Dr Jason Lisle Interview

Welcome to the program ladies and gentlemen, my name is Justin Peters. I hope that you and your family are doing well today. I want to thank you very much for joining me in this program and I am really looking forward to this.

It is my special privilege to have dr. Jason Lyle on the program and I'm going to be interviewing him. About the flat earth movement. Yes, that is a thing. And also here lately in the last several weeks UFOs believe it or not have been very much in the news and I'm so I'm gonna ask him about his Impressions of that and what might really be going on.

But just as a brief introduction Dr. Jason Lyle is a Christian Astrophysicist and he is the founder of the biblical science Institute. He double majored in physics and astronomy. He has both a master's and a PhD in astrophysics at the University of Colorado in Boulder.

He's authored a number of books taking back astronomy stargazers guide to the night sky the ultimate proof of creation discerning truth understanding Genesis and also my most recent Acquisition of one of his books is understanding faith in an age of reason in which he deals with 400 thereabouts alleged Contradictions in the Bible and he explains why they are not in fact Contradictions.

So it's a very very helpful book. So Dr. Lyle, thank you very much for joining them joining us. It's an honor to have you. Thanks. Happy to happy to be on. Yeah, good deal. Well, um Jason if you would is okay, would you prefer to be called?

Dr. Lyle or Jason? Whatever you like. Okay. All right. All right. Well, um By the way, dear friends Dr. Lyle came to our church a couple of years ago Kootenai Community Church and did a conference for us and he is not only is he obviously very intelligent and very well read in his Field, but he's just a nice guy.

He really is very down-to-earth very accessible. Very nice guy. So it's a pleasure to have him on. So Dr. Lyle, if you would give us a little bit about a little background To yourself specifically your testimony how you came to faith in Christ and where you attend church now.

Okay, I was.

Fortunately, I was saved when I was very young. I'm grateful for that. My parents. It's interesting because I think my parents were not believers. At the time that they got married and when I was on my way they decided they wanted their son to be raised in a you know moral setting so they began attending church and hey the Lord saved them and and so then they raised me as a believer and they Taught me to trust in the Bible.

And even when I was young six or seven years old I I knew enough of the scriptures to know that I was a wicked sinner that I deserved death and hell. That Jesus is God and also man and that he'd He paid for my sins on the cross and if I repented and trusted them he'd save me.

And so I I asked the Lord to save me at that point and to be Lord of my life. And I believe that's when I was saved. I believe that's when the Lord got ahold of me and of course my theology has improved over the years.

But that we're sinners and and we need salvation therefore. So I have a very boring testimony and I'm very grateful for that because I've been able to avoid a lot of the pitfalls that a lot of people Encounter, you know.

Sometimes a lot of people have to hit rock bottom before they get saved and I'm just I'm grateful I was saved when I was young.

Yeah, okay, and. Where do you attend church now Jason?

So I'm here in Colorado Springs and I attend Hope Chapel of Colorado Springs. It's a it's a wonderful church. I'm a member there. I feel Privileged. It's a small church, but just great people there and great folks who love the Lord and have good theology.

There's good preaching on this on Sunday mornings, which I appreciate and in fact, they asked me to fill in. Last Sunday I preached the sermon there. So it's an honor to occasionally get to do that. So a really good church Hope Chapel Colorado Springs.

I highly recommend it if you're in the area.

Okay, excellent. Good deal. And Jason you are a Young earth. You believe you take a very literal interpretation of Genesis. As you should so young earth. You don't this Theistic evolution kind of try to compromise the Bible with what the prevailing view of science is.

Great. And and I yeah, I take that I take the Bible the same way that my Lord and Savior Jesus did. He took Genesis as literal history and sort of the Apostles and Paul refers back to the first man Adam and so on.

So yeah, I take it the same way my Lord my Lord does. I take Genesis a little history. It's written in that style. I do have articles and books even my book understanding Genesis. Which shows that if we're going to get to the author's intention, we really have to take Genesis as literal history.

There's no doubt that that Moses intended it to convey historical truth. It's just the way that it's that it's written. So I would reject the idea that it's an allegory or parable or whatever that does not fit the context.

Yes, indeed.

All right. Well Jason the two primary issues. I'd like to talk to you about the flat earth and the latest kind of interest in UFOs. Believe it or not. The flat earth view is a thing I am just amazed that we you know, we're living in a day and age in which information has never been more readily accessible.

I mean a quick Google search and you can come up with I mean just all kinds of information photos of earth and planets and all of that kind of stuff and yet there is a almost Counterintuitively to me a resurgence in the belief that the earth is flat.

How is this a thing and are you surprised this is a thing.

I. It is a little surprising it's disappointing to me it shows an extreme lack of discernment in our society in general which. Frankly these days. I know these days. I'm no longer surprised when I first heard about it I thought there's no way that people can believe that do they not have any knowledge of astronomy because we've.

Human beings have known that the world is spherical for Thousands of years the Greeks knew that before the time of Christ when Jesus was in his earthly ministry people already knew the world was Round right the idea that that Christopher Columbus was out to prove that that's a myth.

People already knew the world was round at the time of Columbus. He just thought it'd be faster to go that way. Partly because he underestimated the size of the earth and also because of course they didn't know about the Americas at that point, right?

So Columbus wasn't out to prove the world was round. He just he was out to prove that it was faster to go the other way than to go. What he thought would be the longer way he was wrong, but I'm glad he made the trip.

Yeah, so it it it comes from a lack of discernment. I think people don't realize the good evidence that there is for a round earth. The way the fact that the ancients were able to discover that the fact that the Bible teaches that the world was round.

It does it doesn't it. The Bible's not an astronomy textbook. But it does reference the roundness of the earth in a couple of places in Job 26 10 the Bible Poetically describes God inscribing a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness.

And that boundary between light and darkness is what we astronomers call the Terminator. That's where light stops on the earth. That's where evening and morning are happening. And the only way that can be a circle especially on waters because the earth's surface is mostly water 71 water.

The only way that can be a circle is if the earth's spherical any other shape. It'll it could be a circle maybe at one time, but in other times it won't be so that's that's an example right there of Job knowing something about the spherical nature of the earth and Job we think was written around 2000 BC.

Which is interesting because the secularists at that time were the ones that taught the flat earth. It was those that were faithful to God who understood the shape of the earth. Apparently God had revealed that to them interestingly, or maybe they figured it out another way.

I don't know. But in any case we know that the Jews did have some divine insight into these issues. It wasn't until around 500 BC that Pythagoras began arguing that the world was Roughly spherical in shape and it's usually not considered until the time of Aristotle.

So that's what 100 150 years 200 years later. That the world is considered to have been proved to be round and one of the ways that Aristotle proved it Was by pointing out that in a lunar eclipse when the earth is between the Sun and the moon.

The shadow that the earth casts on the moon is always a circle. And it doesn't matter what the orientation is now if the earth were a flat disk that could only happen at Midnight because that's the only time it would project as a circle right any other time if the moon's lower in In the horizon, then that means the earth would be closer.

It would cast an elliptical shadow and if it was edge on it would it would cast just a line. And I actually had the opportunity to confirm this just a couple days ago on on Wednesday of this past week.

We had a lunar eclipse and this particular eclipse happened right around the time of sunrise just a little before sunrise. So the moon is setting in the West the Sun's rising in the east. Which means I know I'm between the two because I can see the moon's there the Sun is gonna rise over there.

So I know I'm in between the two and also because the orientation of the earth It would have if it were a disk it would be edge on. Which means the shadow it would have cast would have been a horizontal line and it wasn't it was a round shadow and I've got pictures to prove it.

That's just one example of many that that we know that the earth is round the way when ships come up over the sea. There the mast appears first and then the rest of the ship and so on and people knew that in ancient times.

And so Aristotle argued that that was a good evidence that the world was round by the time of erratus erratus themes he actually was able to Measure it measure the size of the earth that pretty accurately actually Using light and shadows and so on so it's people have been clever for quite a while.

They've been able to figure that out. And so I think that most people who believe in a flat earth if not, all of them are not aware of How these things came to be the fact that one the Bible teaches the world's round to the scientific evidence for it.

How that was discovered it's it's it's not a recent idea. The world's been known to be round for a very long time. Yeah.

Well, um speaking of what the Bible says about around earth that that's I'm glad you brought that up because many of the flat earthers sadly and embarrassingly profess to Base their belief on the Bible.

They profess to be Christians. They say oh, well, the Bible speaks of the four corners of the earth. Which that doesn't really help their argument any but they use the Bible as their support. So How what verses would they use to To try to support belief in a flat earth.

And and why is that erroneous?

The the verses that they use when you read them. You're like how does that even remotely support a flat earth? The one that you mentioned would be the one that I would think would be the go-to one because you could argue.

Well for you know corners, so it's but that would make it a square and you know what flat earthers don't believe that. They believe it's disc. So they can't use that verse. It doesn't have court. It doesn't literally have corners.

Yeah, so that one's not gonna work. I've heard them say well, you know, the Bible talks about the surface of the earth and the surface is always flat. I'm thinking no the Hebrew word for surface Pawnee, it means it's the same as the word for your face.

My face is not flat. In fact, it's closer to a sphere than it is a flat surface. So that doesn't work. And in fact, I dealt with a few of these actually wrote up an article a while back on our website Biblical Science Institute and I analyzed the the first ten or so Biblical proofs of a flat earth and none of them made any sense.

The only one that gets even close to it, there is the there's the Vision that the king had that Daniel had to interpret. Remember that where there's this well, there's more than one, but there's one vision where there's a there's a mountain that it can be seen from all the earth and.

So so, you know, but well that's a vision though that's not meant to be taken as literal. As literal narrative or the other one that they'll try to use is they'll say well Jesus When Satan took him to a tall mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world.

But in one gospel, it says in a moment in time indicating that this was was a vision. It wasn't that he was literally seeing all the earth because they say well. You know, there's a mountain therefore where you can see all the earth.

And then my question is if that's the case, where is this mountain and why can't I see it? Right, because if I mean if there's if there was literally a mountain there where you could see everywhere on earth.

Then everywhere on earth should be able to see that mountain, but you can't in the middle of Kansas. You don't see any mountains. I see nothing. So that doesn't make any sense so I again there there is no verse that says well.

You know the earth's flat or there are top verses that talk about, you know The pillars of the earth again in a kind of a poetic way, but that doesn't make it flat. That just means it's supported which of course it is the mantle supports the crust and so on.

So a lot of it has to do with very bad Eisegesis reading into the text based on your pre suppositions. Rather than then then exegeting the text and seeing what the text has to say because there aren't any verses in Scripture that really teach.

That's flat. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, and if the earth was flat theoretically all of us should be able to see Mount Everest. Yes, it's the tallest point on earth and I should be able to walk out my front door and see it right.

I don't.

Right, and you don't that's right. Yeah.

And isn't it true that the stars that you and I see the constellations that you and I see Gazing upward in the northern hemisphere is not what our friends down in Australia or The tip of Chile would see.

Correct, right, right.

And some are the same if they're close to this celestial equator. But the North Star you can't see the North Star from once you get significantly below the equator. The North Star is not exactly at the North Pole.

So you could see it on the equator at certain times and there's atmosphere. Refraction, but once you get down to Australia, you cannot see the North Star and the flat earthers will say well No, that's because it's what's too far away now.

Because because they imagine the stars are relatively close to the earth. But that won't work because you can see the constellations that that would point toward the North Star. You get a little bit south of the equator.

You can still see the Big Dipper you can use the two-pointer stars in the Big Dipper and you can see that the North Star is below the horizon and That that doesn't work on a flat earth. You can't in the current.

Picture of the flat earth and I should say that's what I'm that's what I'm doing when I when I refute their view I'm taking their current the current most accepted view among flat earthers, which is that the earth is a flat disk and The Sun and the moon rotate above that and the Sun casts a shadow kind of like a cone.

On the surface of the earth and moves around like that and there's you can explain some things that way. But not all things including the positions of the stars. You cannot account for them in that model.

Yeah, you can't account for the seasons.

Right eclipses as you were talking about earlier. It's just yeah, I'm just I'm just kind of amazed that we're even having this conversation. Not too infrequently I get emails from people Calling me a false teacher because I'm one of those ball earthers.

They say, you know, you're a ball earther.

Well, I guess. Yeah. Well, yeah, I am just as just as jobless. Yeah, this is exactly.

Well, let's deal with a couple. I've watched some of these videos and you can really get in some Go down some rabbit holes with some of these flatter, but they're all over YouTube. Globebusters is a flat earth YouTube channel, and I think it's got almost 63 ,000 subscribers and it's a Pretty popular thing, but a couple of their more popular arguments they'll say they say that if we were truly living on a on a sphere and This sphere is rotating it.

We the planet rotates at about a thousand miles per hour. Is that correct at the equator? Yep at the equator, right? And so they say if that were true then all of the lakes rivers and oceans would be flung off of the planet and they say.

And they have some Experiments that they set up and they'll like take a tennis ball and they'll dip it in water and they'll spin the tennis ball. And they'll show it in slow motion and you see the water spinning off of the tennis ball when it rotates really quickly.

And they say well the tennis ball isn't spinning anywhere near a thousand miles per hour and it's throwing the water off of it so if we were really rotating that quickly, then everything would just be flung off of the Planet into space.

So is that a valid argument? That's a very.

Bad analogy because it's it reveals an ignorance of physics. The the issue is not the velocity. The issue is the acceleration. You see in in one of the things that we understand now about physics is that an object in motion tends to remain in motion object at rest tends to remain at rest unless acted upon by an outside force and so in order to Know rotation is a change in velocity because you're changing the direction and you're constantly doing that.

And so when when you're doing it with Earth's oceans, for example, how long does it take to? Completely change the direction of the ocean from this way all the way around to that way. It takes about 12 hours.

So if they were to do that accurately with their tennis ball, it should they should put the water on it and take 12 hours. To turn it. Okay, because it's not the velocity. It's the acceleration. It's it's the the acceleration is what causes the the water to change direction.

That's the key. But the fact is I you know in an airplane I fly quite a bit you can if you drop a ball in airplane. It doesn't go flying back because I'm moving at 600 miles per hour from my vantage point.

It goes straight down. Now somebody watching the plane from outside would watch both me and the ball and they would say no the ball is following a Parabolic trajectory, but from my standpoint in the plane, it seems to fall straight down as if as if I weren't moving at all.

But I know better. I know that I am moving. It's no different on the surface of the earth. You drop something it doesn't go flying back. It moves with the earth because an object in motion tends to stay in motion.

And so that's true of the lakes and the oceans that motion that motion is changed because they're accelerated. And it's gravity that does that it's gravity that pulls them around keeps them fixed to the surface of the earth.

But if they really wanted to do a proper analogy. They should take the tennis ball and turn it. So that it makes a half a revolution in 12 hours and they would see the water does not go flying off. Yeah, exactly.

All right.

One of their other favorite lines of argumentation is the Bedford Canal experiment and I don't have the gentleman's name in front of me, but back in 1838 I believe This man in the United Kingdom Great Britain Got on the Bedford Canal I suppose or Bedford River and he wanted to test Whether or not the earth is really a sphere and so he got one of his friends to get in a boat with a mast Sticking up out of the boat a flag on it I think it was about three feet the flag was about three feet off the surface of the water and so he got in the canal with his telescope and This this canal is is in a straight line a number of miles long.

So this fella rode out six seven or eight miles and according to the The mathematics of it if he had really if the earth was truly Spherical after he had gone out six seven eight miles then the curvature of the earth should have completely hidden His little rowboat and the little flag and yet this man With his telescope could still see it could still see the boat and the flag even though he was he should have been hidden by the curvature of the earth, so.

Is that one is that a valid argument for the flat earthers? Well, it would be if it weren't for atmosphere. That's that's a good idea. That experiments a good idea, but we do need to keep in mind that Light can be bent and we know that we if you stick your hand underwater.

The reason your hand looks like it changes the angle like it's being bent sharply and you're wondering how do I how's my bone? Not broken is because when light Transfers from the water to the air it changes its direction a little bit.

Air can do that, too. We know this look down if you ever look down a road on a hot summer day. And it looks like the roads dancing around. The roads not really dancing around the the air is is changing the path of the light very slightly.

And what will cause that is temperature differences. Temperature differences in air will bend light. Especially if it has to travel over a distance of you know a mile or so it gets bent a little bit. So I'm not opposed to the the Bedford type experiments.

That's a good idea. But the only time where you can be assured that the light is not being bent is If there's no temperature differences between the water and the air so you have to pick the right day to do that experiment and if you do It will work it will reveal that at a certain distance the the mast is no longer visible.

I've done The equivalent of that experiment myself in Kansas, and this was a long time ago first time. We took a trip as a kid we took a trip out To Colorado and was we were going through Kansas I figured how you know from my position in this car how far ahead in the road can I see?

Because of the curvature of the earth and it's not very far. It's in terms of seeing something that's on the road now something sticking up then you can go further right? But it's something like a mile and a half.

It's not very far and sure enough you can't once cars get beyond a certain distance. You don't see him anymore because the curvature of the earth so I'm not opposed to that kind of experiment and it will reveal the roundness of the earth if you do it when the Temperature is stable and that's something that Danny Faulkner's written about in his book falling flat where he talks about that experiment.

But it's it's so it's temperature differences. That's that's so tricky. That's not an experiment that I would recommend. There are there are better ones. I mean I live in Colorado Top of Pikes Peak and I can see a certain distance To the edge of Colorado, maybe even a little bit into Kansas.

I can't see Ohio and it's because of the curvature of the earth you can only see so far because of the curvature of the earth and that that experiment is not quite as dependent on temperature differences because The angle is is a bit steeper.

So but there are experiments you can do that are not sensitive to temperature and I have listed some of those in that article that I wrote on the Biblical Science Institute website. If you go to our website and do a search for flat earth.

You'll find a couple articles and in the second one I wrote I showed some experiments you can do to test the curvature of the earth that do not depend on temperature.

Okay. Okay. I'm not yet read that article, but I'll put a link to it in the description below. Thanks. Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Um, and I'm in some people I don't mean to mock because some people I think are for whatever reason genuinely confused.

I had a gentleman that has emailed me a number of times and we've exchanged a few emails and he's he's really appreciative of. Of my teaching of John MacArthur's he listens to John MacArthur a lot and he's a he writes well, I mean.

But he thinks the earth is flat and for some reason he's got a blind spot and he's fallen into this into this deception. Even though I even pointed out to him speaking John MacArthur a couple years ago at the truth matters conference.

Jeff Williams an astronaut. Jeff Williams. Do you know him by the way? I do. Yeah, you do. Okay. Yeah, so.

He sent me his book one time and autographed it. So but I've had a number of conversations with Jeff. He's just a great guy. Yeah, he is he is.

So he's been up in the International Space Station. I think holds the record for the he did. It got broken recently. It got broken. Okay. Yeah, he was the.

American who'd spent the most time in space and then that recently a couple years ago got broken by somebody else. But okay, I was with him one month before that got broken. I said how long until that gets broken?

He said next month. Really? Yeah, but in fact, I actually had a conversation with him one time when he was on the space station. We skyped and that was cool because he's floating there. So I know he's not faking it.

It's pretty neat. Well, that's that's the thing and these people would say speaking of faking it. That it's all faked. The moon landing is faked. NASA is is fake the the space shuttle one guy that does flat-earth videos.

He said it's it's just a big balloon. Basically. It's like a bouncy house it's not real it goes up, but it doesn't go up into space and give us some some idea of the magnitude of The deception that people would have to that that that NASA and all these other space agencies Would have to force upon us to keep a secret like that.

I mean I how would. It just boggles my mind that that everything is is faked. Every person in every space agency would have to be in on this deception, right?

Yeah, and and you know, I've I've Jeff Williams. He took me on a personal tour of NASA in Houston, and it was one of the highlights of my life. It was a blast and I got to meet all these these wonderful people.

You know, these are these are not. These are not demon-possessed charlatans that are out the fullest. These are people that are going good science. NASA is very transparent in terms of. You can go and watch.

I've seen the space shuttle launch. I've seen it go into space. I've seen it go into orbit and cross over the horizon. So I knew I mean, I know it's in space. It's in orbit. I've seen it happen. It was a night launch.

So tonight launch you can watch it go all the way into orbit. So I've seen that with my own eyes. There's no doubt about that. I've seen the I've been inside mission control the Jeff is one of the advantages of knowing an astronaut.

Jeff was able to get us. He was he and a few others of us were he was leading us around there. We got to go inside mission control. The astronauts were in their downtime. So they said, okay. We can come in and just kind of be quiet and it was really cool.

I got to see the old mission control where they did the the moon landing. It's so they use a different building now released a different room. Anyway. The funny thing is it's it's not technologically, but it wasn't technologically possible to fake it.

And what I mean by that is if you look at some of the movies that they've done where they've tried to Put people on the moon. It it looks pretty fake it looks pretty fake and one of the reasons is it is very hard to simulate one-sixth gravity.

It's spatially in a large environment now. They can do it on that plane that there's a plane that they can use to simulate zero G. They can also simulate one-sixth G by taking you know by taking the plane out and then diving.

But only lasts like 30 seconds or so and then they have to come out of it. To simulate one-sixth G on a soundstage. You can't do it. If you slow down the camera motion, you can tell it looks like it's slowed down camera motion.

I've seen that there's that old series space 1999 where that takes place on the moon and when they're outside there. You know, they're fighting or something and they slow down the camera. But you can tell because the way other things move you can tell the cameras been slowed down and that's not.

We didn't have the technology to fake it back then now. We're very close to being able to do that now day the movies that come out like like today. They're pretty close to being able to where they can build a complete environment.

All on computers and simulate one-sixth gene. It looks pretty real but back in the 60s. They didn't have computers were slide rules back then. I mean that was that was about the extent of it. They had very primitive computers.

They couldn't do stuff like that back there or you know, people say let's Photoshop. There was no Photoshop back in in 60 in 69. So when you see the picture of Earthrise, that's that's what it looked like.

They didn't have computer technology where they could manipulate that today. We can get pretty close back then not possible so the ironic thing is. It's actually easier in 1960s. It was actually easier to go there than it would be to fake it.

That's the bottom line. That's ironic. Yeah I've also heard him say I think it's is it's the Allen radiation belts. Van Allen the van Allen Van Allen radiation belts. They say that Back in the 60s. We didn't have the kind of technology for an astronaut to Safely pass through the Van Allen radiation belts.

It would have killed on. I think some of them say we couldn't even do that today and they say there's proof that we really didn't go into orbit because The Van Allen radiation belts would have killed anybody that tried.

Show me the math. That's you know, it's easy to make these outlandish claims. You know, well, do you know how much radiation is the Van Allen belts? No, do you know how much radiation would be lethal?

Well, well, no, but I just don't think you could possibly survive the Van Allen belts. Well, it seems to me if you have two unknowns, you can't make any argument at all. Now I happen to know the amount of radiation in the Van Allen belts because that's something that's been measured.

It's been studied and when the astronauts went through the Van Allen belts They did get a little blast of radiation about the same as you as you get when you get an x-ray. So if you've ever been x-rayed and you didn't die that that's that's evidence that you can pass through the Van Allen belts.

You wouldn't want to spend your life in the Van Allen belt because that would build up over time. But you know every time I go through an airport I get x-rayed and you know, it doesn't kill me. You can get a little bit of radiation.

It doesn't kill you and we do know the amount of radiation that the Van Allen belts possess. We know the amount of radiation that human beings can tolerate safely even in low-earth orbit the astronauts Jeff Williams was telling me that There's certain places in the orbit where the magnetic field is weak on the earth.

And they won't let them do spacewalks when they're in that part of the orbit and also there's a there's a lifetime Radiation limit where if you're getting close to that, they'll say okay you you can't go up anymore so that so there that is something that NASA looks into but.

They actually unlike the people who make the claims to the contrary. They actually go through the numbers and say, okay. What is the quantity of radiation and how long till that builds up to an amount that would be dangerous?

So they've done those calculations.

UFOs and I I have told I told you before we started officially Recording here that ever since I was a little kid. I've always had an interest in astronomy. I've just been absolutely fascinated with the size of The universe the galaxies, I mean, it's just the human mind cannot comprehend and From time to time.

I'll talk to people that believe that there might be Intelligent life out there somewhere. The universe is so vast, you know, what's to say that God didn't make some some other life and put it out there somewhere and and I've always told him and you can flesh this out much better than I even if there were Aliens out there, even if even if there were which there aren't I believe that theologically and Scientifically, but even if there were They would have no way to get here right so All right walk us through us.

I sent you a couple of videos that have been on the news lately interviewing some fighter pilots and showing these recently released video footage of Taken from some of these fighter jets about these unusual objects and according to the testimony given These things are doing things.

They are moving at speeds and Angles and in ways that we just absolutely cannot explain. Pulling. It's estimated six seven hundred G's what would be the equivalent to six or seven hundred G's which of course?

I don't think a human could even withstand more than ten or eleven. So and there they say there's no means apparent means of propulsion. There's no wings Help us here. What what do you think might be going on?

Oh.