RADIOOctober 20, 2025

Is a Manhattan-sized ALIEN SHIP hurtling towards Earth?!

A mysterious object about the size of Manhattan is hurtling through our solar system. Is this object, called 3I/ATLAS, an alien spacecraft or naturally occurring comet? Harvard University professor Avi Loeb joins Glenn Beck to explain what’s so weird about this object …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Professor Avi Loeb is with us. Avi, how are you, sir?

AVI: Doing great, thanks for having me.

GLENN: It's great to have you on. So can you just please explain, are we just seeing these things more than we ever have, because we have the eyes now in space to see this?

AVI: Yeah. Over the past decade, the astronomers constructed the new survey from the sky. Or for computers. But the motivation for building those -- I thought that Congress gave to NASA and the National Science Foundation, in effect, to survey the sky for any objects that are near earth, that could collide to earth because that poses a risk. And they all pose the challenge of finding all of this bigger than a football field. That may collide with earth.

Near earth objects. And there were two major observatories constructed back, a decade ago.

It was in Hawaii. And there recently, in June 2025.

And a new observatory in Chile was inaugurated called the Reuben Observatory. Founded by the Department of Energy and National Science Foundation. And those allow us to see objects that are the size of a football field and have a complete survey.

And amazingly, in 2017. And objects like that were slagged. And then the astronomers realized, it's actually moving too fast to be bound by gravity by the sun.

So it came from outside the solar system from the sun. It couldn't be around.

So that was the first. It was given the name 'Oumuamua, which means scout in the Hawaiian language.

GLENN: Hold on. Hold on just a second. Because I remember this. And I think I talked to you around this time. Explain what you meant. It was moving too fast.

AVI: Oh. Well, you know, the planets orbit the sun. For example, the earth moves around the sun, at the speed of -- about 30 kilometers per second. You know, which is faster -- it's 300 times faster than the fastest race car we have. I'm talking about 30 kilometers in one second.

That's about 20 miles in one second. That's the speed by which the earth orbits the sun. But imagine boosting the earth and just giving it -- attaching their rockets to it. Once it would reach a speed of about 42 kilometers per second just divided by the square root of two. 1.4 times the current speed that it's moving, it would be able to escape the solar system.

So it just needs a high enough speed to escape from the gravitational potential from the sun. And we know what the speed is. And so if we see objects moving near the earth, at more than 42 kilometers a second, we know they cannot be bound by gravity into the sun. They must have originated somewhere else. And so 'Oumuamua was one of those. And since then, we found two more with telescopes. I actually identified with my students, a fourth one which was found by the US government satellites that are monitoring the earth. That was a meteor that came from interstellar space. But, if anything, the most recent one, was found by a small telescope in Chile. Called the Atlas and again, to identify risks for earth. And that one is -- was different than the 3I/ATLAS.

GLENN: So help me out on this. Because we didn't have these telescopes. This is obviously a relatively new thing that we're doing. How much damage does a football field sized comet or -- or space debris, what would that do?

What was the size of whatever killed the dinosaurs, if that is indeed what happened?

AVI: Right.

GLENN: What is an earth killer size?

AVI: Right. Well, the size of a football field, and objects like that, that collide with earth, can cause regional damage. Much more you know, like older, a thousand times the Hiroshima atomic bomb energy output --

GLENN: Kind of what happened with Russia, back in the turn of the last century?

AVI: Yeah, something -- no, that one was actually much smaller than -- that was a thousand times less massive.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

AVI: So, you know, these -- these big ones are really rare.

And that's why I would say, as we continue this discussion. I would mention this nuance.

It's estimated to be, you know, older. The one that killed the dinosaurs. And these are extremely rare. And so question is why are we seeing an interstellar object that is that big, just within the last decade. Coming to your question. The size of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was roughly Manhattan Island. Okay? So compare the size of a football field to Manhattan Island. It's a very different scale.

GLENN: Jeez. Yeah.

AVI: So what the Congress wanted NASA to do was identify those that caused just regional damage. Not catastrophe like happened with the dinosaurs. Where there was a nuclear winter.

You know, the earth was covered with dust.

GLENN: Yeah.

AVI: And, you know, 75 percent of all species died. And we owe our existence, because after the dinosaurs died. You know, the more complex animals came along.

And we are one of those species.

GLENN: So you say they're only looking for the small ones.

I'm sure if a big one shows up. You will ring the bell.

AVI: No, that's much easier to see the big ones.

GLENN: Right. And do we have any technology that can move these things out? Or is this just something that -- just another thing on the -- by the way, this could happen. And it's coming our way. And there's really nothing we could do. Is this just a big worry? Or is there things that we could actually do?

AVI: Yes. We can. Because if you catch it early enough, before it comes close to earth. You can nudge it a little bit to the side, and then it will meet the earth.

There are all kinds of proposals for how to do that.

You know, the most aggressive one is to explode the nuclear weapon on it.

GLENN: But wouldn't that break it up, and then we would have all kinds of little meteors coming our way.

AVI: Exactly. That's why it's not a good idea.

The missiles were doing just that. They created. When they were operated, back a decade ago.

You know, they created much more damage, than help, actually. But you can do it in a more intelligent way.

Maybe explode the weapon close to the object. So that it doesn't disintegrate, just a part of it. Then you get the rocket effects from the ablation pushing it. But there are other ways.

Some people suggested painting it on one side. So it reflects more sunlight on one side. Then it's getting nudged a little bit.

You can imagine shepherding it, by the state craft is massive enough.

It shepherds it.

It basically gives it a gravitational nudge.

There are all kinds of methods that were produced. Proposed.

And, by the way, NASA just a year ago, they -- they tried one of these methods with the emission called Dark. Where they collided with an asteroid. To see how much it gets. The result. What happens to it.

And it's quite surprising. Because some of these asteroids were not really rigid.

They're porous. And you get all kinds of dust drawn out of them in ways that they were not anticipated. In any event, the people are thinking about, you know, rocks -- rocks are easy to deal with because in principle, you can tell what their path would be. However, one thing that was never discussed, and the kind of thing I'm trying to advocate we do, is, what if there is some alien technology out there, then you -- you know, if it was designed by intelligence, you won't be able to forecast exactly what it would do. It's just like finding a visitor to your backyard. But they enter through your front door. You have to act immediately. And you have to engage in ways that are much more complicated than dealing with a rock.

GLENN: Okay. So let me -- another thing. Here's something else you can worry about.

So let me -- let me start there.

Because there's some things that I have been reading.

I don't know what's true. I don't know what's not true on this 3I/ATLAS. And I want to break that down, including the Wow! signal. Which I think you had something -- you were there, weren't you for that in '77 or whenever that was?

AVI: Yeah.

GLENN: Okay. So I don't know what's real. What's not real. I don't know who has credibility. You know, we've heard so many things. You know, extraterrestrial technology.

We had, you know, all of the drones in the sky. That everybody was thinking aliens were going to I object invade us for a while. And the world is on age. We're very 1938. '39. War of the worlds territory in America. And I think in the world. We're freaked out about everything.

So tell me about 3I/ATLAS. And why you say, it -- it may have alien technology.

AVI: Right. So let me give you the facts. The whole point about doing science that we can collect evidence, data from instruments.

And we don't need to rely on stories that people tell.

So what are the facts that make it really unusual?

Well, first of all, it's besides.

As I mentioned in the beginning, we expect many more small objects than big objects.

And the previous two interstellar objects. Were roughly hundreds of meters in size.

The first one 'Oumuamua, was a football field, a hundred meters. And this one, I wrote a paper two weeks ago that shows that it's bigger than 5 kilometers. You know, comparable to the size of Manhattan Island.

And that means it's -- it's a million times more massive. If you take solid density, relative to the first one, the 'Oumuamua. And medium-sized. So how can it give a third object? We should have seen millions, 'Oumuamua-like objects before seeing a big one like that.

GLENN: But we didn't have -- wait. Wait.

But we didn't have the technology to see it, right? I mean, these things have been passing us.

AVI: No, no, no. It's easier to see the big one, because they reflect much more sunlight.

So in fact, especially as they shed mass. 'Oumuamua did not shed any mass. There was no gas or abductor on it. We just saw the rare object.

And it was already puzzling because of that. It was pushed away from the sun, based on exterior force. It was there -- it was most likely flat. It had an extreme shape.

GLENN: And it -- it accelerated, right?

It didn't just whip around the sun. It accelerated, which does not naturally happen.

AVI: Yeah. Well, it happens, if the rocket --

GLENN: Correct.

AVI: If it's losing mass in one direction. And getting recoil in the opposite direction.

But there wasn't any mass observed from 'Oumuamua. Nevertheless, what I'm saying, is an object that was that is a million times more massive is much easier to see. When we talk about the -- it being within the distance of the earth from the sun.

And so we could have seen that easily. Many of those small ones before we see a big one.

And then the second one was a comet. Very similar to the size of natural comets we see. And that one is a thousand times less massive than -- than this new one, 3I/ATLAS. So the size is -- it's just surprising that we would see a giant one like that. There is not enough rockets here in interstellar space to supply such a giant one, once per decade to the inner solar system. We expect it once for 10,000 years or something. Anyway, that's the size anomaly. Then there is the fact that the Hubbard Space Telescope observed it.

And not in the image. It displays -- low that is towards the sun. Pointing towards the sun.

Instead of what you usually see for comets, where you see them pointing away from the sun. The reason you see them pointing away from the sun. Is because dust and gas are being pushed by the sunlight. And the solar wind.

GLENN: Yeah. That's what gives it -- the economy the look of a tale.

AVI: Exactly, that's the definition of a comet.

The other experts say, oh, no.

Here's a comet. Because we see the extension of the globe.

But what they didn't realize -- so they were just like seeing an animal in your backyard.

And everyone says, oh, it must be a street cat. Because it has a tail.

But then you look at the photograph of this animal, and you see the tail is coming from its forehead. And you say, well, how is that -- a common street cat does not have a tail coming from its head. So, anyway, the first one, you know, that shows such a thing, and unlike, a regular comet. And then in addition, so these are two anomalies so far. In addition, the -- the trajectory of this object is aligned to within 5 degrees with an ecliptic plane of the planets around the sun. And the chance of that is one in 500. So basically, it comes in the plane where all the planets are moving around the sun. And, you know, that could be by intelligence planning. Because if you wanted to do a reconnaissance mission. You know, coming close to planets. That's the way to do it.

And the previous one came both -- 'Oumuamua and the second one came at a very large angle. So this one came straight. And you ask why. Why would it come in a plane?

And, by the way, all these anomalies. No one who is calling himself or herself a comet expert. They just say it's a comet. But if you ask them, why is that?

They would not have an explanation. Why would they come in a plane? "Oh, it's by chance."

Why is it so big?

"Oh, it's by chance." Why does it have this glow towards the sun rather than away? "Oh, it's something we don't fully understand."

So they would say that, but they would not admit that it could be something else.

Then there's the arrival time of this object.

You know, with it arrived two days, at the special time, because it's very close to Mars, Venus, and Jupiter. And these planets are moving around the sun.

And you have to be at the right time, at the right place in order to come within tens of millions of kilometers within each of them.

So that's another coincidence. That, you know, might indicate fine-tuning. But there is some reason that it's coming so close.

And then --

GLENN: On hang on just a second.

I want to clear some stuff up. And then I want to take a break.

All of these things could be chance, right?

But you're saying now, they're just all --

ERIC: Yeah, but the probability for each of them is very strong.

GLENN: Right. So it's all stacking up.

AVI: You need to multiply -- you need to multiply each likelihood by another, and you get something like one in a million chance.

News

How JD Vance & Marco Rubio Became Trump's Not-So-Secret Weapons

Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere unpack JD Vance’s viral response to a potential 2028 Vance-Rubio presidential ticket, where Vance praises Rubio as his “best friend” and credits Trump’s “grand strategy” for the administration’s success.

The SECRET every young man NEEDS to hear

The world has a plentiful, seemingly endless supply of angry boys. What it's lacking is real MEN. Glenn Beck shares the secret that our young men must learn if they truly want to protect and perfect our country.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: There's a difference between a revival and an awakening. We are in a revival right now, but that doesn't necessarily lead to anything. Except, oh, I have to re-learn those principles. But that doesn't mean you apply them in your life. Okay?

That's an awakening. There's been two great awakenings in American history. One brought us the American Revolution. The second one brought us the Civil War and the freedom of slaves.

We have the possibility of going into a third great awakening. That's the only thing that will save us. If you don't know the difference between a revival and an awakening. Let me give you the negative print of a godly awakening. Our kids right now, they don't have any purpose. They don't have any meaning.

They look at everything, and it doesn't -- it's not real. None of it is real. It's money. It's fame.

It's -- you know, it's ever changing truths and definitions. And they have no purpose in their life. Okay?

So they're looking for that. Because man has to have purpose in his life. Man has to search for meaning.

So they're searching for meaning. And they found a group of people that actually mean something. And they're willing to die for it. And it's ISIS.

And so they're like, at least these people believe in something. They believe it. And they're willing to die for it. I'm going to stand with them. And they put that twisted understanding into action. That's the -- that is -- that's an awakening. It's just an awakening to the dark side. And that one is already happening. It has to happen on the good side. And let me speak directly to young men: Look, you are inheriting a very loud, angry, cynical and worst of all spiritually starving and malnourished society. And you are being sold a future of cheap pleasures and hollow heroes and screens with blue light that just rob you of your strength, one distracted second after another.

And in the middle of all that noise, may I just give you one piece of instruction. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, of good report or praise-worthy, seek those things.

Don't admire them. Don't nod at them. Seek them!

Hunt them. Chase them. Build your life around those things. A man who will do that. A boy. A young man who will do that, will become different. Noticeably different.

He will stop letting the culture feed him garbage. He stops applauding the trivial. He stops laughing at the obscene or cheering for the cruel.

He will become a curator of -- of real, lasting beauty in an age that has forgotten what beauty even looks like.

When other men are chasing down or holding up cynicism, this man holds up hope!

When everyone around him is chasing dopamine, he chooses discipline. When others will blame their circumstance, he'll take responsibility for his own action. When the world worships the shallow, he goes and searches for the deep!

You want to know what the secret of becoming strong is, or becoming trusted, or becoming the kind of man that your future wife, your future children, your future nation can depend on?

Here it is!

You become what you seek. If you seek trash, you become trash. If you seek virtue, you become a man of virtue. You seek excellence, and your life will begin to shine, not loudly, but steadily. Like the steel glow of a blade being forged.

That's who you'll be.

The world has a plentiful, seemingly never-ending supply of angry boys. We don't need any more addicted boys.

We don't need any more distracted boys. The world needs men. Whole men. Clear-eyed men.

Men whose souls are anchored to something higher than the algorithms, trying to own them!

Build a life worthy of admiration. Forget about the applause. Fill your mind with words that make you wiser. Fill your days with work, hard work, that makes you stronger. Fill your home with beauty that lifts every soul who walks into it.

Have your home a place where people walk in and go, man, I say so great here. I just love it here. I don't know what it is about your house. I just love it. It's the spirit that's there! Because you built it! You protect it.

Protect your integrity like a watchman on the wall. Don't lie. Don't cheat. Don't steal. And when you fail, and you will, stand back up again.

Because a man who seeks the virtuous, is not a man who never fails. He just -- he just becomes a man who refuses to stay on the ground.

If you seek things that are lovely and pure, trustworthy, praiseworthy, you'll become a kind of man this age almost never produces. A man whose very existence is a rebuke to the darkness.

That's your calling. That's why you were born.

Not to be lost. Not to play video games. Not to give up. Not to say, there's no hope. Not to end up in the trash bin of human history because you've -- you've taken so many drugs, you can't stand up straight anymore.

You're not destined to be alone.

You were destined for great things. You are destined to find an amazing woman!

Believe me. I didn't think I would ever find an amazing woman. Because I didn't think I was worth it. I didn't think I was worth it.

And until I started understanding how God works. That, yeah. I'm not worth any of the stuff that I have.

When you realize, it's all a gift. It's all a gift. And even if you work your brains out, you may not ever get all the things that you want. But you're going to have everything you need. Once you realize, carefully selecting friends makes a difference. My mother used to always say, show me your friends. I will show you your future.

It's true. Be careful who you select as friends. Watch your language. Watch what you're putting into your brain and what's coming out of your mouth. Because the brain is so amazing. It's being turned to mush. Did you know that there is a new study that just came out. I have to tell you about it next week, maybe.

New study going out. It is -- it's AI. And it has access to social media, and they have found that the AI -- the AI that is scrolling through social media all day, just to keep updated on everything that's going on in social media. It's getting brain mush. It's actually becoming dumber. It's become less effective!

It's a machine. What do you think this, flesh and blood, this thing is going to do?

We say life is meaningless. And life is the only thing that has any value. And yet, we spend all of our time, on things like social media. And that has absolutely no value.

But we think that's life.

I'm not that smart. I've just lived a long time. And I've made so many mistakes.

And I decided at one point, I'm going to stop saying, it's somebody else's fault. I'm going to start saying. Maybe -- what did I do to create that?

What did I do to attract that?

Why does this thing keep happening to me?

Why is it that I always find myself involved with these same kind of people?

Because, Glenn, dummy, it's you!

What you think, it's like -- it's like think of yourself as a -- as a beacon. It's just -- you're a beacon. Your GPS pin, that is constantly saying, here I am. Here I am. Here I am.

Except, it's transmitting more than just your location. It's -- it's transmitting what you're looking for, who you are. And it's attracting other dropped pins to you. It's saying, "I like this. I think this way. I believe these things. I am afraid of these things."

Whatever it is, you're thinking. It's constantly putting that out.

And saying, here I am. Is there anything else like that?

Anything else that can reinforce that? Anything else that can live like this?

Because that's me. Here I am. Here I am. Here I am.

That's why you keep finding yourself in exactly the same situations. Nothing will change, if nothing changes!

And the only thing that you can change, is you!

Seek the things, that have virtue.

Seek the things, that have beauty in music, in -- in art, in life, in architecture, in clothing! Whatever it is. Look for real, lasting beauty and value.

Find the things that are true! Truly true.

Universally true. Find the things that uplift. Seek those things!

And you will change your life and your world!

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Autistic Kids Can READ MINDS? ‘Telepathy Tapes’ Doctor Reveals All | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 273

Autism may not be a curse ... "it may be a blessing that we just don’t understand yet,” says Glenn Beck to groundbreaking neuroscientist Dr. Diane Hennacy, whose research into the telepathic powers of autistic children left the nation stunned in “The Telepathy Tapes” podcast series. The pair go on a mind-bending exploration into psychic phenomena, savant syndrome, the secret messages in our dreams, and the possibility of a spiritual meeting place for autistic children guarded by angels. Glenn says, “This will make you reconsider everything you think you know about autism, the brain, ESP, human consciousness, everything.” That is, only if we’re willing to leave “scientism” behind us and embrace the fact that reality is much more than the material world ...

This will CHANGE how you think about NUCLEAR WAR

The new Netflix movie “A House of Dynamite” has caused a stir at the Pentagon and led many Americans to change how they think about nuclear war. The film’s writer, Noah Oppenheim, joins Glenn Beck to address the controversy and explain why his movie ends the shocking way it does…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Noah, welcome to the program.

NOAH: Thank you so much for having me.

GLENN: You bet. I have to tell you, your movie, frustrating, because it ends. And I'm like, wait, there should be five more episodes.
This should just not be a 90-minute movie. There's so much more.

Really compelling the way you told the story. So congratulations on that. First question: Are there going to be sequels?

NOAH: Well, first of all, thank you very much. I really appreciate it. It means a lot coming from you.

There is no plan for a sequel. You know, we -- we wanted the movie to be a provocation, in the best sense of the word. You know, a provocation to a larger conversation about this nuclear issue, which I'm so glad to be having with you right now.

GLENN: Yeah. Was your primary source the Annie Jacobson book, or was that just one of many? Did you go to government sources?

How did you get all this information?

NOAH: We spoke to a wide variety of people, who had worked in places like the White House, the CIA, strategic command.

We -- you know, I had worked as a journalist, previously. And so new folks who had held these kinds of jobs, Kathryn Bigelow, who is the director of the movie had made Hurt Locker, Zero Dark 30. So she has extraordinary relationships in the national security world. And obviously, there is some incredible body of work that has been done over the past several decades.

Think tank folks, authors, journalists, et cetera.

And, you know, it's surprising how much -- a lot of this information is in the public domain. In terms of what procedures the government would follow. In -- in case of an attack like this.

And then a lot of it, you know, you can build by talking to sources. You know, much like you would do, if you were trying to report out a story or get to the bottom of something.

GLENN: You know, it's amazing to me, that most presidents don't ever ask for training on this.

They don't -- they don't do dry runs. This is -- you're the one person that could change the whole world. In 15 minutes.

And you're coming into it, most of them are coming into it, absolutely dead cold. If something would happen. They don't -- they don't know how it works.

And this is not something. I don't know how you would make the decision, in that amount of time.

NOAH: Yeah. Two of the most terrifying things that we -- that we zeroed on early was this question of sole authority and decision time. Right? So the idea that in the United States we live in a nuclear monarchy, the president of the United States has the sole authority to determine whether these weapons are used. It's not like he has to build any kind of consensus with the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He has to decide. He has to decide under extraordinary time pressures.

So if a missile is launched from the Pacific theater. That part of the world. It's under 30 minutes to impact on the continental United States.

If a missile is launched off our coast by a Russian sub, for instance, it would take ten to 12 minutes. So you do have a scenario, in which one person has arguably the fate of all mankind in their hands, and they have a clock ticking. And, you know, depending on where they are, and what the target is. They're probably running for their life or being evacuated. Worrying about their own family.

And it's all put to them, what you want to do.

And if you -- that's not scary enough. The cherry on top is, we spoke to people who had worked directly with presidents. Directly with secretaries of defense. And we said, how often is the president rehearsing this. Practicing for it. Preparing. And they said never.

Basically never. They get one briefing when they take office, or they're introduced to the military. We're all familiar with the guy who follows him around with the suitcase. The nuclear football, if you will. Their process is explained, how that would work. And then after that, they never think about that again.

And, you know, Ronald Reagan, we were told, was the last president who participated in any kind of live nuclear decision-making exercise.

And it's -- and so the -- the guy who has the most responsibility, all the authority, is also arguably, the least practiced and prepared of any one of his --

GLENN: It's really.

It's terrifying.

You know, I've talked to President Trump about nuclear capability.

And I will tell you, you can say whatever you want about Donald Trump.

But one thing I know he's afraid of, is nuclear war.

He -- that has kept him awake, night after night after night.

He knows. Like Reagan did. And Gorbachev did.

You start that, you push that button. It's over. It's all over.

There's -- I mean, you hinted at it, you know, when you -- you were like, I've got -- if we fly these missiles over this country, what are they going to -- are they going to perceive this as a threat?

You know, missiles with Russia. I think in the movie, you've got Russia saying, how do we know you're not going to bomb -- we should just trust you?

It's over!

NOAH: Yeah. All of which begs the question, I think, for President Trump and for all of our leaders, what do we do about it?

You know, how do we solve this problem? We've lived with this threat, in the background of all of our lives, since the dawn of the nuclear age.

Despite my last name, not related to Oppenheimer.

GLENN: Half the name.

NOAH: We've lived with this dynamite in the walls.

For so many decades now. And really, since the end of the Cold War. We haven't really thought or talked about it very much.

It obviously is on President Trump's mind.

He does talk about it. He talks about trying to build the Golden Globe. And a better defense missile system.

You know, I think -- I think this question of, how do we make the world safer?

And it may be, part of that is building a better missile defense system. It may be part of it is reengaging with an arms control and an arms reduction process. Right?

You start our last remaining treaty with the Russians, that -- that governs the development and, you know, proliferation of these weapons. Is set to expire at the end of the year. Maybe we should engage in a process with Russia and China. To try to dramatically reduce the nuclear stockpile.

There are a lot of levers, that the president can pull to try to make you us all safer.

GLENN: So part of the controversy with your -- your movie, which is House of Dynamite, and it's on Netflix.

Part of the controversy, I guess, with the -- with the Pentagon is that the ground-based missile, interoceptors, and the interoceptors, you say it's 60 percent success. I think -- I think Annie Jacobson says, it's like close to zero.

And the Pentagon says it's 100 percent every time. What do you think it really is?

Is it 60?

NOAH: So there's a few factors involved here. The record of -- the testing record for this system, which was the ground-based mid-course interoceptors, is -- is public.

And it is 61 percent. They have done a series of tests over the last 25 years.

And if you add up the -- you know, the number of successes, over the number of failures, it comes to 61 percent.

The -- the Pentagon in their memo, is trying to say that the last several tests have been successful.

The previous ones were not.

So they say, if you only count the most recent ones, it's 100 percent.

That's like saying, I made my last -- I made my last two free throws. So I am a 100 percent free throw shooter --

GLENN: Exactly right.

NOAH: Yeah. So that being said, they're not wrong, in that that the system is getting better.

The software is getting better.

All of it is improving. It's nowhere close to being able to say, it's 100 percent effective. And part of that also comes down to the conditions under which these tests are undertaken. Right?

If I tell you, Glenn, I'm going to throw a baseball at your head. It's a lot easier for you to brace yourself and be ready and catch that baseball.

If an attack were to happen in the real world, it's far less likely, you know, it's far more complicated to defend against.

So, you know, this though, is not a debate between, you know, us as film makers and the Pentagon. It's really a debate between the Pentagon and a much wider community of experts, about the efficacy of this system.

You know, like I said, it's a good conversation to have. Do we want to improve the system.

Do we want --

GLENN: Yes, we do.

NOAH: -- to get more and more money to build something like Golden Dome?

GLENN: Yes, yes, we do.

Yes, we do.

The -- one thing that you didn't hint on, that was in Annie's book that I thought was fascinating. Was that when the president has to finally make the decision, he still doesn't know if it's nuclear-tipped.

There could be a conventional weapon on a ballistic missile, that is being sent by North Korea, let's say.

I mean, it would be an incredible waste.

But, you know, if we launch, before the missile hits, we don't even know if that's nuclear.

And we would have then started a nuclear war. Because we're launching nuclear weapons.

And they didn't!

NOAH: I think that one of the things that we're trying to capture in the story that we taught, which, of course, is a fictional story. Is the difficulty of making decisions in the thick of war.

And that particularly, when you have such a tight decision window. When that clock is winding down, so rapidly. It's -- you're going to find yourself being forced to make calls with imperfect and incomplete information.

And the other thing that is scary, is that the system that we built to -- that governs the use of nuclear weapons was designed during the Cold War for a specific purpose.

It was to make sure that the Soviets believed they could never get away with a first strike.

That if they launched missiles at us. The president would be able to fire back, so quickly. That our decision-making. Our command and control apparatus. Would be able to retaliate.

And so maintaining that deterrent threat, we needed to make sure that the president could respond, and retaliate as quickly and as easily as possible.

So that's the world we still live in now.

And so, again, if one domino falls, there's not a lot of breaks built into this.

The idea is to make it easy for the president to fire back.

And so, yeah. The mistakes can be made. I think it's miraculous, frankly, that we're all still here.

GLENN: It is. It is.

It really is.

Noah Oppenheim. We're talking about the show on Netflix called House of Dynamite. If you haven't seen it yet, it's a must-watch. It is an absolutely thrilling 90 minutes, that will scare the living daylights out of you. Because you'll be like, that can't be true! Right? That's not the way this works. No, that's exactly the way it works. And we're talking about nuclear war. We will come back for a little bit more here.

I want to know, Noah, because I made a decision, what I would do. But I think that is what would make me a really bad president, maybe.

I would love to hear if you guys had a debate, internally. And decided what you would do, if you were the president in that exact situation. We'll come back in just a situation. First, let me tell you about Chapter. There's a good chance, you've already heard it on TV. The Medicare deadline is coming. It's true. It's December 7th. And that's not far away.

But here's what they don't say: For millions of seniors, that deadline feels like a test you didn't study for. Chapter is here to help you pass that with ease. Things change from year to year. Chapter has a team of licensed Medicare advisers who work for you, not the insurance companies. They're the only ones that can look at every single plan. This is a tech-based company. They understand your medical needs. Your prescriptions. Your budget. And then they go out, with AI, and they actually find the plan that fits you perfectly.

So when the next year rolls around, they're still there, helping you reevaluate, adjust, and stay covered. It's free. It's personal. Believe me, they saw their own parents get screwed by this, and they're like, I don't want that to happen to anybody else's parents. Don't wait until December 7th. Get help right now. Chapter's lines will be full by December 7th. Make sure you call right now. Chapter. All you have to do is just hit #250 and say the key word Chapter. #250, key word Chapter. Free and honest advice. #250. Key word Chapter. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: From House of Dynamite.
(music)

VOICE: Approximately three minutes ago, we detected an ICBM over the Pacific. Current flight trajectory is consistent with impact in the continental United States.

VOICE: Have we seen dead people fall?

VOICE: No.

VOICE: Is this real?
(music)

VOICE: Chi-Com is asking for the launch instructions right now.

VOICE: I'm going to need you to breathe. You're talking about hitting a bullet with a bullet.

VOICE: So what's the point? Us. That's what $50 million buys you!

VOICE: Get in the car, and just start driving.

VOICE: If we do not take steps to neutralize our enemies, now, we will lose our window to do so!

VOICE: If we get this wrong, none of us are going to be alive tomorrow.

VOICE: We did everything right. Right?
(music)

VOICE: We did everything right!

VOICE: None of this makes sense. Making all these bombs and all these planets.
(music)

GLENN: It is --

VOICE: The world is just ready to blow.

GLENN: It is remarkable. House of Dynamite on Netflix.

I'm talking to the screenwriter. The screenwriter and the movie maker, Noah Oppenheim. Noah, there's one part of this I don't understand.

And maybe this is what would make me a bad president.

Because I would say, I am not striking until that thing hits. And we know that it's hit.

And it's blown up one of our cities. And then I'm going to wait. And I'm going to say immediately to the world. Everyone in the world, you isolate, and -- and take action against this guy. Or I will have no other response.

I have no choice, than hit him back.

But I would take the one hit, in order to try to save the whole world.

Why can't the president wait?

Why is it this constant, you've got to launch before it hits?

Why?

NOAH: I don't think that would make you a bad president at all.

I think that's a perfectly reasonable response to the situation.

I think that the counterpoint would be the -- the argument made by one of our characters. The generals in STRATCOM, who says, if you don't -- now that the genie is out of the bottle.

Right?

Now that somebody has kind of broken this nuclear stalemate that's existed for the last 70 years. That if we don't -- it is now increasingly dangerous. It is increasingly more likely that more weapons logical be launched our way.

We've now entered into what they call a spiral of alerts. Where bays that missile. The one missile is coming towards us. We then raise our level of military readiness. Start mobilizing forces. As soon as we start mobilizing our various forces around the world.

Everybody else does too. Now the nuclear genie is potentially out of the bottle. And do we want to wait and see if more missiles are sent our way. Or do we want to try to make sure that it stops with this one.

And take out the other -- you're enemy's arsenals and command and control systems, before they can potentially launch more.

I agree with you. It's perfectly reasonable to say, I'll take that chance.

There are more coming.

But I want to see what happens with this one first. Somebody else might say, don't take that chance. What are the odds it's only one?

Let's hit everyone else's missiles while they're still in their silos, and their bombers while they're still on the ground and make sure that we limit our losses to just this one city.

GLENN: Jeez. Once you do that, it's over anyway. Once you do that.

NOAH: Yes. That's arguably the insanity of the nuclear deterrent.

Which is once you do -- it's -- it's we destroy the entire world, as a means of defending ourselves.

GLENN: Yeah. Noah, great job. I hope there's a sequel. I would love to see what the president -- what he would choose. Noah Oppenheim.

The -- the show is, a House of Dynamite.