On May 29, 2026, Dr. Michael Salla — the Hawaii-based founder of Exopolitics and one of the more prolific voices in the UFO commentary world — received a text message. The sender, described in Salla's own account on exopolitics.org as a source he had known for several years, claimed to have twice encountered a woman presenting herself as Amy Eskridge: antigravity researcher, founder of the Institute for Exotic Science in Huntsville, Alabama, and — by public record — deceased since June 2022. According to the text, this woman had described an underground base beneath Green Mountain, near Redstone Arsenal and NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, where Nordic extraterrestrials were allegedly training international military pilots, and where she was leading research into antigravity propulsion, stargates, and consciousness transfer.
That text message is now the load-bearing beam of a growing media structure — republished, re-narrated, and extended across a circuit of low-credibility UFO outlets. What began as a single source's second-hand account has been amplified into a layered evidentiary claim. The question worth pressing is not whether any of it is true. It is how, exactly, this story was built — and whether anything solid sits beneath the spectacle.
The network here is tight and largely self-referential. Salla published his initial analysis at exopolitics.org in early June 2026. The site ufos-disclosure.blogspot.com then embedded and promoted that piece, along with a subsequent interview Salla conducted with Michael, the host of a podcast called Conflict Radio — a man whose full surname has not been publicly disclosed in any of the coverage reviewed here. Michael claims to have been the source who texted Salla, and who says he personally encountered the woman identifying herself as Eskridge in a late-night meeting. In the interview, published on July 6, 2026, and again promoted through ufos-disclosure.blogspot.com, Michael describes Eskridge as wanting to reveal to the world not only the facility's existence but also "four additional fundamental forces of nature" essential to antigravity and interstellar travel.
"four additional fundamental forces of nature"
Each of these outlets — exopolitics.org, ufos-disclosure.blogspot.com, and Conflict Radio — operates at what this publication would classify as tier 4 credibility: no editorial standards are publicly documented, no independent verification processes are described, and claims are presented without primary source documentation. That is not a dismissal. It is a necessary flag. None of the specific claims about the Green Mountain facility have been corroborated by any official statement, independent reporting, or documentary evidence. No response has been sought from, or offered by, Redstone Arsenal or NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.
The Architecture of the Claim
To understand why this story has traction, you have to look at what it was grafted onto. Green Mountain is a real place — a wooded ridge rising above Huntsville, Alabama, a city whose identity is inseparable from the aerospace and defense complex that surrounds it. The claim that the U.S. government considered building a hardened, subterranean command facility beneath Green Mountain in the 1950s — a so-called "mini-Pentagon" — is presented in Salla's account and in the ufos-disclosure.blogspot.com writeup as historical backdrop. The implication is that a classified project from that era never fully ended, and that what exists today is its successor.
That 1950s plan, if it existed, would in principle be traceable. Documents from that period — particularly those related to civil defense infrastructure, continuity-of-government planning, and hardened command facilities — have been declassified in significant numbers over the intervening decades. The National Archives holds substantial Cold War-era military planning records. A FOIA request targeted at hardened facility planning for the Huntsville area in the 1950s, or a search through Army Corps of Engineers project files from that period, could either surface corroborating material or confirm the absence of any such record. Neither Salla nor any of the outlets promoting this story appears to have pursued that avenue. The historical claim remains unverified — and, critically, unrefuted, because no one has yet checked.
Into this gap, Tony Rodrigues was introduced. Rodrigues, who has appeared on Salla's platform previously to discuss his claimed experiences in remote viewing programs and secret space operations — accounts that are entirely unverified and which Rodrigues offers as personal testimony — reportedly conducted or participated in a remote-viewing session focused on the Green Mountain area. According to coverage on ufos-disclosure.blogspot.com from late June 2026, three independent viewers in that session described an underground base containing extraterrestrial technology and a dark-haired woman overseeing its operations. This description was then folded back into the Eskridge narrative as apparent corroboration.
It is worth being direct about what remote viewing is and is not, because the sourcing here collapses a real historical program into something different. The CIA did operate a classified remote viewing program — a fact now a matter of declassified record — investigating whether individuals could gather intelligence on distant targets through extrasensory perception. That program was real. The claims being made in this circuit, however, go well beyond the program's documented scope and findings, and the remote-viewing session described here is presented with no methodology, no independent oversight, and no chain of custody for the results. The "corroboration" Rodrigues's session is said to provide is, in structural terms, one unverified account describing another.
Salla, to his credit, acknowledged in his initial June commentary that the Eskridge encounter could represent genuine information, a psychological operation, or a story wholly invented by his source. That is a reasonable epistemic framework. But it was largely discarded in the subsequent interview format, where Michael's account was presented in a register closer to documentary testimony than to contested allegation.
What the Broader Moment Makes Possible
This story did not emerge in a vacuum. It appeared during a period of genuine, documented institutional movement on UAP disclosure — movement that has created real confusion about what is and is not being confirmed at the official level.
In February 2026, Jesse Blasengame of Colorado MUFON published a piece in MUFON's outlet reporting that the Trump White House had taken what he described as an unusually direct role in pushing for expanded congressional access to UAP-related facilities. Blasengame cited Missouri Congressman Eric Burlison, who claimed the administration had explicitly instructed the Department of Defense to cooperate with lawmakers seeking access to sites historically associated with UFO programs. MUFON is a tier 3 source — more established than the blogosphere outlets, but still not an independent journalistic organization. Burlison's specific claims about what he has seen and what he has been told remain largely unverified in open-source reporting.
In late March and early April 2026, UFO Matrix — another tier 4 outlet — reported that President Trump had issued a direct mandate to the Pentagon to release all classified UAP files, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth overseeing the effort. Hegseth was quoted, in that account, as saying the declassification duty was "absolutely not on his bingo card" and that he would "find out right alongside the American public." Representative Anna Paulina Luna was described as coordinating with the White House, the FBI, and the Department of Defense on the declassification pipeline. ODNI Director Tulsi Gabbard was said to have signaled imminent data releases.
These claims — Trump's executive order, Hegseth's review, the involvement of Luna and Gabbard — sit in a different evidentiary category than the Green Mountain testimony. Trump's Truth Social posts are publicly accessible. Hegseth's public statements are on record. But the specific operational details — which facilities are being opened, what files are being released, what precisely Burlison examined in a SCIF — remain unverified in primary sources. What is confirmed is that there is institutional momentum. What is not confirmed is almost everything specific claimed about it.
That gap — between the real momentum and the unverified specifics — is precisely where stories like the Green Mountain narrative flourish. When the government acknowledges it has been keeping secrets, and signals it may be preparing to release them, the appetite for what those secrets contain becomes almost impossible to discipline. Salla's circuit is not creating that appetite. It is feeding it.
The one question that could begin to ground this entire discussion in recoverable fact is the one nobody appears to have formally asked: are there records, held at the National Archives or in Army Corps of Engineers project files, documenting a Cold War-era proposal to construct a hardened command facility beneath Green Mountain? If such a plan existed, it should have left bureaucratic traces — cost estimates, engineering assessments, correspondence between the relevant commands. If no such traces exist, that absence is itself information. The document, or its verified nonexistence, is what this story is actually waiting for.