again saw this correlation And I think what persuades me is when you leave the occult these experiences go away You enter the occult they come you go in there they go away And you know from a christian worldview perspective the occult is driven by These angelic beings that are in rebellion against god That's the other thing you notice is that when people get these automatic writings from these beings is that What you see there is that it's a hundred percent deceptive I mean, I find it interesting that there's a four thousand page book the orante of book That was communicated to humans through these ufo beings A third of that book is denying the deity of jesus christ Why would these be so focused on that? But again, that's what uh, you know, john keel was pointing out is that uh, hey It there does seem to be there's one-to-one correspondence what you see in divinology and the occult I mean, I'd say that the same one-to-one correspondence exists between sightings of jesus and christianity for the most part To but that's not I wouldn't say that's evidence of christianity I just say that's evidence of people who believe it want to see it And so they see what they want to see just like the sightings of santa claus are usually one-to-one of children because they they believe santa claus exists Um, you mentioned that the experts weren't gullible. I don't definitely don't agree with that because there are faces like um banacheck and James james randy james randy who i understand. Yeah, they do the experiments They do the magic thing to try and show in the case of scientists to trick the scientists to show that the scientists are gullible They don't understand what's going on because there are a few famous Musicians who were shown to not be real or legitimate who did the same thing who fooled the scientists into believing this so Experts are definitely gullible for sure And that's why we require more of the consensus the kind of future testable predictions thing But you mentioned when I asked for evidence you listed the phenomenon like people see a thing in the sky that seems to not Cohered the laws of physics and then we see a crater in the ground Those are both experienced phenomenon, but you can't use those as an explanation. Those are just the things we see You have to say well Why would this be better explained by the supernatural as opposed to an undiscovered law? And trying to use like a negative argument saying well Laws can't do x y and z that that doesn't really work because we don't really know what unknown laws can or can't do You would need to make some kind of testable prediction Um and the occult thing you mentioned of just saying that People leaving the occult will stop seeing ufos. Well, I can make the same prediction about any religion if people leave the religion They'll stop seeing visions of their deity That doesn't mean it's necessarily evidence of any of those particular religious beliefs in the same way It wouldn't be evidence that the occult and Demonology are connected in the same way. It's just human psychology if you believe a certain thing then you're going to attribute Interactions with the world to that thing So do you have any other kinds of like testable predictions you could make that would indicate Your explanation as opposed to just any of the unknown natural things Well, I think what impressed the physicists have devoted a decade plus to studying this phenomena Is that there's a one-to-one correspondence? You don't see exceptions. They were anticipating. Okay If this is just people having delusional phenomena Then we're going to see a dispersion, but there is no dispersion. They're all reporting the same thing And so and then the idea that it's some undiscovered law of physics Now that is testable in the sense that for example People who have Speculated there's a fourth law thermodynamics where entropy goes the opposite way Well, that were really true It actually rules out the physical possibility of physical life anywhere in the universe So the fact that we're here actually proves there is no fourth law thermodynamics And there's other ways maybe that's what people have done in this journal of scientific exploration Is basically saying we're going to speculate new laws of physics that haven't been discovered You know, what properties are you predicting and can we test those properties? And so that's one thing that's come out of that journal is Pursuing a thing where you got anti gravity Or anti electromagnetism or anti thermodynamics It doesn't work because if that were going on anywhere in the universe I would rule out the possibility of physical life everywhere in the universe Because I mean they've actually speculated maybe we're living in an exotic site in the universe But the homogeneity and the uniformity of the universe is a requirement for life to exist anywhere in the universe So these are the kinds of papers that are published in this journal So I think they're really taking this seriously saying, okay If we're going to speculate something other than the occult and demonology And we have to come up with scientific evidence for it And that's where they're basically saying Where it's where we're running into brick walls and that's where they fall back and saying No, it really does look like there's this one-to-one correspondence Well, you need evidence for both if you say it's supernatural or if you say it's an undiscovered law of nature You I need evidence for both and the fact that you've ruled out some particular Undiscovered law hypotheses doesn't at all rule out the undiscovered natural because there's infinitely many Potentially undiscovered laws that could exist So just ruling out a few of them doesn't in any way rule out undiscovered natural processes one bit But I do agree that if you do propose an undiscovered natural process You need to provide evidence for it Just like if you propose a supernatural thing you need to provide evidence for it And so far the only evidence I've seen you permit present is Just the description of the phenomenon itself which works for any explanation any explanation is going to be describing that phenomenon And the connection between the occult and this experience which I also had a question about that But it seems like again that would be purely explained by psychological phenomenon The only you're never going to see people in A country who's never heard of some religion have experiences of that religion because it's Going to be specifically one-to-one to their belief system So the fact that it's one-to-one is usually evidence It's not the case not evidence It is the case and most of the ufo sightings I've heard of don't have any connection to the Occult at all like many pilots see ufo settings all the time it's a common phenomenon But most of those I would probably put into the Explanable by natural phenomenon category. Yeah, I would do so so when you're talking about the one-to-one correlation Is this just a specific subset of those events that you're talking about have a one-to-one correlation? Yes, this is where Alan Heineck came up with his Encounters of the close kind You know first one first second third fourth, etc And basically said hey when you get into these really close encounters This is where you see that correlation But if it's a pilot an airplane where he's seen something it looks like it's four or five miles away then You don't have the data to really determine what's going on and almost and most of those things have been explained as natural phenomena I mean one thing I've noticed is that The human eye takes time to adapt To different levels of illumination So I've learned to ask the question Okay, when you saw this ufo How many minutes transpired between the time? You left your lit home and went outside To see the phenomena If it's less than 20 minutes, I know that that's something that can happen in the human eye where you see flashes of light It takes 20 minutes to fully dark adapt. So I mean that's why I mean most of the people have written on this say they can rule out 95 percent As an astronomer, I've been able to rule out 99 percent because I've learned to ask these kinds of questions Where I can quickly discern. Okay. This is this kind of phenomena that's causing it Uh, but I think that thing that impresses me is when you travel around the world and talk to people It's those parts of the world where you've got a significant fraction of the population Deep into the occult Believing in demonology and practicing demonology where this phenomenon exposes such a degree that everybody believes in it The skeptics are in places like here in the u.s. Where the phenomena is just so low People say it's not real. It doesn't happen And that's why uh, you know, peter stirrick actually began to interview these astronomers And discovered it's the astronomers who've never had any contact with the occult that basically say This is just fiction. It doesn't happen But those who really have been in it. They say, oh no We're utterly convinced it's real And when I say one to one the fact that you're getting the same story I mean, this is what jock belay was pointing out. We don't see outliers. We don't see anomalies. We see this consistent Uh account of what they're experiencing That'll be true to jock belay and alan heineck They were agreeing that there's a variety of phenomena that can explain it But that the range of phenomena must be occurring within something that is interdimensional And so they said if we're if we're going to speculate inter dimensionality that opens up quite a range of possibilities And so i'm not trying to put words in their mouth saying they've nailed down one particular phenomena most physicists have But people like jock belay said You know, I do see this one-to-one correspondence with demonology But my position is it's interdimensional and it's interdimensional That opens up quite a wide range of possibilities But he's also saying we need to pursue that with rigorous scientific research How is that different from witchcraft like for example witchcraft was really prevalent in the dark ages And the inquisition when there were people burning witches and they said Oh, this person was a neighbor they put a curse on me and they cursed my field and experienced this And so witchcraft was very common back then everyone was experiencing witchcraft But as soon as we discovered, you know, witchcraft doesn't exist it all kind of went away There's no more witchcraft that doesn't seem like it's a one-to-one correlation of belief in witchcraft witchcraft occurs It seems more like the phenomenon doesn't exist because it would only exist with people who had this prior belief in them So it seems like if demonology was real It wouldn't be contingent on the occult. It would be Just a thing that existed in the world And so the fact that it's contingent on occult beliefs seems like it's probably based A mental phenomenon is resulting from those beliefs Like witchcraft or any certain kinds of religious experiences. What's the difference there? Well, for example, uh, what a number of researchers have pointed out is that People who have these close encounters less than 500 feet They won't wind up with recurring terrifying nightmares But the animals that are associated with them the dogs the cows the cats They get killed by the phenomena And so I mean the dog wasn't involved in the occult And yet the fact that the human was having this experience led to the immediate death Of the animals that are associated with them But the animals in the same area that were not that person's animals They're they're untouched. So there's this selection effect And again, we're dealing with thousands of examples where that has happened people have been killed by these encounters So it's not just people having delusions and dreams and visions There is actual physical harm That's been coming upon people as a result of these encounters and the closer the encounter The more likely the artists suffer serious harm And uh, you know as my colleague, uh, Kenneth samples was pointed out There are cases where people have actually been killed I'm guessing these weren't the people giving the stories Well, the people who got killed weren't giving the stories but So the relatives saw the death did So Did they get killed during the the encounter or did they die after the encounter is How does this occur like you say in the animal we're talking about they they literally die on the spot So that that's what impressed. Yeah, go ahead So someone sees the encounter and they see someone die in the encounter and they just find the body afterwards. Is that Well, I think that's what's impressed some of these researchers is that the human who has the encounter survives Albeit they have after effects, but their animals get killed right on the spot in front of witnesses And these are healthy animals And then what they notice is the animals that don't belong to that individual but belong to a neighbor. They're fine Could could you describe this for me? So there are a bunch of people there's there's the animals. There's the person who has the encounter and there's these other people So the person who has the encounter Supposedly gets seeing sees the aliens or the demons and their animals die and there's this other person And they don't see the encounter. They just all they see is just the animals around and dies that what's going on That's what's going on, right? They they don't have the encounter the encounter is only because that's something we document in the book is that people Have these encounters That only happens to individuals who are deep into the occult And the deeper they are the more likely they are to have these encounters And so, you know, I've made trips to alaska where I met all kinds of people who are having these encounters But alaska is a place where you got a whole lot more occult involvement than you do say in idaho or kansas Sure sure. So That would be an interesting phenomenon for sure. I've never heard of any cases where that that has occurred That would be really cool to see. I still still don't know if that would count as evidence It's still just a phenomenon. We can't explain yet So are there any future testable predictions you can make related to how to Indicate this is supernatural as opposed to just an undiscovered physical thing Well, I think you're onto something tom in a sense. This is something we can't explain with known physics Uh, and this is why we have this journal saying, okay, let's look at non-knowing physics And the journalists filled with articles where they say let's restrict ourselves To physics that could fit within the spacetime dimensions of the universe and see if we can make that work Then you got others saying well, let's go beyond that and consider possible phenomena Where we look at other dimensions of space and time Or dimensions that are not even related to space and time And so these are the kinds of discussions and dialogues that are going on And I would hope you would agree with me at a minimum. This is at least worthwhile doing Given that we're looking at a hundred million people claiming to have these kinds of experiences And given that this has been going on for they can document this back to 3 000 years So it's not just our own time. It seems to be in every culture It seems to be ubiquitous to humanity and it seems to be as you know, a rather large database So at a minimum, I would agree with alan heineck This is worth investigating Whatever it is, it's worth investigating because it's impacting a significant fraction of the human population And we can help them. Let's help them. Yeah, I think everything's worth investigating. I think Discovering the truth about the universe is the most important thing we can do So for sure it's definitely worth investigating and I'm aware of the the UFO sightings from 1500 bc or whatever So I do know those occur but again, it seems that You do you have any testable predictions that we can make related to the supernatural that can show that it Exists as opposed to just because when I say undiscovered law of nature, I mean The discussions they have about what that could be There's infinitely many that what they could be both in physics and out of physics like we don't know the physics behind dark matter or dark energy or certain kinds of other physical phenomenon or entanglement quantum mechanics emergent space time Consciousness there's all kinds of things we have no explanation for but that doesn't mean it's outside of physics We're just outside of the known physics, which is very very tiny. We don't know nearly everything Like I think hope Thomas house and we only know I think you're free to speculate that but does it explain the database And I think what it's impressive is that the physicists who've really devoted their lives to studying this 100% of them say this falls outside Of what's conceivable within the space time dimensions of the universe And so that's where we see a consensus. We're doing with something that is trans or inter dimensional Now that again opens up a wide range of possibilities but I mean if it really was something within known physics or physics that could be knowable I would expect to see some departures from that consensus, but we're not seeing that What what do you mean because when you talk about what is conceivable? That's an argument from incredulity the fact that we can't conceive of something doesn't tell us anything about what the universe is Like for example, we couldn't conceive of space time bending before Einstein And it was inconceivable that was one of the main arguments made by Philosophers against Einstein time isn't a physical concept. How could it possibly been therefore we reject the general relativity? Yeah, no the the boundaries in this discussion have been okay Let's look at possibilities that take place within the space time dimensions of the universe And let's look at possibilities where we invoke other dimensions And so that's kind of where the dialogue is gone saying Okay, the fact that we agree that the universe is constrained by certain space time dimensions puts restraints on the physics Given that we got physical life in the universe So just the fact that we beings exist in the universe The fact that we agree that there's these space time dimensions That puts constraints on our speculation about unknown physics that falls within that category And this is where these physicists are saying Boy everything we know about the UFO phenomena tells us it doesn't fit within that paradigm. It's outside that paradigm Well, again, when when they say that that's an argument for ignorance. They can't say that it's not even plausible You can't say well because of here we know this little bit about how physics works Therefore nothing can possibly exist in space time that could do this. That's that's not reasonable conclusion It's always an argument from ignorance to say it can't possibly or it transcends where it's Well, I gave you an example I mean, there has been physicists who speculated like steward kaufman for example That there's this fourth law thermodynamics. We haven't discovered yet Other physicists jumped in and said if that is the case What are the consequences? Basically steward was speculating that to explain the origin of life But then other physicists jumped in and said well, if we take it to the degree that you are trying to take it to explain The origin of life it rules out the possibility of physical life anywhere in the universe Because of the enthropic principle We know that to have physical life in the universe the universe has to have certain properties And therefore, uh, there's now a consensus in the scientific community We better stop trying to pursue a fourth law thermodynamics. It's a waste of time We can pursue other things like maybe there's this modified Newtonian dynamics that is affecting the behavior of galaxies I mean, that's within the realm of possibility That can be tested Again, that's kind of what this journalist scientific exploration is all about Basically, I totally agree. I totally agree that there's certain categories of things a very specific theory that we can say If this theory is through we can predict the consequences. We don't see those consequences. Therefore, this theory is not true It's falsified for sure, right, right, but that doesn't in any way falsified the class of things like All things within the category of space time Like that that isn't really something you could falsify just based off of a few select theories that we can falsify So the entire class of unknown natural things within space time can't be falsified because we don't know everything within space time We only know no, I would agree with that But again, you know trying to apply this to the UFO database. That's the challenge What do you mean? That's a challenge because from my understanding what problem of undetermination Any combination of phenomenon can be explained by infinitely many hypotheses The hard part is trying to tie those into a specific theory Which can then make predictions and be shown to exist And I don't see how the supernatural can do that any better than any of the made-up physics ones Well, again, you got people like Alan Heineck and Jacques Valais saying, okay, we're looking at phenomena That obey the laws of physics and are constrained by the space time dimensions We don't see any possible way to explain the UFO database Therefore, we're saying we're dealing with something interdimensional I mean Jacques Valais has written very lengthy books on this Just with your suggestion, for example, have I knew physicists that gave that a serious look that drew a different conclusion But that's not what I'm seeing Well, for sure But I don't see how his argument is any different from saying the fit the philosophers who said time can't bend therefore It must be supernatural essentially The fact that we can't imagine something being the case given our current limit of understanding Isn't in any way evidence that it is something else So Well, again, Jacques is not using supernatural language Yeah, I mean he's not trying to argue for the supernaturally saying It's something going on in dimensions that don't fit within our physical universe That's what he's saying. And you know, if you read cosmology You got asked for physicists making the same kinds of speculations when they deal with the multiverse So that's what he's saying. Is it something outside of all that? And uh, so this is where you're seeing the consensus Right, right. That's where I agree. I agree that there are things outside of the known physics Which are probably just more physics and I'm asking is there any reason to believe that that something more Is supernatural as opposed to Unknown natural because just saying there is something more than the known physics Doesn't indicate supernatural something more as opposed to just an unknown natural something That all depends on your definition of natural and supernatural You know, and that's what Jacques has basically made the point is it's something outside Of the spacetime dimensions of the universe and the laws of physics And what he means by the laws of physics are the laws of physics that for which there is no doubt that they exist Things like gravity thermodynamics electromagnetism the strong and weak nuclear force And also he's making the point if you're going to speculate a fifth force of physics Uh, it's got to be able to be powerful enough to explain this phenomena without being discovered by their son other scientific means Well, it could also just be it could be an emergent interaction between those other forces And which you just don't know about yet. So it doesn't have to be outside of those The current laws of physics entirely could just be a new emergent phenomenon of those phenomena that we just don't know about yet Yeah, again at the 30th place of the decimal Uh, but this is where Jacques is making the point. We're dealing with something That's a lot closer to us in the 30th place of the decimal So this basically we're saying this is where we put it outside of well Maybe there's something going on that adjusts the theory of general relativity 40 places a decimal out And that's why we can't see it because we don't have the measuring capacity to see it But Jacques point is we're looking at the u of o database We're not looking at the 10th 20th to 30th place of the decimal And therefore this is why he says it's got to be something operating in dimensions outside of the dimensions of the universe Yeah, it's an interesting hypothesis. I just don't think it follows from any of the evidence Like I'm pretty sure that there's infinitely many ways to explain that that take nothing more than just There was some kind of an explosion and the wind blew away all of the evidence that was there Well, Jacques actually deals with that and just says, you know, that's not going to fly And again, I would encourage you actually look at these these journals. Look at the uh I mean the fact that we have these physicists All who've put more than 10 years of study into this thing I'm the only one of these physicists. That's a christian. The others are all agnostics and atheists And yet they're not disagreeing with me And so I don't think you're going to attribute it just the fact that you know, I've got a world view that's different than theirs Uh And so and they're actually dealing with the evidence. You say you know prediction. That's one thing we tried to do in this book saying Here's what we found is for example, americans tend to be really naive about the occult And so we helped them out in saying These are things that if you do From a christian world view perspective You're inviting these interdimensional beings to impact your life Take away the invitations. They can't touch you Give them the invitations. They're going to come And so that's where I would say this is a test of the hypothesis If you don't believe it put it to the test and see what happens Although I would caution you to avoid those things that are going to have deleterious impacts on your life I don't think that's a novel prediction. That's the same prediction made in psychology for the past 500 years If you play with weegee boards, you'll make it it'll seem like there's something giving you a word and it'll actually spell the word And really we know it's just the psychology of the people playing with the weegee board There's no special dimensional spirit there same with stones. If you play with magic stones, you'll see these effects like if it's A stone that'll help you be more energetic You'll be more energetic just because of the placebo effect I mean all of those things are predictions that have already been made in psychological fields Many times over and have already been confirmed and made testable predictions and have all kinds of results that we already know Show that those predictions have been true. So it doesn't seem to be a novel prediction that you're making It's just like the sun will rise tomorrow if you already know that So can you like why do you think that counts as a novel prediction that would actually indicate this being true when it's the same prediction that's been made in psychology for the past 500 years All the very fact that it works if you leave the alcohol you'll stop having these experiences And we're not talking trivial experiences I mean, yeah, I do agree that people playing with magic stones You really don't see anything happening. People aren't being killed. They're not being injured Their animals aren't being killed on the spot. They're not having these terrifying recurring nightmares They're not getting communications Where they begin to go in a trance and begin to do automatic writing Automatic writing that adds up to thousands of pages that kind of stuff is not going on And so I think again about Two-thirds of those examples are things I've exactly heard of from occult or ouija boards and talking with the dead and magic stones and different kinds of Things are exactly the same that I've heard of. I don't know about the dying animals I've never heard that hurt that happened before but most of the other examples You listed are things I hear exactly from those kinds of people Well, again, what these researchers are saying there is a one-to-one correspondence between the ufo phenomena the residual ufo phenomena and the occult and demonology And so when you raise examples from the occult and demonology, that's consistent I think where you have a challenge with the ufo database number one, it's huge We're not talking a few dozen isolated cases. We're talking tens of millions of reported incidences And you know, we literally have thousands of places where you got a crash site that you can go and investigate And again, you got people you can interview Where we have documented cases where there's been actual injuries animals dying people dying and so And that's kind of what people like Jacques Villay are saying is We just can't sweep this under the rug real things are happening and they're hurting people I think that's his motivation says look I'm not a believer in God, but people are being hurt and I want to help them We have to go to the Q&A pretty soon here If you guys are ready for it If there are any last points that you were just extremely excited to get in we could do that Otherwise you've got about 15 maybe 20 minutes tops to do these questions that we have Oh, yeah, I mean I just mentioned that I totally agree I think it is there are definitely real phenomenon that cause people to die all over the world and suffer and We know lots of those and they're not all attributed to the occult There's lots of the other things I mentioned also lead to death and pain and suffering all over the world voodoo does That's why they think that you can curse someone and kill them because it does lead to deaths and suffering and pain For all kinds of things. I don't and definitely I think it's worth investigating. I think everything is worth investigating for sure But all the things that he that you listed seem to be The same kinds of things other than like the animals dropping dead on the spot I haven't heard anything that makes that kind of claim all the claims you've listed seem to be the same as any of the other claims that are made by voodoo or Ouija boards or astrology or any of the other kinds of science Uh, the the ideologies that try to make these kinds of claims I don't see anything different about the claim that you're making and the claim that they're making It's just the generic kind of stuff that psychology has already predicted for like the past 500 years And so if you could actually make novel test predictions or like the scientist that presents an artifact On time that could demonstrate this that would be great evidence I would be happy to accept that I have nothing against the supernatural or aliens But I just don't see any reason to believe it's true and it's most of the stuff that we can see is just explained by psychological phenomena That's exactly my point tom. There is a one-to-one correspondence. That's what these researchers are saying And moreover our model would not predict that there would be artifacts If you're talking about something that's interdimensional and outside the laws of physics, there won't be artifacts I mean that's what got these researchers interested if there was artifacts Then we know it's part of the physics of the universe, but that's not what we're seeing We At some point can jump you guys ready for the q&a. We do have a lot So we just had another one fighter in really excited to get to these This has been a really interesting conversation folks So we hope you have enjoyed it as much as I have because I've really enjoyed it and we will jump into it with sentinel apologetics who says Dr. Hugh Ross is my hero and then in parentheses. Allah he as Salame I'm not sure if that's Hebrew, but you have a fan dr. Ross. So very nice and steven steen Thanks for your super chat along with let's see She calls herself stupid whore energy. She says any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic I think this is a challenge to dr. Ross Anything that you'd like to say to that phrase dr. Ross Well, we're gonna talk about uh, you know beings that are more intelligent than us But again constrained by the physics that we are constrained by they still have to obey the laws of physics I think that's where tom and I agree is that this idea that Physical aliens like us have come to earth. That's simply not possible Because if you go through interstellar space Your spaceship will be destroyed by the particles and the debris there I mean, we already know for example the biggest spaceship that you can send to the nearest star Cannot be bigger than 10 centimeters across because if it is it's going to get destroyed Or likewise, I think we now know that sending humans to mars is not part of the Uh possibility because to make that happen You've got to put those beings inside a gigantic stable magnetic bottle And uh, there's now a growing consensus amongst physicists We might be able to make a small magnetic bottle But not one big enough to be able to protect astronauts on a trip from earth to mars and back And so we'll have to send machines. We're not going to be able to send people If that just got recently published that it'd be exposed humans to the radiation you're going to encounter between here and mars Where you don't have a magnetic bottle to protect you from that radiation Your digestive tract will be destroyed in three months Really interesting I would disagree a slightly though because I think that there are definitely things in physics like an Einstein Rosenbridge Maybe maybe new technologies can make small Einstein Rosenbridge And you can't actually travel across the universe just by bending spacetime in some way that we just don't know yet So I I always hesitate to say things are impossible It's only impossible as far as we know, but we can never say it's truly impossible because we just don't have all the knowledge Well, that's why I devoted a chapter in uh license sky and little green men If you're talking about sending a physical craft of a certain size between here and the nearest stars You're going to have to move at a significant velocity In order to uh get them there Within a few thousand years You know, even if you got beings that can live 10 000 years you still got a problem because If you try to go very fast your spaceship will be destroyed if it's made of any kind of a material matter Well, that's just to clarify That's why I mentioned an Einstein Rosenbridge because it just takes the two points of space and moves them together And so your ship doesn't actually move fast at all It's just normal speed But because you put a hole in spacetime you can just travel from two very distant places very quickly without any additional physics Well, I have physicists friends for example to say that uh, you know, if you can Bend the spacetime Through making adjustments In your ship You can actually go Close to the speed of light The problem is you got to convert the mass of jupiter into pure energy every second to make that happen And so now you got a problem How are you going to be able to come up with an energy source? Equivalent to converting a hundred percent of jupiter into energy every second black I mean, it's not impossible, but it does stretch credulity to speculate something of that nature We Maybe we'll go to the next question as we do have others that are related in a way This one's not this is more on converse contender. Thanks for your super chat. They said would I would pay money to see Dr. Ross and dr. Heiser on this topic. Well, who knows maybe someday appreciate that iphone musings. Thanks for your support in that super chat and Thanks for yours michael dresden a challenge for you tom and old nemesis of yours from the super chat says Theist gives evidence violating laws of physics suggesting supernatural tom replies with quote That's just the laws of physics. We know of I think there Is there it's it's pretty obvious like you can't ever present evidence of anything violating the laws of physics because we don't know All the laws of physics you can only be an evidence of something violating the known laws of physics Everything in human knowledge is tentative and provisional. This is the stuff we currently know about So saying that there is something that an interaction that we can't produce by combining our known laws of physics It doesn't mean there's something supernatural there. That's just basic argument from ignorance. It's not this therefore x That's how the structure of an argument from ignorance So all you're saying when you're saying it's outside of the laws of physics is really it's outside of the known laws of physics Not outside of all of physics Gotcha and thanks for your question. This one comes in from matt powells pet pterodactyl Thanks for your support and leo filius who asked dr. Ross. Can you explain how a non physical thing causes physical effects? And How do we determine that it was indeed a non physical cause for that said effect? What is the mechanism? Hey, the reason why i'm saying is that it's a non physical effect something outside of the dimensions of the universe Is because it's producing Physical impacts that are significant. We're not talking something that's trivial The fact that you see a large crater where the ground is depressed by a foot or more Where all the snow is melted the vegetation is damaged and is damaged in a way that can't be explained by no unradiation phenomena This tells me that something significant is happening The fact that there's no sonic boom or heat friction And so and again, i'm not alone in saying this everybody Who had a phd level in physics who studied this has drawn the same conclusion We're dealing with something that has significant power That's operating outside of the laws of physics and the spacetime dimensions Gotcha and thanks for your question. This one comes in from let's see what Sentinel apologetics appreciate it said Hugh please elaborate on the key fact of fine tuning that since there is no possibility for Extra-terrestrial life then residual ufo phenomena must be supernatural Yeah, in the sense that if we're talking about physical beings like us On another planetary system building a spacecraft and traveling here I mean people have speculated that such aliens for example help the egyptians build the pyramids Then you have to explain Within no one physics how they got here and if you're going to appeal to unknown physics You have to explain why we've not been able to observe their effects in the universe I mean, this is what's constraining speculation amongst astronomers and physicists About these unknown physics. Yes. I agree with tom There could be laws of physics and constants of physics. We've not yet discovered But they have to be at a sufficiently low level to avoid discovery at this point Which is why I made the comment. Yeah, we're willing to make measurements to 30 places a decimal Maybe we will find some subtle Addition to what we know about physics, but it will be subtle It's not going to be dramatic enough to explain how physical beings like us could travel across interstellar space Moreover, what I can tell you is an astronomer everywhere we look in the universe Outside of our planetary system We see physical conditions That are hostile for the existence of any life form beyond a microbe I mean, we've been looking I mean when you watch those star wars movies They all begin with a galaxy far far away As an astronomer, I got a problem with those movies because we've looked at stars far far away And none of them have the characteristics that must be fine tuned to make possible advanced life in those galaxies Ours is the only galaxy we can see That has those characteristics Our galaxy group has characteristics that we see in no other galaxy group Characteristics that are crucial to make possible the existence of advanced life And I argue At reasonably we can extend that argument out to super galaxy clusters We can extend it all the way down to fundamental particles in each case We see these fine tuned characteristics That constrain what we can speculate about existence of life elsewhere Now incidentally, I'm not saying we're not going to find the remains of life Outside of planet earth. I've been on record since the 1980s We're going to find the remains of life on every solar system body except for the sun For the simple reason earth has been so prolific with life or so long That when meteoroids strike the earth they export earth soil And deposit that soil and all the solar system bodies And so I've been promoting Literity for the past 20 years We need to go back to the moon Because on the surface of the moon, we've got 20,000 kilograms of earth soil for every 100 square kilometers And one ton of earth soil will have 100 quadrillion microbes in it We can go to the moon and we'll find the fossils of earth's first life On earth we'll never find them. Earth's geology has destroyed them But they should be there in pristine form on the moon And I'm arguing that could be a huge breakthrough to giving us insights on the origin of life Gotcha. Thanks so much. And stupid whore energy as she calls herself strikes again Her question is what about all of the habitable exoplanets that we've been cataloging? Yes, I've written on that and you'll see a lot of it in the published literature When they talk about habitable planets, they're talking about planets that orbit their host stars In the liquid water habitable zone That's the broadest of the habitable zones Broadest of the planetary habitable zones I mean any orbit where we got the possibility of water Existed between zero and 100 degrees centigrade would be in the liquid water habitable zone But that's not the only habitable zone you got to deal with First a planet to be habitable that must simultaneously exist in the ultraviolet habitable zone Too little ultraviolet radiation certain biochemical reactions crucial for life won't run Too much ultraviolet radiation you kill the life And that zone is much narrower than the liquid water habitable zone And papers been published showing that it's extremely rare to have the liquid water habitable zone Simultaneously overlap the ultraviolet habitable zone And in addition to those two habitable zones there are 11 more we know of And above the 4300 planets that have been discovered outside of the solar system We can't even find one that exists in even two of those habitable zones, let alone all 13 Of all the planets we know of including those in our solar system Only one exists in all 13 habitable zones you get three guesses which planet that is Gotcha. Thank you And thanks for your question from this one comes from james w who's been on to debate this topic He says tom you seem okay with the known laws of physics being violated Wouldn't let me see if I got that right you seem okay with The known laws of physics being violated wouldn't alien technology be a rational explanation And that would make interplanetary travel possible Well, the known laws of physics are violated all the time dark matter and dark energy you violate the known laws of physics So no laws of physics are just the stuff we currently know about to violate them Just means there's something we don't know about yet could undiscover technology would absolutely We have no idea what the limits of technology are like like you said It's going to take a lot of energy to do that and if we have a found a way to create miniature black holes We could potentially do it that way. So or we could create a Dyson sphere and create energy that way. There's lots of different ways We could potentially produce the energy to do this with the known laws of physics But there could always be more unknown ways to do it too that we just haven't discovered yet So there's lots of different explanations for it You bet and thanks for your question this one comes in from sigafredo saravia says Dr. Ross is Christianity or the Christian perspective? Or sorry about that in the Christian perspective Is it not arguable humans were created to be the only intelligent life or To have the I think they mean or life's Purpose, I don't know what they mean by that if not, how do you deviate from the bible to say that it's not true There's another Quote perfection unquote in aliens. I think that Yeah, I get the question and this has been debated by a christian bible scholars Literally for several thousand years It goes back into the days before christ And what you really see in this debate is that from a biblical perspective You can go either way you know one Christian perspective is that God enjoys creating to such a high degree. He's not going to stop on one planet He's going to have been created life on other planets However, given the evidence that what we see here on planet earth requires supernatural intervention Likewise, we'd expect it that there as well. So the christians for example that are anticipating We're going to find life including advanced life on many other extra solar planets But then there's another group of christian theologians are saying when you read the bible It seems like god does not waste miraculous interventions without something that fits within his purposes And given that the purpose for god creating the universe is to permanently eradicate evil and suffering While he enhances our human free will capability to express and experience love He only needs one planet and he only needs one Species of physical intelligent beings and so they would argue that we're alone But as you look at the christian debate, it's about split 50 50 And so as a christian you got the freedom to believe one or the other Although i've personally argued that if you look at hebrus chapter 9 and 10 it seems to imply That this is the only place in the universe where god has created intelligent physical beings That are in need of being redeemed From their propensity to commit sin and evil That doesn't rule out dolphins on another planet But it does seem to rule out the possibility their beings like us that are in need of being redeemed From their evil But could there be beings that who have never committed evil that's certainly within the realm of possibility So this is an open debate and many years ago. I wrote an article on this subject With two other astronomers all three of us were christians But all three of us held different views on this Basically making a point from a christian worldview perspective You've got options on where you want to land on this as an astronomer I can tell you when we make the observations All we're seeing are conditions outside of our solar system that are hostile for the existence of advanced life We're not seeing the possibility Based on observations we've made so far That there could be these sites in which there's you know advanced life like us You bet and spart 344. Thanks for your question Said in regards to the correlation of UFO experiences and the occult, how is it that different people seeing How is that different from people seeing their religious iconography? Or figures during a near-death experience? Why don't you want to take that one tom? That's kind of a whole other subject near-death experiences But I kind of put it in the same categories of UFOs Is it most people who claim a near-death experience? It's really not a near-death experience Uh, but if you were to bring say dr. Nilsa Bogo on this show As a medical doctor He'd be able to make a case similar to mine about UFOs that there's a residual there Where we got actual hard scientific evidence that in the experience Is something going on at the psychological level or could be attributed to oxygen deprivation in the brain I think he's asking like the kids who have near-death experiences see santa claus Hindus who have near-death experiences see brahma christians who have near-death experiences see jesus muslims who have near-death experiences see Yep, man So so the point is that The people who have near-death experiences all experience with a one-to-one correlation their preferred belief system So how is the occult experiences? Not the same the fact there's a one-to-one correlation between personal experiences with aliens and in like close proximity Being Co-related to the occult seems to be the same kind of phenomenon where it's because they already have this pre-existing belief in their mind Their experience is then interpreted by the mind to be caused by aliens Just like near-death experiences interpreted by the mind to be caused by your preferred deity Well, uh, again, I could talk about we we interviewed this dr. Savoto And he said you know as a medical doctor and a surgeon he was very skeptical Uh, but what he did is he would put written messages on the girders above the operating table And so and people recover from surgery and claim that a near-death experience and said Well, did you see anything written on the girder? And they said yes Tell me what it is And so apologies for interrupting but um, I think the the questioner was asking What is the difference between the fact that people have near-death experiences and only see their preferred deity and the fact that the correlation between the occult and Aliens is the same kind of a thing where it seems to be a psychological phenomenon. I get it. Sure Well, keep in mind from a christian worldview perspective You've got these angels and rebellion against god who are trying to Move people feel people away From the christian faith and there were anything that's not christian They're happy with and that's something we see is that in the occult They're basically trying to get you to live your life and die before you adopt the christian faith And they'll use whatever tools they have at their hand. So i'm not surprised. There's a diversity But again, what we've been discussing john tom is that when we look at the ufo database We're looking at phenomena as beyond just delusions and wishful thinking People are actually being hurt By these phenomena their animals are being hurt We got these crater sites. I think that's quite different from what people experience in these visions from near-death experiences It's a vision. It's a whole lot different than a real crater Where you've got physical evidence that something happened there Where you got animals Who had got nothing to do with the occult other than the fact that they have an emotional relationship With the owner that does and that people that don't so i mean these are the reasons why physicists are saying This is something that we can't just put underneath the rug. We have to investigate it and find out what's going on Thanks. I think james w from the chat had a something to add to that just saying The occult isn't the same as aliens though. I think that james w is arguing that Though jesus is like an example of something from the christian religion It's not clear that let's say aliens or The occult are an example from the other camp necessarily in the way that it's obvious that Christ is from christianity. I We do have a new question that came in. Thanks for your question. This let's see. We got that from james. Thanks james for that appreciate your Super chat input there and thanks for your patreon input The next question. Oh gosh, sorry close the window, but I do have it here. Thanks for your question from Sohan to susa glad to see you again says if our Omnivalent being only needs one Omnia omnivalent the evil omni evil Is that what he's saying? I've never seen this omni before it's The omni so omni and then v as in victor a as in andy L as in leo So omnivalent Like malevolent but omni malevolent. Oh, yes. Yes. That makes sense. Okay That's worth the question. So maybe it means all good if you don't if the I think it means all evil malevolent is evil Gotcha, let's see. They say if this being only needs one planet in one species Why the vastly outsized quantities of extra solar debris? I think they must mean Omnipotent they say If if this omnipotent being only needs one planet in one species Why the vastly outsized quantities of extra solar debris and extinct species to get there? So like they're saying like extra solar debris like things that you don't need kind of like waste I think is that they're saying Yeah, I mean there's two ways you could look at that question Why a universe of 50 billion trillion stars if god only needs one planetary system? another way to look at that is Why 3.8 billion years of a half billion species of life that predates If god's goal is to bring us human beings upon the scene Those are two distinct questions. I could answer either one or both Gosh, what do you want me to do both sounds good to me both sounds good. Okay Well in terms of why you need to have billion species From my biblical worldview perspective It's god's intent that there would be billions of human beings living on planet earth With the wealth and technology To be able to take the good news of salvation through jesus christ To all the people groups of the world quickly Rather than slowly and that requires Quadrillions of tons of bio deposits in the crust of the earth And so for that to be possible You need billions of years of previous existing life Efficiently laying down coal oil natural gas limestone marble Egyptian Gypsum etc without that we couldn't have our global high tech civilization as for the universe The total mass of the universe Must be crucially fine-tuned to get the elements we need for life Make the universe even the tiniest bit less massive Then when you have the universe expanding on the cosmic creation event You get only a small percentage of the pre-mortial hydrogen converted into helium Through nuclear fusion in the first three and a half minutes of the existence of the universe Which means future stars will not be able to make any element heavier than helium There'll be no carbon. No oxygen. No nitrogen On the other hand make the universe the tiniest bit more massive Then the future stars quickly convert all of that pre-mortial hydrogen to helium Into nothing but elements heavier than iron in both cases you get no carbon. No oxygen. No nitrogen I can make a similar argument that the mass of the universe Must be fine-tuned to get the galaxy stars and planets You need to make physical life possible If the universe is not massive enough Then galaxies will never form and if you make it too massive Then the only objects that form are black holes and neutron stars And so if you want stars and planets like we see here The universe is mass so for two different reasons the universe Total mass must be exquisitely fine-tuned Likewise the age of the universe must be exquisitely fine-tuned I've written a book saying there are 140 other features of the universe that must be exquisitely fine-tuned Assuming that god had other purposes for the laws of physics that he chose And again in my book why the universe is the way it is I detail all those different purposes for why the universe must be the way that it is Thank you. And so han desuza. Thanks for your response via super chat said But god can just create oil deposits. I think that's in response to what you said dr. Ross Well god could but uh, then Why do we see the carbon 12 the carbon 13 isotope ratio that indicates that it came from past living creatures? We see the same thing with the Limestone and the marble Incidentally, that's an argument I get from young earth creationists. They say god could have just snapped his figures and done it But he wouldn't erase the evidence of what he's done That's something we see in the bible that god does not deceive He does not lie He's not going to erase the physical evidence of what he has done And the physical evidence tells us there indeed has been Billions of years of life that predated us Gotcha, and thanks for your question. This one comes in from slam r.n. Glad to see you again slam says Hi, this is susan l from val Paraiso Can you talk about the super enrichment? The earth and sun have of heavy metals, especially uranium and thorium Well, that's what's interesting is that we live on this planet That seems to be the uranium thorium champion of the universe I mean if you compare the quantities of uranium and thorium, we see on planet earth To what we would expect based on our measurements of the elemental abundances Of our galaxy and of our star and of the universe Rocky planets like ours We have 630 times as much thorium and 340 times as much uranium We got 60 times as much titanium In fact, I've written a book making a point every element in a periodic table We see these extreme anomalies with respect to planet earth and other rocky planets Within the universe But in each case that extreme anomaly is exactly what you need for advanced light to be possible If we didn't have that extreme super abundance of uranium and thorium Then we wouldn't have a powerful magnetic field to shield us from cosmic and solar radiation We wouldn't have long lasting plate tectonic activity to transform our planet from a water world Into a world where you've got both surface oceans and surface continents. I could go on but I think that's enough Gotcha and thanks for your question. This comes in from Pants L. Jones. Thanks for your question said for Oh He Ross they said uh Jason Lyle said decay rates have had been sped up by millions of times In a lab and you had disagreed Which is true Okay, I had a debate with Jason Lyle a few weeks ago A few weeks ago. He's a young earth creationist And we were basically debating the point Have the laws of physics Changed by factors of millions and trillions of times at the fall of adam or Noah's flood or both Now I was making a point number one the bible repeatedly tells us the laws of physics do not change Um and will not change until evil has been conquered and eradicated At number two we astronomers Can actually measure the laws of physics and the constants of physics in distant stars and galaxies And we're looking at distant stars and galaxies. We're looking back in time Because it took light time to reach our telescopes And what we see is at least out to 12 billion light years The laws of physics are identical to what they are here on earth And the laws of physics are not changing Then all young earth creationist models that have been proposed so far Fail every one of them requires dramatically altered laws of physics at the fall of adam Or the flood or both To sustain their interpretation of the bible But most of our debate was over whether or not the bible actually teaches That the creation days are long periods of time like I believe Or just 24 hour periods like jason believes That was basically making a point if you go through all the creation texts in the bible Read them Literally and consistently It rules out the possibility that these creation days are only six consecutive 24 hour periods Gotcha and thanks for your question. This one comes. This is a uh, let's see you've got a fan out there tom jump They said support for my homie tom all day every day. Let's start a podcast mr. Rogan is that your new nickname tom mr. Rogan? I don't think so That's quite flattering and Thank you for your question. This one comes in from sigafredo sarabia Appreciate it. This i'm a little bit confused. I've never heard But this is outside of my specialty the idea of speed of space Uh sigafredo sarabia said dr. Ross hypothetically is it possible to travel faster than the speed of space If aliens are not in observable the observable universe, how do we make contacts? past that Yeah, i'm not sure what he's getting at but we're talking about beings That are not constrained by the physics of the universe or the universe's spacetime dimensions Pardon me tom. I think I know what he's saying when he says the speed of space, you know the expansion rate of the universe Space can travel faster than speed of light. I think that's what he means Yeah, okay. No that that's true That the expansion of the space surface of the universe Is not limited by the velocity of light Because it's not anything physical is traveling faster than the velocity of light It's just the spacetime dimensionality And that carries objects with it So for example, uh, we go into the future There will be galaxies moving away from us at greater in the velocity of light Now it doesn't violate einstein's principle that a physical object cannot be accelerated beyond the velocity of light So if you're moving from one spot in that space surface to another spot You are limited by the velocity of light, but the space surface itself Uh, can expand faster than the velocity of light It's physical objects that cannot be accelerated past the velocity of light And yeah, right now the universe is old enough that it's expanding At the farthest distances that we can see along the space surface of the universe have barely under the velocity of light Which means a time will come in the future Not too distant future astronomically speaking When we'll no longer be able to see the light from the cosmic creation event We can see it now. We couldn't see it in the past. We won't see it in the future, but we can see it right now I think his question was was can the supernatural Entities travel faster than that right? Yeah, I would agree they can because they're not subject to einstein's theories of relativity If they're not part of the physics of the universe, there's no reason why they would be constrained by the laws of physics So yeah, they could go Technically faster in the velocity of light because they're not physical entities Thanks so much and slam rn for another question says where and this is by the way folks We may not get to any other questions slam rn said where was our early solar system first formed I think that question is directed at me and that would be we see In the elemental abundances of the sun and of our solar system And it could not have formed at its current location or galaxy There are many papers published indicating We had to form inside a rather large and dense open cluster of stars probably Almost halfway closer to the center of the galaxy than we are right now And got ejected from that cluster And sent out to the location where we are now Meaning that we were born in that part of the galaxy That was maximal and its abundance of heavy elements and wound up in a location That is one of the minima in terms of heavy element abundance But there's one reason why advanced life is possible here on planet earth Is because of that Extraordinary journey that our solar system took when it was very young Gotcha want to say thank you so much. That is the remainder of our questions I want to say we really appreciate you folks for your questions and for hanging out with us today And especially you want to say thank you so much to dr. Hugh Ross and tom jump. It's been a pleasure to have you guys on Thank you Thanks Absolutely and thanks mods for keeping an eye on the chat as well We are excited as mentioned we'll be back We'll actually be back tonight tom jump is coming back for a tag team debate So that should be an interesting one I don't know how converse contender got you and godless girl to team up So that should be an exciting one But want to remind you folks both tom jump and dr. Hugh ross are linked in our description So having listened to today's epic discussion This is a really fun one folks want to let you know you can hear plenty more and read plenty more From our guests at their links that are conveniently in the description waiting for you So thanks so much folks and we will see you next time. We hope you have a great rest of your day or night