UAP Physics and the Project Unity Interview of Luis Elizondo

INTERVIEWER: Dr. Eric Davis has repeatedly stressed the importance of the 38 Defense Intelligence Reference Documents from the precursor program of AATIP known as AAWSAP (Advanced Aerospace Weapon Systems Applications Program), in terms of extrapolating the physics and engineering of 2009 out to 2050, to determine whether or not the Americans can approximate the capabilities of Tic-Tacs / UAPs in a scenario where the UAPs might become a future threat to the US.

Now, Eric Davis talks about the 1977 Colares (Brazil) case where UFOs purportedly utilised beams to kill and injure people. In the 1960s NASA engineer Dr. Paul Hill theorised about UFOs employing heat beams, paralyzing beams, force beams and that the UFO propulsion or power systems could be utilised as a weapon.

Dr. Jack Sarfatti has theorized UAP having high frequency gravity weapons capable of disrupting aircraft weapon systems, jamming radars and communication and affecting missile launch circuitry; emitting beams of gravity curvature that range in power from that of an electromagnetic pulse to essentially tearing an F-18 apart.

My question is how realistic is the timeframe given by Davis for the US military to achieve these capabilities and also to convince Congress to allocate the money for a huge Manhattan Project-style effort to get there?

How realistic would funding for such a project be, given more immediate and tangible threats presented by: near-peer adversaries, regional trouble-makers like North Korea and Iran and the war on terror?

ELIZONDO: Well, let´s look at the last time the U.S. was in a similar situation in the world; let´s take right after World War Two and the Korean War. We had a lot going on and we had a lot of civil unrest in this country [USA]; we had a lot of issues we were dealing with and yet we still decided to put a man on the moon. And it took us ten years, but keep in mind just a decade before, we were still using aircraft with propellers to fly across the ocean and now we are talking about spacecraft and putting a man on the moon within a decade. I think when we decide as a people to do something, then all sorts of things are possible.

Let´s not forget that on the Apollo mission alone, something like 6200 major innovations were invented and developed that wound up actually benefitting mankind and all of this was a result of competition between the United States and Russia to see who was going to be the first person on the moon. And as a result we have cat scans and Velcro and LED lights and all these other innovations that we now we take for granted… but these were revolutionary approaches to problems that helped advance society.

I think it´s too early to answer that question first of all, because we still need more data, we need more transparency and we need more discussion. But I think we´re getting closer to having that conversation. The establishment of a UAP task force was a step in the right direction towards that goal; being able to put our time, resources and talent into that topic. So maybe I´m a little bit more optimistic than some when it comes to your question as far as will the government ever galvanize itself to pursue this endeavour. I do. I think once it accepts the reality that these things [UAP] are real, then it´s almost fait accompli; I can´t see how they wouldn´t, if that makes sense.

INTERVIEWER: In a recent white paper, written by a colleague and friend of mine, Franc Milburn, published BY the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, Franc asked Dr. Jack Sarfatti if a Tic-Tac with its surrounding field would be susceptible to weapons like surface-to-air or air to air missiles, aircraft cannon, lasers, rail guns, EMP devices or even nuclear warheads that were detonated in proximity to a UAP. Sarfatti theorized that if the warp field surrounding the UAP is strong enough…it could essentially create.. and I’ll quote Jack Sarfatti here “A white hole artificial event horizon generated by the metamaterial which would prevent anything from penetrating, no matter how powerful the energy associated with the weapon used against the Tic Tac was”

If correct, then this would mean more advanced weapons being developed like lasers and rail guns, are already obsolete, except for use against near-peer adversaries.

Is this not then, an even better argument for development of offensive and defensive UAP technology in order to mitigate the threats presented by both near-peer adversaries and the operators of UAP, and especially, to get there first before China and Russia do?

ELIZONDO: Sure.. first of all you asked me to comment on Mr Sarfatti´s physics model; well, unfortunately I´m not a physicist so I´m not sure I can do that. I can´t tell you the validity of his scientific modelling and whether something is or is not impenetrable and whatnot. I´m certainly not qualified for that. But if there is something out there that displays extremely advanced capabilities, whether it´s a weapon system or propulsion, you now.. I think there is a potential threat. There are countries out there we know that are a fact that if they had a strategic advantage on us, they would use those in an irresponsible way. They would use them probably as a weapon of war rather than a weapon of peace. So as a result of that, I think it´s incumbent upon us to do our due diligence to make sure that if this technology is viable that it does not get into the wrong hands…I don´t want this technology getting into the hands of an adversary. I also don´t want it getting into the hands of somebody irresponsible in my own country. 

INTERVIEWER: Something I really wanted to touch on is the infamous slide 9, [see attachment] that was discovered by a fellow researcher, also called Jay, creator of the platform The Mind Sublime, who discovered on Christopher Mellon´s web page, an AATIP presentation slide which included within it some pretty disturbing conclusions, this is what the presentation slide said : The science exists for an enemy of the united states to manipulate both physical and cognitive environments in order to penetrate U.S facilities, influence decision makers and compromise national security - The slide then goes on to list the applications of this science which includes Psychotronic Weapons, penetration of solid surfaces, alteration or manipulation of biological organisms, instantaneous sensor disassembly, unique cognitive human interface experiences and one of the most disturbing and intriguing, Anomalies in the space/time construct. Now this slide, if I am correct, is essentially saying that a science or technology exists that would allow for the complete and total manipulation of both cognitive and physical environments, including the manipulation of the very fabric of space/time itself - is that correct?

ELIZONDO: I think that´s a pretty fair assessment. 

https://www.academia.edu/41715972/Explaining_US_Navy_Close_Encounters_with_Tic_Tac_UAV_Metric_Engineering_New_Expanded_Version_Feb_6_2021