Archived podcast for paid Subscribers only. Please login to access.

From 2003-2010 Dr. Ardy Sixkiller Clarke retraced the footsteps of John Lloyd Stephens and Frederick Catherwood–two prominent 19th century explorers of Mesoamerica. However, her search differed in one crucial way: she was searching for the truth behind tales of sky people, alien encounters, and the origin of the Maya civilization. What she found is nothing short of a breakthrough in ufological research. She shares some of her findings with us.

To find out more and to contact Ardy Clarke, please visit

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. Jeremy, I just wanted to tell
    Jeremy, I just wanted to tell you that I think you are doing a terrific job with The Experience! I’m so pleased that the Strieber’s have added your show. You’re doing great work. I listen every week.

    1. Thank you, kindly.
      Thank you, kindly.

  2. Very interesting show. The
    Very interesting show. The people she writes about staying with seem very spiritually advanced. I couldnt help but wonder who was “converting” who in that small village with all the western denomination missionaries.

    1. Great point! Earlier today I
      Great point! Earlier today I drove through a town on the Big Island of Hawaii that was a tiny strip of a street and yet it had no less than 5 different churches all on one side. What is that about?

      Why are there still missionaries here? I don’t get it.

      1. Being a rather cynical
        Being a rather cynical optomist, one of my first thoughts re their extreme interest in this place — is that they wish to uncover/learn the secrets this village may possess — whether it be oral history or actual artifact. imo, it seems that some locations are more valuable than others when it comes to crossing timelines/worlds. Don’t know if you are a fan of the Stargate series, but one of my favorite episodes is about the Nocs — a people perceived (at first glance) at being quite primitive — but, in truth, were far more advanced than any of their contemporaries. There is a train of thought that posits that many of the American indigenous peoples ‘ascended’ before the coming of the Spaniards to the Americas. I have come to the conclusion that the more dependent upon technology a civilization becomes — the more they lose their ability to interact/understand the universe as it really is. They also lose/forget? their ability/power to interact w/the universe in ways we are only beginning (as a civilization) to rediscover.

  3. Great show, and wow, great
    Great show, and wow, great book!

  4. Jeremy, I really enjoy your
    Jeremy, I really enjoy your interviews. I only wish (Sixkiller) would have let you finish some of the questions before she jumped to her own conclusions. She was half listening in my opinion and not really hearing. Thanks for the last 10 minutes, this did explain some things.

    As mentioned above in an earlier post by ‘AMnLR’ I too want to thank Anne and Whitley for the splendid addition of ‘The Experience’ to Unknown Country.

  5. This guest was in such a
    This guest was in such a defensive state that she bordered on being confrontational. I can understand that people who choose to speak publicly about high strangeness face ridicule in the form of “set up” or “attack” interviews; but she was ridiculous. The woman even went so far as to interrupt the host before he could finish asking his questions on several occasions. I don’t usually post negative comments, but I felt strongly enough about the way the guest handled herself to speak up.

    She also made it clear that her mind is closed to alternate possibilities regarding the nature and origin of the “visitors”. After all, if some south american people tell you some far out stories then you must assume that it’s all perfectly accurate…right?

  6. What an appalling situation
    What an appalling situation to be in: a friendly probing interviewer asks a “scientist” to look beyond the interpretations of her subjects. And she lashes out at him as if he were some kind of mind rapist. Jeremy, you handled it well. I’m less inclined to read her work, however, given the unprofessional bias she revealed in this interview. Yes, she has an obligation to report the facts as accurately as she can. No, she doesn’t have a right to snuff out interpretive queries. If her research can’t stand up to objective scrutiny, then it isn’t research. It’s dogma.

  7. The reason I think her work
    The reason I think her work is still solid is that the book is mainly stories told into a recorder from the experiencers, with no slant to it. At the end she gives her opinion of what this adds up to, but going along, some folks ask her what she thinks they saw and she rightly doesn’t answer, but turns it around and asks what do YOU think you saw?

    So, we’ve got these stories from a corner of the world we otherwise wouldn’t have and they are open to interpretation whether the researcher likes it or not. It’s definitely worth a read, in my opinion.

  8. wow I didn’t hear it in a
    wow I didn’t hear it in a negative way at ALL – I think she’s got a lot to say and she just wanted to get it in – fascinating interview, thanks

  9. This interview reminded me of
    This interview reminded me of one that William Henry did several years ago with Zechariah Sitchin! Mr. Sitchin was very defensive,and also acted like William was attempting to steal his ideas. Kind of sad, but William handled it well, just as you did, Jeremy.

    While I feel that Ms. Clarke may have some interesting ideas to share, I must admit that she could have handled the interview with a lot more grace than she did.

    As for missionaries, my mother had a first cousin who was a missionary for the Church of Christ in, of all places, Halifax, Nova Scotia! We are talking back in the 1960’s. Even as a kid I couldn’t quite understand the need for missionaries in Canada!

  10. Jeremy,
    Another great


    Another great interview. I think the reason why there is an apparent misunderstanding is because you are approaching the subject matter from one direction and Dr. Clarke is approaching it from another one.

    The entire trickster theory seems to me like it originates as a method to answer the fundamental why paranormal phenomena occur. The approach you are taking is trying to find the fundamental principle and building it up to create the phenomena, e.g. the Visitors. The parallel in modern physics is quantum theory.

    Dr. Clarke’s approach is asking the witnesses, the direct participants, what they are experiencing. This approach is looking at the phenomena from the macro scale and trying to understand it and classify it from that perspective. The parallel in modern physics is Newtonian, or classical physics.

    Of course, the two approaches are explaining the same phenomena, but there are gaps in trying to get from the fundamental why to understanding why we see or experience what we are experiencing. Because we see what we see and treat it as the experience, we have come to accept that as the fundamental experience. When people report alien abduction or UFO sightings, they report what their senses report. However, the question why do the senses report seeing similar creatures or why people report similar experiences is a question related to trying to understand the phenomena from a fundamental level.

    For example, in physics, we understand, from Newton, that force equals mass times acceleration. We can use basic principles and we can fully model the behavior of objects around us. But ask any physicist what is a force and they will say “a push or a pull.” But what is really a push or a pull? Physicists don’t really understand what is going on. The Newtonian world view works well, except at certain limits of the very large and the very small. It is at those extremes where what we know breaks down.

    When paranormal researchers stay within the observable range of phenomena, specifics can be recorded and we can develop models or gain somewhat of an understanding of what is going on. We can begin to classify specifics. We need detailed reports to be able to obtain a complete model of what the paranormal is. But when we reach the limits or try to go beyond traditional theories, we have to ask tough questions. Thanks for asking those and helping to develop a better understanding of what the Experience really is.

  11. Nice analysis, Quantum
    Nice analysis, Quantum Johnny.

  12. Native people are right
    Native people are right brained and most scientists are more left brained.
    This is what I perceived as the difference and cause of some of the conflict in this interview.

  13. Thank you for your patience,
    Thank you for your patience, it was a great example & teaching.Keep up the good work.

  14. She said she believes the
    She said she believes the aliens are doing the same thing Europeans did to the natives, ie,
    wipe them out or replace them via hybridization…it sound like she had an agenda, and that agenda was to align her research to the prevailing theory of Jabcos et al, in order to lend it an air of authenticity, but for me it does the opposite.

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.