Video Transcript
This is This is so crazy to me. I see this this morning. He goes, I'm gonna read it out. After This is Ryan Graves, Air Force pilot. After further review, it's conceivable the video is of a prosaic target struck by a missile. chunks broke off, stabilized in the airream, and began a parabolic descent that is generally aligned with the camera angle, making the target aspect change nearly imperceptible as it descends. What? Hey, the the debris got caught in the airream and kept floating. That what are you just making up right now? That's not how that's how gravity works, bro. That's not how gravity works. And then we actually forced him into like a semi- retraction. Forced him into a semi-retraction because I post here I'm going I'm just lfao. These are UFO here. Complete idiots who have no clue what they're talking about. Not even former military have any clue what they're talking about. That's Ryan Graves. He's former Air Force. He's looking at this and he thinks it's a balloon. There's a prosaic explanation that it's just a debris that's drifting in the airirstream for like 10 seconds. It's just floating in the sky for at least 10 seconds. And then they also lie. They just lie. They'll be like, "Oh, the uh the video edits." They'll be like, "The video cuts off right after it gets hit." No, it doesn't. It doesn't cut off right after it gets hit. It stays and you can see the thing still floating freely for like at least five more seconds. So, it's just so weird. And so, then we forced him into a retraction. Just to be clear, I'm not dismissing this video. The above is just my current best guess at a rational explanation. Curious to see what else we can learn from the video. This really proves that it's all about peer pressure for Ryan Graves, right? Like, it's peer pressure. He got peer pressured into making a stupid statement about it being prosaic. And then he gets peer pressured into retracting his statement because if you look through the comments, people are like, "What are you talking about, dude? This theory is flawed. The objects in the video maintain altitude. You can see the reflection. Even if you can't see the reflection, you can still tell they're maintaining their altitude. It shouldn't even require that. It shouldn't require some detailed analysis, forensic analysis. You can just see with your eyes that it's still floating freely. so crazy to me. I did see some other follow-up posts today where more than like this is why it's important that we are social media influencers because if we're not pushing back on these absolutely ridiculous claims like it's a balloon. Look at that plasma flying around. It gets hit by a projectile splits into multiple plasma pieces and people are going oh it's a balloon. If we don't push back on these ridiculous narratives then people fall for the ash conformity. Do you want to know how you break down the ash conformity experiment? Does anybody know? Does anybody know what the cure is for the ash conformity experiment? The cure is telling the truth. If one person comes in and says, "Nope, it's line number one. If one person goes against the herd, then the other people feel safe in following." Um, okay. One more thing I want to say about this video. Let's pull this up again. Uh, a lot of people are saying, "Well, what about like it breaks up into three here?" And they say, "Oh, is this connected to the MH370 videos?" So, this is another one of those situations where we can't hit on 19, right? Not everything is MH370 video orbs. I don't think this is the same kind of orb as we see in the MH370 videos. It could be, but I don't think it is. Now, what I'll say about this is I believe it's just coincidental that it breaks up into three extra pieces. It doesn't have anything to do with Ashton four orbs. It's just coincidental, but it's definitely plasma. And and how do we know that? Because if it wasn't plasma, it wouldn't break into three like easy chunks like that. The reason why it breaks into chunks like that is because the plasma is trying to attach itself together. Kind of like a a drop of water. like a drop of water has uh what do you call it on the edges? Man, I'm struggling right now. Uh when it kind of groups up together, that's what's happening with the plasma here is the plasmas produce its own electromagnetic field. And so even if a small bit of the plasma breaks off, it kind of clusters together kind of like a smoke ring. Like a smoke ring does. So I think it's just coincidental that's happening. Oh, surface tension. Thank you. Surface tension. That's what we're looking for. It's like surface tension, right? So surface tension. That's why it groups together. Now, what I will say is what we've learned is that even if a bit of the plasma falls off the main body, it shouldn't be a problem at all because the plasma is potentially being produced from the air itself. So, the object inside of the orb and it can be pretty small object inside of the orb. It's producing the plasma around it. So, even a bit of plasma falls off, that's okay. We've still got enough plasma where we can reform our orb where our orb can fly freely still, which is why I think that orb still f flies freely even though some of the plasma gets knocked off. And then that plasma that gets knocked off I presume would slowly fall to the surface and then dissipate or something like that. The other side of it is this. I do think it's possible that one ball of plasma could break into multiple balls and then become their own self-coherent balls of plasma. That does seem theoretically possible, but it seems quite a bit more advanced than where we're at with plasma drones or where we were at in 2014. But in the future, why not, right? Right? You could have one big ball and then break it into three smaller balls of plasma and then have each one be a self-consistent ball of plasma that floats around. So that's my answer and viewpoint for all the people out there wondering, you know, is there significance to the three blah blah blah balls? And yes, not just like ball lightning, literally ball lightning. Ball lightning is exotic vacuum objects, is plasmoids, is field reverse configuration. They're all essentially the same thing. They're all a self-stabilizing, self-regulating, self-organizing ball of plasma. And they're using a neutronic or maybe just neutronic fusion propulsion. Fusion propulsion because that plasmoid has jets like exhaust jets. Axial jets they call them. Axial jets like the planet has axis on it. axial jets and those jets can be used as propulsion. What I I messaged Congressman Berles after I said, you know, good job leaking that video and I was like, dude, it's it's plasma propulsion, dude. It's just a neutronic plasma fusion propulsion. We are so far ahead of the public now. Like we are actually like this MH370X people watching this live stream. You're literally 5 to 10 years ahead of the public in terms of like public disclosure. Like this stuff is starting to come out. We're hearing Loheed Martin saying they've got magical technologies and stuff like that. They actually their CEO was quoted saying that recently. Um and if you know about plasma, if you know about field reverse configuration and this fusion stuff, you are just so far ahead because I'll tell you Congress has no idea. They've got no idea that this is what it is. None at all. That's why when they're looking at that video, that's probably why people are thinking it's a balloon because they don't have any basis to understand that that's just plasma and that plasma can be used for propulsion. They just don't understand that. And I get it because people don't think fusion is real. They think fusion is something that like, yeah, we could just never really do it, man. It's just like too complicated, you know? So, people just have to come up with some other explanation.