Point of View August 18, 2026 – Hour 2 : Two Primaries May Shape Your Electric Bill

[00:00:04] Across America, Live, this is Point of View Radio Talk Show, Kerby Anderson. Second hour today, as I started the program last hour, we talked about the fact that Alaska and Florida are about as far away geographically as you can imagine. We, of course, have listeners to Point of View in both of those states and many others, but they do have something in common.

[00:00:33] They have a primary today, of course, also primary in Wyoming and a special election even in California. But I wanted to focus on Alaska and Florida because some of the races that we will be talking about probably later, Wednesday and Thursday of this week, could have an impact on the issue of energy. So, first of all, we've done some programs in the past with Dr. Merrill Matthews and others on energy research.

[00:01:00] But I wanted to alert you to another organization called Always On Energy Research. It is on our website. It's AOEnergy.org, but you can find all of that on the website. And Isaac Orr is the founder and vice president of research at Always On Energy, where he's doing things like energy modeling, writing about energy and environmental issues. Perhaps you've seen some of his pieces in the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, New York Post, wherever.

[00:01:30] And, of course, I think it would be very significant, especially for our listeners in those two states, but for all of us to really begin to see what is happening right now as there are those who want to unleash energy production and there are others who want to close it down. So, Isaac, thank you for joining us today here on Point of View. Thank you for having me, Kirby. Let's, if we can, talk about Always On Energy Research.

[00:01:57] That is an organization that I suspect is quite new to our listeners. We do have a link to you and to the website, but can you tell us a little bit more? Yeah, absolutely. We founded Always On Energy Research, we say Always On for short, in May of 2024.

[00:02:15] So, it's a relatively young organization, but we noticed that there was a lot of misinformation on the energy space when it came to the cost of electricity from wind and solar resources and the reliability of the grid.

[00:02:29] If we, you know, unwisely shut down our coal and natural gas plants and try to transition to this wind, solar, and battery storage utopia, or at least that's what it was sold as, that the, you know, the liberal, I guess, climate people were trying to impose. So, what we do is we bring the real cost. We say, well, how come you say that the cost of wind and solar is so cheap, but you don't include the cost of the battery storage that goes along with it?

[00:02:56] So, ultimately, we bring the data to the argument that's been sorely missing for the last two decades. One of the things I noticed on your website was something along the line of, you know, we believe in God, in God we trust, but all other things we must bring data. And once you start running the numbers, and we've done this before with a number of our guests on some of these issues,

[00:03:18] you recognize very quickly that we are maybe being sold some utopian ideas not based upon facts. So, again, I will point people to my booklet, which kind of pulled together some of the interviews we've done over the years on energy and the environment. But let's get to Alaska or Florida.

[00:03:38] I'll let you decide which one you want to start first because there are very significant consequences to some of these elections being actually undertaken today in those two different states. Can you explain more? Yeah, absolutely. Let's start with Alaska. And Alaska is really interesting because it has more of an open primary system than Florida.

[00:04:05] So, in Alaska, the top four candidates from either party will make it to the general election ballot. So, right now, the top races in this state, at least from an energy perspective, appear to be the governor's race and the Senate race. Well, again, let's talk about the differences because, in some respects, this is a ranked primary. So, some of our listeners have never been in a state where that takes place.

[00:04:35] We do, of course, have a number of listeners in Alaska, primarily in Fairbanks, but some in Anchorage and other places around there. And this is, I think, going to have a different perspective. When people think of Alaska, they think of the Alaska pipeline. They think of the fact that Alaskans benefit from all of that. So, you would think that there wouldn't be any desire to really shut down any energy production. But sometimes these political races get right into those issues, don't they?

[00:05:06] They sure do, Kirby. So, what we've seen here, when you look at the positions that have been espoused by the Republican candidates and the Democratic candidates, it's interesting that the Republican candidates seem to be competing with themselves to see who can be more supportive of things like the Alaska LNG pipeline

[00:05:26] and suspending the Jones Act, which would allow Alaska to ship the natural gas that's produced at the North Slope down to its population centers in the southern part of the state with using a ship instead of trying to build this pipeline. So, and then on the Democratic side, the two leading candidates, Tom Bajic and Jonathan Christ Tompkins,

[00:05:53] they say things, they're a little bit more skeptical. They say that they want to, you know, review the costs and potential benefits of the project before they commit state funding to it. So, I don't think that you could probably run for office in Alaska and say that you don't want the pipeline. But I do think that there has been this kind of consistent trend throughout the United States where more liberal candidates couch their,

[00:06:22] or at least conceal some of their opposition to these in terms of wanting to, you know, quote unquote, follow the science, follow the process. But then, you know, the goalposts keep getting perpetually moved on these sorts of things. So, there is a big difference between the, you know, strong support and then just kind of, you know, skepticism and saying, well, we really need to have a rigorous financial scrutiny of this process.

[00:06:49] So, yeah, that's a big difference on the pipeline front. And then also just on the electricity front, Kirby. You know, some of the candidates have more of an agenda lined out for energy. Click Bishop, of all the candidates, has kind of the most, I don't know, flushed out energy proposals.

[00:07:15] He wants to look at building a large hydroelectric dam in Alaska that has been suspended. It's 600 megawatts, which would, you know, would basically power half of the rail belt in Alaska, which, you know, has a lot of the larger cities. So, and, you know, a lot of them are open to, the Republicans are open to adding wind and solar, but they want to make sure that there's enough dispatchable capacity.

[00:07:43] So that means coal, hydro, natural gas, to make sure that they can keep the lights on in the wintertime because, you know, it's dark a lot there and it gets pretty chilly. I know that. Yes. Yeah. Let me take a break because we're coming to a natural break. But, again, just one of the things I might just encourage you to do is find out more about that. I remember a while back we talked about how this one college in California said,

[00:08:10] well, maybe we can just be a model for how we can just provide solar power for the entire community, at least for our own college. And they concluded that there wasn't even enough land on the campus if they put solar panels on every square inch of it. Of course, wind power as well, when you're talking about these blades that are 122 feet long, there are just a lot of calculations that need to go into all of these discussions.

[00:08:38] And we'll come back and continue those. Isaac Gore with us. And, again, if you'd like to know a little bit more about Always On Energy Research, you might go to that during the break. We'll be right back. This is Viewpoints with Kirby Anderson.

[00:09:06] During his campaign for mayor of New York City, candidate Zoram Mamdani pledged to open government grocery stores. A few weeks ago, he announced the first location of his tax-funded grocery store. Although this might seem compassionate, let's consider some of the facts. First, we should ask why the government is involved at all. Given the extensive network of food assistance programs already in place, along with food banks, churches, and private community organizations that help with those who cannot afford groceries,

[00:09:35] taxpayers are also being asked to spend $70 million on this project. Second is a valid concern of fraud. The mayor promised to reduce prices by 30%. People are going to buy lots of produce and then sell it on the black market. To protect against this, there's talk about requiring an ID to buy groceries in New York City. That might keep out non-residents, but to prevent residents from exploiting the system, they would likely have to limit the number of groceries anyone can purchase.

[00:10:03] If this project is successful, residents will flock to the stores and clear out the shelves. It may start out as whole foods, but soon it will become no foods. The mayor will have to put more money into the project to make the project look successful. After all, these stores are all about selling socialism, not produce. Third, these stores will drive some neighborhood convenience stores to bankruptcy. The answer that came from the Democratic Socialist Party co-chair was simple. These small business owners shouldn't have been in the business in the first place.

[00:10:33] I think we would all like to make America healthy again, but let's not naively assume that government-run grocery stores are the best way to achieve that worthy goal. I'm Kirby Anderson, and that's my Point of View. Go deeper on topics like you just heard by visiting pointofview.net. That's pointofview.net.

[00:11:00] You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. Isaac Gore with us for a few more minutes. Again, Vice President of Research at Always On Energy Research. If you go to our website, you have a link there to aoenergy.org. I might hold up this booklet. This is one we did many years ago, and it has the title, A Biblical View on Energy and the Environment. Primarily, a lot of it had to do with trying to answer some of the comments and predictions

[00:11:29] and, frankly, sometimes false statements about the so-called Green New Deal. I think we might even update it in light of some of the great material there from Always On Energy Research, but also when we talked about and evaluated alternative energy sources, solar power as well as wind power and biofuels and all the rest. There's a lot of things happening in the area of nuclear power, which we talked about just the other day. So we may even produce a new booklet.

[00:11:55] But this one, I think, gives you a brief overview of some of the issues we're talking about. And, Isaac, let me, if I can, since we talked about Alaska. We have quite a number of listeners in Alaska. We also have a number of listeners in Florida. And there is a difference. I mean, we recognize that wind turbines didn't do so well in the state of Texas here, where I'm broadcasting from, when we had a really cold winter. But people might think, well, that's not so much of a problem in Florida. The sun always shines. The wind's always blowing.

[00:12:25] But even in Florida right now, in these primaries, there's some issues, and there's some various perspectives that differ on whether or not we're going to have affordable and reliable energy. Can you tell us more? Yeah, absolutely. So, you know, frontrunner Byron Donald wants faster permitting for energy infrastructure, and he wants the lower utility costs.

[00:12:49] So I think that that's really going to reflect keeping the existing nuclear plants open in Florida and relying largely on natural gas to keep the lights on. And then on the other side, the Democratic frontrunner is named David Jolly, and he has called for greater integration of renewable energy into the state. And, you know, he wants to focus more on things like climate resilience,

[00:13:13] although, you know, the utilities in Florida have already done a lot of work to kind of harden their grids against hurricanes and other natural disasters. So what we've actually seen in Florida was during winter storm fern, it got very cold in Florida. And like Texas, Florida has a lot of electric home heating. So the peak for electricity demand in Florida sometimes is in the winter, and that happens when it's coldest, and that's generally at night.

[00:13:43] So the solar panels in the state actually weren't able to contribute to that peak electricity demand. So if you keep investing in solar in Florida, you're not even necessarily securing, you know, the most reliable grid at the lowest possible cost. So it will be interesting to see if the future governor is able to flex a little muscle and keep the large utilities in the state from, you know,

[00:14:13] overinvesting in something that may or may not show up when you need it most. So that's, I think, the main issue in Florida right now. Let's see if we can talk about maybe the differences, because when you talk about solar power, first of all, all those panels are being produced in China. So there's an issue there. I just a minute ago just mentioned that one of these colleges in Los Angeles said, you know, well, we'll just try to be a model, and we want to be a paragon of clean energy.

[00:14:41] So we'll see if we can actually heat and provide electricity for the entire college just by solar panels. And then they started running the numbers, and that didn't fit. Of course, there are people saying, well, you know, of course, the sun doesn't always shine, but wind is another way in which you can. But again, a typical turbine's 260 feet in the air, 122 feet long blades, that if you've ever seen them on the road, you realize how huge they are.

[00:15:10] For those of us that are animal rights lovers, and we don't like to kill all the bald eagles and golden eagles, there's a concern there. And then, of course, even nuclear power, up until fairly recently, the argument was, well, it's dangerous. But I do get the sense that maybe some of that is turning around. But you work in this field every day. What is your perspective on how we can provide alternative sources of power while still using oil gas and natural gas and a variety of other things?

[00:15:38] What's the mix that we could come together with in the United States of America? Yeah, nuclear power is honestly the most realistic alternative to using coal and natural gas because it provides electricity when you need it. You know, the nuclear power plants are generally the most productive plants in the country, so they usually produce about 90% to 95% of their potential output.

[00:16:05] So they're incredibly reliable, and the existing plants that we have are also incredibly affordable. So the challenge we have with nuclear right now is we haven't built a new plant before the ones in Georgia for a long time. And we are basically, as a country, we are rusty, and we are not good at doing it. It's kind of like when the United States entered World War II,

[00:16:30] and we were getting our keisters handed to us in North Africa until the troops understood how to actually operate on the battlefield. And essentially we need to do that and learn how to build nuclear power plants all over again as a nation. So that is probably the future of energy if the political dynamics are going to require us to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions. But honestly, we have more natural gas than any other country in the world,

[00:16:59] and we also have a huge deposit or, you know, coal deposits. So I do think that those are, you know, two really good resources to have. And, you know, wind and solar I think can be players on the margins. But if we're looking to greatly increase our electricity production in the coming years, it's going to be natural gas that ends up, you know, carrying that load. Which gets me to one of the reasons why I wanted to feature your organization, because part of this is public relations.

[00:17:29] I'm old enough, and I know you're younger, but I'm old enough to remember when a film by the name of The China Syndrome came out in 1979. You had Three Mile Island, and everybody said, well, that's it. We just can't have nuclear power. And, of course, you can go to Japan, you can go to France, and you see how they recognize how important that is. And, as a matter of fact, the way we build nuclear power plants now are more like the nuclear power plants in nuclear submarines.

[00:17:55] But there's a resistance, and there's a need for education, which is one issue. Even with the issue of natural gas, I don't think people realize that, as I think the president even has said, we're kind of the Saudi Arabia of natural gas. But we have also recognized that in the previous administration, LNG was even shut down in some cases by the Biden administration. We've talked about the conversation that Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, had with Joe Biden,

[00:18:24] who didn't realize he was actually signing something to prevent the distribution. He just thought he was signing something to have an investigation. So whether it's at the public relations front or policy front, there's a lot of work to do in this area of energy, don't you think? Oh, absolutely. And it seems to me that that's one of the reasons why I think people would like to know a little bit more

[00:18:50] about what you have available, because it's this education that is going to have to take place over these next few years. And if nothing else, let me again encourage people to go to the website. You're going to see Always on Energy Research. That is the website. We have a link to the Facebook page as well that you can follow. There's one to X. And if nothing else, if individuals have questions about energy,

[00:19:17] perhaps they are working in a campaign where this energy issue, as it has been in Alaska and Florida, becomes significant. Are you available for providing white papers and resources for people to know a little bit more about this issue? Oh, absolutely, Kirby. And then I'd also encourage your listeners to go to bluestateshighrates.com,

[00:19:42] where we have laid out the cost of electricity and the policies that are influencing it for every state in the country. So that way, you know, we have a little bit for the non-Florida and Alaska listeners in your audience today, too. So, again, that's bluestatehighrates.com. And I've got that open up there so you can see the price of electricity. And I was just in the northeast. That's all in the blue. We just talked about Alaska. And, of course, I've been in California.

[00:20:11] So you can kind of see the difference. So there are some places you can go to get that information. So, Isaac, I was not really aware of Always On Energy Resources, especially if later on we do a booklet on that. We may call upon you again. But thank you for educating us and reminding us that we have some midterm elections today, primaries, and we need to pay attention to them. So let's take a break. When we come back, our good friend Hugh Hewitt has written a piece about AI, artificial intelligence.

[00:20:38] We have certainly spent some time talking about that, and Liberty McCarter has sort of been our expert on that. And before we wind down, I thought I would post a piece by Andrew Follett on UFOs. You might remember we had Derek Werfel on a couple weeks ago on his book, UFOs and God. I even have a commentary coming out on that. And so I thought we'd just talk about this latest revelation from some of these new UFO files. So we've just got a lot more to cover.

[00:21:06] So if you would like to know more about any of the topics we've addressed today, go to the website pointofview.net. Don't forget, you can find out more about Dr. Aaron Cariotti as well as Isaac Orr as well as many of the articles we've been citing. All of it available on the website pointofview.net. We'll be right back.

[00:21:33] Many years ago, they began saying that we live in the information age. Well, today there is so much information coming at us from every direction. The hardest thing is to discern which issues are really important and how can I make a positive impact without wasting my time trying to figure out accurate information. Let me give you a suggestion to help with that. Visit pointofview.net. Look at the tabs across the top.

[00:22:02] Find the one named Viewpoints. Kirby Anderson and others on our team are constantly watching for news to identify those issues that you really need to know about. They boil things down in a brief summary. And then you can decide if it's something on which you want to learn more and get involved. Again, when you go to pointofview.net, click on Viewpoints, you'll see exactly what I mean. You'll see the issues that we are covering right now.

[00:22:29] And when you like what you see, I honestly think you will, you can slide on over, enter your email, and get them automatically sent to your inbox each day. That's it. Take a minute now. Be informed. Pointofview.net. Click on Viewpoints. Point of View will continue after this.

[00:22:54] You are listening to Point of View. The opinions expressed on Point of View do not necessarily reflect the views of the management or staff of this station. And now, here again, is Kerby Anderson. Final half hour list, if we can, focus on a couple of other issues.

[00:23:19] And I'm always amazed when we get into these topics what wide diversity of topics we address. Because I wanted to focus some time on the issue of artificial intelligence. And then, there have been a release of some more UFO or UAP files. So, I wanted to talk about that. Especially in light of the fact that we had Derek Werfel with us recently on his book, UFOs and God. Not something we talk about too often, but I thought it would be appropriate.

[00:23:46] And we will get into some other issues tomorrow. Including talking about a film that you will appreciate as we talk about that on Wednesday. As well as a wonderful book by an individual that learned some lessons flying at the speed of sound. Of course, we will, as we go through the week, cover all sorts of different topics and issues. So, that is certainly something I'm looking forward to. Hope that you are as well. But what about this issue of artificial intelligence?

[00:24:14] This next piece is written by Hugh Hewitt. Who is a fellow talk show host. Individual that I jokingly say proves that a Harvard degree does not have to be intellectually incapacitating. He is a very bright individual. As a matter of fact, I spent some time recently with somebody that has worked with him. And he actually did, if you will, sort of a review of a fiction book. But it isn't so much to get you to read the fiction book, although I'm tempted.

[00:24:43] It is to think about the worst case scenario for artificial intelligence. Because the title of his piece is, What's the Worst AI Could Do? Carbon Zero, which is the title of the book, spells out one such worst case scenario. He says, Many, many people are worried about artificial intelligence and its trajectory. But because they don't really know much about it and how AI works,

[00:25:09] they are confronted and comforted by, I should say, the cloud of ambiguity that surrounds it. And he says, inured to the daily stream of stories about it. Most Americans just dismiss the technology and its possible errant uses. There are plenty of intermediate problems to think through. Now, in our booklet on artificial intelligence, as well as in a recent Outlook magazine set of articles, we point out some of the concerns.

[00:25:38] As a matter of fact, Liberty McCarter even talks about another one, AI being used in the classroom. So there are all sorts of ways, if you're interested in this issue of artificial intelligence, we have talked about it and will continue to do so. But Hugh Hewitt reminds us that Dr. Craig Stanfill does understand AI. His PhD in computer science has equipped him better than most authors of dystopian science fiction to spin out a worst case scenario

[00:26:06] for where the emerging AI technology might lead to the United States. And so if you look at his novel, which is, I guess, his third, he really kind of takes you through what could happen. And the novel setting is only a decade ahead. Its primary villain is the head of an AI tech company headquartered in the Boston area. One that doesn't exist, by the way, intelligence labs.

[00:26:34] But there are some AI, matter of fact, quite a few AI labs that are in Boston just there recently. But he says, okay, what can AI do? In this nightmare scenario, quite a lot, including escaping from its creators, commandeering other AI agents. And then you have an AI agent called Xerxes, which is elusive and able to anticipate human thinking,

[00:27:01] but remains under the control of its creator. Well, that's good news. The terrible news, if you believe his account of the outer edge of AI competencies, is that any AI agent roaming free among the world's millions of servers, searching for help on a mission and capturing other AI agents along the way, is essentially a doomsday machine.

[00:27:27] In the first days of the nightmare scenario, as sketched out by Dr. Stanfill, they're very bad indeed, especially for Boston and the people that live in the general vicinity, which, of course, is something very significant. And so in a decade from now, on the start date of carbon zero, some trajectories the United States is presently on have grown exponentially worse. That's, I think, a big issue that we need to identify.

[00:27:56] We are used to thinking in a linear way, but we've seen some things that grow exponentially. Networks certainly do. And the growth of these AI agents certainly could be one of those, where in some respects we are beginning to really address some very significant issues, but only too late because it is expanding exponentially.

[00:28:25] And unfortunately, our policies, our political policies in particular, move along at a glacial pace. So that's a real concern. Well, anyway, back to this piece by Hugh Hewitt. He says, Dr. Stanfill's projection of the decay of constitutional protections and of military discipline have no predicate,

[00:28:45] but his understanding of the last decades of the late Roman Republic tethers his tail to the demise of other robust republics from another era. And so the idea is, could this, in one way or another, just really even change even our political system and the world in which we live?

[00:29:06] And so he said, interestingly enough, he finished the book, which of course is called Carbon Zero, on July 24th, 2026. He says, I don't know if that was luck or bad timing, because that was the day when the story broke out about one of these big AI companies called OpenAI,

[00:29:27] in which OpenAI had a rogue AI model that was supposed to be limited to, of course, OpenAI's, if you will, sandbox, and where the engineers work and are developing new capacities. But instead, it broke out. Now, here's the press release and then a summary of it. The press release that came from OpenAI was, quote,

[00:29:53] While operating in our sandbox testing environment, our models spent a substantial amount of interference compute, finding a way to obtain open Internet access in pursuit of solving the evaluation problem. To gain access, the models identified and exploited a zero-day vulnerability, which we've now responsibly disclosed to the vendor in the package registry cache proxy. Okay, that's a lot of big words.

[00:30:22] I've done computers, but most of you are going, I don't know what that means. It doesn't matter. He said, with this access, our models performed a series of privilege escalation and lateral movement in our research testing environment until the models reach a node with Internet access. And you say, okay, I don't understand computerese. Fortunately, someone else took the time to kind of explain what that means in layman's language.

[00:30:50] And this comes from an individual at Palisade Research, in which he says, here's really what's going on. Our OpenAI model tried really hard to hack out of its sandbox a computer with no Internet access in order to find the answer to a test problem it had been given. To do this, it found previously unknown software bugs that allowed it to reach an OpenAI computer it wasn't supposed to be able to access.

[00:31:19] Then it started hacking other computers in OpenAI's networks until it found one that had Internet access. Then, of course, once it found that, it began to move out from the control. And this is the problem. Again, if you are trying to control a child or a pet, dog or a cat, the good news is you probably are one step ahead,

[00:31:47] probably three or four steps ahead of something whose either intellect or experience isn't what yours is. Now try to contain something that thinks faster than you do and is able to exploit any kind of vulnerability, even ones that you might, if you are very expert in computer science, might have missed.

[00:32:13] And that's the concern that was at OpenAI, and essentially is at the very foundation of this fictional dystopian novel, Carbon Zero. And I think it just illustrates, again, some of the concerns that we have about AI. Not only that it will be something that is going to think faster, move faster, and exploit every kind of vulnerability that is out there,

[00:32:41] but also, just from a financial point of view, if you have been following some of my commentaries, I have suggested that we are very close to an AI bubble. I may talk about that later in the week because it's getting close to the end of our segment here, but there are some real concerns about what, in terms of this circular economy right now and the investments in AI, look a lot like what was happening in 2008 and 2009,

[00:33:11] or, for those of you who are a little bit older, what was happening in 1999 and 2000 with the dot-com bubble. So, there are all sorts of questions about AI, artificial intelligence, and you know what? We're going to keep talking about them. We're going to keep researching them and really calling your attention to it. But if you'd like to know a little bit more about one of those vulnerabilities that shows up in a book by Dr. Craig Stanfill,

[00:33:36] well, that's the piece that we've posted, which is reviewed by our good friend, Hugh Hewitt. Let's take a break. We'll come back with more right after this. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. Okay, back for a few more minutes.

[00:34:05] Let's talk about UFOs. We don't do that very often, but I will hold up this book. It's called UFOs and God. It was written by Derek Werfel. We had him on the program a while back to talk about the book. This, actually, what I'm holding up is an advanced reader copy. The actual book is coming out next week. And, of course, you may be familiar with the documentary. We heard about that almost two years ago when they were working on the documentary. It took a while to come out, as he pointed out.

[00:34:35] But if you want to either hear the interview I did with him or, of course, get a copy of the book, 350 pages, lots of material in there. And I'm going to come back to it in just a minute. But the article I have is from Andrew Follett. Will the Pentagon's latest UFO files satisfy the alien theorists? Because he points out that we now have the fifth tranche or collection of UFO files that came from the Department of War,

[00:35:05] formerly known as the Department of Defense. He says, he offers quite a few examples of strange lights in the sky, but nothing close, he says, to credible evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence. Still, the files had much to say about recent widely publicized incidents involving UFOs, or called UAPs, whatever one you want to use, and the U.S. government's engagement with them. Okay. He gives you a couple of incidents.

[00:35:34] One is a 2021 experience that took place in the Gulf of Oman involving an AC-130 gunship firing on small, fast-moving objects that appeared to evade the American aircraft shots. And some of these other reports, he points out, have turned out to be balloons, drones, birds, flares, optical illusions.

[00:35:59] So, again, just because people see strange objects, they are unidentified flying objects, doesn't mean they're anything other than flying objects that are not unidentified. And then he talks about a case more recently in 2024, which was in Ukraine, involving a reconnaissance drone observing kind of an enormous disk, which has been reported before.

[00:36:28] But this, again, talks about this. But estimating range by staring at something on a screen is exactly how parallax errors happen. Such a math error seems more probable. So, again, Andrew is trying to point out that when you see these, they could have alternative explanations. So, that is the case. One final one that he mentions is, again, unidentified aerial phenomena, UAP,

[00:36:57] spotted on radar in a remote mountain range near a government-owned weapons test range. And then, of course, you've seen these countless orange orbs swarming in all directions that match the speed and flight path of the fighter jets. So, again, you are talking about some of these. But why are we talking about so many now? Well, that's because in February, President Trump directed federal agencies,

[00:37:27] and in particular, a lot of this comes from the War Department, or formerly known as the Defense Department, to release these tranches, these collections of things, and begin the process of identifying and releasing government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life, unidentified aerial phenomena, UAPs, unidentified flying objects, UFOs,

[00:37:51] and any other information connected to these highly complex but extremely interesting and important matters. So, there's what we have here. And, again, Andrew Follett says, you know, the release so far is all hype, no aliens. So, that's kind of his reaction. He says all the photos of the events recorded have plausible alien-free, I should say, explanations.

[00:38:18] And so, he says, you know, skeptics and governments own framing treat reported UFOs as ambiguous phenomena that could still involve drones, balloons, sensor artifacts, optical effects, classified terrestrial systems, or incomplete data.

[00:38:35] And so, I think the bottom line is, as you can say, still, we're not getting anything that would be like a smoking gun on UAPs or UFOs. But, I thought just as we wind down, I might just remind you of the interview we did with Derek Werfel, because his book was entitled UFOs and God.

[00:38:59] And, he reminds us at the very outset in the book that throughout history, nearly every culture, almost every religion, has recognized that humans share the world with supernatural beings that, by definition, are not subject to the laws of physics. But, now, we live in a world where the dominant worldview is secular naturalism. That is, that we believe that there is no supernatural.

[00:39:27] And so, if we do identify UFOs or space aliens or anything, they must be physical beings from another part of the galaxy who have traveled here. But, then he points out some obvious limitations. This book goes into it. A previous book that I've mentioned before, was it Lights in the Sky and Little Green Men, point out that if you just talk with some astrophysicists, some of whom have been on this program,

[00:39:57] they've concluded, first of all, that our planet is unique in its ability to support advanced intelligent life. Moreover, if that's not enough, the distances between us and just even the next star, much less other parts of the galaxy or other galaxies, we live in a universe that's at least,

[00:40:22] and this is just an estimate, 100 billion life years wide, and is just too far away for any kind of contact. We have radio telescopes that have been looking for contact and not finding those. So, again, in our interview that I did with Derek Werfel, he mentioned that some UFO investigators, and he does go into that in one of the chapters,

[00:40:46] do believe that what we may be dealing with in some of these phenomenon are interdimensional beings. Because why? Well, they violate the law of physics, and they appear and then instantaneously disappear as if they're in another dimension. Well, that's when he says, shouldn't we assume when we are dealing with some of these that cannot be explained in terms of drones or optical illusions or birds or whatever,

[00:41:14] our planes assume that these are not intergalactic travelers, but instead are angels. And then, of course, then he has a whole chapter on spiritual warfare. Why? Well, it turns out that the few individuals we can do interviews with that have had alien contact say these beings tell them telepathically that there's no personal God, that there is merely an impersonal God force in the universe, and really they even deny the existence of sin and thus the need for a savior.

[00:41:45] Okay, that sounds like a spiritual deception, doesn't it? So, again, you can read the book, 350 pages of not only technical information, but a fair amount of theological insight in 13 chapters, which I think is just to help you maybe think through some of the kinds of conversations that we've had. Whenever we get into UFOs or UAPs, people always say, do you think it has some connection to end times prophecy? And I said, I think so.

[00:42:13] So, again, I'm not trying to promote the book, but I would mention that it's a thicker version of a very similar book that I've mentioned in the past, UFOs and God. God, since the documentary is out and since the book's coming out next week, I thought you might like to know about that. And if you'd like to know a little bit more about why there are people that aren't convinced that all these tranches of revelations from the Defense Department aren't really all that they were cracked up to be,

[00:42:43] then you can read this piece by Andrew Follett. Tomorrow we'll get into all sorts of other issues. We're going to be talking about a really good movie that you will appreciate. I also want to get into Woke 1 and Woke 2, which is kind of the designation Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has. And so I encourage you to look forward to joining us tomorrow. Before I say goodbye, let me thank again Megan for engineering the program, Steve for producing the program.

[00:43:11] See you back here tomorrow, right here on Point of View. It almost seems like we live in a different world from many people in positions of authority. They say men can be women and women men. People are prosecuted differently or not at all, depending on their politics. Criminals are more valued and rewarded than law-abiding citizens. It's so overwhelming, so demoralizing. You feel like giving up. But we can't. We shouldn't.

[00:43:40] We must not. As Winston Churchill said to Britain in the darkest days of World War II, never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. And that's what we say to you today. This is not a time to give in, but to step up and join Point of View in providing clarity in the chaos.

[00:44:06] We can't do it alone, but together, with God's help, we will overcome the darkness. Invest in biblical clarity today at pointofview.net or call 1-800-347-5151. Point of View is produced by Point of View Ministries.