Transcript of Dr. Steven Greer's Interview
on Coast to Coast AM Radio with George Noory

April 4/5, 2005

[continued after the long break]

George Noory (GN): A few months ago, Steven, I had former Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell on whom you know, and I've got to tell you, I was just thrilled with what he said when I asked him if he thought we were being visited and he says, "Evidence seems to prove that we have been."

Steven Greer (SG): Right.

GN: And, you know, when you hear things and again, you've talked to a lot of government whistleblowers and witnesses, but when you hear something from a person who walked on the moon that you have respect for, I mean, you've just got to stop and say "You know, there's got to be something to this!" And it's amazing that the skeptics are so convinced that there's nothing going on. I think one of their problems is that they're looking at our technology today and they can't figure out how they [the ETs] could go so many trillions and trillions of miles to get here and they're not thinking of it in terms of , like you are, you know, going through different kinds of use of physics.

SG:Well, I don't even think that they're than naive. Some of them are, many of them are simply corrupt. I will remind people of the famous Condon Report that closed Project Blue Book. We have documents from the CIA that were released to us after I briefed President Clinton's first CIA director, James Woolsey, that name Dr. Condon and the University of Colorado as a paid CIA operative and so what you find out if you look historically, the same thing is true of Dr. Donald Menzel. We also have it on very good source that Carl Sagan was such a paid disinformation debunker. Many of these people are not just naive and don't understand the physics, they are actively on the payroll of some shadowy operation to go out there and make like honest scientists when they are actually again defrauding the American people.

GN:You know, the FDA came out with a report finally, because they were pushed, about some of their own researchers and people who have conducted studies of pharmaceuticals and they found that a great many of them have been on the payroll of the pharmaceutical companies, or they have been consultants to the pharmaceutical companys, looking at, studying and making reports to the FDA on the very drugs that these same companies are producing.

SG: Correct.

GN: A tremendous conflict of interest and I would guess, then, that the same thing is true in the UFO field.

SG: Right, and I think it's true in spades and you have to wonder, I mean, can people like Seth Shostak of SETI really be so dense that they can't look at the evidence and they always say, "Well, where's the physical evidence?" Well, there's only like four thousand landing trace cases. You know, Admiral Lord Hill Norton and I talked about the physical evidence collected when one of these objects landed at Bentwaters up in England in the 1980's. There are thousands of cases like that. There's hard evidence. There's photographic evidence. There are radar tapes. They'll also say "Where are the radars? If these things are real objects, why aren't they on radar?" The third highest ranking person at the FAA during the Reagan years is one of our witnesses who took, when he retired, radar tapes that the CIA thought they had confiscated in a secret meeting with him that shows this UFO moving around this 747 over the skies of Alaska. I have this stuff. We tried to give it to Peter Jennings. We've given it to these other people and you have to say, "Look, are you really that unable to digest data and read the King's English? Or are you really on someone's payroll?" I mean, you know, these people can't be that dumb.

GN: A friend of mine who used to be a reporter for a local station in St. Louis years ago was called up to Elsbury, Missouri on a UFO situation where residents there saw all kinds of lights and possible landings. The next morning, Steven, there was a huge round circle burned out. Cows were walking around it and there was a dead cow right in the middle, and then he told me one thing that I'll never forget. He said, "George, I saw a tree near this what I thought was a landing spot. The whole side of it was scorched as if some flame had hit it, and etched in and burned into the tree must have been thousands and thousands of dead flies!" Now you know this just doesn't happen naturally.

SG: Right, right. You know, there are so many cases like this and this is one of the problems is that they'll state all their theories as "Can you give me a piece of a black hole?" They've never measured a black hole, you know. The fact that I can't flop a dead ET on the table for them, they'll say that "See? They don't exist!" I'm going, "This is ridiculous!" It's double standard, it's junk science. There's plenty of good science that supports this. But one point you make is important in terms of the paradigm. I think that we have to begin to look at this not so anthropocentrically. What I mean by that is that this is 21st Century Earth. If we're dealing with civilizations that are hundreds of thousands or millions of years technologically more developed than we are, every manifestation of their technology would look magical to us, just as if we went back five thousand years and showed primitive tribespeople cell phones and flashlights. I think that we have to understand that the technology isn't at its apex on Planet Earth as it is represented throughout the universe and that the ability to make the universe -physical universe - verysmall, through the ability of what I call this sort of phase transition from the three dimensional material object into these, what some people call, "interdimensional". I don't call them that, I call them a finer fabric of the structure of reality, that it can be accessed and I think that this is what we're observing and in fact, many of the military people I've dealt with have seen solid materialized objects that then morph into something that looks almost like an energetic plasma, almost like a ghost, and then it moves off slowly and then vanishes into space.

GN: Then it's gone.

SG: So you have these things that are obviously three dimensional material morphing over into these other forms of energy and stuff that we haven't quite quantified except in our covert programs. Now, it's also important to understand that we have witnesses who were, as far back as the 1950's, were in facilities run by U.S. and Canadian governments that had the ability (it sounds like Star Trek) where they were able to literally (quote) "dematerialize" a solid object and have it reappear in another room under controlled electronic systems in 1953. I was not a twinkle in my father's eye at that point. So, you know, you hear this sort of thing from more than one very credible military or ex-military guy and you know, you have to go, "There's a lot of stuff going on out there and that we have -" and this brings up this other question. If we have these sort of experiments that have been going on for over fifty or sixty years, why are we still burning oil and coal? And why are we destroying our biosphere? And why are we in Oil War number whatever in Iraq? I mean, the whole situation on this planet is an artificial contrivance by people who want to keep a centralized, transnational lock on the power system. It has nothing to do with what is extant within these classified projects and I think it's very important for your listeners to understand that even though what we're doing at SEAS (this sort of energy startup research group), what we're doing is primitive by comparison. We have to begin to say, "Look. Isn't it time for us to say, if these guys won't let this stuff out of a black box, don't we need to pull together, pool our resources together, find the scientists who are out there and begin to make our own versions of these things."

GN: I'm beginning...

SG: I think we can do it. I think we can, and we must!

GN: I'm beginning to see the picture of the dots connected by you, which it took me a long time to see, quite frankly, Steven.

SG: Right.

GN: Because, I couldn't understand why there wasn't disclosure. I couldn't understand - What's the big deal? Just come and tell us we've been visited, we've been visited since the beginning of this planet.

SG: Right.

GN:...and there's life out there, and everything's great, and let's go find them, and let's build spaceships, and then all of a sudden you start talking about alternative energy and it dawned on me that if they disclose that they know about these craft or these forms of energy that they've used in order to get here...

SG: Right.

GN: then the American people and this world would start saying, "Well, why don't you create it for us?"


GN: And that's where the big oil companies and these other organizations that are just continuing to sap us, that's where they have the problem, so I think -

SG: That's right, and you know - and interestingly, Thomas Jefferson, who's buried right down the road from my home here (I live right near Monticello in Virginia) said, and warned that when the United States was first being founded, that the unchecked powers of large corporations could destroy our democracy, and I think that (I am NOT anti-corporate or anti-business at all, I am anti-corruption, however) and I think that's what Catherine Austin Fitts will talk about it if you ask her, and what we're really talking about is the world's largest RICO (Racketeering Influence Corrupt Organization) and it's in our government and it's in corporate and it's in financial sectors and it is, of course, damaging our society greatly, if not to mention our biosphere.

GN: Oh, sure, here we are with oil now at around $58 a barrel and they say because there's an increased demand. Come on! I mean, you know, we're using oil and we shouldn't, but the point is are we using, Steven, that much more to push it up to $58 a barrel where it was around thirty-something a year ago?

SGWell, think all of these markets are manipulated, although there are some fundamentals that are real and that is for example, China moving into the commodities markets whether it's oil or steel or copper or cement! I think you have pressures and I think this is why, all the way back in the early nineties when we first started having discussions with people like Laurence Rockefeller and President Clinton's people that we said, "Look, this is a freight train headed down our direction. We have got to anticipate it, make some changes and bring this stuff out. But no one had the courage to do it, and I think that what we have concluded over the last decade is that WE THE PEOPLE are going to have to form our own energy research effort and bring this out. We're going to have to do our own disclosure. The government is not going to do it for us, or if they do, it'll be too damn late. I think that we have to take responsibility for this. This is why I gave up my medical career to pursue these things and I think that we really have to take responsibility for our planet and our future and create the good future that is possible for us. It isn't going to be done by itself.

GN: Let's talk a little bit about why we can't have an energy X-Prize. I mean, already now, we're getting the privatization of space. It works ...

SG: Right.

GN: Burt Rutan is doing his thing. Why can't we do the same thing for energy?

SG: Well, I think we probably could. The problem is that, A: Who's going to fund it, and B: Who's going to support and protect the inventors who work on this? I think that, for example, we have identified at SEAS at least a dozen solid, proof-of-principal technologies. One of them, for example, derives hydrogen very inexpensively from water and a few catalysts so that you could have free hydrogen out of water, and we're not talking electrolysis or anything expensive. But these are things that are in their early stages. They need to be developed further. There's really no funding for that. We have funded what we've done really out of the back pockets of a handful of our people, and the question is, you know, the billions of dollars going into - from the public coffers - into coal and oil and hydrogen research, why isn't any of it really going into this new energy field of advanced electromagnetic generators, electrogravitic systems? I know a man right now who has a very well-developed mathematical and physical proof-of-principal model for anti-gravity, but we're having a hard time finding anyone to put the funds up to bring it to the next stage of development. So, what I'm saying to people is that these things exist, but who's going to fund it? When you end up -- I've met with people for example, from Senator Byrd's office and other offices, even in the last year or so, and what they'll say is, "Well, you know, it would rock the boat too much. I'm not sure that the Senator would want to pursue that." Of course, it would replace the need for coal!

GN: Exactly.

SG: Or if you're from an oil state, Oil! So I think that it's going to take people coming together realizing that we have to pool our resources and our research and I will still say, if there's someone sitting out there in their basement or garage with something that genuinely is creating a lot of zero point energy, and I don't mean milliwatts, but hundreds of watts to a kilowatt or two, and they want to see that get out to the public, our group can do it. But we're still searching for that one that is that far along. The ones that we have seen are not far enough along to, I think, win what you would call an X-Prize. Actually, for awhile, we had something called a Z-Prize for this same purpose. But none of the things we found met that criteria except things that had already been corrupted and suppressed. You know, Dr. Bearden and I talked extensively about this. There were things such as the Kawai motor and other things that existed in the eighties and the corrupt enterprises bought them up, shelved them, threatened the inventors, and took them out of public circulation. So, you know, we're going to need to pool our resources and also stand together in a united front to get these things out there.

GN: Toshiba last week announced that for a hybrid engine for a car they've now invented a new lithium battery that recharges in minutes instead of hours ...

SG: Right.

GN: ...and they thing that's going to revolutionize things. At least, there are some companies out there going in the right direction, aren't there?

SG: Yes, there are and in fact, there are some inventors we're dealing with - I mentioned this hydrogen development and I think this gentleman who's the inventor who sent you an e-mail that he copied to me tonight. I don't know if you read it. But what's interesting is that there are significant potential breakthroughs that are on the horizon. The question is, what will happen to them? If there isn't large financial or government support, what we're going to have to do is put them on Coast to Coast, or put them out in front of five, or ten, or fifteen million people and say, "All right, now you guys need to support this." I don't know if we have to do an IPO or what we do, but we're going to have to say the people are going to have to support it. I'm very skeptical that large corporations like General Motors or Exxon or the U.S. Government are actually ever going to do anything meaningful on this issue.

GN: Well, one of the reasons...

SG: I think they'd have to step on too many of their own toes to do it.

GN: I also don't know what your take is on peak oil, Steven, but I don't believe it. I think it's contrived. I think the oil companies are trying to create fear that we're running out of oil, therefore they've got to do what they've go to do. I think this planet probably has an abundance of oil, unfortunately, in that it could last thousands of years!

SG: Yes, it could last thousands of years being used for something other than energy. The problem is and I'll tell you (I've never talked about this before), I have met with folks within that sector dealing with intelligence and what you said is true. There's a lot more oil than people think, but if we use it at the rate we're going to need to use it, to let our whole six billion people civilization advance, the damage to the biosphere will be ten times worse than what we're seeing now.

GN: Sure.

SG: There's an exponential decay.

GN: Of course, what's happening...

SG: It's happening already in China. We have huge dust clouds and smoke clouds in the Pacific Northwest because of the smokestacks and junk coming out of China. So, you know, the planet is a small place when push comes to shove and even if you could pump all this stuff out of the ground and burn it at the rate that we could, and keep it cheap and plentiful, what's going to happen to Antarctica? What's going to happen to our biosphere? I think that - and yet, they also don't want to bring out these alternatives because once they're out of the box, they're going to take off very quickly, just like the internet, computers, and PC's and cellphones did. These sort of technologies, once they get some legs, man, they're going to run and then it's goodbye iil, goodbye coal, goodbye centralized wconomics because, when you can generate free energy from the zero point field out of your own house for manufacturing clean water, electricity, transportation, it would be a whole new world, a completely different world.

GN: A little more than a week ago, I was in Hawaii for a show and then a speech, and then I was back home again. It all took about two and a half days...

SG: Right.

GN: And I got there, Steven, and I went "That's it? That's the trip? And you know, it felt like, you know it does on a map, it looks like it's halfway around the world and you're right, it's a small planet! And so what if these six billion people are reduced to five hundred million? Then they have something.

SG: Right, and I think there are folks who have this sort of eschatological solution to the human problem, I'm sort of putting the Third Reich words - phraseology - here, but there's some really strange characters who are out there in this power structure that Catherine Austin Fitts and I and others have uncovered, but I think that what we also have to say is that there are some very good people. You know, I'm reminded of Monsignor Balducci when I was interviewing him overlooking St. Peter's Basilica, and after I interviewed him and he was talking very affirmatively about the fact that there is life in the universe and we're all children of God and had a very positive take on all of this, off-camera, he pulled me aside and he said, "You know, Dr. Greer, I could not be saying this to you unless Papa (referring to the Pope that just passed away) wanted me to tell you that."

GN: That is absolutely true, Steven, You're always...

SG: A very interesting story.

GN: You're always welcome on Coast to Coast, my friend.

SG: Thank you. It's great speaking with you.

GN: Two websites:, and They're both linked up with Dr. Steven Greer's name under tonight's guest on Coast to Coast A.M. Now, when we come right back, Catherine Austin Fitts as we talk about black ops, trillions of dollars over the years. What do they use it for? We'll be back in a moment.

[commercial break which concludes Steven Greer's portion of the program]

Click here to go back to Part 1.

More Transcripts