Stanford professor who studied impact of UFO encounters on brain unpacks new batch of Pentagon files

0:00 Well, speaking of space, the Pentagon has released another batch of never-before-seen files on UFOs. This is all part of President Trump's efforts to increase transparency on government knowledge of possible extraterrestrial activity. The release includes dozens of documents, videos, and several audio files of NASA pilots reporting mysterious objects. So, I want to bring in Gary Nolan, a professor in the Department of Pathology at Stanford University School of Medicine. Professor Nolan, thank you for being with us. I have to tell you, you may have one of the most extraordinary resumes I've ever seen. You hold 50 US patents, honored for as one of the top 25 inventors at Many of your innovations in biotech focused on cancer research, Ebola, the immune system, to name to to leave out some of the others. So, what does this have to do with UFOs? I I have to say that you also have a study focused on how UFOs impact a person's brain. Can you explain this

1:00 study for us? So, this really gets back to how I got brought into it. Basically, one day the government showed up in my office asking for help with about a hundred or so diplomats and/or military personnel who'd been harmed. As it turned out, after a few years of analysis, these were some of the first of the so-called Havana syndrome patients. So, they'd come to me because of the immunology that I'd been doing. I have And a invention that was co-developed in my laboratory that was the deepest blood profiling. And they were looking to do blood profiling as follow-up analysis, medical analysis of these individuals. So, that got me involved, but what was interesting was not all of those patients that they brought to me were Havana syndrome. A few of them claimed, at least alleged, that the damage that had been done to them, the scarring that had happened on their body or inside inside their brains or inside the body

2:01 was due to proximity to alleged UAP. So, as I didn't necessarily just walk away from this cuz who couldn't be interested in something like this? I started getting more and more involved and being brought in and introduced to more and more people about the subject matter. And my main interest is just bringing a science-based inquiry to this. You know, it's look at the data. People so often use the word there's no evidence. That's just a misunderstanding of the word evidence. Evidence like in a courtroom is data contextualized around an idea. Is the person guilty or not? Is the evidence enough to convict? What I would say to anybody looking at some of these videos and thank you very much to President Trump. Thank you to Representatives Luna, Burchett, and Burchett, and many others, Senator Schumer, etc. who have been behind the scenes pushing for this. This is evidence. It's not proof yet. It's data that I think anybody who looks at this and sees how these things some of them

3:02 seem to be moving and assuming that they've been data has been collected correctly is evidence that is worth answering the question, what are they? Now, what's missing from most of this data that is for instance what seems to be blacked out on most of the videos that are here is how was the data collected? Where was it collected? When was it collected? Uh what were the instruments, etc. What kind is it? Is it radio frequency measurements? Is it heat signatures, etc. That's what lets a scientist like me further validate what it is that we're seeing because it's clearly not seagulls. So, okay. I want to go back to the study though cuz what have you found happens to individuals who claim to have seen or experienced UFOs? Well, some of these individuals and you know, there's lots of people who claim all and allege all kinds of interactions

4:03 for the from the from the standpoint of a I'm not an MD, I'm a PhD. Uh but from the standpoint of what we saw in some of their brains uh were what we would think of as white matter disease, basically scarring inside of the body. Uh so it's not like the I I wouldn't think of it as whatever these phenomenon are reaching in and doing something to people's brains specifically. It's more along the lines you know, if you walk across an airfield and you get in the you know, in the exhaust plume of a jet engine, you're going to get hurt. So whatever it is that these objects might be using to move around in the ways that they do create some sort of local field structure or some sort of let's call it ionizing radiation. Uh that will burn tissue. No surprise there. So some trauma that occurred in these individuals' brains. And I'm curious, I mean do you think I mean I think I got your answer earlier. Do you think it's beneficial then for the American people to see these images

5:04 and documents? Should they stay classified just purely because of the damage it potentially could do to somebody's brain who may have experienced this? Well, yeah, I mean I think perhaps the instinctive reaction Well, you have two instinctive reactions if something lands on the ground or you see floating around. You might want to move towards it or you run away. Uh and so my you know, my instinct would be you know, maybe to think about moving towards it, but it that would be of course modified by my knowledge of what's happened to people who do get who have gotten or claimed alleged to have gotten to to close to these objects. Um you know, I I I think what it really calls for is frankly more data. I think I want to see more of the kinds of background information that led to these observations. Now these are all presumably taken from pilots at a remote distance. You might ask yourself, do I want to get close to something which is emanating a bright light, you know, that

6:05 I don't know what it is. I I think, you know, a smart individual would say caution is warranted. But the the fact though that we're seeing these things is important on at a number of levels and the fact that the government has finally released this is I mean it's certainly the tip of the iceberg of what could be released is there is an opportunity here at least twofold. One, there's the hope that we're not alone in the universe. That's a hope. It's It's an I'm alleging that. But two, it's we're watching technology, potential technology that we don't have. And if we could begin to understand even the the remotest piece of that, you know, what we're seeing there, if it's true, is hundreds of technology revolutions ahead of us. Wow. Just I mean just look at what grain of sand did to our civilization. Silicon has changed everything about who and what we are. Imagine what some of those things represent. And if we could get the

7:05 government to release and have some sort of let's say public private interaction where scientists academics or otherwise can be brought in to help understand what this is, we could move forward human technology and civilization to maybe overcome some of our our current problems, energy or otherwise. Professor Gary Nolan, thank you so much for being with us.