Legit whistleblower testimony. Congressional hearings. Military-affirmed UAP footage. What more do skeptics need to believe that alien disclosure is happening right now? In the first half of this episode, guest host Jeremy Vaeni asks Mick West, author of Escaping The Rabbit Hole: How To Debunk Conspiracy Theories Using Facts, Logic, and Respect, those questions and many more. Then, for subscribers, Vaeni tries to take Mick down a rabbit hole of his own… but will he follow?
To order Escaping The Rabbit Hole, please click here.
And To keep up with Mick’s latest work, please visit his site: https://www.metabunk.org
Dreamland Video podcast
To watch the FREE video version on YouTube, click here.

Subscribers, to watch the subscriber version of the video, first log in then click on Dreamland Subscriber-Only Video Podcast link.


  1. This show was, hmm, how shall I put it, unexpected on Dreamland (see, I am trying to follow the guest’s advice and write respectfully). The other good thing he said is that the press should dig more into the UFO topic even though some parts of it look silly.
    At least, now we know that the skeptics do not have any good argument.

  2. I get the impression, that no amount of information would be enough, for a die-hard skeptic, to acknowledge that an object or phenomenon is of alien / extraterrestrial, or extradimentional origin.

    What an internally mundane world they live in.

  3. I felt sure that when I logged in tonight there would be only a few comments, considering the subject. Where is Whitley lately?
    I do understand inviting a host guest on occassion but it seems that it’s happening much too often of late and this is NOT what I pay a monthly subscription for.
    I look forward to the show with anticipation and high expectations each Friday. I settle in with my headphones on so I don’t disturb my husband, wo retires much earlier than I, and look forward to another fascinating guest led by Whitley, who knows how and features subjects I’m actually interested in. Please Whitley.. do better. Please…

    1. One thing I do is seek diverse view points—on everything, including news, politics, culture, you name it. I especially want to see view points that differ from my own. I’m a big picture person, and I not only want to be aware of different view points, but seek to understand why people see things the way that they do. Yes, I do some eye-rolling, but I occasionally learn something new that I had never considered.

      I’ll give an example: When I worked in public health I worked in an area that was the source of divisiveness. I worked with vaccines. The first few months working with vaccines, I sought out as much as I could learn about them, the good, the bad, the lies, and misconceptions. My boss wanted to know why I was wasting time learning all of that, and saw it as negativity. I let her know that I already knew the problems I would face from deniers, especially after she told me that vaccine deniers must not care for their children. I knew better, and informed her that if they didn’t care about their kids, they wouldn’t question a thing. I also told her that whether I agreed with them or not, I needed to find ways to better communicate with them. While I didn’t convert some of these people, I treated them with respect, got some to really listen to the benefits of vaccine for themselves and their children, and even changed some minds by keeping to the facts.

      We live in a country where facts have taken a backseat in just about every area of our lives, from politics, to science and medicine. I have been an experiencer of all kinds of weird ‘stuff’ since I was a kid. I also want to know as much as I can about the possibilities of why and how these things have happened to me. I don’t have an agenda.

      I was on Twitter for many years and followed Mick, along with Jeremy, Whitey, and others. The truth is often not pretty, interesting, or convenient to belief. I have book shelves full of science books, along with the books by Whitley, Vallee, and many others. We all know that some things that once had a ‘scientific’ basis in the past, now are viewed differently by science, plus we don’t know what we don’t know. I don’t agree with everything that Mick says, because I get that reality is much stranger than we yet understand, but I respect that he is at least attempting to learn what he can, in a reasonable way. He might change his tune if he himself had a mind-bending experience that could not be explained by science, but that’s up to the Universe to deliver that to him, and it is up to him to decide how he will deal with it or blow it off as just something weird that happened, attaching no meaning to it.

      Jeremy, thanks for interviewing Mick. We need skeptics, and he is respectful, doesn’t engage in name-calling, and is an important part of this crazy-quilt reality that some of us experience, and should continue to question. It’s the right thing to do.

    2. Well, I like a change now and again. I enjoy Jeremy and I can see that his style is changing and, frankly, I find this exciting.

      He’s got balls. Taking the reins to ease the pressure on Mr Strieber is no small task and so I humbly bow to Jeremy and offer a tip of the hat (not that I wear one..)

      Routine is fine. Comfort and safety zones are fine. They don’t tend to stiffen a spine or sharpen perception though and, believe me, I love my itsy bitsy little lazy zones.

      Take today for example; it’s a bank holiday weekend here in the UK, and has been very wet and showery. My grass was getting untidy and that bothers me. So, in between showers today, I decided to mow the lawn and trim the hedges.

      Yeah, I have a routine, do it in a certain way, get it done then sit back and pour a glass of wine and chill. Deciding to do things differently, I mowed the lawn naked.

      Three taserings later and having explained to certain authorities that I identify as a lawn mowing naked scarecow, I hitched a lift home on a hay wagon and dashed up my driveway clutching a handful of hay to protect my modesty.

      Sitting back indoors, I reflected on changes of routine and, now, I can safely say, they are healthy. One must, though, carefully consider things before rushing to judgement, which is precisely what I advise with most comfort zones.

      Comfort can be a prison.


    3. It happens once a month, not “more and more.” It’s been part of Dreamland since William Henry and then Jim Marrs were co-hosts back in the 2002s.

    4. Whitley has switched to doing 3 to 4 DLs per month with the last one taken by Jeremy, giving Whitley an important monthly break for doing other equally (to him) important things. I think this episode is an important one, since we shouldn’t only view things from our side of the fence but also look at the opposing view. It is after all one of the biggest problems with social media, that it isolates us in our own world view bubbles. It wasn’t easy for me to listen to this guest either, but it was interesting! Thanks Jeremy, and glad you weren’t caught in the Hawaiian fire disaster!

  4. Good interview.

    This is an important stance to take in this area. If we keep asking questions, keep an open mind and do everything we can to stay objective then we have a real chance to see deeper into what may be behind intrusions into our reality.

    I frequently remind myself of the flying wooden junk wood box with Christmas tree type lights that Mr and Mrs Strieber saw fly over. The unlikely nature of the ‘craft’ (or being) that showed itself suggests that other minds can think in familiar ways. Why did it look so unlikely a ‘craft’? Was its wackiness a reveal?

    I’m listening to this discussion again later when I mow my lawn, in between bank holiday weekend showers and I know that the grounding that this discussion gives me may very well be what I need right now.


    1. The Christmas tree observation is certainly surprising.
      Also, it would be surely be dismissed by by the guest for its silliness. (Skinwalker ranch grade, or worse!) And it does not justify the insinuations that pilots cannot see the difference between an insect and a flying craft; or that people who think they work on reverse engineering of crafts of non-human origin are actually working on drones from China or wherever. But I understand that one might try a different point of view once in a while.

      1. Yes, for example, the TicTac FLIR footage. It’s not showing an object, it’s actually demonstrating a field effect of ‘something’. I have not seen evidence of a physical object in those videos, rather I see emanations caught by sensors.

        To the best of my knowledge neither I nor anyone else has actually seen footage of what the aircrew saw with their own eyes, if they did see anything with the naked eye. If they only snapped it electronically then was this pure luck or not?

        Whom did the reveal serve? Is the sky full of living objects invisible to the eye?

        Could a living being have been radiating those fields? I have an opinion but it’s not worth two cents and so I will patiently observe and not rush to judgement.


        1. “It’s not showing an object, it’s actually demonstrating a field effect of ‘something’. ”

          Let’s talk ‘fields’…and my brain has taken another direction with that one. It’s a bit off topic, but…

          Consciousness is something that so many have attempted to define, but maybe even it occurs in ways that people haven’t thought about. I have thought for a long time that consciousness is not about individuals at all, but is itself a ‘field’, and everything taps into it at various levels that are part of it. In higher levels (not the highest) it could manifest things in the physical, depending upon the observer(s).

          This poetry by Rumi has stuck with me for a long time, and as I’ve gotten older, it makes so much sense about—pretty much everything…

          Out beyond ideas of wrong-doing and right-doing,
          There is a field. I’ll meet you there.
          When the soul lies down in that grass,
          The world is too full to talk about.
          Ideas, language, even the phrase each other
          Doesn’t make any sense.

          1. I define consciousness as sensing and responding to changes in the environment. Therefore, everything is conscious, or consciousness is everywhere, or something like that. Either way, we are more filters or transducers of consciousness than we are producers of it, though complexity might add something. I’m open to changes and discussion.
            The standard model with fields for each elementary particle is among the most accurately and well tested models/hypotheses around. Virtual particles are and are not everywhere.
            I used to think of protons as quarks held together by gluons, but it may be gluons pulling quarks out of infinite virtual quarks, or something else.
            Everything we observe comes down to quantum events involving collapse of probabilistic wave functions into what we experience. What makes dark matter invisible to photons? Or, rather, how do elementary particles, like photons and eye receptor electrons, interact on the quantum scale?
            Each particle vibrates in their own field, and physics has yet to describe how vibrations interact among fields. There seems to be some kind of sensing or awareness going on across scales.
            Along with a consciousness field comes universal knowledge, AFAICT, though probabilities and stochasticity might keep events unpredictible and free will still viable.
            Here is a proton reference.

      2. Apparently, according to a pilot, after a close fly-by of one of the anomous objects present during a ‘tic-tac’ incident, it was described as a metalic cube inside a transparent sphere. Coupled with RADAR evidence of their flight characteristics, jamming capabilities (which would be classed as hostile during an interaction with a known enemy), seeming ability to be aware of pre-planned rendezvous points and no visible means or evidence of propulsion…. then I genuinely think it disrespectful to the pilot(s) and RADAR engineers to suggest that these objects have a mundane explanation, like balloons or Chinese drones. Many skeptics will narrow in on specifics and offer a ‘case closed’ verdict but none can explain the evidence in its entirety. Also, to say that if an object cannot be explained, then there is just ‘not enough data’, seems a very easy, dismissive way out.

        An analogy might be a religious text…it may contain multiple truths, indeed many principles to live by…but taken to extremes and viewed as the only true path, could at best be described as closed-minded… at worst potentially damaging.

        A certain degree of healthy skepticism is a good thing, as long as the mind is still open to the possibility of other realities, despite the lack of evidence any more concrete than subjective experience.

        1. Multiple pilots reported cubes inside 15 foot transparent spheres, as I recall from the recent congressional testimony. So many were reported that UAPs were included in Navy pilot daily briefings along the East Coast. At least one in involved such an object being stationary at 20000 feet in a major flight corridor.

    2. I don’t remember all the details or exact date, but I can relate to the ‘Christmas tree type lights’ for some odd reasons that tie in to Whitley’s major experience at the cabin—on December 26, 1985. His even recounting in ‘Communion’ about eating leftovers from Christmas dinner that night is there too. Christmas is a major holiday, with lots of colorful lights. So a weird box flying around with Christmas tree lights might be an attempt at humor. I tend to pay a lot of attention to these things because…my birthday is December 26th (purely coincidence)….Just like the major event exactly 5 years previously in Rendlesham Forest, December 26, 1980. The Rendlesham Forest incident(s) also had an element of time travel, oddly enough, which I have also wondered about in relation to Whitley’s experience. Once again, maybe purely coincidence, but it has crossed my mind.

      1. …thanks for mentioning the Dec. 26th coincidence and the time travel connection. This is food for thought.
        …:::tippin’ my hat:::…

      2. December 26th, celebrated as Saint Stephen’s day in the UK amongst other countries. Also known as Boxing Day, traditionally a time for gift-giving. He is the patron saint of Masons.

        I don’t know about you Cosmic but there seems to be a connection there?…The gift-giving (Whitley’s experiences…could they be classed as a gift? / Rendlesham), and the Masons, having an arcane tradition filled with symbolism, and the Visitors, whose mode of communication seems heavy with it.

      3. Sherbet, I agree. Funny you mention Boxing Day, because I had a conversation with another UC subscriber yesterday and I mentioned Boxing Day. (When your birthday is the day after Christmas, you take in what you can, because Baby Jesus is a hard act to follow!) I am already in the process of looking into details of both events, and tracing down other events on or near that date ( Say, a 3-day window around December 25th. )

  5. I am confused by the statement it started at Skinwalker ranch? This is based on what evidence? The book ‘Hunt for Skinwalker’ has a 2005 release date while Project Blue Book started in 1952: obviously the statement is a lie. ‘Skinwalkers at the Pentagon’ was an interesting book, but the governments interest in UFOs started long before that (Foo Fighters?). Also note that Bigelow’s research is not available to the public! Such divisive tactics are common debunking techniques, rather than logical skepticism.

    1. I think he had in mind the research reported in “Skinwalkers at the Pentagon”.

      1. Yes, but he made it seem like the whole government interest started there, which is a curve-ball tactic. From there he tried to debunk Skinwalker research and thus sidetrack the conversation.

  6. I’ve made no secret of not being particularly fond of Mr. Vaeni’s output in general but, other than a quibble about the characterization of Ross Coulthart and David Gorusch, I thought this interview was alright. It’s a good idea to engage those who we might consider ‘adversarial’ to the subject if only to reaffirm how superficial and cherry picked their much vaunted adherence to reason, logic and science actually is. West clearly considers the topic to be nonsense. He talks about ‘repeatability’ where the principle doesn’t even apply – the investigation of this subject is largely not experimental science. He talks about the ‘likelihood’ of certain things without really having a basis on which to determine a likelihood. He takes the most sketchy and sensationalistic people and investigations ( Steven Greer, Travis Taylor, the Skinwalker tv show) and presents them as representative of the entire field. He then says he’s willing to listen to people in the field even if they’re wrong – how noble! And all of it wrapped in a blanket of that aloof, passively arrogant demeanor that conveys this sense that they’re tolerantly indulging some child’s wild imaginings as they pat him on the head.

  7. This was certainly a surprise! Personally, I prefer to not refer to those trying to detract from the issue as “skeptics”, since the term implies that they’re just unsure of what they’re being presented with, rather than the disingenuous individuals that would rather distort the truth to promote their own beliefs.

    West, however, seems to be a proper skeptic: we’ve featured his work before, specifically a deep analysis of the Gimbal UAP video that illustrated that the object’s trajectory was impossible for anything built using conventional technology:


    Jeremy is definitely here to keep us challenged, as Von Hausenberg has already mentioned, and I hope he never changes in that regard. Personally, I look forward to his monthly shows!

    West brings up the question of why more journalists haven’t investigated David Grusch so far; to my count, no less than six individual civilian groups have carried out their own investigations, with varying degrees of depth. For reference, and in no particular order, they are:

    – Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal went as far as confirming Grusch’s story with his coworkers and the IC Inspector General:



    – Ross Coulthart worked with Grusch for a number of months before the story broke, although I haven’t heard him describe how deep his own investigation went.

    – The Washington Post at least started an investigation before Kean and Blumenthal had to switch to The Debrief for publication; although I can’t vouch for how far they went, it’s a forgone conclusion that they found nothing untoward.

    – The Debrief posted a series of three articles outlining their own due diligence:


    – Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp were approached by Grusch a year before the story broke:


    – Compass Rose Legal Group, as part of their representation of Grusch when presenting his two cases with the ICIG; to that end, the group’s senior partner and former ICIG, Charles McCullough, left the firm to represent Grusch personally after he was no longer eligible for their services.

    This isn’t counting the ICIG’s investigations into Grusch’s allegations, something they said was “credible and urgent” (see the second link after the Kean and Blumenthal entry), and whatever the individual Representatives and Senators that are working with him have discovered over the course of their endeavours.

    So far, the *only* investigation into Grusch that turned up any dirt was The Intercept’s Ken Klippenstein, and that only amounted to… Grusch receiving treatment for a PTSD-related emotional breakdown. Huh…


    If nobody minds me understating things, I’m getting the distinct impression that Grusch is the real deal.

    1. Thank you, that is more than the hearsay that West seemed to say is all that is available. We need to demand more information about Grusch’s allegations, not discount it because we are open to the possibility of inept Pentagon bureaucrats keeping too many secrets about weapons development.

  8. I do wish, however, that Jeremy would have pushed back more, to defend pilots/radar operators and their ability to know the difference between knowns like birds etc and UAPs, and the same throughout. He was agreeing so much i could hardly believe he’s an experiencer.

    1. I agree. The guest had the control and directed the conversation very cleverly.

      1. There were times I felt that way too, but I had the impression overall that Vaeni intended to sit back and let West present his perspective rather than trying to actually debate him – which as someone else mentioned would likely have been a waste and gotten mired in details. Vaeni did push back a bit in the final half hour, but by letting West talk so much, I thought he gave him a lot of rope. West seemed to get comfortable and in his expansiveness he was perhaps less careful than he would have been. His first few minutes impressed me with his level rhetoric about respect, but by the end I had the impression he doesn’t know what the word means.

        I’ve been enjoying Vaeni’s guest appearances. This was a hard one but I ultimately appreciated it. I was impressed that he reached for it!

  9. Thank you for the respectful interview exploring UAP, skepticism and investigations from varied perspectives. Jeremy covered well a variety of angles around possible events and explanations within the military and beyond.
    West made sure to let us know that he discounts events based on estimates of probability and partial review of evidence. That leads to writing off whistleblower testimony to congress in the face of corroborating documentation. Calls for further investigation and more knowledge were weak amidst belittling of experts while exploring possibilities. When aliens were mentioned as a possibility, it was often followed by he didn’t think it was.
    More investigation and open data are needed, not denial couched in philosophy of possibilities.

  10. West said that things in ufology will stay as they have since the 1940s until conclusive evidence is widely available. This fits right in with Them. If there are visitors, then there have been coverups. People could muck it up, but visitors might well have the power to leave no doubt across the globe at any time. Yet, here we are.

Leave a Reply