The New UAP Files: Nathaniel Gillis on Disclosure, High Strangeness & What's Next

So within John kills mythology, uh, We have this kind of idea that there exists a super spectrum from where all of these beings come from.

You combine and contrast that with hauntology and what we see with respect to apparitions that literally look like their flesh and blood.

For the past...

Eight or so years, I've been kind of beating that drum that maybe we're looking at something that's more singular than it is a multiplicity of intelligences.

And I think that is exactly what we're dealing with here.

I have been recently rereading and I even got it on Audible.

It's the Skinwalker at the Pentagon.

and

call

him keller her all about james lakatsky their research group and i've come to the conclusion this is just my current position that yes we are dealing with a singular species or a singular intelligence that is masquerading as various entities um the pathology is exactly what we have been discussing for a few years now If it doesn't get what it wants, it will haunt you.

And then out of nowhere, you start to see that perhaps there are no morologies.

That ufology as a field simply does not exist.

Hauntology as a field simply does not exist.

These are little boxes, the compartmentalization of the phenomena that we place in the corner of the room.

Meanwhile, we are being spoon-fed two different narratives with respect to disclosure.

One is that we have alien bodies.

Okay.

That's not the full width and breadth of the phenomenon.

Yep.

at all and people are getting caught up with that and proving well it is extraterrestrial because we have a b and c and they checked those boxes not realizing that with respect to james lakatsky all sap atip that they went into this research funded by the federal government and what they realized was that this is not just extraterrestrial if it even is at all and that what they what they were what they were noting and and documenting was not the hitchhiker effect that's a reframing of an older narrative an older motif in the phenomenon and that is the attachment and so what i'm warring up against in the field and it really does make me angry Because it's the reframing of an entire different taxonomy of beings underneath the umbrella of ET.

Even though people like Matthew Roberts, because he was initiated by a UFO, he does not have the proper taxonomy of beings to refer to in ufology.

So where does he pull from for context? And again, I'm not attacking anybody.

I'm just calling into question the narrative we are being given right now, because it is incomplete.

And I think it's incomplete on purpose.

Matthew Roberts witnesses a craft in the sky, goes home, and in his own words, is initiated by succubus.