Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out.
>> The Joe Rogan Experience.
>> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY
NIGHT. All day.
>> All right. Hello, Julia.
>> Hello, Julia.
>> Pleasure to meet you.
>> Yeah, I'm very excited.
>> So, you said you had questions for me.
We start with your questions.
>> Excellent. Um,
>> first of all, tell everybody what you
do.
>> Okay. Let me just change the angle of
this
>> just so folks just tuning in right now
like who is this young lady?
>> Thank you.
>> What do you do?
>> I'm a year younger than you.
>> There you go then. Then you're young.
>> Nice. Um what do I do? I'm
trained as a scientist cognitive
neuroscience and computer science and uh
did some AI stuff. Did some stuff with
the human brain in terms of trying to
understand how time works in the human
brain. And then I got really interested
in how funky time works in the human
brain like precognition,
>> which is of course predicting future
events in ways that we don't normally
think about.
>> That's how I found out about
>> that's you was the Popular Mechanics
article.
>> Yeah, I believe so.
>> Yeah.
>> And then a bunch of other stuff that I
looked at.
>> And then a bunch of other stuff. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And then I got interested in just the
idea of ex what we call exceptional
human performance.
>> So um I actually don't think it's that
exceptional. I think people have these
capacities and they've been dampened
down and uh they're in us and they can
be developed and some people have them
just sort of naturally. I'm a person who
has some of them just naturally, not all
of them, but there are people all over
who have these different gifts and and
how does that work? And so that became a
question that was interesting to me.
>> Well, it's always interesting when it's
this this question is asked by an actual
scientist. So you approach it by let's
let's try to gather data. Let's try to
find out what we can actually show
because so many people have feelings
that there's something else. Like
there's you have intuition, you have
some sort of pre-nowledge of events and
some feeling of something. You're
thinking of someone and they call you.
Is that real? You know, that that kind
of stuff has always puzzled people. So,
it's always fascinating when someone
like yourself actually spends a lot of
time studying it and trying to gather
data and trying to show what's real and
what's not and what you can actually
show.
>> I agree it's fascinating. I'm not sure
it matters. So I mean my experience has
been that um sort of regardless of how
much time I spend studying it and how
much I see it and how much I can test
different controls to make sure it's not
this that or the other thing and that it
really is getting information from the
future or it really is telepathy. Um
people still kind of don't uh in the
science world tend to just ignore it or
it actually is actively suppressed. I
mean, there's some papers that I've
published that just won't get listed in
Google Scholar, even though they're in
peer-review journals with other articles
that do get listed in Google Scholar.
So, there's it's it's frustrating and
who cares because it's just an academic
complaining, but I'm also not an
academic. I also want to build things.
I'm into making stuff. So, I got my PhD
at these tier one research institutions
like Northwestern. Got my masters at UCA
San Francisco. I did my posttock at
Northwestern. So, fancy dancy
institutions. Um, so I learned a lot
about how to how to think and how to
write and how to do these kind of
experiments and I know what I'm seeing
and I keep seeing it and other people
who study the same stuff keep seeing it.
But it is um
it is inside of me or there's something
inside of me that wants to create things
with this. Okay, so this is happening.
People have these capacities. You know,
they're actually useful. What can we do
with them? And it turns out you can do a
lot
with them if you feel like you are
allowed to have them. If it doesn't feel
like it's verboten, if it doesn't feel
like shameful, which is part of the
cultural piece
>> or foolish
>> or foolish, which is part of the
questions I wanted to ask you.
>> Okay.
>> So, what I notice when you talk with
people is you're you're like you seem
like a tough guy, but you're really
sensitive. like you're an incredible
obviously an incredible listener and you
learn all these things and you're
putting together just this is my
impression you're putting together a um
kind of a map of the world like a map of
knowledge of the world through all these
different people's eyes
and my question for you is how do you
see culture shifting
because I think you're really sensitive
to it and I think you're kind of like
one of these signal fish that are at
you notice what's happening in the
environment and you're going to guide a
school of fish accordingly.
So do you think that the culture is
shifting towards
sort of better use of these
I guess exceptional or these natural
capacities that we already have or do
you think that we're shifting away from
it and we're going to run away in fear?
H that's a good question. Okay. So,
I think that because of conversations
like the ones that you've had and the
ones that I've had, the ones that are
available online, I think people get a
much deeper understanding of so many
different topics and so many different
things than has ever been available
through whatever you want to call the
mainstream media.
And when you have these inherent
prejudices in higher learning, whether
it's people that don't don't want to be
foolish, so they don't want to entertain
certain notions or they don't want to
accept certain things because it goes
against things that they've taught and
things they wrote about. We have a
problem of ego and ego becoming a wall
to gathering more information or getting
a better detailed map of the landscape.
And I think uh there's way more people
that um are
pondering these ideas and having these
conversations and thinking about these
things than has ever been before. And uh
I think that's one of the really
beautiful things about the internet. The
internet has made much more information
available
and many more people are thinking about
these things in ways that you know if
you were in uh an environment where your
career depended upon you following
certain lines and certain narratives,
you wouldn't pursue that because that
would be detrimental to your own
personal interest. Like if you wanted to
get ahead in academia and all of a
sudden you're talking about psychics and
premonition and you know people are like
oh Julia's a [ __ ] loon like why you
know but you're courageous and you see
value in these things and because you
can come on here and talk about it
instead of just addressing a class or
selling a book that's going to reach a
few thousand people.
We can have a conversation where 10
million people are going to listen. And
so then those 10 million people are
going to go to work and they're going to
tell their friends at work like, "Hey,
there's this, you know, you know how
that feeling that you get where
sometimes you know something's going to
happen and it happens like that might be
real." And then there was this lady, she
was on the Joe Rogan podcast and she was
and so that opens up people to this idea
that you don't have to worry about being
a fool because that's what a lot of
people are worried about. It's it was a
big hurdle talking about aliens, UFOs.
Like all my life, all my life, I've
always been fascinated by UFOs and
aliens. But I don't mind being a fool.
Like I I was fascinated by Bigfoot
forever. Kind of abandoned that for the
most part. But I like weird stuff. I'm
interested in it. And I don't I'm not a
person that needs to be taken seriously.
It's not my job. I'm literally a
comedian. Like you can make fun of me.
I'll make fun of me. it's fine. I don't
h it doesn't my my future doesn't rely
on people taking me seriously.
So I think having that ability to have
conversations
about all kinds of different things has
really changed the way the entire world
is discussing just reality. like every
everything about reality from
quantum computing to alien life to
international politics to the way human
beings misrepresent each other
purposefully for their own gains like
what is all this like and why why is it
taken so long to have so many
discussions about this so I think that's
if I have a purpose in this world it's
like I'm an antenna for that.
>> Yeah, I to I'm just clapping because
it's such a great purpose because,
>> you know, the reason I fell in love with
science was it's about discovery. It's
about not knowing.
>> It's about being foolish. I had this I
was just thinking today I had this
amazing high school uh bio biology
teacher who had us go outside and he
gave us these little note cards and he
said, "On one side of the note card, I
want you to write a question about your
environment. Look around, you know, the
plants or whatever. pick something, the
dirt, whatever, and write a question you
think Einstein would ask about this. And
then he said, "Okay, now flip it over,
and I want you to write a question that
like a two-year-old would ask if a
two-year-old could, you know, write."
And my favorite side was the 2-year-old.
And at the end, he said, "Now Einstein
was more like the two-year-old."
>> He said, "Einstein was full of wonder
and confusion and um uncertainty, and he
just asked questions and imagined
things, and that's how I want you all to
learn to be." And I was just like, "Yes,
>> that's a good teacher.
>> That was amazing teacher." And and so
then I when I went to graduate school
and I went in the world of academia and
I was like, there's all this pressure to
um you know, you write your grant uh
after you're you've done about
threequarters of the work so that as
soon as you get the grant, then you can
publish the papers that go with the
grant. So you're not really discovering
anything. are kind of talking about
here's what I already know but I'm
acting like I haven't looked at it yet
or and there's pressure to um follow as
you said follow the line of thinking
um for both funding and for your career
>> and you know I was told very nicely by
wonderful people who wanted to support
me um that if I took this stuff about
psychic stuff off my resume I would have
a perfectly good resume for academia and
I was like are you crazy this is the
stuff that's actually interesting why
would I want to take it off? But that's
what took me away from academia and made
me realize I I had to put one foot in
building things. I could leave a foot in
academia, but I had to I had to build
[ __ ] because um academia is so slow.
They can learn something and then 10
years later they're like do you think
it's true? And then 20 years later
they're like maybe we can make something
with it and it's like
but at the same time you have to be
careful. You don't get to just say well
I just know people are psychic and
therefore you know right screw it. So um
so yeah there's this dance there's this
dance there but when you were saying
this thing about
people people afraid to be foolish I
want I wonder how much it helps me
>> to come from a family of very foolish
eccentric people
>> I'm sure it helps a lot
>> because I'm not afraid to be foolish in
fact I just know that I am.
Well, I think intelligent, kind people
don't mind talking to people that say
occasionally say foolish things. Well,
>> or things that could be perceived as
foolish because they're willing to take
chances and look at these obscure topics
and strange phenomenon and just and not
not worry about the stigma that's
attached to these subjects that keeps
supposedly intelligent or serious
people, people that want to be
considered as serious people
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> from discussing.
>> Well, like when you said the thing about
um Bigfoot
>> Yeah. and and I laughed a little bit.
That was that was like a reflex laugh
from academia. So that's
>> that's a fun one. Bigfoot's a fun one.
>> It is. And I have friends who study
Bigfoot and other cryptids and and in a
in a scholarly way and and I had to
learn not to laugh. Like
>> it's like we have our little discomfort
and then we laugh because oh I would I
want to be taken seriously and stuff.
But you know, interestingly, the UFO
whole world got accepted into the
mainstream land of things that possibly
exist before the psychic world. But the
psychic world has been studied like by
the intelligence community, etc. since
openly, since like the 50s, right?
>> Whereas the UFO world was supposed to
be, oh, we don't care about that. And
then only recently has come to the four.
So, it's really interesting to see this
balance. They're both related and and
they're both have their own processes of
disclosure, but um it's just interesting
the culturally it's interesting to see
this instinct to be right
>> as as you called it. And I feel like
that's I was there's the PBS um
convention is in town right now in the
hotel where I'm staying and I and I I I
got to say I think that's still largely
a very leftleaning organization and I
was raised up in a really left-leaning
household. But the thing that really
pisses me off about the left is this
wanting to be smart and and proving that
you're smart. And the thing that pisses
me off about the right is wanting to be
right. And I feel like both of those
things fail.
>> Yes.
>> I mean, neither of them allows us to
just discover, okay, what's next? Like,
how can we actually how can we actually
solve the problems that are going on
instead of just wanting our team to win?
Yeah.
>> Or and so it's interesting to me how the
cultural change with
>> science also relates to our politics.
>> Yeah. I grew up in a very left-leaning
household as well. My parents are still
very left and um I think that there is a
real problem with ideologies where
especially in this country we're so
polarized we have a right and a left and
I think most people are kind of in the
middle somewhere you know and I'm I'm
certainly in the middle I'm like middle
left that's where I I kind of see myself
but if you like read about me I'm like
far right somehow or another which is
>> I know it's interesting I I'm I'm now
independent I'm officially independent
because I'm Screw it.
>> Yeah.
>> I I don't I do think most people are in
the center and I think we need to um get
clarity on that. You get to you get to
say something that's different from what
either side is saying.
>> Yeah. The problem with e either side is
you have to accept if you're going to
accept if you're going to join one of
their team. I had a bit about it in my
last comedy special that if you're going
to join their team, you have to believe
all the things.
>> Yeah. Right. And you have to kind of
display them perform like you're
performing.
>> Very good point.
>> Right. You have to you have to say all
the right words and if you say the wrong
words, you're canceled. And that happens
on both sides.
>> 100%. And you know, the right was always
complaining about the left doing it, but
now the right's doing it. They're
canceling each other about all kinds of
stupid things. And it's just a it is a
it's you know, Mark Andre's talked about
this that they display all of the
behavior that you get from cults.
>> It's the same thing.
>> Totally. excommunication.
Yeah. Extreme following of doctrine with
no deviation whatsoever. Everyone's very
performative that they are more in line
with the doctrine than you are.
>> Ew.
>> Yeah. And by the way, academia is a lot
like that.
>> Oh, it's very much like that. And that's
very disturbing.
>> It is disturbing because these people,
you're supposed to be open-minded
because how are you going to get to
truth? I mean, the idea is to get to
truth, right? Yes.
>> How are you going to get to truth if if
you've decided, well, that person's
asking this question, that's an
inappropriate question.
>> Yes. Yeah. And it's also there's this
thing about people being gatekeepers of
information. So like if you're an expert
in a very particular subject and someone
disagrees with that, people are like, I
am a PhD in this subject and let me tell
you about this and I know what's going
on like that. It's so irritating. And
actually that bothers me when I go on
shows and people say, "Oh, but you're a
scientist and you study this." And it's
like, yeah, but could we not rever me
for that reason? Could we instead ask
the question like, does she do good
work? Does she have interesting
thoughts?
>> You know, does this seem reasonable?
Does it seem like she's after the, you
know, moving towards the good? Those are
really the standards regardless of your
degree.
>> And so I it worries me that we put so
much reverence in scientists or
whatever, experts. And I also see that
there can be this problem where you go,
oh, experts are all full of [ __ ] And
then you know you have to get like brain
surgery and you're like I would like a
really good neurosurgeon.
So there's kind of both.
>> Oh 100% there's both. I think the
problem is human ego and the problem is
that even people that have like deeply
studied subjects the wanting the
reverence and wanting people to defer to
you wholly with no questions whatsoever
like as if you have the entire database
on whatever this thing this thing is
settled this is settled science we know
everything about it and that doesn't
seem to be the case very often there's
very few things that seem to be
completely settled And it's much more
interesting to me when I talk to someone
that their perspective is I'm a person
that has spent an inordinate amount of
time going over this stuff and this is
what I know. I might not know all of it,
but this this is this is what we know
and this is why we think this is what it
is and this is so instead of like having
this ego and I see it god I see it from
so many it's a very male thing too. It's
a very male ego thing to be like
the, you know, the dominant force of the
narrative, you know, that they're the
enforcer of the narrative and, you know,
very dismissive and very rude and
saying, you know, just insulting things
about anybody that deviates from it
instead of just saying this is why I
think this is the case and this is what
we've learned over the ears and this is
but having humility when you're dealing
with especially when you're dealing with
something like cognitive like anything
involving consciousness anything
involving the human mind it's so complex
there's so much going on and it's so
biologically variable there's so many
different people that have different
ways of thinking and their mind works
differently one of the more illuminating
things about doing this p this podcast
is having so many different people in
here and so many different
conversations. So many unique and
fascinating people, but they're all
different.
>> Yeah. Yeah. You're you're like you're
like tasting from all the different
flavors of humanity and and it's a
delight to listen to, but I I I sort of
want to know what it's like to be in
your brain as you start to so it's like
you're a sponge and you're soaking in
all these points of view. So, the model
that you're building, I just I wonder a
lot about what it's like to be different
people and and I imagine the model that
you're building of the world is really
well informed. Hey, Jamie, could you
turn down my um
>> Oh, you could do it. There's a little
thing right there.
>> Oh,
>> we're like professionals.
>> It's like a whole show.
But yeah, I I I think the model that
you're building could be put to some
really powerful use. So, I'm here to
convince you to run for president.
>> Oh, God. trying to get me killed. Julia,
how dare you?
>> No, I'm not interested in any job of in
any government whatsoever.
>> I like doing this.
>> Okay, I get it. But
>> what you said about it's a really male
thing. I think it's better said to say
um
>> it's a really um insecure male thing or
an insecure it's an insecurity thing
that happens more probably to men
because there's such a standard of
you're supposed to be alpha. Everyone's
supposed to be alpha,
>> right? And for women, there's not that
standard or you're not, you know,
>> right?
>> And so there's more insecurity because
everyone can't be alpha.
>> And what the heck is alpha? And so I
feel like I I I have a desire for
someone who has a sense of their own
like is secure in their own masculinity
and their own femininity, which I think
you have both. I hope you don't mind me
calling you out on that, but I I know
that you like have this reputation of
being like total guy, but you have this
I mean because you're a deep listener,
that's already a feminine trait. And so,
>> is it really?
>> Yeah. Oh, yeah.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah.
>> I didn't know that. I never thought of
listening as being masculine or
feminine.
>> Listening is a deeply feminine trait
because you have to be relatively humble
to want to listen.
>> And humility is a feminine trait.
>> Yeah. No, it's just I don't I don't
think of it as a feminine trait.
>> Yeah, I don't think listening is a
feminine trait.
>> Yeah, maybe I'm wrong.
>> I think it's a kind
>> Women are generally better listeners. I
mean, that's
>> really
>> Yeah, it depends on if you're in a
relationship with them or not.
>> Depends on who you're talking to.
>> I don't know if that's true. I don't
know if that's true.
>> Let me see where I'm going to get in
there.
>> I think curious people, genuinely
curious people are better listeners.
That's what I think. And I don't think
women or men are genuinely more more
curious.
>> You're right. And I think that there's a
thing if you're always trying to prove
that you're alpha. And I think men more
susceptible to that.
>> Yeah.
>> Where you could not be a good listener
because you want to make sure you say
the right thing.
>> That's an insecurity thing.
>> And then I think there's more insecurity
among men because of those standards
that are ridiculous. And so maybe that's
what I'm talking about. But you're
definitely right. I can definitely think
of men and women who are both crappy
listeners and good listeners. So, it's
about the insecurity. It's about the
emotional maturity.
>> I think it's also a learned thing that,
you know, people have this desire to
show everyone how intelligent they are
and how dominant they are in any
particular subject. And it's one of the
most infuriating things about having
conversations where people aren't really
talking to you. They're just trying to
win whatever little verbal game you're
playing. They're trying to oneup you and
they're trying to
>> I've seen that.
>> Yeah. It's It's gross.
>> And also just like it makes you want to
leave.
>> Yeah. It's not fun. It's not a fun
conversation. Like
>> I love talking to people way smarter
than me.
>> It's fun. Like it I don't need like I
can't be the smartest person. I'm
friends with Elon. I'm definitely not
the smartest person. I know that. I'm
friends with a lot of people that are
[ __ ] way smarter than me. So, I'm
just curious and I I think uh the world
would be a lot better place if more
people were curious and if you embraced
it and not and just
>> squash that that insecurity that makes
you want to like puff your chest up and
>> see I don't think you can squash it like
I get I also think the world would be
better place if more people were curious
but I think the solution is I don't
think any squashing anything works like
I I think I think you have to work
through it.
>> That's a better way to say it.
>> Yeah.
>> Than squashing it, right?
>> Squashing it just means it's going to
come up later as garbage.
>> Yeah, that's Yeah. No, you said it
better. Yeah. It's really just
addressing why you're insecure. And for
a lot of men, um there's there's just
physical insecurity.
>> And the physical insecurity is a real
problem. But some of my favorite people
are martial artists. And one of the
reasons why is because they're the least
insecure. Everyone's insecure in some
way, but martial artists are dealing
with that insecurity literally on a
daily basis. So like say jiu-jitsu for
instance, if you're training jiu-jitsu,
if you go from white belt to black belt,
you have to get humiliated thousands of
times. You have to get there's no ifands
or buts about it. There's if you're a
white belt and you train with a black
belt, you're going to get humiliated or
>> dominated. You're going to lose. You
have no chance. And so by learning over
and over and over and over again that
you're not really special and it's
really just about the time you put in
and then about getting better and having
the ability to objectively assess your
position, who you are in this this room
of people that are trying to strangle
each other, who you are in the world
itself. And I think a lot of people
don't ever address that. And so they run
around trying to posture and pretend
they're something they're not. Pretend
they're smarter than they are. They're
more of an expert, a subject. They're
the one who should talk. You should
listen. You know, there's a lot of that
where whenever people say just shut up
and listen. I'm like, that's not I'm not
going to do that and I don't want to
talk to anybody that wants and I don't
ever want anybody to do that if I'm
talking.
>> Well, yeah, because then you're not
having a conversation. That person
doesn't exist.
>> Exactly.
>> You've just decided that person doesn't
exist or they don't matter. You just
you've asserted dominance in the dumbest
way possible, which is intellectual.
Like Yes. If you
>> It is the dumbest way possible. Sure.
>> And and the funny thing is culturally we
kind of think that it's the smartest way
possible.
>> Well, it's just a bunch of fools.
>> Well, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And so what
>> fools with a lot of information.
>> Okay. But let's talk about what what a
better world would be. So in a better
world in a better world, if you're going
to assert dominance, you would like the
Marshall. What I love about martial art
is it first of all it's it's all mental,
almost all mental. And then second, it's
very similar to what happens when you go
through and get your PhD, right? You get
beaten down
>> and you realize you're not the smartest
person in the room and you're hanging
out with all these other super smart
people and then you got to learn to be
like, "Okay, that's not what matters."
So that's the good part of of going nuts
with school. But but there's this um
false information that it reminds me of
when I was at UCSF and I went to go see
this talk by this famous scientist. I
think he won a Nobel Prize. I forget his
name. But he was an [ __ ] and he gave
his brilliant talk, but I couldn't pay
attention to it because he was an
[ __ ] He was being rude to people who
asked questions. He was just dickish. I
mean, I don't know how else to say it.
Just like arrogant.
>> Yeah. And I walked out and someone said
to me, one of my mentors said to me, you
know, you have to learn to separate the
personality from the information that
they're that they're giving. And I said,
you know, no, I don't like he's giving
me all the information in his
personality.
>> Right.
>> Right. I don't need to learn to listen
to that. I need to learn to say, unlike
all of you all, I need to learn to say
I'm not going to hang out with people
and put myself in the presence of people
who are rude like that. That's more
important than their amazing intellect.
And I somehow
somehow we got to a place culturally
where we think you can be really mean or
dismissive or rude and arrogant. And
that's fine because you're winning.
And I feel like a better world would
acknowledge that. What's more important
is
love,
>> which is this connection where you
actually acknowledge there's someone
else there. even if you like think
they're an [ __ ] But still,
>> yeah,
>> you know, like I wasn't practicing love.
I wasn't accepting him, who he was.
>> But I was in a place where the
environment wanted me to just ignore
sort of the information I was getting
about who this guy was and just say,
"No, all that matters is his
intelligence."
>> Yeah. No, sometimes you can learn a lot
from people that are gross.
>> Yeah. you know, and it's valuable to be
able to put their personality aside and
listen to the actual information. But
still,
>> in that moment though, I was
>> you don't want to. Yeah.
>> Well, in that moment, in that moment, I
was like 24 and I was a woman in a field
where there are a lot of guys and I was
feeling like I have to have boundaries,
>> you know, I have to learn to have
boundaries. And then later when I'm, you
know, like now I'm postmenopausal and
you know how postmenopausal women are,
we have much more confidence.
>> You're not playing that game anymore.
>> Yeah. No. Right. Exactly. It's like now
I'm like I can listen to, you know, some
[ __ ] listen to what he's saying. But
at the time it's like no, like I have to
stand up for something that I think is
important,
>> right?
>> You know,
>> I I'm not saying I'm better then. I'm
saying I had that experience that made
me see that there was this level of like
sort of import placed on the intellect
and that had always been the case. My
family had always placed all this level
of import on the intellect and I just
kind of walked out of that.
>> Well, it has to be balanced. Like I
think putting all of the emphasis on the
intellect itself and ignoring the
personality is kind of like the
messenger is important. Like the message
is important, but the the messenger
sucks that that you know if if someone
was yelling out the most amazing
information in the world, but they were
singing it like a Slayer song. I don't
know if that's a bad example, but you
know what I mean? You know those death
metal bands where they just scream and
you're like, "Oh jeez, I got to get out
of here.
>> It's not my thing, right?" But
>> it could be like the most interesting
information, but the messenger sucks.
It's not fun to listen to. It's not
exciting. Or the messenger's arrogant,
or the messenger's rude, or
>> it ruins the message.
>> Yeah, you need both.
>> Human beings need to communicate. And in
order to communicate, we need to we need
to establish that we're just two people,
you know, and if you have some
information that I don't have, I want to
hear it. I don't want to like, oh, she's
saying too many smart things. I want to
say something smart to show I'm smarter
than her. Well, hold on there. You know,
there's a lot of that. And that's a lot
of that in academia because that is
their entire identity.
>> It's a chess game.
>> Yes.
>> Yeah.
>> But it's a chess game with pieces that
are stunted. Like they're not allowed to
freely move.
>> No kidding. Yeah, it is a cult. I mean,
that's the cult part. That's where you
leave and people feel sorry for you and
you're like, I have my freedom. I'm so
excited. And they're like, I'm so sorry
for you.
>> Yeah. It's social hierarchies. It's
gross.
>> Yeah. And you know, I mean, I think
that's going to exist whenever there's
ego, whenever there's these the human
dynamics of these bizarre creatures that
we are where we're territorial apes with
weapons, you know, like we're weird and
we're always establishing some kind of
dominance, whether it's intellectual
dominance or wealth dominance or social
hierarchy dominance. Like people love
that stuff. They love it.
>> Is it Do we or so I
>> They love to play it. They love to
pretend.
>> We love to pretend it. But do I mean do
we really
>> Well, that's why people name drop.
That's why people want to have the the
fanciest cars and the nicest watches and
things.
>> I know. But is that really making them
happy?
>> No, it's not.
>> So, I don't know that people love it. I
think people do it because they think
it's going to make them happy, but I
don't think they love it.
>> Yeah, there's something to that. There's
there's probably something that some
sociopaths feel if they show up with a
million-dollar watch and a
million-dollar car and they, you know,
pull up in front of a giant house. It's
bigger than anybody. It's like, "Wow,
me. I did it."
>> But I think Yeah. What
>> that's rare. I think that's rare.
>> Yeah. I think it's not lasting either.
And then there's also a bunch of people
that are on [ __ ] pills. They don't
even know what they like.
>> They're just running around in the the
fog of pharmaceutical cloud.
>> That's the way they're dealing with it.
So it's like like I guess if we see it
as like there's this big problem which
is that I call this the human problem.
>> No one knows how to be with themselves
or others in any kind of harmony like
>> right harmony.
>> This is we don't know how to get to
harmony.
>> Right.
>> Right. And so one way is for drugs and
one way is prayer and one way is
>> the big car and the dominance and one
way is you know being addicted to your
phone. I mean what you know none of them
work
>> right
>> but all of I mean that's not true I
think prayer works but but I think the
only one that works is love and I think
that's what prayer is about but um
earnest prayer but
we have to try I mean we're built to try
to get to harmony
apparently because we keep trying and so
part of me wants to say
I'm of two minds part of me just says
like we're trying the best we can and we
have all these faults
And then there's a part of me that says,
"And we can do better."
>> Well, we definitely can. And I think
that's one of the reasons why people
hunger for conversations because we're
all trying to figure out how to do
better. Yeah.
>> The human mind is one of the most
>> extraordinary things that's ever been
studied. And yet there's no guide book
on how to use it.
>> Because we still don't know. Do you know
how much we don't know? We know about as
much about the human mind now as we knew
in 1991 when I first went to graduate
school. I mean, in neuroscience, I mean,
the brain, we know a lot more about the
brain. We still don't know that much
about it. We're still missing some basic
pieces of like things like what's the
neural code? How do these neurons
actually communicate? How do we actually
learn? How do we actually represent
things in memory? But, but we know more.
But in terms of the mind, wow, we're
just beginning. I mean, I I guess I'm
differentiating the brain and the mind.
Like the brain is this like physical
chunk of stuff
>> that's related to the mind but the mind
is what we are doing
>> right
>> well the thinking feeling emoting
wondering all that stuff is mind stuff
and that's super mysterious
>> and super difficult to manage for almost
everybody.
>> Yeah. And again, no guide book. Like
you're giving the most complex
instrument known to man, which is the
human mind. And everybody's like,
"Figure it out."
>> And you're like, "Fuck. Maybe I'll
become a mooney. Maybe I'll go into
Scientology. What do I do? I have to do
something. I have to do some someone
knows. I know. I'm the one who knows.
Follow that guy." You know, it's like
that's we
>> do these 10 things and you'll be okay.
That's how cults get started.
>> We'll do those 10 things because we're
so nervous we can't figure it out.
>> Exactly.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Uh, have you ever seen a
baby be born?
>> Sure. Yeah.
>> Yeah. So, so have I. My own, but also I
was a doula for a couple friends who are
babies. And
>> you know, everyone should just see a
baby be born because
>> it's very psychedelic.
>> It's psychedelic. And it's also it just
it puts you in that liinal space where
um it's like you've seen beyond the
veil. You've seen the the border land
between life and death. Mhm.
>> And it feels to me like that experience
which is much more rare for people to
have now. Most people can can avoid
seeing a baby being born. Um but that
experience is and also seeing someone
die. That experience I think helps train
us in it is the instruction book for the
human mind. I don't know why I'm saying
that. I I look at you, you know, you're
wrinkling your brow and I'm like also
why am I saying that? I never
>> No, I'm only wrinkling my brow because
I'm listening. It's like the face of
someone who's always upset, but it's not
true.
>> No, I I I don't know why I said that.
Like, I've never had that thought
before. But occur. I guess I was looking
at this little like you've got this
little like idol thing on there.
>> Oh, that is um a death whistle. That's
an Aztec death whistle. Don't do it. You
Last time we did it, the pandemic
started.
>> I got really close enough.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. And with the headto virus thing
going on, don't blow it.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. It's there's a meme online cuz my
friend Brian Ken was in the podcast
studio and he blew this Aztec death
whistle like literally was like a week
before the [ __ ] pandemic kicked off.
It was way too close and the meme was
Brian Allen kicking off the pandemic
with the Aztec death whistle.
>> Okay. Well, I didn't blow it.
>> Yeah,
>> I saved everybody.
>> Do you know what Aztec death whistles
are?
>> I imagine it's really scary.
>> It sounds horrible. And they would play
them at night while their enemy was like
camped at night. And so they would haunt
them so they couldn't sleep.
>> They would stand on the mountain tops
and and make that noise.
>> Wow.
>> And it it's very high pitched and it
carries
>> like a crying baby.
>> Well, no. It's very It's like demons. It
sounds like demons.
>> Like people scream and you just think,
"This is the last day of my life."
>> Scream. Aztec soldiers will blow while
charging into battle and during human
sacrifices. But how does a whistle make
that horrifying sound? When air is blown
into the tube, the airflow splits into a
big and small chamber, each making a
different noise you're about to hear.
>> Click here to see me try the world's
loudest.
>> Did that guy survive this video?
>> I don't know. He might not even be real
in this world. That might be AI.
>> Well, that's true. So, no wonder I was
thinking about like the veil between
life and death because I was looking at
that thing and there's something that is
like a reset, you know, when you um when
you see a baby be born or you see
someone die,
>> it's like a um
it's like you get to what matters and
it's and it's not whatever the dominance
thing and it's not the insecurity thing
and it's not the
it's not any of that. Yeah,
>> you know, so I think that's the
instruction book. And so we're sort of
given these little resets that allow us
to get in touch with what it really
matters. But the more we get away from
them, you know, in the modern world, um
maybe the fewer instructions we have, I
don't know. Never had that thought
before.
>> Yeah. Um, I I think it would benefit
almost everyone to do something that
takes you out of your own thoughts. And
um, I think that physically difficult
things are the very best at that. Like
yoga is one of the very best things at
that because it's very physically
difficult to do. It it requires a lot of
willpower and concentration while you're
doing it. You're balancing yourself.
You're sweating. you're straining and
because it's so difficult, you can't
think of anything else other than it
while you're doing it. And I think that
cleans your mind out. And that it purges
you of all this weirdness that's inside
of you that is constantly battling with
everything around you and allows you to
just be.
>> Yeah.
>> Just exist.
>> Yeah. Yoga, I mean, child birth is very
physical. Dying is very physical.
>> Yeah. But the thing is, you can't
voluntarily do that every day.
>> No, you can't. You can't. But but I do
sort of think like child birth for women
who who go through it or are lucky
enough to go through it
>> um is kind of like boot camp for men. I
mean, it it really it really
pushes you to your limit
>> and then
puts you in an altered state where
>> Oh, for sure. You just had a human come
out of your body. Now it's alive and you
love it more than anything.
>> Yeah. And it brings this like incredible
I'm looking at this UFO guy behind you.
It brings this incredible self-trcendent
experience of like whoa,
>> right?
>> This is not about me,
>> you know? And so, yeah, same with people
who play team sports. I was never one of
them, but I hear that that experience
>> happens.
>> Yes.
>> Or like when you're practicing a musical
instrument. Well, I think anything
difficult I think doing when I was
talking about martial arts, you could
>> martial arts will help you in that
regard, but I think kind of anything
that's hard to do gets you out of your
head and helps you and just de and
getting an understanding that
>> whatever you're doing in life, if you
concentrate on it and focus on it and
and you'll get better at it and that
gives you confidence and an
understanding of kind of how the world
works. And then you could also apply
that to being a person, you know, like
you're you're not the same person you
were when you were 20 years old, right?
Why? Because you're better at being a
person because you've lived a lot.
You've had a lot of experiences. You
made a lot of mistakes and you're
constantly constantly practicing and
learning, you know, and I think other
things that you can do other than just
being a person will enhance your ability
to be a person.
>> Yeah. Being a person who is applying
yourself to something.
>> Yes. My my martial arts instructor had
this thing that he told me when I was
very young. He said that martial arts
are a vehicle for developing your human
potential
>> and that
>> I think but I think that could be guitar
playing that could be tennis. When I
used to teach remote viewing, we used to
call it a mental martial art. It it's
anything that's hard
>> um on which you have to concentrate that
puts you in that space of flow.
>> And the flow means like you know you
know that Mahali chickep mahal idea I
don't know if I pronounced his name
right but this idea of timelessness and
you're just sort of having to surf
whatever is happening. Mhm.
>> And that could happen it could happen in
any field, right? Whatever whenever you
have to apply your whole self to
something then what's it's so ironic
because you apply your whole self to
something and then what that allows to
happen is that you become selfless. Like
you're almost like a tube,
>> right? You're not thinking about you
anymore. You're thinking about the
thing.
>> Yeah. And there's neuroscience to back
that up, right?
>> Yeah. Yeah. I think anything difficult
there that I I feel that when I practice
archery, I feel that when I play pool, I
feel that when I work out, anything
difficult where you you you lose
yourself, but in doing that you like you
could you have a better understanding of
yourself, which is
>> Yeah.
>> odd.
>> Yeah. And it's almost like you come into
consciousness more.
>> Yeah. I'm really fascinated by the
remote viewing and I want to get to
that, but I want to start with like how
did you begin
studying this stuff? So, you're involved
in neuroscience. You're, you know,
you're trying to pick which lane you're
going to really pursue all your
interests in. How did you get involved
in this idea of premonition and psychic
ability and that there's a real
something there?
Yeah, I um I sort of hid it from my I
hid my agenda from myself. So really I I
discovered, you know, later in life.
Yeah. Because when I was a kid, uh my
first precognitive dream that I remember
was when I was seven and um it was very
clear. I dreamt that my friend I knew
which friend Eane would what would
happen? She would lose her watch. Where
would it happen? On the playground. And
then the next day that happened. It was
very specific, you know, it wasn't like
you don't have to be metaphorical about
it. What does it mean that Shane lost
her watch on the playground the next
day?
>> Right.
>> And so
>> did you tell your parents?
>> Yeah. And they said my mom so my so my
so my very eccentric um family would
always talk about dreams at the
breakfast table. My mom is a therapist
and a learning disability specialist. My
dad was a physicist. My sister's an
artist and we would all talk about
dreams. And so I would I mentioned this
and my dad, the physicist, says, "Well,
that's a coincidence." And my mom, the
therapist, says, "You should get a dream
journal and write them down." And so I
did that. And um
>> your dad just dismissed it as a
coincidence.
>> You know, he he has come around.
>> That's a very specific coincidence.
>> It's three three factors. And I always
like to say if you have two or more
factors, it's likely precognit. just the
one lost the watch and then she loses
her watch.
>> She did just get her watch. She was we
were seven years old. She got her watch
from her father. You know, I could you
could predict that as someone who's good
at figuring out what kids do is that
they might lose the watch, right? So,
that could be a coincidence. You have to
think about all the possible things that
could happen to a seven-year-old and the
watch that they just got. Losing it is
up there.
>> Yeah. But you thought about it the day
before she lost it.
>> I dreamt it the day before she lost it.
>> It Yeah. So he did dismiss it as a
coincidence, but we also had ball
lightning and like weird orbs in our
house and he also dismissed that as not
actually having happened.
>> Wait, you had ball lightning in your
house?
>> Yeah, we were in this old farmhouse in
Libertyville, Illinois where I grew up
and we lived with my grandparents there
and um and uh ball lightning came inside
the house and my mother stood up for it.
My mother said, "Ed," my my dad's name,
you know, "Didn't you see that lightning
zipping around the house last night?"
Lightning. And my dad said, "Um,
that couldn't have happened."
>> Did he see it?
>> Of course, he saw it,
>> but he just wanted to see.
>> But he didn't have an explanation for
it.
>> What does your dad do?
>> He was a theoretical physicist when for
his dissertation. He was at University
of Chicago. He he discovered or or or
showed somehow the electron layer on the
moon that there's this like atmosphere
of electrons on the moon.
And um
>> how can he say that that couldn't
happen?
>> So the one of the reasons so people are
so complex with the reasons they go into
particular fields and my experience with
physicists my dad included is they tend
to go into this field of physics because
the whole job of physics is to simplify
everything into a few equations. Right?
Let's like there's the funny there's the
I don't know if it's funny but there's
the standard physics joke of like all
right let's figure out the volume of a
cow. you know, let's let's just estimate
it. It's a sphere, you know, and so it's
like you cut off the legs and the and
and the heads and the tail and all of a
sudden you're just calculating a sphere
which doesn't give you the volume of the
cow. And so I think there's a desire to
simplify everything and I think there's
a desire to control things. Um, and many
many many physicists have OCD and have
control issues. my dad had severe severe
OCD. And so in his in his mind, um it
couldn't have happened because it would
all his circuits would fry
>> because he didn't know how to explain
it.
>> And my mother just stood up for it and
said, "Well, it did happen and you saw
it and I saw it and it hit the edge of
my room and then went out and there was
still like the brown mark where it was
burned in the corner of the room." So
like we had plenty of evidence. Um,
so there was stuff going on and there
was a there was this pushpull with my
mom who just uh believed in the primacy
I guess of or the importance of
experience like we saw it and uh the
pull from my dad who believed in if you
didn't understand if you didn't have a
theory for something it couldn't exist
and so I was living in that. So what I
did was I kept a dream journal uh sort
of the rest of my life. I I still write
every morning my dreams and started to
notice that I was really good at
precognitive dreaming and it would
happen again and again and again and I
would have um experience we can get into
later the weird school stuff but
experiences at school that reminded me
that I had this capacity and um
then I hid it from myself when I
realized I wanted to go to graduate
school and actually be a scientist.
So by by which I mean I just sort of
said well all of that stuff's crap even
though I was still having those
experiences. I had to kind of split off.
This is a thing that you have to do if
if you think okay I have to ride the
academic train right and the academic
train says like I'm going to do hard
science. I'm going to you go to the best
neuroscience school. I'm going to you
know
>> right? And then by the time I was in my
late 20s
and um I was in my second graduate
school getting my PhD at Northwestern, I
started to remember and the reason I
started and it's not like I had really
forgotten, but it's like it just wasn't
allowed to be real. I started to study
timing in the auditory system because I
I was into understanding how the
auditory system managed things in time.
And then I started to ask myself, why am
I so interested in time? Why am I so
interested in the nature of time and how
it works? And then boom. Oh, right.
Because I keep having these precognitive
dreams. There's obviously something we
don't understand about how time works
because these are so consistent and
clear. And at that point, you know, I
knew that was happening because I knew I
wasn't making it up. I could look at my
journal and I could see it. So that's
when I started saying, "All right, you
know, I'm old enough to choose my own
path and I'm going to start asking these
questions."
And when you started asking them and
trying to apply it in uh using the
scientific method, how did you first
attempt to do that?
>> Well, I called I I was a I I'm kind of
fearless when it comes to cold calling
people, especially scientists, because
very few people call scientists. So, I
called up Dean Raiden. I had read some
of his work from the Institute of Nordic
Sciences. I called him up and I said,
"Um, hi, my name's Julia." And I was
thinking of going into this field and I
think pre-cognition is real. And he's
like, "Oh, okay." And uh and I remember
where I was sitting uh when I called him
and uh he said the thing you have to do
is get your PhD in a field that is not
this. So finish your PhD and then as a
posttock start to investigate it. So I
did. I finished my PhD while I was
studying all this other stuff and
understanding the field. And then as
soon as I got into my posttock years, I
found a sympathetic adviser at
Northwestern in the cognitive
neuroscience program and um and just
said I want to start studying this
stuff. So I at the same time I had one
foot in more mainstream stuff about
timing and the auditory and the visual
system and then the other foot was in
this purely basically psychic stuff
trying to understand it and I made an
experiment. Um there's a foundation
called the Bial Foundation in Portugal
and I wrote I wrote an application to
them and they funded my postoc so I
could study the sense of being stared at
um with like closed circuit TV monitors
and I could study how the skin
physiology you know skin conductance or
sweat changes when um just before you
get a response right on a random like
psychic task and so that that's kind of
precognition or presentiment and then I
just pulled from I got really interested
in presentiment because I saw that it
was real and I also saw there was a big
gender difference that was fascinating
to me which is that before men got their
first trial correct and this is just a
guessing game so that you know it's
randomly selected their skin conductance
would go crazy like they just won the
lottery and when they before they didn't
get it correct or they were incorrect it
would just kind of like peter along so
they were anticipating at a very high
what the future was going to bring,
whether they were going to win or not.
Whereas women practically, but not
totally, showed the opposite. But their
skin, but but regardless of what
happened, whether it was correct or
incorrect, they were much lower than
men. So men were really excited about
the future correct thing. At least their
physiology showed that. So I got
fascinated by that and pulled together a
bunch of um worked with a couple other
people at different institutions and
pulled together 26 studies over the past
or the prior I guess 40 years that
looked at this kind of physiological
change that predicts essentially a
random future event and uh just analyzed
it.
>> Do you have a theory as to why men have
that response and women don't?
>> You know, I kind of think it's cultural.
Well, you were talking about the
importance of winning
and I think
I mean that we know that gambling
addicts are twice as likely or maybe
three times as likely to be men as
women.
>> Really?
>> Yeah. And
the importance of winning, well, I don't
know if it's biological or cultural, but
in any case, the importance of being
alpha or the importance of winning, I
think it's a big deal.
It's a big deal to the to men.
>> Do you think that goes back to tribal
war?
>> I think it goes like back to like
chimpanzees.
>> Yeah. Which do tribal war.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. I mean, it kind of makes sense
that the importance in winning is
literally survival or death.
>> You will get kicked out of your little
chimpanzeee colony.
>> Not only that, the ability to predict
things that are going to happen would
probably keep you alive.
>> Yeah. Like if you were running into an
ambush, you're like, I don't like this
or something's wrong, something's off,
or now's the time to go, like I feel it.
>> Mhm.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. So those combined, but you know,
there's other tasks that aren't about
winning that are just about is, you
know, are you going to see a picture
that's scary versus a picture that's
neutral where women and men both show
the effect. But in this particular task,
it was just like very clear. And then I
replicated it in heart heartbeat. So
that first one was in skin conductance
and then I looked at heart rhythms and I
replicated that same thing where men are
like oh yeah here we go
>> and women are like d um it doesn't if
something doesn't matter so much to you
in the future I don't think it matters
so much to you in anticipating it.
>> Now here's the question about this
stuff. Do you think that this is an
emerging phenomenon in human
consciousness or do you think it's
something that has atrophied that was
available before language? So
>> it's very clearly available. I mean
before language.
>> Okay, that's what I think. I've been
thinking that a lot lately. And one of
the things that I've been thinking is
>> one of the things that we've noticed
like I think phones and the internet and
the computers are an amazing thing. You
can acquire so much information. You can
learn about things. You can encounter
new people. There's so much stuff that's
great about the internet. The bad thing
is a lot of people have a much shorter
attention span now because of social
media. And then now they're
demonstrating that through use of large
language models, a lot of people are
actually getting dumber. Yes. Or I've
>> noticed it already.
>> Well, it's they've studied it and they
especially children, they're they're
actually less capable of solving
problems themselves because they always
turn to a computer and have the computer
solve a problem. And the more I think
about that, the more I look at that, I
go, "Well, what is language?" Language
is a technology. And language is a
technology that allows you to say things
with your mouth and I know what you're
thinking. Maybe before that existed, we
had an understanding of what we were
thinking. You know, maybe there's like
some sort of a weird psychic connection
that we all believe that people have
with each other in some way or form and
some of it's you could demonstrate some
of it, you know, but most of it is just
intuition and feeling. And I always
wonder like is this atrophied? Like
before we could talk, when we were just
these bipeedal homminids with, you know,
larger brains and all the other mammals
and these weird abilities to be curious
and figure out things and develop tools,
like what was what was consciousness
like before language, before written
language? You didn't have a word for dog
and tree and like what was it that was
going on in your head? If you don't like
you think in your head, I think in my
head in a voice.
>> Yeah. You know, and they say some people
don't have an internal voice. You don't
have an internal voice.
>> I have pictures.
>> That's interesting.
>> Yeah.
>> Really?
>> Yeah. I sometimes wonder about that if
that's why I can I can do the remote
view.
>> Only pictures.
>> Feelings.
>> Oh, I have a whole dude in my brain.
>> Yeah. I I've heard that most people have
that.
>> No, I don't think it's most people. I
think it's kind of Well,
>> is it your voice? Like
>> Oh, it's not me. No. I mean, it
>> is like your dad or
>> No, no, no.
>> Is it Is it a guy?
>> Yeah, it's like a general.
>> Oh,
>> it's like someone's going, "Shut the
[ __ ] up." Like, "Go to work. Go do this.
What are you talking about? Why you
being such a bitch?"
>> So, he's kind of a jerk.
>> No, no, no, no, no. He's right. Always.
My voice is never wrong. My inner
self-correcting voice is always correct.
It's always right. It's always like it's
uh I mean if you wanted to get really
crazy you would say it's like a guardian
angel in your brain that's stirring you
steering you in the right direction. But
if I've done something wrong in my life,
made a mistake in my life, said
something I shouldn't have said. That
voice berates me.
>> Wow. So that seems hard.
>> No, it's good. It's great.
>> I mean like but you got to get over it.
Well,
>> but that's how you learn. Well,
I mean, let's talk about that.
>> Okay.
>> Because when people go through hard
things, one way to learn is like
berating.
>> Uhhuh.
>> Um, but that's kind of like not as
sustainable as forgiving yourself and
deciding that you can figuring out how
you can do better. I mean, is berating
really the best?
>> I think you have to feel pain from
mistakes.
>> But don't you already feel the pain?
>> Yeah. You got to really feel it.
>> I don't like making mistakes twice. And
the best way to not make make a mistake
twice is have the first one suck so bad
that you never want to go through that
again. And if it doesn't really suck,
make it suck in your head.
>> But does it already
does I feel like it already sucks
without a guy telling you that it sucks.
>> Well, it's not nec I mean, I'm kind of
exaggerating. It's not just that, but
it's like it's not even like you're you
it's not poratives. It's not, you know,
insults. You're a [ __ ] loser. It's
like you [ __ ] up that you did this.
You were supposed to do that. You you
were supposed to get something done. You
didn't get it done. You were supposed to
do this, but you [ __ ] it up. Like,
don't [ __ ] it up again. This is what you
did wrong. Don't do that again. I get
it.
>> This is what you could have done right.
>> It's like your conscience.
>> It is like a conscience, but it's very
strong. It's very loud.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. And I have to learn how to
sometimes ignore it and just calm.
Otherwise, I won't sleep.
>> Right. I need that be too harsh.
>> Yeah. But it doesn't like I don't hate
myself or anything like that. It's not
that. But it's just like
>> honest.
>> Yeah.
>> It's just an honest assessment of
everything that I've ever done
>> ever. Yeah.
>> That sounds That's like instant karma.
>> Yeah. In a way. Yeah. But it works. It
works. And I think it made me makes me a
better person. I'm better than I would
have been if I didn't have that
self-correcting mechanism. There's this
poem by this mystic and I forget her
name but at the end of it she says um
at the end of the day I always bring to
my mind all the people that I was kind
to and then I can fall asleep. And so if
you know that's another way to do it,
right? If you know that
>> at the end of the day you have to look
in the face
>> Yeah.
>> of all the people that you were kind to
so you can fall asleep then that kind of
makes your day
>> that. Yeah. No, definitely. And I think
I always tell people that being kind and
being generous is kind of selfish.
>> Yeah,
>> because because Exactly.
>> Because you feel better.
>> Yeah, you do.
>> You feel better about yourself. You feel
better about life. You feel better about
everything. It's actually a good thing
to do to be kind and generous. And that
that's like
>> counter to like you shouldn't think that
way. No, you should just be kind and
generous. I I agree. But also, you
benefit from it. And I think the more
people understand that you benefit, the
more people are likely to behave in that
way and it'd be better for everybody.
>> So back to the language thing. So this
actually to me relates to the language
thing. If you develop language,
um you are more aware of of what you're
thinking in a certain sense if you think
linguistically.
>> Um but you also
in a way sort of dampen down as as you
say and I agree with you that there's
this there's a there's a trade-off
there. you dampen down the the sort of
instant knowledge of how people around
you are feeling like the telepathy
thing. So I keep looking at this skull,
right?
>> And so what we know I don't think but I
don't think we've lost it. So you you
had this idea that we've lost that
psychic stuff. I think it's absolutely
there and I think it's
neuroscientifically defensible that it's
there, but that language actually
suppresses it. So
>> yeah, atrophies it.
>> It doesn't atrophy it. It's like you can
actually use um so okay so there's this
cool result from this guy in Bayrust his
name's Morris Freeman and he's a
neurologist there uh up in Canada and he
noticed in his um stroke patients that
if they had lesions here so their stroke
kind of messed up this area here left
frontal orbital area um of the brain in
the cortex um that they seem to be more
psychic like he didn't know how to
explain it. So he did an actual
experiment where he tried to get people
to move with their minds an arrow on a
computer screen. So that there was no
mouse. There was no way to move it. They
just had to look at the arrow and say
move to the left or move to the right
and wish it to happen and using their
intention. Right? So the people who had
the strokes there were able to do it
statistically significantly.
Um people who had the strokes over here
were not able to do it. So, can I pause
you here? What was actually moving the
cursor?
>> So, he had a random number generator
hooked up to the direct. So, the cursor
was kind of like shaking
>> and the random number generator would
make it deviate to the left or to the
right. So, the person was effectively
changing the random number generator.
>> How often?
>> Um, enough so that it was statistically
significant.
>> What is statistically significant?
>> So, what you would do is sure you would
have a control. So you have the the try
period where you say to the person try
to move it to the left, try to move it
to the right. And then you have the
control period where you say, you know,
read a book, like you're not trying. And
you compare the amount the distance and
the amount of time it's spent in the
intended direction to the reading a book
time. And if it's you can, you know,
there's statistical tests you can use to
determine whether it was spending time
in the intended direction more often
when it was intended.
>> But but how much more often? um a number
that's statistically significant. So I
guess so it's like imagine
>> 5% 10%.
>> Oh I forget what the actual quantitative
number
>> but that would be interesting to know.
>> I totally would. I just
>> and whether or not it would change with
different humans.
>> I I agree. But then he then he
replicated it instead of looking at
stroke patients. He looked at uh used uh
transcranial magnetic stimulation
>> which turns down activity. So he put
that over here. So he's putting that
over the left area
>> and to turn that down and again they
people these are not people have had
strokes just regular people you and I
they were able to do this with their
minds so it's just sitting there what
was his explanation is that the front um
uh left orbital frontal area is we know
that it inhibits the right uh frontal
area and we know that the right orbital
frontal inhibits the left and his
explanation is this stuff is going on in
the right hemisphere or at least is
dominated by that. And um when you
suppress it, it you're not as psychic.
And when you release the suppression,
you are more psychic. And it's just
right under the surface. It's right
there.
>> And so when I when I work with
non-speaking autistic kids, it's um it
feels to me like that's a pretty good
explanation of what's going on. They're
not activating this part as much. I I
not that I've proven this. This is a
hypothesis and and and it's not I'm not
the only one with the hypothesis, but
they're not activating this part as
much. We know that because this is where
speech is over here, right? These areas
uh in the left. And so therefore, this
area can be a little bit more free. So
the psychic stuff is coming out.
>> Huh. Well, that's one of the weird
things that they've demonstrated about
certain psychedelics like psilocybin.
You would think that it just like turns
on your mind and all the synapses are
firing. No.
>> Dampens. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Which is very weird.
>> Yeah.
>> Because it makes you think like what are
we doing with the mind or the brain I
should say, not the mind.
>> Well, and the brain is related to the
mind in ways we don't understand. And
then it's sometimes not related to the
mind, right? Like in the psilocybin
results,
>> you're having all these experiences,
>> but the brain is dampened. Yeah. What's
going on? And there's the filter theory
of consciousness says, well,
consciousness is kind of like out there
almost like a radio signal, and your
brain's kind of filtering it.
>> Yes. So that then you have this simple
like oh pick up the cup and say the
words and you know you can kind of live
your life without realizing that person
over there is having this experience and
that's going on and then in the future
this will happen. So it makes sense to
me that it's like our conscious minds in
order to just deal with daily life have
to be kind of stupid
>> and then
>> because otherwise you'd be overwhelmed
by all the data and possibilities
you're in the universe and
>> it's so much data. multisellular
creatures all around you and subatomic
particles like
>> well yeah and then and that's and and
when we're working with um I work with a
whole team that works with non-speaking
autistic kids like in telepathy tapes
and when we're working with them like
they get distracted by that stuff like
they'll say I you know I'm distracted
they when I say say I mean they're you
know typing on a letterboard or a
keyboard
>> you know there's spirits in the room or
you know I'm I'm thinking about what you
did earlier today that I didn't know
about but I do know about cuz I'm
telepathic, you know, and so it's like a
lot of information that makes it pretty
hard to be in the here and now.
>> Has have any of those non-verbal
autistic kids ever wrote something down
where they couldn't possibly have known
it?
>> Yeah.
>> Like what?
>> Oh, I can give you many examples. In
fact, um, do you want to I have a video
of that.
>> Oh, sure. Okay.
>> I have to walk you through the video.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. Do you have that over there?
>> I don't know.
>> I gave you like 18 things. Oh, I give me
a second. Sorry.
>> Okay. So, the So, let me explain the
context.
>> Okay.
>> So, um uh I met my research team
partially through people I had already
worked with and partially folks who uh
Kai Dickens, creator of the telepathy
tapes, introduced me to.
>> I had her on.
>> Yeah, I know. It was a great show.
>> Very interesting.
>> And so, I I wanted to ask that question.
Can we use rigorous methods to have
folks write down non-speakers or
spellers, whatever we want to call them?
Um, I think non-speakers or spellers are
preferred. Um, non-verbal kind of
implies that they don't have language at
all. But the the reality is they don't
they may speak, but they don't speak to
communicate. They use letterboards or
>> Got it.
>> or keyboards. Um, I wanted to understand
like they're doing all these tests where
they're repeating numbers and letters
and that's interesting, but it doesn't
really to me I mean the whole world of
testing people for psychic abilities,
it's not very interesting. And if we
presume that these students are actually
pretty smart, it's got to be boring for
them. And so I thought, well, let's give
them an opportunity to really show their
stuff. And so I set up this whole
rigorous trial set and even the
non-speakers came on board and actually
told us what they would like to see the
stimuli be. We want videos, we want
music, we want words and the videos that
are sung. I mean they just told us all
these things that they wanted and by by
again using the letterboards and we said
okay we can do all that but the the
catch is the person who's sending the
information is going to be in another
room maybe like 30 yards away with a
closed door and you can work with your
communication partner but she is not
going to know what the target is and
she's going to have no idea what the
target could be because she's never
going to see any of the target videos
that we'll use.
And so we were preparing for this and uh
we were getting our software ready. We
were preparing for the formal trials
that would be filmed for the for the
documentary. And so we were doing that
on Zoom. We weren't yet in person, but
the non-speaker that I'm about to tell
you about was with his communication
partner, Maria Welch, who's a speech and
language pathologist. Um and he was, you
know, getting ready to do the trial. We
were explaining it to him and I was in
Virginia. Maria and the student were in
um in Illinois and then Jeff Tarant uh
another co-investigator,
another neuroscientist was in Oregon.
And so the person who was going to send
the video, in other words, just intend
to send the video like in a tele
telepathy experiment was going to be
Jeff. The non-speaker chose Jeff. And
then um
we did it. We turned off our cameras. We
were on Zoom. We turned off our cameras.
We turned off our microphones. Jeff sent
the video.
Maria and the student started I don't
know intending to receive it. And then
the the student said he was ready. He
spelled that he was ready. And then
Maria asked the question that I put I
thought I had put in the Zoom chat for
her because we didn't have our software
set up. So I had to send her a question
in the Zoom chat. And I and the way we
traditionally did it at that time was I
asked multiple choice. Is it a is it a
this this or this? But the thing is by
mistake I sent that to Jeff because I
had a private chat with him going. So I
didn't realize that she didn't have the
questions. Meanwhile the student
starts to spell on the letterboard. He
says I'm ready. He says it's a beautiful
sky.
And she had not seen the questions.
Um, it was a beautiful sky. The of all
the videos in the world that he picked
to describe that way, it was a video of
the tops of trees and then above them
like northern lights that had been
colored like by an artist to look even
more cool and then it's like a time
lapse. And he said it's it's art of a
beautiful sky. And that was a really
great description. And statistically
there's almost no way to calculate how
statistically likely that is because it
could have been any video in the world.
And we didn't even give him the the
multiple choice.
>> Whoa.
>> Yeah. So, actually that's not the video
I'm going to show you. I just realized
that I wanted to answer the question
more directly. The video I'm going I
want to show you if you can find it is
one of what we call a telepathy train
where the students and this happened
more than once when when we were
physically in town in in Chicago as a
team where the one student comes in and
says something leaves and the next
student comes in with their mom and they
check in. You know, Maria always asks
them, "Would you like to check in?" And
then they refer to the thing the last
student was talking about. And um and it
happened in a really compelling way in
this video because there was also a
discussion that the first student who
comes in, which I believe I'm calling
participant four just for anonymity. So
participant four comes in and asks says
he wants to go on a double date with
participant five and his girlfriend.
And then and then he says tell his mom.
And then when participant five comes in,
he says, um, tell my mom I want to go to
on a double date with participant four
and his girlfriend. So they clearly had
already discussed this telepathically
because they're non-speakers. They're
not talking to each other. Their parents
haven't talked to each other about this.
Their parents don't know each other. And
so
so that happened and then they also
passed on this. So this stuff kept
happening. They also passed on this idea
of slamming a beach ball on the ground
in order to identify each of the videos
because they wanted to get the telepathy
uh signals right, but they were missing
them, you know, on the formal trials.
So, they discussed between themselves
apparently telepathically. If you slam a
beach ball on the ground before we do
the trial, then we'll focus on it in
time and we'll go to the right timeline
>> to talk about this is this is what they
write down to to get to the video in our
minds. And so that's the video that I
wanted to show you if it's here where
where because I don't include the double
date stuff in it because it's too
private and they say too many names of
other
>> on the page I have it says here's a link
but there's no link that I can find
unless
>> oh um you know what if you go uh go back
to what you just saw and then say I
worked with my team to get out this
response right away. It includes a link
to this video as well.
>> I had that open.
>> Yeah. So that's the on the unailable,
right? Then if you go um down.
>> I didn't see a video.
>> Go up.
Go down. You're going too fast here.
>> Sorry. I'm just going to the top and
then
>> Yeah. So that's my mom and my other mom.
All right. Scroll all the way down.
You got it. Keep going. This is all
about the science stuff. Okay. Now stop
right there. Slow down.
And then now go a little bit more down.
Okay. Go up.
Yeah.
>> Video the debrief.
>> You got it.
>> All right.
This is it.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> And that's Jeff and me on the right. And
that's Maria.
>> Maybe someone else has questions to ask.
I was wondering if the best way to
present the video so that the timing
doesn't become a factor. Like maybe he
saw a video at a different time, but how
could we make this one stand out so you
know that's the one we're talking about?
>> Yeah, great. That's kind of what I was
going to ask.
>> And that's Natalia on the very left.
Put your foot on the floor.
And so he's typing something into a
keyboard right now.
>> He's typing into the keyboard.
>> It's got electronic voice.
>> And the electronic voice is hard to
hear. So she'll repeat it. And then I
also have a little slide that shows what
I said.
>> What did the voice say?
>> Slam.
>> Slam.
Hey,
>> slam a ball.
>> This is where he's giving us this idea
to slam a ball on the ground to get him
to the right timeline in telepathy
trials. It was his idea. We never It
never occurred to us. Before that,
>> that's before.
>> I picked up the F. I don't know why.
Before.
>> Great.
>> By the way, Maria has a big crush on
you.
She knows you're married, but she told
me not to tell you.
>> Thanks.
>> To said thanks.
video.
>> Okay. Who should where or which person
would be helpful to do that for the
video?
>> So, this
>> Okay, so this is the transcript of it.
Slam a ball before sending. That's what
he's saying.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh, Natalia says, "Who should do that
before the video is sent?"
>> He says,
>> he says, "Scender." What kind of ball?
Slam a beach ball. Why would you draw
your Why would that draw your attention
to this timeline? He says, "Because I
could see and hear it when looking in
the future." Does it matter how many
times she slams it? He says, "Before
each video once."
>> Yeah.
>> So, the slamming of the ball allowed him
to look into the future is what he was
saying.
>> He was hoping that would work because he
had just failed a telepathy trial and he
said, "I was on a different timeline."
And we said, "So, how can we get you on
this timeline?" and he said he made up
this idea of slamming a beach ball. And
what we found fascinating about it was
um you know that's an original idea that
none of us thought about. But then we
also found it fascinating because of
what you'll see next which is the next
person who comes in who of course hadn't
heard any of this.
This is another participant participant
five and Natalia is
>> participant four arrives out to
participant five leaves. He asked to go
on a double date with participant five
and his girlfriend. Something
participant five asked about participant
four already. He also brings up
something participant five mentioned
about how to make the telepathy work
better.
>> What is that voice?
>> That's him. He um
He's able to type and um do this sort of
sing song talking at the same time.
>> Good to try the beach ball.
>> Now, did you see how Natalia just does
that little shrug?
>> It would be good to try the beach ball
slam. So, now he didn't hear that other
conversation at all. He wasn't in the
room.
>> His mom was so he was at home with his
mom. So, he came in after we had a
20-minute break between the producers.
>> So, he wasn't anywhere near the
building. No, there's no way he could
have known. That's why Natalyia gave
that shrug like see she and Maria see
this all the time where students will
all be talking about the same thing and
they
>> so he just comes in and says the beach
ball slam would be a good idea.
>> Yeah.
>> So he somehow in that conversation.
>> Whoa.
>> Yeah. And this this is it is it is like
they are all in the same conversation
and
it is so it's hard to think about what
it would be like but it's becoming more
and more clear to me that it would be
very difficult to just be in this
conversation where the words are coming
out of our mouths
>> if you also are just having all these
conversations with other people. I mean,
it's like an incredible focus. And so,
the work that he has to do to type and
then he's also using his singong voice
and he's clearly having some kind of
conversation
>> in his head. It's incredible focus that
they're actually having to do. And many
of them have dyspraxia, so their bodies,
it's hard for them to control their
bodies,
>> which is part of the speech issue. And
so, um, I I I just think they're all
gifted. I mean, at this point,
>> right? Well, there's that thing that
they kept talking about in the telepathy
tapes where they all meet
>> on the hill
>> psychically on the hill. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So, I had
>> And they all talk about it independently
like it's not something that has been
taught to them like do you meet on the
hill? Oh, yeah. I do. No, they they've
talked about it independently which is
very weird,
>> right? And one way so
>> odd concept.
>> Well, I I turn on my scientist hat when
I think about that and I think okay well
they could have heard it on the
telepathy tapes and then they started
talking about it. But that's not how it
seemed to have worked. But I I have my
own experience of that particular
student. I forget whether I called him
participant four or participant five at
the end.
>> He and I became um I had a good
understanding of his mind and we had
some good conversations. And I had a
dream one night where um he came to me
and all he did was show me this like it
was like a it was like a sun where you
could see the sunspots and it was just
slowly turning and it was beautiful and
he just gave it to me. And then the next
day I was working with him over Zoom and
so I asked Maria I said can I ask him a
question? You know and she said sure.
And I said, you know, last night you
gave me something. You gave me a shape.
What was the shape? Because I didn't I
hadn't told Maria about the dream or
anyone else. It was just my dream that I
wrote in my journal. Um, and I was
thinking he would say ball or sphere.
And that would either be a good guess or
it would be telepathy. But he goes,
I can't I still can't get over this. I
sent you a a pre-revolutionary
orb with four stars on it slowly
rotating.
>> What is a pre-revolution?
>> I don't [ __ ] know.
>> I don't know. I mean,
>> four stars on it
>> with four star stars on it slowly
rotating.
>> But that's not exactly what you saw in
the dream.
>> Well, there were these sunspots. So,
see, he's see there's a poetic license
that they have. I I would say that's 80%
correct. So, it was slowly rotating and
there were these sunspots that I were
calling I was calling sunspots. He was
calling stars.
>> And it was definitely an orb. What does
pre-revolutionary mean? I don't know.
They talk about and I talk about in my
book the love revolution. this idea that
we're moving towards a time when we can
actually use love in our lives to
communicate and to connect people. But
maybe that's what he means. Um, and then
so that's one instance. So I sort of go,
okay, that was interesting. And it kind
of blew my mind that he used that
language. He's very he's just gifted at
interesting language. And then this
other non-speaker who worked with
Natalia who is the young woman you saw
on the left who also works with a lot of
spellers
um just decided
to start reading my mind like we did he
started I asked Natalyia I said can we
just do an experiment where I'll be
doing something and I'll know what I'm
doing at that time and you just ask one
of your students to to read my mind and
then no one else will know what I'm
doing and she won't know what I'm doing.
And so what I was doing was doing this
remote viewing uh for a friend. And so I
knew exactly what I was doing during
that time. And what I was thinking, but
what I was thinking about was remember
that comet
>> Threeey Atlas.
>> Mhm.
>> So I was thinking I was kind of
obsessively thinking about Three Atlas
like what is it? What's the deal? You
know, it was during that exact time in
December last year.
>> And he comes back with
some stuff I don't understand like
poetic license. I call it poetic license
or just it's wrong that I don't
understand where it came from. And then
he says, um, oh, and threeey atlas and
he talks about this owl that I saw in a
video when I was doing the remote
viewing. Um,
and I was like, so Natalyia didn't even
know what three Atlas was. She had to
look it up. And the parent didn't know
what threei Atlas was. And he spelled it
three ey atlas.
>> Right. Wow.
>> So it was phonetic.
>> Yeah. And then later, a couple weeks
ago, I get a text from Natalia that the
same student, who apparently has now
felt perfectly fine reading my mind,
tapped into my mind when I was thinking
about a medication that my stepmom was
taking. And he used her name, which
Natalia didn't know, and told me that
she would be okay on the medication,
that it would help her. And then told
Natalia to text me, and so she did. The
three I atlas in writing it as E is very
strange. That's hard. That's because
that's not how it's written anywhere.
>> Yeah.
>> Right. So the fact that he wrote it I E
means he was hearing you.
>> It's how it's how you would hear it.
>> What the hell?
>> Yeah.
>> How weird.
>> So there's no way I can explain. Oh,
also he came up with my son's name which
Natalyia didn't know. So that could have
been from her, but still he read her.
>> Did you ask him more about this
pre-revolutionary orb with four star?
Did you like why did you give me that?
What does that mean?
>> I wish I I did. One thing I know with
this particular participant is that he's
so gifted and his family asks him a lot
like about um to do mediumship stuff
like what does grandpa think about this
or whatever. And in fact,
>> grandpa's dead.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And to him there's not a lot
of difference. And so
>> and so yeah and and they also like the
the grandmother um had a had a lung
transplant and they asked who the donor
was and he identified a probable donor
who lived in the area who had died that
day and they they won't know for a year
if it was the actual donor because it
takes time to learn who the donor is but
they're pretty sure that it probably is.
But so
>> boy, if they if it turns out that he's
right and you can't find out for another
year.
>> Yeah.
>> Or they won't release the information.
>> Well, you know, yeah, my husband had a
double transl. It just takes a while.
Everyone has to agree that they want to
release the information.
>> But um in any case, he's just really
good at this. Like he's very skilled and
I didn't want him to feel like he was a
show pony and I wanted to get on with
his lesson.
>> And so I didn't want to ask other
questions. I feel like, you know, he'll
probably just show up in my dream and
tell me at some point.
>> Yeah. But do you think that he even
would think of himself as a show pony?
Like, wouldn't it just be communication?
>> He doesn't, but I didn't. Also, I wanted
like I feel like
>> I I would want to know. Why'd you give
me a call?
>> Of course, I wanted to know, but also
what's pre-revolutionary. What do you
mean?
>> I agree. I mean, he he's the kid who I
mean, there there are some we worked
with six kids. They're all gifted and
amazing. But he's one that um showed up
in telepathy tapes as do you I don't
know if you remember this story. It's so
wonderful. Um his teacher so Maria what
she does is like they'll read a
paragraph about a topic and then he'll
ask you know the students like okay
let's you know talk about the topic just
like in school but he has to spell out
his answers. And so I think the topic
was um like gothic art. And so, um,
excuse me, I'm going to have a drink of
water.
So, the topic of the paragraph was
Gothic art. And she says, "So, you know,
what was the purpose of Gothic art?" And
he said, "Oh, it it afarizes the
masses."
And she says, "Uh, I don't think that's
a word." And then she thinks, "Well, I
better look it up because he says it's a
word." And so she looked it up and it
was only a word that was used in the
1600s.
>> Oh my god.
>> And and so and it means like it appeases
them. So he wrote out it means it calmed
them down
>> and and she said, "Well, how do you know
about the word? It's it was only used in
the 1600s." He said or the 1400s or
something. and he writes out, "Oh, I was
talking with a a magistrate from that
time period."
So, like,
what you know, what do you do with that?
>> What do you do with that?
>> Except for maybe
state that there's something going on we
don't understand and it deserves more
study and these students shouldn't be
dismissed. Now, is he I don't know if
you even asked this, but is he
communicating with people in a different
timeline or he would is he communicating
with disembodied souls that no longer
live in that timeline but still contain
consciousness. So, um, my experience of
him and several other people who are
non-speakers is that there's really not
a lot of distin like it's hard for them
to know if someone's alive or dead
because they're not spending too much
time in the physical, right? They're not
spending too much time. We spend all
this time in the physical and that's
what seems to be real and important to
us. But to them, it's like when I
brought up that someone he mentioned, he
said, "Oh, I was just talking to the JP
who was another non-speaker."
And I said, "Oh, were were you sad when
JP died?" And he said, "Oh, I didn't
know he was dead."
>> Um because
>> because you was just talking to him.
>> I was just talking to him and and it
does seem to be on this timeline because
there's information that they say, well,
again, this is their experience, but
their experience is that they get
contemporary information like JP saw his
mother do this and he's happy that she's
doing that and that happened two years
after he died. So,
>> wow.
So, JP was relaying information about
his mom two years after he died.
>> He gets around.
>> God, it's so weird.
>> Oh, and that and that was that was this
student's it's so hard not to say his
name, but that that was this student's
story about it. But like as we know from
people who study mediumship like the the
Windbridge Institute or the Windbridge
Research Center and places like that
that study mediumship,
>> there's this big argument about their
experiences. They're talking to dead
people. Are they actually just tapping
into some kind offormational substrate
that underlies everything or are those
the same thing?
>> Right.
>> Yeah.
>> Right. So we we're trying to
differentiate so we could exist in this
consciousness, in this form, in this
reality and we think that this is it.
This is it. This locked down. This is
the box.
And it's not.
>> It's apparently
it looks like it's not.
>> It seems like it's not to them. So then
the question is, what is it about being
non-speaking
that allows them to have access to this?
>> Yeah.
>> Is it,
you know, is it like one of those things
where, you know, people that can't see,
apparently they can hear much better?
>> Yeah. you hear about that?
>> Yeah. Yeah. Sure. Sure. Um, you know,
there was this cool article recently
came out in the New York Times about
these singing mice. So, Cold Spring
Harbor researchers
um are studying these mice that sing at
a frequency that we can hear. Humans can
hear. All all mice vocalize at
ultrasonic frequencies. Uh, but when
they're close to each other, but when
they're far away from each other, these
singing mice will do this singing. And I
guess they call it singing because it
sounds like singing to us. It's really
really communication of course.
>> Um but they wait, they take turns, you
know, I'll sing and then you sing. I'll
sing and then you sing just like you
would in a conversation.
>> And they looked at what the difference
was between regular laboratory mice who
don't do this and these singing mice
because they were thinking these ones
have speech and these ones just do this
other thing. And there was very little
difference. They saw like some more
fibers but that's it. So when you say
singing mice, what do they do?
>> Like
>> Jimmy, play this.
>> Here we go.
>> I don't hear anything.
>> Do you hear it?
>> Yeah. You want to hear that chirping?
>> You hear that chirping? Watch the with
the with the audio wave here. It'll pop
up here.
>> Look at the spectrogram on the
>> It's like It starts right after the 4
second mark.
That
God, I barely hear that. I need to turn
my thing up.
>> I'll try it again.
>> Oh. Oh, my thing's really low. Oh, yeah.
Now I hear it.
>> Okay, that's a Okay, my
>> my volume is really low.
>> So that's singing mice. They just make a
little chirp chirp.
>> Yeah. And so the reason I'm bringing
that up is because if we can understand
what gives mice the capacity to have
this kind of communication and other
other mice the capacity that they don't
have it maybe we can understand
non-speaking autism versus you know sort
of speaking autism or people who can are
neurotypical
but it turns out that the difference
just is in degree in other words just a
few more fiber tracks. Um, and so that's
why I keep saying I don't think it's
about something that's atrophied. It's
just like a slight difference allows us
to speak. Most people have that ability
to speak. People who don't are, I think,
very much like that. You get to be in
contact with this information that is
generally sorted out if you're using
language more actively.
>> Like you're like I almost think that
that babies are probably telepathic. I
think I'm wondering if that's how we
learn language. I keep thinking like we
have so few exposures compared to an
LLM. We have very few exposures of like,
you know, death whistle. Like how many
times do you hear that before you have
to learn it? If you're a baby, I have to
like know that when you say apple,
you're talking about the thing in your
hand and not the 8,000 other things that
are going on,
>> right?
>> And I don't hear it that many times
before I get that. That's what an apple
is. And so,
>> can you imagine if you could just go
back and be a baby again before you
learned language? just to just like just
to exist and understand what thinking is
like.
>> Well, I think and then you wouldn't be
able to understand it because everything
would be like William James said, like
blooming, buzzing confusion. I mean,
>> right. But it would probably be if you
could just I mean if you could access
that memory
>> to a time where you didn't understand
language, but could you even do that?
>> I don't know.
>> The thing is like the problem is you you
already understand language. So, how
would you even be able to access? It's
like those movie fantasies where you go
back in time and you have all the wisdom
you have now, but you get to experience
being a kid again.
>> Like that's the fantasy. That would be
amazing.
>> That's a coward's dream.
>> But isn't it nice sometimes to be a
coward? No.
>> No. That's a coward's dream. Because
it's like no one wants to make the
mistakes that they made in high school.
Boy, if I could go back now, I'd be the
king of the school. Like,
>> no. You'd be a cheater. You'd be playing
video games on god mode. I mean, that's
how I made it through trauma as a as a
kid. That's how I made it through abuse.
I mean, like that time travel therapy is
a thing.
>> So, going back and like reliving your
life as an adult who knows better and
has information,
>> it really helps people.
>> Interesting.
>> Because you can love yourself from the
future.
>> I think you're talking about a different
thing, right? You're talking about abuse
and getting over abuse. What I'm talking
about is just general sucking at life.
like, "Boy, if I could go back and do it
again, I'd be so much better."
>> Oh, I understand. That's different. Now,
this isn't going back and doing it
again. This is almost like the opposite.
This is like you're still there back
experiencing it, making the bad choice
or abuse or whatever it is, but then
your wiser self who's survived and gets
that it was a bad choice or who gets
that it was abusive, you go back in time
mentally and you see yourself. So,
you're still there doing it, but you're
it's like a second character is
introduced. Yes. in the timeline, you
see yourself and you go, you know what?
You're going to learn from this. Things
are going to get better. You are loved.
It's going to be okay. And that works
regardless of whether it's a bad choice
or whether it's abuse. It's like you're
doing the best you can no matter what.
>> Right. That that seems to make sense.
Like you're a human being that
understands language back then. If you
can go back to being a baby
>> Oh, yeah. Then you don't know language,
but then people would be talking. So
what would you hear? What would the
sound?
>> I think you'd feel things telepath.
>> Yeah, dogs are really good at that. Some
dogs, not my dog. I have a golden
retriever. Everybody's the best.
Everyone's awesome thinks. Everybody's
amazing. Oh, no wonder you can have like
a general in your brain. You have a
golden retriever who will love you
forever.
>> Oh, he's the best. He loves Everybody's
his best friend. Like if he was in the
room, he would just go from you, get pet
by you, go over to Jamie, get pet by
Jamie, come over to me. He would just
make the rounds.
>> You should bring him.
>> I do. Sometimes he's on the floor. It's
a carpet.
>> Oh, look.
>> See right there?
>> That's Marshall.
>> Oh, he's wonderful. Golden retrievers
are the best emotional support animals.
>> Oh, they're so sweet.
>> They just love people.
>> Yeah, they love everybody. He I have a
little dog, too. A little um King
Charles Cavalier Spaniel. Yeah.
>> And uh all he does is like attack
Marshall, like bite his face. And
Marshall's so tolerant. He just lays
there. This dog's licking his ear,
licking his eyeballs, licking his face,
and just kissing him and biting him. And
he's just never gets upset, never
growls. Never never says, "Get off me."
Just deals with it.
>> I love that.
>> Oh, he's the sweetest.
>> Yeah. I want a dog.
>> They're the best.
>> I know.
>> I love them. I had a weird drug dream
about my little dog. My little dog was
so little that I could hold him in my
hand. He's not that little. He's pretty
little. He's like that big. But he was
so little that I could hold him in my
hand. And he was running into traffic.
And so I had to run into traffic and
risk dying to grab this dog and pick him
up and hold on to him and somehow not
knock not get hit by a car.
>> Oh wow.
>> It was very strange dream.
>> Was this recent?
>> Yeah. Wow.
>> And but he didn't even look like him. He
looked like a Chihuahua, but I knew it
was Charlie.
>> Huh. Isn't that funny how in dreams you
just know it's someone even it could be
someone else?
>> Yeah. I knew it was Charlie, but it
didn't look like Charlie cuz he was so
tiny. It was like a mouse. Like
literally, I was holding him in my hand
like a like a little baby mouse.
>> You know, that reminds me of that that
dream quality of uh of someone being
someone like having the essence of them
but not looking like them. Yeah. Reminds
me also of something I've noticed in the
non-speakers where they're not very good
at labeling animals like like
camels and kangaroos might be the same.
>> You know, it's like it's like the
physical form
>> uh
>> is not what's important.
>> It's just not what's important. It's
like the feeling
>> Yeah.
>> on the inside. It's to me it's like
proof of a soul or something. I don't I
really think we ought to start studying
souls scientifically because if we can
show that and this is I didn't think we
were going to talk about this but wow
I'm sure that happens a lot but
but if we could start
>> understanding what a soul is
>> right how would you quantify it
>> yeah I don't know right I mean I think I
think
>> maybe it's one of those things you just
can't
>> maybe
>> you can't study
>> but if you I guess I'm always coming
back to theformational substrate because
that's like my favorite concept. But if
you understand that underneath, if this
is true, I sort of think this is true,
that underneath all of what we call
physical reality, so spacetime, matter,
energy, is this informationational
substrate that it's almost like has all
the information from the beginning of
the universe to the end of the universe,
like all of it, including like what
you're thinking, feeling, etc. at this
moment or other moments. And
if you could
I guess
insert information into it and read
information from it
then I think
maybe that means you're
have a soul maybe that's what a soul is
is that which you know inserts
information into that informationational
substrate so you change things in the
world and reads things from it you
perceive things in the world and maybe
if you can do both of those things. It
means that's what a soul is.
>> What makes you think that there's
anformational substrate that contains
all the information from the beginning
of time to the end of time?
>> Yes, that's a very good question.
Um, it's just a feeling I
>> I'm not saying you're wrong.
>> I'm not saying I'm wrong either, but I'm
not saying I'm right. It's it it's
aesthetically pleasing to me
>> to to Okay, it does seem like people,
whether they're non-speakers or people
who are particularly gifted at remote
viewing or whatever, can go to different
times in spaceime or different places in
space, different times in in time and
get information that seems like in this
physical world, you shouldn't be able to
get, right? I mean, that's what I've
been studying and and I've shown that
that's the case at a great at a at a
rate greater than chance, especially if
people are in a place of self-trcendence
or feeling love.
>> And so that suggests that there's this
sort of link about what we call God or
love or universal love or this ineffable
force. I don't know what to call it.
Universal love, I'll call it. um it
suggests that there's a link between
sort of what happens in the universe and
what we experience and what we do and
what we intend and this universal love
force. So I want to as a scientist I'm
like how do you make a physics of love?
So I want to
think about it as something that I can
think of as what I could do physics or
math on and that would the way that
comes out is like thisformational soup
or something that has all that
information there and then it is we play
with it throughout our lives,
>> right? But how would it have all the
information from now to the end? Because
time time doesn't work in this linear
way that we're used to experiencing,
right? Like
>> that's what precognition is showing us.
>> If you can get information about future
events at a rate above chance and I can
do that and other people can do that and
and actually most people can do that
according to the statistics and they're
just not conscious of it.
>> You know, if your physiology is changing
>> then that means that sort of information
can leak backwards from the future,
>> right? But can it leak backwards an
infinite amount of time? Like could it
link backwards all the way to the end of
the universe where it dies of heat
death?
>> And so Jamie's bringing up this
>> Oh, the aosic records here, right? I was
going to bring that up. Yeah, it's
modern esoteric term.
>> The idea of a cosmic library that stores
every event, thought, feeling, and
intention that has ever occurred. Often
said to be accessible through psychic or
mystical means. Um, that's that has ever
occurred. But what about forever in time
in the future? The potential future.
Yeah. So in theosophy and
anthroposposophy.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh what is that word?
>> Anthroposophy.
>> What is that word?
>> What does it mean?
>> Yeah. What does that mean?
>> I don't know. I don't get whether
anthroposophy. There's all these
anthroposifists and they're related to
the Waldorf people, but I don't totally
understand.
>> It's perplexity. Our AI sponsor trying
to flex.
>> Oh, okay.
>> That's what it's doing. It's flexing on
us. Showing us how smart it is. uh
they're described as non-physical
compendium of all universal events,
thoughts, words, emotions, and intents
spanning past, present, and potential
future. So potential future meaning
forever. So the idea that we're somehow
or another when these people are able to
sense something that's going to happen
or know about an image that's going to
be displayed that this small leap in the
future of a few seconds or a minute or
whatever it is
it's also accessible forever. It's like
there's no distance that's
>> t if you just think about time as a
landscape.
Imagine time is a landscape. There's a
mountain. There's a waterfall. There's a
tree.
>> And we're used to just walking in in
single file,
>> right?
>> In one direction in the landscape.
>> But if you fly a plane above, you could
say, "Oh, I see on the other side of the
mountain there's this waterfall."
>> And so flying the plane above is like
doing any of these mystical practices
like with the aashic records or doing
remote viewing or
>> accessing that information, accessing
the landscape in a different way. not
through this linear um sort of physical
dimension or reality or whatever you
want to call it, but through some other
like maybe you go to a different
dimension. I don't know how to think
about it mathematically. Maybe go to a
different
>> dimension. The the thing about memory
and consciousness and just the idea of
future and time at all. Everything is
made out of matter, right? We we are
made out of atoms.
>> Ideas aren't made out of matter.
>> No, no, but I'm going to get to that. So
the idea is that if we are made out of
atoms, well that means subatomic
particles exist inside of us. Subatomic
particles are made out of magic. Like
what they do is they exist in superp
position. They're moving and they're
still at the same time. They they can be
quantumly connected to other particles
that are nowhere near. So why wouldn't
we think consciousness that exists
supposedly at least if not exists is
tuned in by our own minds
that somehow or another that's probably
connected in some weird spooky action in
a distance way.
>> Well, it's not even weird as you said.
It's it's exactly what we're made of,
right?
>> So we call it weird because we're
trapped in this
>> monkey mind.
>> We're trapped in this like linear
>> Oh, it works like this. Oh, the ball
will always go in this direction.
>> We're trapped in that. But we are made
of quantum particles as you said,
quantum wave particles. And even by the
way, at the larger level than the
subatomic particles, you have chemicals
in our body that are actually, you know,
in quantum coherence or super
superposition.
>> Yeah.
>> And so, and in birds and in leaves, I
mean, that's how photosynthesis works.
So, don't get me started on quantum
computing because
I get a little pissed off about this
because
Okay, I know we were talking about
consciousness. Should I?
>> Yeah, go ahead.
>> All right, I'll just go on my little
train.
>> My heartbeat is going wild.
>> Is it?
>> Yeah. Because this is I'm This is really
something that is really important to me
for some reason that I don't understand.
quantum computing is
>> our mistake our our current mistake with
quantum computing what I believe to be
the current mistake that
misunderstanding
>> so a leaf is is using essentially
quantum computing to do photosynthesis
um in a way that we don't that we can't
replicate right now I mean at room
temperature above room temperature if
it's out in the sun right um it's
keeping these uh chemicals in superp
position. Um it is able to trap energy
from photons uh better than anything
that we have. It's um it's doing quantum
computing without a lot of expense.
So when we go and we decide that we want
we want to be the first in quantum
computing and we're going to invest all
this money in like super cooling systems
and uh and very difficult to understand
error correction methods and all these
things working on trapping single
particles at the subatomic level and
that's how we're going to have to do it
to make it to force it into these
patterns. Like come on, we're doing
something wrong. like a leaf can do it
outside in the sun and does it all the
time.
>> We're doing something wrong. So, so I
started thinking that way like 12 years
ago
>> and uh got really passionate about
photons and how photons are kind of like
this almost like a link. This is another
thing that I'm going to say. You're
going to be like, why do you think this?
Regardless, it came into my mind that
photons are kind of like a link between
mind and matter. Like they're not
really, like you said, they're made of
magic. They're not really um matter.
They don't have any mass, you know, and
they're actually they're bonic
particles. So there's two type types of
particles. One's one is a fairionic
named after Enrico Fairmy. And those are
things we're used to like protons,
neutrons, electrons. Um, and then
there's bosonic particles which are
things that generally I think they none
of them have any mass and they're very
different like the Higs bzon is one.
Photons is another example. Photons are
another example. I think there's a
version of helium that's also bonic. But
what makes it bonic is um it could be in
the same place at the same time as
another bosonic particle and then
another one and another one and another
one. So like they kind of don't exist in
physical reality. It's like we have this
idea that two electrons can't be in the
same place at the same time and they
can't but these can.
>> And and so it's almost like they're
interacting in another dimension that's
less physical. And
there it seems just interesting to me
that we think a lot about what a photon
would feel. And I just I just keep
thinking that there's some connection
between what we call mind and what we
call brain that has to do with photons.
So anyway, I got obsessed with photons
and I started thinking about um the
double split experiment. Do your does
your audience know what that is?
>> Um probably, but a refresher would
probably be good for everybody.
>> Okay. Yeah. So when I first told my
husband about the double slit
experiment, he's an artist. He's like
double slit.
I'm like that never occurred to me
because I'm like all ready to explain it
to him and he's like couldn't get off
that. But anyway, it was pretty
>> and butads.
>> Yeah, you said double slit.
So, imagine there's like a like a
flashlight at one end of a tube and then
there's like a um a photon detector at
the other end of the tube. And in
between the flashlight and the photon
detector are two slits. And they could
be in cardboard or metal or whatever. So
there's two slits here. And they're very
skinny. And the reason I say they're
skinny is because they're so skinny that
if you turn down the light enough, only
one photon is going to get through. And
it's going to have to choose between
this slit or that slit. And the weird
thing is if you do this over time,
you'll see the pattern at the photon
detector at the other end of the tube.
It'll look like an interference pattern.
What does that mean? Oh, look at you.
>> Yeah, here it is.
>> Yeah.
>> So, the electron beam gun electrons goes
through the double slit and at the end
of it, you get this very bizarre
pattern.
>> Yeah. and this pattern and so I was
talking about photons but yeah you can
do it with electrons you can do it with
larger particles but um and that does
and it doesn't matter but um if you here
that one double slit up there is really
good that's a good one yes
so there's two two pieces of it that are
weird the first bullet up there that you
can't see on the screen but is going to
say that when you send a single particle
one at a time it has to choose between
the slits but it still interfere it
seems to interfere with itself in space.
It's like it goes through both slits.
One particle goes in two places at once.
It's called non-local in space. It's
non-local. In other words, it's not
behaving like we're used to. It's not
behaving like a billiard ball. It's
going to one thing is going through two
slides. So, I kept looking at this and
saying, well, it might be non-local in
space, but if it It could be non-local
in time.
And by that I mean that if you put an
electron or a photon in there, it could
be interfering from uh the future like
with another electron or another photon
that happens in the future. And there's
actually an experiment you can do to
test that and I wanted to do the
experiment.
>> So the so first of all did you
understand what I just said? Okay. So
the way you could test that is look if
the photon that's gonna if the photon
I'm just okay now I'm going to pretend
I'm a photon. I don't really like
thinking of photons traveling because I
don't think they really travel but
anyway I'm going to pretend I'm a
photon. I just got shot out of this
flashlight or this light bulb. I'm
traveling towards this light and I
interfere with another photon that
wasn't just shot out of the light bulb.
It's going to be shot out of the light
bulb in the future, but it's just sort
of hanging out there because it's
floating around in time.
>> Is it Is the actual light able to do one
photon at a time?
>> Yeah, if you turn it down enough, it is.
>> How could you measure whether it's one
photon?
>> You calculate You can just calculate the
expected amount of light that should
come through with the detector. And
>> and is that accurate down to a single
photon? you yeah you can calculate based
on the speed of light and the emission
and the where the detector is.
>> Okay.
>> How much Yeah. So you can turn it down
to that level. Um and I mean I think I
think it's this experiment is like
almost I think it's 100 years old. Uh so
they were able to do that way back then.
And
so imagine this photon gets shot out of
this flashlight. It interferes with
another photon just like it from the
future. Just imagine that's possible. If
that's true, then in experiments where
you have a lot of photons available to
interact from the future, like in other
words, the light is on for a long time,
>> the interference pattern should show a
different sort of pattern than if you
don't have very many photons in the
future. So, the light's not going to be
on a long time. So, the experiment I
wanted to do and that I did was look,
just randomly determine how long this
experiment is going to last. How long
are you going to leave this light on
into the future? And then look at the
very first period of time. Like, look at
the first 30 seconds. And after 30
seconds, you randomly choose, are you
going to turn this light off or are you
going to leave it on for another two
minutes? In the first 30 seconds, can
you determine what the choice is going
to be based on the pattern? if you can,
that means this thing is interfering in
time. And it turns out you could.
So I ended up replicating that and
replicating that and replicating that.
And then a friend at UC Berkeley who
teaches the advanced physics lab there
said, "I want to set up my own
equipment, do the exact same experiment.
I'm going to run it over a year and I'm
going to see if I get the same result."
So he sent me his data. He walked away.
I analyzed the data and I figured out
the equation that relates the amount of
future time after the decision to the um
the the detection pattern before the
decision. And so that's the kind of
result that I think is going to actually
shift quantum computing because you're
working at room temperature with groups
of photons rather than trying to trap
them. And you're treating them more like
a giant unit, this unit in time rather
than this unit in space. And so actually
can I can I name drop my new company?
>> Yeah. What was the results of his data?
>> Oh um that the same result happened. I
mean,
>> so it really was that somehow or another
the photons were able to predict the
future.
>> Yeah. Well, if you think of a box, okay,
so think of a really deep well. Let's
think of a well
>> with water on the bottom.
>> You cannot see. You can't like look over
the edge. It's so deep you don't know
how deep it is. So, you might drop
something in it and then you listen for
the ding and you can have a sense of how
deep it is. It's a little like this. You
can't know in sort of with our eyes how
long that experiment's going to last,
but you're getting a little
reverberation from the future in the
photons. It's like they're telling on
themselves like we've got a lot of
future photons to interfere with, so
we're going to behave in this way or we
don't have so many future photons to
interfere with, we're going to behave in
this other way. One of the things that
people are very familiar about that know
about the double slit experiment is the
idea of the observer and how the
observer changes reality.
>> Yeah.
>> What do you think is going on there?
>> The word change is super telling because
when you think of when you were asking
about timelines before.
So uh uh
>> hey can you pull can you pull up like a
picture of timelines
>> and and and retro like a picture of
retrocausality. Can you look at
retrocausality and put put up a picture?
I want to want to say something about
the word change because okay
>> we have this idea of
um it was supposed to be like this
whatever it is. It was supposed to be
like uh that's a kind of a complicated
one. Uh,
oh gosh, there's all these complicated
ones. There's the Look, that path
diagram.
No, that's Why are they all so
complicated? Let's do this. No.
>> Well, what is it about them that's so
complicated?
>> Well, because people don't really know
how it works, and so they make all these
different pictures of it. Okay, I'm just
Let's ignore that. I'm just going to
make a picture in our head.
>> Okay. Okay. Imagine a figure eight.
>> All right.
>> So, we normally think of things just
going like this. Figure eight goes, "Oh,
I go back like that. I get the
information here and I bring it back."
Exactly. And so, it's more like time is
doing that or events are doing that,
right?
>> So, I guess um
>> what was your original question though?
I was got obsessed with pictures of Oh,
timelines change
>> observer.
>> Yeah. So the thing about changing
something is if it was all if it was I
like to use the word influence because
if it was already always going to
happen, you didn't change anything. It's
not like you're on a different timeline.
It's that the future influenced the
past,
>> right? But the observer influences
reality in the results of the tests.
>> So if you do an experiment
>> Yeah. though I so let me explain that
effect and then so with the double slit
experiment
>> the result is if you that that indicates
this if you put a little detector by one
of the slits because you say I'm going
to trap one of those I'm going to trap a
photon or an electron I'm going to
figure out which slit it's going through
>> so you put a detector at one of the two
slits if it if you get a bing it means
it went through that if you don't get a
bing it went through the other one right
what happens is the actual outcome now
looks different you don't get the same
interference pattern. You get a single
slit interference pattern as if it
didn't it wasn't non-local in space or
time. It didn't interfere with itself
and it just kind of like went through
like a billard ball,
>> right?
>> And so that's where the observer effect
comes in. It's this idea that you have
observed, you've tried to trap the
photon at it during its flight. So
that's the other reason why I think that
um mind and photons are related is
because there's something about the
knowledge I almost again think of it
informationally but it's like you just
gained knowledge about this system
>> as our knowledge mechanisms of our mind.
You've just gained knowledge and it has
now changed. It's almost like the
photons are part of mind. So of course
mind is affecting mind
>> and so mind observing the photon changes
the path of the photon.
>> It changes mind
>> changes the behavior of the photon
changes what we see as a result.
>> It's like like affects like. So if
photons are like mind and mind interacts
with mind. Now both minds are different.
You have gained this knowledge. The
photon has gone into this different
place. H
it's the the problem with it's so weird
and so weird to think of that and
observing something changes it that it
makes people start to consider okay like
if that's the case how much of observing
the known universe
is a part of it existing
>> it all all of it it's like this figure
eight is that's The thing is that that's
just a great example it seems to me of
mind observing mind. Your mind and my
mind will never be the same after
observing each other. Just like with
every other person we meet, right?
>> We're constantly changing. We're like
influencing. We're constantly
influencing each other,
>> right?
>> And it is like this figure eight thing
carrying it back.
>> So
I don't think there's any difference.
It's just that photons behave more like
our minds. So they're showing it to us
at electrons and you know anything
that's doing the quantum thing.
>> And so why do you think that we have a
bad understanding of quantum computing?
>> Oh, I mean no I shouldn't.
>> This is how we started this.
>> Yeah. Not that we have a bad
understanding of quant we have great
understanding of what we are currently
considering quantum computing.
>> Or maybe this is the way talking about
it. The approach.
>> It's the approach. It's this approach of
we're going to trap a single
particle
slwave. We're going to trap a single
photon. We're going to trap a single
ion. We're going to
have it behave in ways repeatedly
according to these commands,
these gates that they these gating
functions that they do.
We understand that. The problem is it
seems to me it's forcing something that
shouldn't behave that way that doesn't
naturally behave that way to behave that
way. It's like we're trying to imitate
classical computers with quantum
computers and it and we're not taking
into account these group classical level
properties that clearly a leaf uses when
it's doing photosynthesis.
It has to. It's not building a super
cooling system and you know trapping
ions. it's functioning in this really
wet physiological environment and it's
doing just fine with quantum
computation.
So it's more like the approach needs to
become more naturalistic and I think it
needs to take into account these
non-local temporarily non-local
phenomena like the like the one I
discussed. Aren't they considering that
at least partially at least it's being
discussed that this many worlds
interpretation of the results of quantum
computing that something's happening
that you can't account for in the known
universe? Something's happening with the
scale of the equations that it's able to
solve in the time span in which it's
able to solve. It's not possible that
the same sort of process is going on
that would occur if it was happening
right here and right now. that it seems
that it's gathering the computing power.
>> Yeah, that's great. That's the whole
point of quantum computing is to capture
that. And yes, it could be multiple
universes. It could also be
retrocausality. And people, some people
don't like the retrocausality answer. I
think that's actually more likely. So
the retrocausality thing would be that
all time is happening in this figure 8
loop and then somehow or another this
quantum computer is able to tap into
that and have this infinite access to
all potential future and past
information.
>> Right? And then I just think it's easier
to do quantum computing if you take into
account
excuse me
if you take into account this retro
retrocausality piece and these group
properties
of particles at room temperature that
can tell us about the future.
So the idea that this
does that include a many worlds
interpretation of the universe does that
is that also there? I mean is it
possible that not only do you get the
time of all time available
instantaneously that because it is a
part of a loop and somehow another a
quantum computer is able to tap into
that.
Not just this timeline in this loop in
this universe, but multiple universes,
infinite in fact, that all of their time
is also available.
>> You know, maybe you The thing is, sorry,
I'm just going to have to drink more
water.
>> No, that's okay. There's water there in
the glass, too, if you want.
>> Yeah.
>> Want some? There's coffee.
>> I get so excited about this stuff. The
thing is
>> good. Great.
>> The thing is, you don't need both. And
so it could be both. And I was just
thinking this morning about how it could
be both. It could be both. You could
have these loops with the information
retrocausally bringing it back and and
you could have multiple universes of
those loops,
>> infinite loops.
>> But they're kind of it's kind of like
saying like you know how physicists
really like to be to simplify things.
It's kind of like saying um we could do
whatever we want. We could pick paint a
picture of a fairy who also does
something, you know, and then there's a
gnome over here that does something. But
if you don't need those things, you you
throw them out, right? And so it's like
usually either people talk about
multiple universes or retrocausality,
but not both because they're solving the
same problem. Um,
but it is possible that even with our
little monkey minds trying to understand
retrocausality that we're not taking
into account the possibility that
retrocausality might exist in infinite
timelines.
>> Yep.
I'm certainly certainly the universe
works in ways that we don't understand.
>> And the deeper we look, the more
confused we get.
>> Yeah. And also you find yourself looking
right into mind. I I really do think
there's something to the more you look
into physics, the more you look into
mind. I mean, all the the physicists
from Did you ever read that book? Uh,
how the hippies saved physics?
>> No.
>> Ah,
>> sweet. Yeah. Sweet. Good book about like
the 70s and physicists.
>> Okay.
>> Realizing like
>> that's the real hippies. That's where
the acid was flowing.
>> Yeah. They're all tripping. And they had
this experience of like if we really
understood quantum mechanics, we just
get it that it's mind looking into mine.
>> How do you think that
aligns with this whole extraterrestrial
thing?
>> You're pointing at my book.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. So this cover, my husband did the
art.
>> Have a nice disclosure.
>> Yeah. He's like little little quirky
like uh alien face. Engaging. It took
him five minutes. I love it. Um, yeah.
So,
this book is not about aliens, and some
people get disappointed. It has an alien
on the cover because people think of
disclosure with aliens right now.
>> Mhm.
>> But it's really about what you know,
what we can find out by going into our
inner space, like what we can find out
by tapping into our own wisdom and our
own experience and not waiting for some
authority figure to say, "Hey, this is
what's true." And now we will reveal the
great secret
>> because honestly when that happens which
could be literally tomorrow
>> might be today.
>> It might be today with the release of
the files. I
>> know what they're going to tell us.
>> Yeah. I I think there's going to be a
lot of redacted stuff and flood the zone
with [ __ ] But
>> yeah,
>> but uh but when that happens, it does
it's not going to matter because when
someone tells you something and they say
it's true, it doesn't matter until you
experience it. you know, it doesn't
matter until it matters to you,
>> right?
>> And so
>> that's a good point.
>> And so I think that disclosure, if you
want to have a nice disclosure, it's
really about learning what matters to
you and disclosing all your own weird
[ __ ] to yourself,
>> you know, all the weird thoughts like
you're talking about that guy in your
head. All those weird thoughts that we
have and the weird experiences we've had
in our lifetimes that we sort of vary.
we say that like the thing about the
ball lightning like every I still forget
that and I've talked about it several
times
um we sort of say well that's not normal
that's not usual so maybe it didn't
happen somehow but it did you know or
people who have experienced seeing UAP
or UFOs or people who are psionic assets
or
people like me who have psychic
experiences all the time it's it's and
how I suppressed it so that I could go
into get my PhD and then it came up as a
flower later.
I think that the movement has to switch
like we need a Capernac revolution where
we're not looking from for some
authority figure to tell us what's true.
>> I would I would agree with that. But I
also think it really helps if someone
who knows more than you who's honest can
tell you what's true.
>> What I was kind of getting into I agree
with that. What I was kind of getting
into is this idea of retrocausality. If
all timeline exists in the future, these
things that people keep experiencing,
which uh if you just extrapolated from
what we understand about evolution, from
ancient hominids to current human beings
to what do you think we're going to look
like? Well, that's what I think we're
going to look like is very frail things
that don't need muscles, you know, very
big heads,
>> kind of like weird arms
>> and communicate telepathically. It seems
like and they don't have any gender.
Seems like that's the direction that the
human species is moving in like so if
you thought of this whole idea of time
going in this figure eight loop then you
would consider oh is that us?
>> Yeah. Well, so I I that hypothesis is
one of the many hypotheses but I think
that's a really good one at least for
the grays.
>> Yeah.
>> At least for what people describe as the
grays. I think there people have
described other kind of beings or
creatures.
>> Um, and there's this there's this guy
Michael Masters who studies that.
>> Yeah, I've had him on.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And so we won't we if someone the thing
is okay so what if someone says that's
the truth.
It's still like
it's the same problem I have when I tell
people like look all of us can basically
get information from the future
>> and so can photons like it it doesn't
matter until it matters it doesn't
matter until you make something it does
and and that's
it doesn't matter until you make
something like you show that something
works that uses this principle then
people believe it it's like general
relativity lots of people don't know
what it is but we have GPS Yes. You
know, so we kind of have to say that's
real. But someone saying something and
making something with it are two
different things. And so I I'm I'm very
impressed with what people like uh Anna
Brady Estabas, who used to be at the
National Science Foundation, is doing.
She made this company called it's a I
guess I don't know much about money
companies. It's it's like a fund,
some kind of fund, investment fund
called American Deep Tech. and she's
like, "I'm going to reverse engineer
UFOs
because that's making something from
these principles."
>> Well, there's a lot of people that
believe that's already being done,
>> but she wants to do it in the private
sector outside of, you know, the big
>> contracting companies attempting to
reverse engineer. She's she's not she's
building a fund that's trying to invest
in different companies that are using
these kind of principles like
alternative propulsion or you
knowformational time travel or these
kind of principles spacetime metric.
>> And so she's one of many people who
recognize that we have to get sort of
out of the top five contracting
companies who are holding all the
knowledge about this stuff. Um, we have
to build things and just go forward.
>> I know.
What are you thinking?
>> Well, I mean, um, if this retrocausality
idea about aliens in the future does
exist, one of the one of the weirder
things is the back engineering part
because part of the back engineering um,
there's
Do you know who Diana Pulka is?
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yeah. So, her work is very interesting.
>> You've had her on the show. Yes. Very
interesting.
>> And I love her new book, too.
>> Yeah. It's her books are great. Um, one
of the things that she talked about,
though, was that the idea that these
things are donations.
>> Yes. Yeah. Jacqu Valet talks about them.
>> Yes. Yeah. And and so does
>> Gary Nolan. It's it's so it's this weird
the people that have examined the
physical characteristics of them.
They're very strange. like when they've
gotten these little samples like weird
metals that they don't have
>> atomically layered, you know, somehow or
another printed and this these very
strange alloys that would cost billions
of dollars to make and they found this
crash in 1976. Like it doesn't make any
sense.
>> No, they seem like little to me they
seem like little acupuncture points like
in the history of humanity like little
just little acupuncture like oh let's
put a needle there. Maybe they could
have an iPhone,
>> right? Maybe they could figure out how
to cure cancer, you know, maybe they
could figure out how to do faster than
light travel.
>> So, it does feel like,
>> yeah, a little acupuncture and it can be
done with with with artifacts like
people find. And I'm, you know, reading
Diana's uh book, American Cosmic, she
talks about finding these artifact
artifacts and how she's like not even
sure she believes in them. And I totally
get it. I think I would feel the same
way. But, but then there's this other
side to it that's not artifactual. It's
about consciousness. It's about some
kind of mystical awareness. You can also
do acupuncture that way, right? You can
put into someone's mind like I'm not
sure how I had the idea as a cognitive
neuroscientist to do this experiment
with photons. I think you can put into
someone's mind
information that will be helpful to the
future.
And I think that happens to people all
over, inventors all over.
>> That's the muse.
>> Yeah. and and and that the muse could
come from the future, right?
>> Yeah.
>> That's um Eric Wargo talks about that.
>> I've thought about that with ideas that
it's almost like ideas are a life form.
And this is the thought that I had. Like
if you think about everything that
exists today that human beings have
created. All that stuff came from an
idea. Like the idea then manifests
itself in physical form. And we want to
take credit for it. We want to say, "Oh,
I made that, you know, steam engine."
And you did, right? But how the [ __ ] did
you do that? Like where did the idea
come from? Because ideas, anybody that's
really honest about their ideas will
tell you like, "Boy, I don't even know
if I that's my idea just came out of the
ether." Every great thought that I've
ever had, every great joke that I've
ever written, all that stuff just came
out of space. Came out of some weird
place. And I've always thought of that,
like what if ideas are a different type
of life form? And it's a life form that
manifests itself through us in physical
space. And that's Marshall McLuhan's
thought um in a book from the 1960s. He
said, "Human beings are the sex organs
of the machine world."
>> Isn't that amazing?
>> That's amazing.
>> Isn't that an amazing quote?
>> So, what came into my head, so I love
that idea. I always thought of science
as like a um a living being like it like
it has its desire and if you if you
don't do the experiment, someone else is
going to do,
>> right? It possesses you. And songwriters
talk about that too. If you don't write
the song, someone else is going to write
the song.
>> And you know the image I had in my head
because I think in images was of Do you
remember those Play-Doh heads that would
have holes in them and you would turn
the crank and the Play-Doh would come up
shaving a haircut.
>> Give them haircuts. That's right. Yeah.
>> That's what came into my head. Like it's
just coming out of whatever hole is and
blocked
>> and it just has its own momentum. And
then like what if one of those little
holes said look what I did. I grew this
hair. And it's like, well, okay.
>> Yeah. Right. I know. That's what it's
like. I mean, most people that I've
talked to that are singers, songwriters,
um, authors in particular, they'll tell
you that these ideas just sort of come
out of nowhere and you just got to be
there to receive them.
>> Yeah.
>> Presfield wrote a great book about it
called The War of Art. Steven Presfield?
>> No, I don't know.
>> Uh, he wrote The Legend of Bagger Vance
and he's a screenwriter and just a
brilliant guy. But his book, The War of
Art, is really like a masterpiece
because I I have a stack of them and I
give them to comedians. Just read this
because it's all talks about the muse.
And it talks about like treating it as
if it's like a real deity that you are
summoning. And you do the work, you show
up every day, you like have this
intention to do this. And if you do
that, it will be real. It'll and and it
is like these are things that come from
somewhere else into your head
>> especially in comedy because you have to
be in the moment. You're not think I
mean even if you write your whole show
ahead of time, right? Mike Burbiglia
talks about this on working it out,
right? Even if you write your whole show
ahead of time, if you're not in the
moment, the timing is going to be off.
>> Not only that, it's not just the
timing's off, the audience knows. You
could say things exactly correctly with
the right timing,
>> but they're animals. They smell it. Like
if you're thinking about your laundry or
something else, like they know, right?
>> Like they know if you're really thinking
about a thing. It's hypnosis.
>> Yeah. Or it's like telepathy. They could
I I I um when I was this morning, I'm
like, "Oh god, I just have to take a nap
because I'm thinking too much about what
I'm going to say on Joe Rogan's show."
You know, and that's just the worst when
you're thinking about what you're gonna
say.
>> Yeah. Because then if you say it,
everyone could just tell like you're
thinking about
>> like you're reading a line,
>> you're thinking about a result instead
of thinking about the process.
>> Yeah. Or you're just not in the process.
>> Right. Right. Right.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Which is so funny because we're sitting
here talking about retrocausality and
these figure eight things in the
multiple worlds. And then we're talking
about how important it is to be in the
now, which kind of like doesn't exist
physically, but sure exists
psychologically. Like it's all that
exists.
>> And we were also talking before about
ego. And I think that's a part of the
problem with the way people can create
or not create is that you got to learn
how to get out of your own way. And
everybody talks about that. Writers
always talk about that. Like you have to
get just get out of your own way.
>> And that's really what's going on with
this wrestling match with the mind.
>> Yes.
>> It's like we're trying to like just be
clear what and I think that's where
probably some of this nonverbal these
non-speaking people that's where they
have this advantage.
>> Yes. They're not they don't have the
same perception of themselves the way we
do. I bet.
>> Um not not at all.
>> Or so they're free in that regard that
they don't have that monkey on their
back. So
>> well, but then they have another monkey
on their back which is they live in this
culture in which people think they're
idiots because we read each other's
bodies and we say there's something
wrong with the way you're moving your
body. You can't talk. You're making
these sounds.
>> And so you're free in your mind, but
you're not free in your body.
>> And we're giving off negativity. Oh,
what's wrong with this guy? And then
they Right. Right. Right.
>> And so when we were filming for for
Kai's documentary, we all got together
with the sound people and the camera
people before our first non-speaker came
in for their trial. Um and we said when
you know they're telepathic, so we're
going to do a little prayer right now
that we can all be in a proper positive
state when they come in. And our first
student came in said, "It was really
great walking through the hall and
feeling that good."
and and you know, not like we told them
we did that, but it was just validation
that that was there and the getting out
of your own way. Like, God, I think
that's less of a problem for these
students.
>> Is that a part of the book?
>> Well, the reason I'm looking, I guess,
at the book is that the first two
chapters popped out of me. I didn't know
I was writing a book until I was on the
second chapter.
>> What' you think you were writing?
>> I'm like, I'm writing words on a page.
It was this weird story about a guy who
hears the walls start talking and he's
like, "What's going on?" And then and
it's in the and it's in the second
person like I'm saying you this is
happening to you and like what am I I've
never written like that before and the
second chapter I'm like I think I'm
writing a book and I don't know what
this is about and by the third chapter
I'm finally like what the [ __ ] I mean
what is going on and so it was a
discovery pro so the whole first half of
the book is this discovery process of
like what am I trying to communicate
and I had to get everything out of the
way in terms of all like the scholarly
stuff like, well, I better not say that.
Nope. Didn't get to. Nope. Just had to
say the things that were coming up. Had
to do it all just exactly as it was.
Like I was writing a song, you know? And
then the what it kind of did was work on
me like like it had its own process, but
I didn't think it was going to have like
I thought it would work on other people.
I don't know what I thought. I just had
to write the words and then I I just I
guess in the back of my mind I'm like
it's gonna make people feel their own
inner space in a way that's going to be
unique to them. And then it turns out I
ended up feeling my own inner space in a
way that was unique to me. And then I
had to write about that. So I ended up
talking about this
this gifted and talented program I was
in and um all the receipts I had from
that and what the heck was going on with
that. It's funny to me how sometimes
they'll swear and sometimes they'll say
heck, but I don't know why. It's like
why? Like sometimes like what the [ __ ]
And sometimes I'll be like gosh darn it.
>> Yeah.
>> Don't know what the difference is. Oh, I
think about that all the time.
>> Yeah. But anyway, I It's a weird weird
book, but what it did was open up uh for
a lot of people who were in these weird
gifted and talented programs, opened up
a lot of memories. Um, and I ended up
starting a support group for people who
had these experiences and kind of um,
don't know what to do with them and
still feel the surveillance and the sort
of the the feeling of being studied
throughout your whole life
>> and not knowing if your your gifts are
your own or if they were taught to you
in some kind of way that you've
forgotten. And so anyway, I don't know
why I brought that up. I guess about the
I guess about the getting out of your
own way thing. I had to write all that
down. It's the best book I've ever
written. I've written other books.
They're good, but this one is everything
I wanted to say, nothing I didn't want
to say. And I got it all out there. Um,
and I have a security clearance and I
was afraid that um, it would get taken
away from me if I said all these things
>> because you talked about remote viewing.
>> No, because I talked about the
intelligence community potentially being
involved in um,
>> gifted programs.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Well, of course they are. I would
imagine they are. I imagine they were
trying to get talent in any way they
can, especially if they actually
invested time and energy and we know
they have in remote viewing and things
along those lines.
>> Yeah. But the problem is they were doing
these I mean I of course the int I'm I
am impressed with and know many good
people in the intelligence community and
um at the time that they were doing
these programs and giving students these
weird drinks and doing some kind of
mechanism to remove memory of certain
things. They were not asking for
parental consent. So yes, looking for
talent, understood. Yes, doing trying to
look for psychic. I mean, the
intelligence community has always been
interested in psychic capacities. Not
asking for parental consent. Bad.
>> And so they were giving you guys drinks.
>> Do you know what was in it?
>> No. Um I remember a pink drink that was
chalky. It's the same kind of drink
everyone talks about.
>> Um
>> and then what was the effect of that
pink drink? Do you remember?
>> I don't know. So here's here's the here
there's two memory lapses that are very
consistent. One was in seventh grade
when I was explicitly told I was in a
gifted program rather than my earlier
years when I just kind had these pull
outs and things. So in seventh grade I'm
in what's called the soore program. This
was in like 80 81. This is before gate
gifted and talented education. I think
it's just a predecessor to gate. And I
was um
pulled out every week, I think about
every week, to go see a counselor, but
the counselor
was really two people. And um a man and
a woman, maybe it was sometimes just
her, but I think it was both of them.
And they would see me in this small
room, but all I remember is walking I
remember walking down the hallway to the
room, dreading that, opening the door. I
know which door it was. I can picture it
shutting the door. There's stuff over
the window and then I black out like
every time. And and I don't mean like
I'm 57 years old and I don't remember
what happened in the seventh grade. What
I mean is um when I would then leave I
remember going back to class and not
remembering what happened in the room.
>> Wow.
So there's some kind of and this is not
I mean this is not different from what
many other people will report who were
in that program. So the some amnesic
either either the drink was the amnesia
or the drink is something else and they
did hypnosis to make us forget or
whatever. The other time was when I was
adult. I was adult-ish. I was 20ish
and I took some time off of college to
go uh hang out in PaloAlto because I had
a a boyfriend out there. I I previously
had a boyfriend out there and I was kind
of into the Stanford world. I wasn't at
Stanford but I was just into hanging out
there and I needed a job. Um,
and so I there was the time when word
processing was like you could get paid
to be a word processor
and I understood computers and I was
like I'll be a word processor. So I
either got I either saw an ad in the
newspaper at Lockheed Martin or my dad
told me I know someone you should talk
to Loheed Martin for a job. I end up at
Loheed Martin for an interview in the
morning. They hire me on the spot. Then
um I remember sitting and talking to the
guy during the interview. Uh just I
could see the parking lot behind him. I
see the desk behind me. I'm vaguely
sensing in memory some kind of weird
equipment, but again, no memory of that.
Then I remember the end of the day when
I'm typing on a computer.
My hands are shaking and I'm crying and
I don't remember what happened between
the morning and the night in that
moment. I don't remember. And I feel
like I'm typing up a resignation letter,
but it but in my memory it could have
just been the thing I was typing up like
word processing. But I hand it to the
boss and I go, "I can't work here." And
he said, "Oh, I thought you would have a
great future at Loheed Martin." I'm
like, why would you say that to a
20-year-old who you know is going back
to college in like 3 months? Um, what a
weird thing to say for to a word
processor who you just hired on that day
and then I and then I left.
So, um, I don't know what to say about
those instances. My memory is usually
pretty photographic and my auditory
memory is excellent. Um,
>> so do you think that the people at
Loheed Martin somehow or another had
record of you being a part of this other
program?
>> I figure that's one of the reasons why
they hired you.
>> I I I figure
or my dad knew that and maybe the memory
of him telling me was a real memory.
>> I mean, so he was working for Department
of Energy when I was a kid. Um, and when
I recently had a support group meeting
like two days ago with with the folks
who were in these programs and someone
asked the question, who here had parents
who worked for either the public school
system or federal government? And
everyone raised their hand and then and
then I said, who here didn't? Like,
let's just make sure. And no one didn't.
And so,
>> wow.
>> Yeah.
>> So, the federal government is mining
people's children. seems exceptional so
that they can use them for whatever
they're trying to accomplish.
>> Well, or their contractors and maybe
it's like,
excuse me,
I get burpy when I talk about stuff
that's hard. Um,
you know, maybe like I wanted I wanted
to work for the federal government and I
and I got a job offer and everything and
went through the security clearance
process and then Doge happened.
But but I was recruited four days after
I filed a FOYA to try to get information
about that program. And then a couple
days later, I'm more burpy. A couple
days later, um,
uh, after I passed the first interview,
um, I got a note from the Foyer people
saying, "Are you sure you want us to
continue this foyer request?" 4 days
later, I mean, that's not that's fast
for Foya. Like, Foyer is not super
rapid. And then I said, "No, I guess
maybe not." Because I was thinking maybe
the um people who were going to hire me
maybe didn't want me to have an
outstanding foyer request. So, I said,
"Maybe not." And then three minutes
later I got a call from the recruiter
saying um okay you've passed to the next
level.
>> Oh wow.
>> Yeah. So I think that there's um and now
now so I don't mean to sound so the
thing that I think was wrong unethical
was not giving students things to ingest
and doing experiments that removed their
memory without consent of parents and
the students. Right?
>> And this is universal amongst all the
other students. They all said that they
lost memory.
>> Many not universal. Nothing's universal.
Some actually remember horrible um abuse
that I can't repeat here. Um but um many
of them don't have um amnesic periods.
>> And was the the same
with all of them? Was it a similar
result that they were trying to achieve?
Was it some sort of exceptional powers
that these children had or exceptional
ability, exceptional cognitive ability?
Like what was it? It looks like they
were looking for exceptional cognitive
ability and leadership ability, creative
ability, and uh psychic ability.
>> Um but no, so that's so I mean I just
want to say like
>> that's not nefarious to want those
things,
>> but it is from children,
>> right? And so this is the thing that is
just like okay,
>> you're just taking children and making
doing experiments on them. It's like
you're [ __ ] weirding them out.
They're supposed to be playing with
their friends and having fun and living
a normal life. You've all of a sudden
changed all of that by introducing them
to scientific experiments and then
making them drink [ __ ] Pepto-Bismol
or whatever they're giving you,
>> some amnesia,
>> whatever pink
>> or some radioactive thing. I don't know.
So, I had this dream I had
>> Well, so the reason
>> X-Men type [ __ ]
>> sorry.
>> Well, right. And so, the reason I bring
that up is I had this so I know already
that I'm gifted at dreaming
telepathically and precognitively,
right? And
so, I know that's true. And then I have
this um dream after I moved to
Washington DC and I'm starting to think
about working for the federal
government. I have this dream. I don't
have a job yet or even a job offer, but
this car is following me in the dream.
It's a red convertible and there's a guy
in the convertible and it has a little
FBI badge on it on the car and I'm like,
"Why are you following me?" So I just
speed up and he keeps following me and
he says, "Hey, we like how spunky you
are, but call the office." And I go,
"Call the office. I don't have a job."
And he goes, "Call the office." He's
very adamant. And so I'm pissed. And I
crawl up on the hood of the car and I
look at him, you know, as he's driving,
as one does in one dream. I'm very
aggressive. And I said, "Give me the
phone number." So he gives me the phone
number. And I immediately wake up. I
write it down. It's the only time it's
ever happened to me in a dream that a
phone number actually corresponds to a
phone number of a government agency. So
I look it up, corresponds to a
government agency that monitors
radiation exposure.
And the first document I find online is
this um document about these tests of
radiation exposure in humans that
started in the 70s. And they're like,
"Look, we can't do these tests on
animals. We have to do them on humans."
It didn't say like, "Let's give people
radiation." Or it didn't say, "Let's
give people things that soak up
radiation and help heal them." It didn't
say either of those things. It just said
we have to do this on humans. It was
from the nuclear defense agency. And so
that made me start asking questions
about whether this has to do with trying
to understand the effect of
radioactivity.
And so I looked into a bunch of history
and I found out that my mom's my mom
grew up really poor. Both her parents
worked at a um uranium mining facility
in Denver. And of course her f her
mother was a secretary but her father
was a a minor and he would come home
with ra you know uranium dust on his
boots and uh so there's there's
intergenerational exposure right so if
you're if you're a parent if your mother
especially because you know the the eggs
are she was like seven or so but the if
the eggs are in you your whole life as a
woman right and so if they get mutated I
could see now oh I would potentially be
studied and my sister as well.
>> So then I started looking at all these
places where these programs developed.
The very first um soar program was in
the 70s and started in Aken, South
Carolina. I found a bunch of newspaper
articles about it. Soar at the time
stood for, get this, students on active
research.
Like let's just call it what it is out
loud publicly.
>> Crazy.
>> Yeah. So, uh, by the time it got to me
up in Illinois, it was called scholarly
opportunities in the academic realm.
>> Active research is too creepy for
people.
>> Oh, yeah. Like, maybe.
>> Yeah.
>> But anyway, Aken, South Carolina is
right next to um the Savannah River um
nuclear facility that processed
plutonium. And so, and then there were a
bunch of people who were in the program
in Nevada, which is obviously a nuclear
test site. And then I talked to a friend
who uh who knows a bunch of special
forces guys, but he grew up in a place
where they had these weird radioactivity
like actual containers like in their
school like storage bins in their school
>> which is just weird. And he was in one
of these programs and his friend was in
one of these programs and so I think
there might be something related to
that. And I don't know how all this
stuff ties in, but the story I'm
again, this is just speculation and
based on the receipts that I found and
putting things together could all be
wrong. And some of the my good friends
in the intelligence community think it's
pretty nuts. But regardless,
I would want to understand the effects
of radiation on the human mind. Maybe it
could make positive things happen like
the at level
>> at low levels.
>> Right.
>> Right. May I mean I'm as a cognitive
neuroscientist I get it
>> but you just have to ask for consent you
have to talk about the risks you have to
be clear about it and you don't it's
clear that there's a file that kind of
follows you right when you're in these
programs
>> well it's also very clear that if you
look at the history of MK Ultra their
whole motive operendi was it just do
everything you want to do don't ask for
permission just do it to people
operation midnight climax all those
crazy things that they were doing
>> but they shut it down they were doing it
to a lot of intellig just community
officers. They said, "Okay, don't do
that anymore. So, let's do it to
prisoners. Okay, don't do that anymore.
Let's do it to children. Who's going to
who's going to It's the 70s. Who's going
to say anything?"
>> I bet foster kids.
>> Well, yeah. And people like me whose
families were breaking up and all sort,
you know, and you're in the public
school and you're, you know, your
parents are trying to hold their [ __ ]
together.
>> Um, so they don't know what's going on.
So, yeah, it's um it's unethical,
probably illegal. I and I understand
that it may be for good reasons. I mean,
I think all those things are true.
>> And I think it's interesting that if you
talk to kids who went to the gifted
programs in the DC area in that same
generation,
they say none of this stuff happened to
them, which is a red flag. It's like you
wouldn't want to do it to the the
executives are living in the DC area,
right?
>> The executives in the intelligence
community and in those in those
contractors.
So you wouldn't want to do it to those
kids because those are the kids of the
executives.
>> Oh,
>> I know.
>> E,
>> I know.
>> But I mean, isn't that always the case?
Like that's also why those are the ones
that don't get drafted.
>> Yeah. No, it's the privilege. Yeah.
>> Yeah. It's creepy.
>> Yeah, I know. It can go down a really
bad rabbit hole, but I that's what made
me want to all this kind of difficulty
in my early childhood.
um brought some clarity and also I guess
probably my my psychic abilities or my
pre-cognitive abilities
as an as an adult has brought some
clarity around what really matters and
what we can do to make the world a
better place and and how we can heal all
that because every single person in that
equation was doing the best they could
even if they were making shitty choices
you know like someone I can imagine the
counselor who knows what's going on,
whatever they're doing to me in that
room. I can imagine she, you know, felt
like, okay, I have to do this for
>> the country to find out.
>> Yeah, we need to do this for the country
and we need to do this for humanity, you
know, and so there's a lot of
forgiveness. Like every once in a while,
I'll just send love back in time.
>> Well, that's a very balanced view. Now I
understand why what you were talking
about like your youthful experience that
you would want to live it over again so
you could forgive people and get over
the trauma of it. Now I understand.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Well, that's why I'm wearing this
shirt because I started
>> Applied Love Labs.
>> Yeah. I started that nonprofit in 2019
and what we do is we apply love weaving
it through time
>> in like technology and events and
curricula. So, I would love to show off
uh one of our coolest things. Can you go
to timeachine.lo?
We built a time machine.
>> Whoa.
>> So, we actually use this with um with
some uh native tribes and with some
There it is.
>> Enter your time machine.
>> So, what is this? So, this is it's like
a a journaling an audio journaling app
that essentially prompts you to give
messages to yourself and it says it's
going into your time machine and then
later it comes out and you hear yourself
and it has a
>> in the future.
>> It has a bizarre impact because what
happens is we're not used to hearing
we're used to getting little messages
from ourselves like written
>> but not your actual self talking to
yourself.
>> Yeah. And it changes people and it seems
to be a real favorite of veterans and uh
people who have experienced addiction
and abuse and any kind of situation
where they could say like I'm going to
be here tomorrow and this is these are
the choices I'd like to make and you
know
>> and I'd like to love myself and I'd like
to feel love for other people and
>> so we've used it at the Cook County Jail
with a group of people there um who
really found it powerful and with a
couple of uh native tribes
who would like to change it a little bit
and make it fit their culture a little
better. But still, um, it looks like
unconditional love itself, like from the
math, if you look at the statistics of
the results of this experiment we did,
it looks like unconditional love itself
caused a huge shift along with someone's
time perspective in which they started
to include more like started to love
themselves over time more like it's like
a big bubble that extends over time.
That makes sense.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Makes sense.
>> It totally makes sense. And it and it's
how I handled
>> I sort of wanted to make that up because
that's how I handled my childhood abuse.
>> Was I
>> Can I get your book again?
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> I feel like we just scratched the
surface here. We've already killed three
hours, but I feel like
>> it's been three hours.
>> Close to it. Yeah.
>> Um I feel like you and I could do a
bunch of these. So, let's I would love
that.
>> Let's definitely cuz I feel like we
didn't even talk about remote viewing.
Oh, let's just do a whole show on that
because I was a teacher of it and then
I'm an experimentter and then I have a
team and
>> next time you come in for sure, we'll do
that.
>> Yeah.
>> Thank you very much. This is a lot of
fun. I really enjoyed it,
>> Joe. Excellent.
>> And the book is called Have a Nice
Disclosure, Julia Mossbridge, PhD. Right
there. Go get it.
>> Did you do audio book?
>> I did.
>> Did you read it?
>> I gave you a free copy. It's me.
>> Yes.
>> I don't like audio books where it's not
the person.
>> I agree.
>> It's like so stupid. And the publishing
companies will tell you, "No, you have
to have this actor do it." And I'm like,
"No, cuz you can hear when you listen if
it's that person."
>> Exactly.
>> Yeah.
>> I agree. I'm glad you did it.
>> Yeah.
>> All right. Thank you. Bye, everybody.
>> Bye.