They were doing testing on us. By the
time I got done with that part of the
book, which I thought was the end of the
book, I realized that that process had
worked on me and that I had to write
about my own internal disclosure of this
thing.
And uh you know, you can hear me
swallowing stuff because it's hard still
and I've talked about it several times.
I always remember dreading that walk. As
soon as I get in the room and I close
the door, I remember nothing.
Then I open the door and I leave and I'm
just confused and I go back to class and
I remember not remembering. I don't know
if it was a drug, a hypnosis.
What really makes me think that there's
something going on is I apply for a job
in the federal government that requires
a clearance and they say, "Send us all
of your transcripts from your entire
schooling history." the comments area
from 1 through 8th grade, they're all
redacted. It's hard to sort of recognize
out loud that who you are as a person
was
sort of shaped on purpose.
When I was in New Jersey,
>> [music]
>> um my girlfriend at the time and I,
which became my wife, we were heading
out of a building on a beautiful, let's
say, Tuesday afternoon. We were walking
to our cars to go to lunch. And as we
were walking, the building was behind
us. But as we were approaching the car,
both of us at the same exact time
wrenched our necks over our right
shoulder into the sky over the building
[music] and we seen this object that all
of a sudden went like 45°
straight out out of sight in a second.
Like bam, it was gone. And we walked to
the car. I looked at her and I said,
"Did you happen to see anything?" And
she completely
said exactly the same thing I saw. It
was incredible.
Yes, it was only maybe two seconds or
so, but just incredible. And yeah,
there's we believe
>> Dr. Julia Osbridge, um, thank you so
much for gracing us here in the skiff
with your lovely presence. Um, I met you
first at the contact in the desert uh
convention this past year. we were both
on a panel and I got to say I was just
completely enamored with um your takes
on reality uh and and you know
throughout this this discussion that we
were having on stage was really
interesting because it was a sort of
back and forth about agency
>> and and uh the the disclosure dialogue
and and everything else and then you
know just finished your book have a nice
disclosure uh which isn't about alien
disclosure at all it's more about sort
of inner disclosure and and uh this this
more sort of uh the deeper sentiment of
dealing with something that is not
understandable by your you know general
human senses. Um very fascinating.
You're a very fascinating person. you've
done incredible work in the study of SI
in the study of precognitive
um you know precognition um all sorts of
really interesting sigh stuff and and
you continue today to just really
spearhead this conversation in a way
that doesn't feel militarized.
>> Yay.
>> And I think that that we need more of
that, right? Because there is a
spectrum. I I always I always feel like
there's a spectrum of a masculine and a
feminine energy with this stuff. And
like on on the on the on the feminine
energy, it's like it's all crystals and
woo. And on the masculine side of it,
it's all like missiles and, you know,
and war. And there are people on, you
know, both sides of that spectrum that
inhabit the middle. And that's where
these really fascinating conversations
start to take place because we're
considering everything. Yeah. and we're
we're sort of branching out and yeah,
I'm just a big fan of you and so thank
you for joining me today.
>> Wow, I love that. What a great
introduction. I'd like to frame it in
time.
>> Done. [laughter]
>> Excellent.
>> Um yeah, so we just had breakfast. we
shared or lunch and um you know we were
we were talking about a lot of things
and and you know there's there's that
part of uh the conversation that leads
into a podcast that the audience doesn't
get you know they don't get to hear but
a lot of that is like this dance of hold
on
>> should we save this
>> yeah we did that a couple times
>> we did that a couple times
>> um you know but we're going to be
talking about all sorts of wonderful
things today
>> including you know non-local
consciousness including time travel uh
including intuition and and what is what
does synchronicity mean in all of this
and all of these wonderful ideas. But
hearing it from a cognitive
neuroscientist I think adds a little
gravitas to it for myself at least and
it it definitely inspires me to ask you
some of the more deeper questions today.
But uh I want to start by just asking
you
you've been in this field for quite a
long time. Um you've you've you've seen
a lot you've heard a lot. You've studied
a lot. you've put out a lot of, you
know, papers on this stuff. What is what
is one thing in regards to how we are
currently interacting with reality that
you found to be most surprising in the
last sort of 10 years that you've that
you've been looking into this? Like
what's something that struck you as
well? This is a surprising way of sort
of filtering in reality that I hadn't
really pondered or thought about before.
Oh god, great question.
H
the unfortunately
I think some of the things that are most
surprising to me are surprising because
my mind works so differently. So I don't
know if they're so interesting because
>> Okay. [laughter] Right.
>> I'll be the judge of that.
>> Okay. because
I just recently realized
that um for the most part
people still think that you have to
um build something
if you like a spaceship or something if
you want to do time travel for instance.
Um or you have to
if you were to build a conscious
machine, you'd have to like
build it. You couldn't just take
something that was like a rock that was
already there
>> and make it conscious. And so these
things, it just occurred to me recently,
are huge um hypothesis stoppers. In
other words, we're not going to
hypothesize about all the things that we
could do with our minds in terms of
consciousness and how we can, you know,
use a rock to, you know, become alive or
whatever it is if we think that that's
impossible.
And we're not going to assume that
another species or NHI or whatever you
want to call aliens, we're not going to
assume that they have that capacity
because we haven't thought of it yet.
>> That's interesting. And so the
underlying thing is just what are all
the hypotheses that we just completely
ignore because it never occurred to us
and how do we just absolutely not see
what's there? Like for instance, another
another one's like gravity is fuel. I
really feel that gravity could literally
be used as fuel. Um and maybe that's
what UAP are doing when they're just
bouncing around. Maybe they're just like
loading up and they have to do this
change of like the gravitational just a
little bit and then it fills up their
battery.
>> Yeah. Maybe the like magnetosphere helps
them and so that's why they choose our
planet. I don't know. But like just the
the posity of hypotheses that just come
from our history rather than looking
into the future and seeing what's going
to change when we start to realize that
the laws of physics are shifting.
>> So
>> that's really interesting. Yeah, my
brain's going as well. Like even even as
um you know you you hear stories about
the idea of like spiritual energy
imbuing certain items and like these
things like how do we know that we can't
record an entire podcast into a can,
right?
>> And then and then somehow extract that
information from this can
>> a million years in the future.
>> Yeah. I'm not going to be the one to
figure it out.
>> Or maybe there's like there's maybe a
podcast in in you know a tree root or
something that's been fossilized. And if
you're like into the curan hypothesis,
all we have to do is decode that, right?
>> And then we get all this information.
But of course, we don't think it can
happen, so we don't look
>> and so we don't look and we don't we
don't move our efforts in that
direction.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Wow. Yeah. That's that's a deep
one to start on to think, you know,
that's a great thought. Thank you for
that. That's really interesting to think
about because there, you know, you don't
know what you don't know. That's the
other thing. It's like,
>> yeah,
>> you know, we can't we can't hypothesize
about stuff that we can't even, you
know, fathom.
>> Well, and and this is this is part of I
I think AI is very powerful and going to
do a lot of really amazing things,
especially in medicine. Um, and maybe
hopefully if we use it right in our
understanding of social interactions so
that we can not have war and things like
that, that would be fantastic or not
famine and things. But right now, one of
the things that AI does is it clamps
down on any kind of dreaming outside the
box. So when I have conversations with
AI about what about this, it's lazy and
it just comes back with, well, we don't
know that that would be real and we
probably shouldn't, you know, it just it
it like stops you. And so if we're going
to, you know, be training people to
interact with AI in school, etc., and
we're going to, you know, have them
figure out new technologies. They're
going to come up against this wall. And
when you don't know what you don't know,
the last thing you want is something
acting like it knows and then telling
you like that's not interesting. So,
this is this is a concern I have.
>> Yeah. Gatekeeping by something that
doesn't even know it's gatekeeping.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. That is a concern. And but there's
also the adverse side of that too where
it's like we also don't want to indulge
in people's psychosis
>> and and you know tell them you know
gaslight them into thinking yeah no
absolutely everybody is demonic and
you're like wait hold on you know
>> um
>> yeah no that is interesting
>> well I mean you can do experiments to
test for this so you don't have to just
say well wouldn't it be cool if gravity
could be used as fuel you can do
experiments you know and so that's what
it ought to be incurring encouraging
people to do and that's what it also
ought to be incurring is more
experimentation based on these ideas
that seem really far out but you can
actually test.
>> Yeah. Do you which which um which AI
sort of LLM or or which one are you more
familiar with? Which one do you use if
you had to use any?
>> I use kind of them all for different
things.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. So
>> what's what's your one for like Claude
for research? I guess
>> Claude for research. um open AI for just
asking me good questions. Like I have a
open AI model that I train to
>> it's called a a student of humanity and
it asks only questions. It just asks
insightful questions and the idea is
that you have the answer and so it's not
giving you any information.
>> That's very cool.
>> So that I I use that and then notebook
LM I use when I'm trying to get cool
ideas about how to present things
visually.
>> So that kind of thing.
>> That's cool. It's cool to hear that
because you know you hear a lot of
reluctance in wanting to use AI
especially because a lot of people have
this idea that AI is perverse and that
it will
>> sort of um overshadow the human soul in
some way and in in some creative
expression and although that yes if you
let it but you know it's nice to hear
that there are good sides to it and I
think everybody you know has their own
relationship with AI at this point. Um,
but I guess we're all just trying to
figure out what's a healthy amount.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, because it it can it can veer
pretty quickly.
>> It really depends, I think, on how
you've been trained. Like I've been
trained to be an independent thinker my
whole life. uh even in my family and
then in school and then um you know in
the gifted program even though there's
all sorts of downsides to that one of
the upsides is you know lots of
independent thinking in graduate school
posttock and so when I'm talking to AI
about some research idea or something I
don't see it as an authority it's like a
thinking partner it's like what do you
think of this and then it says something
and then I'm like well but you haven't
thought of like that's actually just
glib like you haven't thought of this or
this and it's lazy. So, it'll just say,
"Oh, yeah, you're right.
>> You're totally right."
>> Yeah, you're totally right. [laughter]
But it's uh it's I worry more about
people who haven't been trained to think
independently.
>> Mhm. [clears throat]
>> Um so I I think AI is more of a problem
for people who are coming up and don't
and don't have proper education.
>> Yeah.
>> So I think that's and I think it's super
helpful. I mean when the data are out on
this like we know it's already very
helpful for people who are already mid
mid to senior career it's very helpful
uh but early career it's a disaster to
replace early career people with AI
because then who's going to learn who's
going to get to mid to senior career.
>> Yeah.
>> Right.
>> Yeah. You're externalizing
>> memory you're externalizing experience
into this Yeah. digital thing.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Absolutely. Um you know you
touched on something right there. The
gifted and talented program. I know that
in your latest book you talk about that
a little bit as well. Uh I think soar uh
the program that you were uh in
>> Students on Active Research which is the
creepiest
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Students on active research.
So sounds so lovely. Um you know um and
you the title was Sorggate which I
thought was interesting. Right.
>> Yeah. Well gate because
>> play on Stargate.
>> Yeah. Exactly.
>> And then gate the program.
>> And gate the program. Yeah.
>> So could you could you fill us in a
little bit? I mean, I just, you know, I
encourage anybody to go check out all
the books that you've done, but um could
you maybe fill us in a little bit about
what that was like uh coming up for you?
>> You know, obviously thinking it's a
little bit strange, the tests that
they're doing, the cognitive tests and
everything else, but also your research
into it afterwards as an adult, you
know, came up a little strange as well
and and maybe walk us through that.
>> Sure. Um I started writing the book. I
didn't know I was writing a book. And
I'm like, I guess I'm writing something.
And um I realized, you know, maybe about
halfway through the first part of the
book that it was about disclosing in
yourself. And it was almost like a
spiritual process, but also like a
physical process, but also a social
process. Listen,
by the time I got done with that part of
the book, which I thought was the end of
the book, I realized that that process
had worked on me and that I had to write
about my own internal disclosure of this
thing.
And uh you know, you can hear me swallow
and stuff because it's hard still and
I've talked about it several times
publicly. Um, but nonetheless,
it's hard to sort of recognize out loud
that who you are as a person
was
sort of shaped on purpose, not just by
your parents and not just by your
community, but by something that you
didn't even know was had an intention to
shape who you are.
And that's the part that I find
difficult. And so, so I I got interested
as I was writing the book in my
background in this gifted program called
Soore that I was in and officially in in
seventh grade. You know, when I say
officially, I mean, so like I have
friends who I still know who are also in
the program and so I know that I didn't
make it up, right? But I started being
tested for it and getting special
privileges and stuff that the other
students didn't get, I think, in
kindergarten because I have the test
results. Um, and then in heavily in
first grade and then from then on out
there was a lot just a lot of testing
all the time. Um,
and for the longest time I kind of
bought into the story of,
but I think this part is true. You know,
I do I I come from a very uh an educated
family with super intelligent minds.
That's true.
Um, and I was very creative. That's
true. I'm still very creative. So, like
that's part of the story. That's like,
okay, I could see that you you might
want to put me in a program where I
would get more stimulation or something.
The other part of the story is they were
doing testing on us that was not about
that. Um, and that didn't seem to be for
our benefit and some of which had
deliberate, as far as I can tell,
deliberate memory removal. um in this
and this is common among people who will
talk about the gifted and talented
education programs and they have
different names taggate
there's one called MGM there's one
called leap there's one called search
there's one I mean there's one called
reach and there's so um and there's
other ones too but common among the
folks who had the experience of being
tested for things that didn't make sense
you know it wasn't an IQ test it was
something else um is this sort of memory
lapse thing where
even in the moment
I remember not remembering. So that's
the tricky thing. So there's a
difference between you know talking to
someone now and saying you know back
when I was in seventh grade a million
years ago I don't remember what I did.
Well, probably because you're 57 years
old, you know, [laughter]
but um
>> but in the moment.
>> But in the moment, so I would go to this
room about once every week or every
other week and I would meet with this
counselor
and I think I know who the counselor
was, but sometimes there would be this
other person there, but I have no idea
what we would talk about because I
remember the steps going to the room. I
could retrace those almost to the point
where I know the colors of the bricks on
the wall to my left and the colors of
the lockers on my right. Um, but then I
get to the hallway that has the room. I
open the door. I remember that. And then
it's the first one on the right. So, I
remember that. It's a small room like
the size of a bathroom. It's very small.
And there's, you know, covering on the
window. Um, so no one can see in. Um, so
that's a little creepy, but whatever.
Maybe in a counseling session makes
sense. I always remember dreading that
walk. As soon as I get in the room and I
close the door, I remember nothing.
Then I open the door and I leave and I'm
[clears throat] just confused and I go
back to class and I remember not
remembering.
So whatever happened in that room. Yeah.
So that was the the deepest part of this
kernel was the acknowledgement that that
wasn't about gifted and talented
education
there. I don't know if it was a drug, a
hypnosis.
>> Do you remember ingesting anything?
>> There was a a pink drink that I have two
memories of. One memory is that I spit
it out because they told me it was
fluoride and it was chalky and kind of
viscous and I thought, "This a isn't
fluoride and b you shouldn't swallow
fluoride, so why would you why would you
want me to swallow this?"
>> Yeah.
>> Um and then there the other memories of
drinking it. Um,
but I actually had a dream last night
about this and
uh, so I'm still trying to figure so, so
I'm still trying to figure out what that
was. So, let me just make the context a
little bigger and then we'll come back
to the dream. So, the context includes
also just too much hearing testing. So,
I've always had very sensitive hearing.
By too much hearing testing, I mean it's
not like I grew up next to a shooting
range and they were concerned about my
hearing.
They were pulling me out to do these
hearing tests that weren't real hearing
tests. I ended up getting a, you know, a
PhD in in psycho acoustics and
communication sciences and disorders
specifically in sound and understanding
sound and the brain and the mind. And
I know what a hearing test is. These
were not that, right? This is not we're
going to raise the level of a sound.
We're going to lower it and we're going
to figure out where you can hear it. It
was here. Listen to this.
How do you feel? [laughter]
That's not a hearing test.
>> Whoa.
>> Yeah. So, um
there was that. I do remember that. And
they were administered by these folks in
suits and they were always administered
in pairs. So like two students would be
there called from the same sort of
cohort and they would administer these
tests. They were not from the school.
They would do it in the nursurse's
office. So I remember that. I remember
the teachers um
like I was I didn't have to go outside
to recess. I should have probably gone
outside to recess, but instead I was
given a chance to to do computer coding
when the first computers came out in the
late '7s. And uh so I learned how to
basic and and uh forran and stuff like
that. Um [clears throat]
that wasn't that that could have been
just enrichment,
but there was this feeling to it of
that there was a goal, but I didn't
understand what the goal was. So I just
just did it cuz it was more
entertaining. I was really bad at soccer
and all the kids used to play soccer.
And so um there was that. Feels like a
feels like a chapter out of Ender Game
>> a little bit. Like they they saw me and
they're like, "Well, so I have the copy
of the test that I took in first grade
where they said across the board I was
operating at like 12.9 grade level,
which means, you know, you graduated
from high school." And they never
skipped a grade. Like I found that, you
know, just a few years ago. And I'm
like, why didn't my parents ever skip me
a grade? I don't think they ever saw the
test.
>> Um because every year I remember just
thinking, I learned the same thing. I'm
going to go insane. [laughter] And so
it's funny. I actively I remember in
third grade I was offered to skip ahead
and I was with my you know we lived on I
went to school on military bases my
entire life. And I remember um sitting
there with my mom and the teacher and
her explaining to my mom that I'm
incredibly bored here. And I I was like
I'd never vocalized that, you know, so I
don't know how she, you know, said that,
but um she was like, you know, he needs
to. And I remember my mom turning to me
and asking me, do you want to go ahead?
And I said, no, cuz I I I I feared the
social consequences. Hey, just wanted to
take a quick second to say thank you so
much for all the support uh that you've
given to Area 52. Um, whether that's
purchasing a ticket to the live shows,
whether that's liking this video,
commenting on another video, sharing it
with your friends, buying something from
our shop, which by the way, we got a
sale going on. 25% off all hats if
you're interested. Um, but just a
generalized thank you. This is not a
sponsor. There is no sponsors for this
video, but I did want to take some time
to just thank you, the audience. Uh
truly truly truly grateful for all of
your support and I won't take up any
more of your time. Please enjoy the rest
of the podcast.
>> Yeah. See, so I think they did it
differently with boys and girls. So
there were plenty of boys that were
skipped ahead in my school
>> and I was jealous. They never asked me
the question.
>> Weird.
>> I don't know if it's cuz they wanted to
study me for longer, which is what I
suspect,
>> or what. Um,
>> so my it turns out, so, so I'm starting
to get this information, but what really
makes me think that there's something
going on, and I'll get back to the weird
counseling sessions in a second. What
really makes me think that there's
something going on is I apply for a job
in the federal government that requires
a clearance. And they say, "Send us um
all of your transcripts from your entire
schooling history." So, I take that very
literally and I go back to like first
grade, kindergarten, [laughter]
you know, the whole thing.
>> Wow.
>> And I write them a note. I say, "I need
my transcripts." They're like, "Okay."
So, they went back to like microfich and
they [laughter] get it and they, you
know, digitize it and send it to me. And
the comments area from first through 8th
grade, they're all redacted.
So, that's what made me So, I said, "Uh,
sorry, I'm me." So, I think I get to see
these and they're like, "Yeah, no, we
this is what we have." Like, we like
>> they don't have the unredacted.
>> They don't have the unredacted version.
>> Luckily, my mom has at least the first
grade one. So, I was able to compare the
unredacted with the redacted. And I saw
that what was redacted are all the notes
from all the teachers talking about me.
>> And what were those notes?
>> Just like Julia is an amazing
storyteller. She's reading at a high
level. Blah blah blah. I help she helps
the other students blah blah stuff like
that. How would that why would they
redact that?
>> Because as you get older in the first
through 8th, this is all the same school
first through 8th grade. As you get
older, there's going to be notes about
we take her out for, you know, forrren
and basic training.
>> Oh,
>> she goes, you know, to the office a lot.
We don't know why. She has lots of
stomach aches. We don't understand why.
She seems to have lots of ear
infections. We don't understand why. You
know, she's now in the gifted program.
So there's no record of me being in the
gifted program on the transcript anymore
>> and a lot of unconsensual things I
suppose like that they didn't run by
your parents.
>> Yeah. So that's that's my thought.
>> Sure. So that made me think, oh god. The
other thing that made me think there's
something going on is
the reason why I applied for this job in
the federal government is I had backing
up. I uh got a call from uh this
organization that I had applied to and
um they said, you know, you back in
January or February, you sent us a
resume. We think we'd like to talk with
you about a particular job. And I said,
'Oh, really interesting. That's cool.
But 4 days before that, I'd sent a foyer
request
about my Soore stuff to FOYA. I'd said,
I really want to understand this
program. This is the deal. Can you just
send me any information you have about
this and if there's any relationship
with I had targeted the Air Force
because I thought maybe there was a
relationship with the Air Force. I it's
called SOORE. I don't know. I And so
four days later, I get this, "Oh, we
want to recruit you call." And so we
have a conversation. I This is
interesting. And then um so they say,
"Okay, that you pass this interview, you
know, next thing is the cognitive
testing. We're going to do some
background research on you and then
you'll, you know, fast forward to the
cognitive testing if that works." And so
then I think it's like couple days
later, I get an email from the Foye
people saying, "Would you like to drop
your request?" Um because it might be
hard for us to find out this information
unless you exactly know what program it
was. Now the foyer just doesn't act that
quickly, right?
>> No. [laughter]
>> I mean,
>> no, no, no. That they're notoriously
Yeah.
>> of, you know, they've got a backlog of
years.
>> Correct. So then I go I start thinking,
okay, well obviously this seems like
there's some kind of a relationship. I
just see what happens if I say yes, I
want to drop it. I drop it. 3 minutes
later, I wrote it down in my journal. I
get a call. Oh, you've been passed the
cognitive testing for that job.
>> Whoa. So you think there's a direct
relationship there? direct correlation
between dropping the foyer request and
getting
>> past to the next step.
>> Getting past the next step
>> and the next step was of course more co
cognitive testing which is exactly what
I'm used to. I mean like
>> again and again and again.
>> So not a coincidence.
>> No. And that well I don't know it could
be a coincidence.
>> Yeah.
>> It just was very interesting
coincidence. Sure. So I started getting
like okay maybe there's something going
on and that's when I started working on
the book. So or that's when I then that
seed was planted. But I also called my
mom
uh because I was like, I wonder what she
remembers.
And I just said, you know, mom, uh, what
do you think about that sore program I
was in? Done. That was the question.
>> Yeah.
>> She goes, well, they were studying you.
[laughter] And I'm like, did they tell
you that? She goes, no, but they had to
have been. She's like, you guys were
smart and you and your sister, and I'm
confident they were studying you. And
um,
>> but who's they? I said, "Who's they?"
And what are they studying?
>> I said, "Who's they?" And she just goes,
"CIA." And I'm like, "Do you know that?"
And she's like, "No, but like that seems
like the right people, right?" And
everyone thinks it's the CIA when
someone's doing something nefarious, but
maybe it is. I don't know.
>> Yeah.
>> So, back to going to that room.
This this experience, I finally decided
I would do some regression
with some memory regression. I went to a
UAP friend in the field. you know, who
do you know who's not going to plant
ideas in my mind as I do hypnotic
regression?
>> And they went and did some research and
they came back and they said, "This
person, this is a great person." So, I
contacted that person.
>> Have I told you this story? No.
>> Now, this is just so burned in my mind.
[sighs and gasps]
Um, I contact that person. I set up an
appointment. I'm scared, you know, and I
told my husband, "I want you to be with
me when we're doing this." Like, this is
scary to me, you know.
>> Yeah. Uh, but that's the day before and
I get a text from her and she says, "Um,
I'm sorry. I have to cancel. I have
emergency dental surgery." And I'm like,
"Oh, oh, totally get it. You know, when
would you like to reschedule?"
I can't reschedule. Anytime you'd like
to do a regression, I will have
emergency medical emergency dental
surgery.
>> Whoa.
>> What the
>> Yo, that's crazy.
>> I know. And I was like I looked at the
phone and I was like I showed my
husband. I'm like, "What does this
mean?" It's like, he's like,
either she was protecting me cuz she
could sense something or
>> she was being told
>> or she was being told. I mean, if you
want to be really paranoid and decide
that the government or whatever is that
efficient that that she would be told, I
would think it's be more likely to be
government contractors than the
government because I don't think the
government's
>> of course. Yeah. Government is a is a
term but not as an actual entity.
>> Yeah. Um, so either she was being told
or she sensed that it would be a bad
idea. So, ever since then, I haven't
done it. So, then I had this dream last
night.
>> Have I asked her about it?
>> You should ask her that question.
>> No, I don't even have her contact
information anymore. I don't even know
who she was. Like, it it was like it was
almost like a shock to my system. It's
like it
>> Yeah,
>> it's like removed my capacity to
function about that in that moment.
>> Does it cause you to be more curious now
or less curious?
I sort of after listening to what
happened to other people
>> through regressions
>> through regressions or even the people
who remember like Jordan Jose.
>> Yeah.
>> I sort of wonder if I want to know. I
sort of wonder if it would be more
traumatizing to know. And that's when I
land on the protective thing.
>> Right. So that's that's her having done
this before.
>> Yeah. and and clearly nonbeneficial
>> for the uh the people involved,
>> right? And so there's so there's a part
of me that says,
>> "Right, that makes sense."
>> Yeah, maybe it's protective to not look.
But then I had this dream,
>> but also okay, please please go on.
>> So then I had this dream last night when
I was I knew I would be on the show and
though I'd probably talk about this and
I had this dream that that one of the
counselors, but this time it was a man.
Sometimes it would be a woman and a man
together, I think. And I think it was
her husband and I think it was the
counselor's husband who had literally
been a a boot camp u sergeant in the
army back where the sword program
started which is um near the Savannah
River nuclear facility by the way.
Anyway, so
I um like near Augusta, Georgia. Um, I
had this dream that the the male
counselor was in my dream. I haven't
seen him in a million years, right?
>> Wow.
>> Yeah. And he's wearing all black and
he's telling me
um he's a white guy wearing all black
and he's telling me this is it. You
know, you're going to um you're going to
do it this time. Like I think we've I
think we've got this. And I'm kind of
like on his team and I'm like, "All
right, yeah, I think I can do this." you
know, like like like let's do it like
like there's some kind of challenge and
in the moment in the dream I don't know
what I don't have any history in my
mind, right? But I have some I
apparently have some kind of
subconscious history like I don't have
any memory of what we're doing in the
dream as that person in the dream but I
have some kind of subconscious memory or
body memory. And so I go, okay. And I go
up
sort of in my mind or maybe in my body,
both. I'm like fly essentially on
levitate to the top of this tower that
looks like the Stanford bell tower and I
look around out of the holes um the
little port holes at the top of the
tower and then I burst through the
ceiling like and then that's when I
realize I'm not that's not my body, you
know?
>> Yeah. And I'm I realize, oh, I haven't
been able to do this and now I'm able to
do this. I've I've I've been stopping
I've been letting the ceiling stop me.
Like it's a belief thing. And I was it
was in a frame where we were very much
working together on this goal of getting
me to be able to just burst through this
and get away from the sort of rules of
the physicality of things and to ignore
that and to assume that I can go through
things and then therefore I could. Um,
and then I look down at him and I go,
"Oh god, this guy's kind of an asshole."
Like I had this moment of I burst
through and then I'm like, "Ah." And he
suckered me into this by making it seem
like this is the the amazing challenge
that I'm going to do and I'm going to
feel great and everything, but I'm not
going to remember this. So, it's all for
him. It's all for whatever he's doing.
That was my experience in the dream.
>> You were you uh your younger self
essentially?
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> And so I mean that's
>> wild. That is wild.
>> It's a dream. But I often get really
useful information in my dreams.
>> But there's I mean the only the only
connecting point here is that you knew
you were going to do the show. You knew
you might talk about this and then it
like uh maybe yeah maybe it stimulated
something in your subconscious that came
forward. But you know just even dreaming
about this man who you haven't thought
about in years. I mean that is kind of
substantial there. And you mentioned
Jordan Jose, which also, you know, that
was kind of the goal from his
conversations and and what, you know,
hearing him and reading, you know, what
he put out as uh as Martin there that
that
>> Yeah.
>> was um was this kind of idea of like,
yeah, get get out of body.
>> Yeah.
>> And like build this construct or
whatever for them, right?
>> Um
>> but I feel like that's
and I know that the Monroe Institute
does great things with with help with
helping people. It can be very healing,
but also I feel like there's this piece
where getting people to go out of their
body is very unsafe for them.
>> You feel that?
>> I I think not if it's not done well. It
can be very unsafe because if you're out
of your body, what can go into your
body? I mean, if consciousness can be
free from the body,
>> I mean, someone else's consciousness can
like, hey,
>> you know, you're a zombie right now
right in there.
>> Maybe. Yeah,
>> maybe. Maybe. I don't know. But if like
if if if
that's a real thing,
it just made me think we need to be
careful. I guess I was trained in remote
viewing by John Pavanco who I mean I
guess I was trained in remote viewing
first by John Pavanco, but I I guess
this is partly his influence because he
would say the safest place for you to
receive information is inside your body.
And remote viewing has a horrible name
because it shouldn't be remote and it
shouldn't necessarily be viewing. It
could be all the senses,
>> right?
>> But in order to do that, you need to be
inside your body.
>> Yes. Yeah. People get that confused with
remote viewing. You're not actually
going anywhere. This isn't an out of-
body experience.
>> Yeah. Your body's like a sensor for the
information.
>> So, um that if that happened, if I was
encouraged to do these these things for
the benefit of someone else, um
it's sort of a bummer. partly because
like cool I could have done really
amazing things that I don't remember
that I did but it's also a bummer
because it was for the benefit of
someone else I didn't get to integrate
it.
>> Yeah.
>> You know as as um
with my own directive and and ethics and
then I was also apparently in according
to that dream
>> you know if we're going to use dreams as
data encouraged to go out of my body.
The reason I feel comfortable using
dreams sometimes as data is because I
know my own dreams have been
highly evidential.
>> Mhm.
>> In terms of precognition and so
>> well Dean Raiden has a you know talks
about that a lot as well or Dean Raiden
or sorry Rupert Sheldrickch
>> about uh dreams being precognitive as
well and encourages a lot of dream
journaling in that way and
>> not all of them. No, not all of them.
Yeah.
>> And so with each dream it's sort of like
well maybe this is just my opinion. It
could be this psychological metaphor.
>> Yeah.
>> For how it felt, but it's still
describes how it might have felt.
>> Very relatable as well to the entire
topic.
>> Have you ever had uh out-of- body
experiences aside from that?
>> So, oh, see, and I don't even know if
that aside from that dream. Yeah.
>> So, I have multiple dreams like that
where I'm having an out-of- body
experience, but I don't um
>> never during a waking state.
>> Not ever were during a waking state. And
almost like veheumly so. Yeah.
>> Almost like I've got that lockdown.
>> Oh,
>> like that's not going to be happening.
>> I have.
>> You have?
>> Oh, yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I have uh two years ago or
two years ago, I suppose it was two
years ago now. Um yeah, I had
involuntarily two nights in a row woke
up hovering over my body like woke up. I
was wide awake.
>> Were you at Monroe?
>> Nope. I was at home. I'd never heard
about this stuff before.
>> Oh, this is before you heard about any
of it?
>> Yeah. Maybe like
>> Can you tell me more about it? Like what
state you were in?
>> I was in I was in deep sleep and then
had a nightmare and then forced my eyes
open in the nightmare to like wake up
cuz I was I was conscious that it was a
nightmare. Yeah.
>> And I had to wake up. So I like forced
my eyes open and then I was in my room.
>> Yeah.
>> But everything was like I could see in
the dark because I guess my eyes were
used to it. So everything was like
>> out of focus. Like it felt grainy.
>> Yeah. um low saturation and um felt this
buzz, this incredible like deep like hum
like I was a tuning fork and someone
just slapped me like it was like like
this and I was like it was almost
euphoric like a nice feeling
>> and uh I I I just felt like I could will
myself up. I don't even know why I felt
that but I just felt I could just cuz
I've flown in dreams before and I felt
like I just this is the same feeling. I
can just will myself up and I did that.
scared me and I started paddling down.
>> Yeah.
>> Back to my bed and then sort of uh woke
up again, I guess. Uh and said, you
know, that was strange. It objectively
didn't feel like a lucid dream. Like I I
woke up from a lucid dream into that
whatever that state was,
>> right?
>> And then I said, I want it to happen
again. So, and I'd taken melatonin that
night, which I don't usually take.
>> Um and the next night I was like, I want
it to happen again. And it did. And this
time I was like, I'm not going to be
afraid. And I remember willing myself
up. And this time turning around and
seeing myself laying there
>> and the fear like back.
>> Oh, it was I was scared the second I was
in that state.
>> It's like you're I always say it's like
like you're walking a tight rope of
fear. Like
>> instant manifestation will happen. It
feels like what I felt like anyways.
Like if I if I think about something
terrible like that will come upon me
>> and or good. So I just didn't want to
think of anything. I'm like just keeping
one foot in front of the other type
deal.
>> And that happened. And uh and then I I
remember swimming back to my body, going
lower than my body, feeling my body as I
falling through it.
>> Was your back facing your stomach or did
you have to turn around?
>> I had to turn around to see. And then I
I just kind of like went like this. I
went, "Oh, no." And then I I was going
like this, paddling backwards to come
back down.
>> Totally. And I went past my body. And I
I remember feeling like the
>> like my body as I'm going through it and
like and I go past it and I was like,
"No, no,
>> you're like out of register."
>> Yes. And I'm trying to like go back up
and I'm like, "I didn't know you can go
down." Like that was very frightening to
me.
>> Um and then so after that I I remembered
a conversation I had with Joe McMonagle,
Joseph McMongle. um during the time that
he was at Stargate that they had sent
him, you know, on weekend retreats to
the Monroe Institute to see if he can
leave his body and to see if that would
be more conducive for a more accurate
remote viewing session. And so he would
do this over the weekends, right, from
Fort me and go there and and uh I
remember him telling me about this and
this is before I, you know, had an
experience and I I thought what like
what is this guy talking about? Like
he's he's
>> how can you leave your body? That sounds
crazy.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Like I was like, "Okay, this
is weird." Like I I was buying
everything else until now and I'm like,
"This guy's a little weird."
>> Um maybe a dream he's having and he's
misinterpreting a dream or something,
right?
>> And so then I when I had this experience
immediately I go, that's what Joe was
talking about. Oh, do you want to turn
it down uh to you? I think you're here.
Does this make it better or worse?
>> That's better. No, I really want to hear
your words, but then I was
>> intense. So, um, so then I was like,
"That's what he was talking about.
That's the out of- body state." I was
like, "Oh my god." So, I start I I buy
Robert Monroe's book. I read that read
through a few of his books, go online.
Everybody's having the same symptoms as
I had. And I was like, "This is
objectively not a dream now. I I know
this." Because I didn't know anything
about this. It wasn't like it was my
subconscious being like, "Hey, you know,
this is I I didn't know what an out of-
body was." And I had the same experience
these people are describing. And so
that's where I signed up for the Monroe
Institute. I documented my gateway
process. I made a little documentary
about that. And then every day when I
came back from that, every day for like
three and a half months, I meditated for
an hour every morning at around 4:30,
like it was super early in the morning.
And then after about 3 months, I started
having regular out-of- body experiences.
>> And did you want that? I
>> I was trying to actively have it.
>> Okay. Um because I was like I want to
try
>> you wanted to face this fear and
>> yeah well I just want to know if this
was a thing you know because I I had it
happen to me and then it started
happening um where I would go into vivid
dreams or or or uh lucid dreaming and I
would roll out of a lucid dream out of
my body.
>> Um but again it's like happening in this
nebulous sort of time at night where I'm
like am I asleep? Is this a dream? Until
one morning at 5:30 in the morning sun's
blaring in my room. I have no curtains
in my room and I meditate for an hour
and I put the headphones down and as
soon as my head hit the pillow I felt
the thrumming the the the vibration. I
was like, "Oh, it's happening. Oh my
god." And I just get up out of my body
and I was lucid the entire time. I
didn't fall asleep for a second.
>> Wow.
>> And I get up and I walk around my room
and then I hear a female voice um which
scared me and so I look and I go right
back in my body. But that short 30
seconds happened during a lucive awake
state with the sun shining in my room
and I didn't fall asleep. So,
>> and that was the last time I was like,
"All right, got my confirmation."
>> How long ago was that?
>> It was uh it happened
I guess maybe not last year, the year
before. Yeah. Two years ago.
>> Do you think Okay, I don't know why I
asked that, but do you think that um you
just wanted confirmation or do you think
you were practicing something? There's a
part of me that thinks you I mean you
seem very familiar to me and there's a
part of me that thinks you were probably
in one of those programs kind of like I
was especially cuz your dad was in the
military. Um
>> I don't know. I don't
>> Do you have any memory of that?
>> I I remember mouthwash like that was a
regular thing like the the pink liquid
with the mouthwash.
>> But would you spit it out?
>> You would spit it out.
>> Yeah, that's fluid like liquidity. It
wasn't
>> Yeah, exactly. It wasn't viscous. It
wasn't opaque. Um,
other than that, I it's hard to it's
hard to I don't remember anything
strange in in my childhood, but again, I
did, you know, I did like 10 schools
when I was a kid, so bumped around quite
a bit.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh, and my dad was uh enlisted. He
wasn't like an officer, so it wasn't
like we were like Air Force or anything.
He was infantry.
>> Yeah.
>> Um, so yeah, don't remember anything
like that. Um, yeah. And and yeah,
adversary
>> because you were so good. I mean just it
just happened spontaneously.
>> It happened spontaneously. I think it
was kind of a perfect storm when it
happened. But then when I tried it, it
took like three months and multiple
people I've talked to at a convention,
the same convention I met you at. Uh we
were I was with like three other people
and we were having this discussion and I
told my story and all three of the other
people said for them it also happened at
about 3 three and a half months into
meditating every day.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> So that seemed to be like the common
denominator between us four where it's
like oh okay it takes that much time to
achieve like this kundalini or this like
experience.
>> Um so it was really enlightening.
>> Yeah.
>> And for me I don't seek it anymore. Not
because I'm afraid of it. Um but there
was this there was this sentiment of
okay this seems to be like what happens
to you when you die.
This this seems to be the phenomenon
that people describe when they
>> which is why I think it might be a
little dangerous
>> perhaps. Um but I also felt like okay if
this is what happens to you when you die
and this might not be the afterlife. It
might just be transitional might be
something else.
What's the hurry?
>> Yeah. Right.
>> Exactly. Like people have the hardest
time staying in their bodies.
>> Yeah.
>> And
>> I was like I got it. But I'm like now
it's time to be in here. Yeah, that's
why I'm here.
>> Yeah, that's coming.
>> Yeah, exactly.
>> I guarantee you I'm going I'm going to
have an out of body again.
>> I think that's really healthy. But I
also think Joe didn't feel like going
out of body helped him very much.
>> Uh what's your what's your memory of
that?
>> Uh he did say that he he had one session
I spoke to Ed May about this as well,
Dr. Ed May. And um
>> he said he had one session where there
was a you know, get out of your body, go
into the other. They started with the uh
with the ping pong balls in the eye of
the Gansfield sort of uh effect to like
stimulate this uh out of body state and
then they said get out of your body walk
into the other room in the envelope
there's a picture go look at the picture
and tell me what's on the picture and he
did that but he couldn't he couldn't
physically interact the envelope cuz he
was out of his body
>> and so he just tried to like project
where he would be where that photo was
taken and he drew and it was like a one
for one
>> to the photo
>> but he was able to do that anyway
without going out of body so it's a
little tricky
>> yeah he really good at it.
>> You still is, I think. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> But anyways, I digress. I I didn't want
to make this about me.
>> No, but it is I mean this and I think
part of it is by like the reason I had
that dream was that it brings this up is
that there is this fear of you know
there's this idea of sovereignty. That's
one of the things we were talking about
at that conference. Yeah.
>> Contact in the desert in this panel. And
there's this idea of like, well, even if
there are an NHI, if there's aliens, how
can we be sovereign over our own minds?
And
I think that there's both a desire in
the ego to be sovereign and an awareness
or a meta awareness in the rest of
ourselves that holy that's not a
real thing. [snorts]
>> Like, where does your where where do
your ideas come from anyway? They don't
they don't come from your ego.
Yeah.
>> Your ego is just a claimer that claims
like look what I did. That's all
>> and nothing is invented.
>> No. Yeah.
>> Everything's discovered.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Even inside yourself. And so um the idea
of sovereignty
like there's a little concern in this
onlogical shock that the people who are
worried about onlogical shock that will
discover that you know aliens are doing
mind control. It's like kind of does it
matter whether it's aliens or your
subconscious? You still don't have any
control over it.
>> Yeah, that's right. Yeah. You have the
illusion of control or what semblance of
control you're trying to hold on to.
>> Yeah. And I think that that's part of
why I
that dream matters to me is because
that's all operating in me, too. I mean,
I can say that intellectually, like, oh,
it's an illusion of control and stuff,
but like it pisses me off that perhaps
people had me do things that that were
really cool kind of in a certain way,
like feats of interesting
of interesting important and nature,
>> but that I don't get to know about them.
>> You're robbed of the experience
>> in a certain sense.
>> Yeah. Um, what do you make of that?
Because I'm I mean I'm curious to hear
your thoughts as well about where
cuz you you touched on information there
for a second and in your book you speak
about this as well as like
>> you know information you know rides on
light to travel and that type of thing
but
>> it doesn't have to. It doesn't have to,
but it can. But it exists sort of um I
guess omnipresently um all around us and
we all have access to that in space and
time. And I do believe that as well. I
think that that's a sound assessment of
you know I always I always use the
example of if if this earth just
disappeared another one were to appear
like stories uh around you know
mythology or or religion would vary
>> but math would essentially be the same
>> and so where's that right it's in it's
it's it's
>> how foundational is that it must be you
know before space and time yeah right
it's this idea of this
informationational substrate
>> if you want to think about it is
like like
like a bunch of ones and zeros that
don't that aren't being manifested on a
page or on a computer. They're just
presence absence
>> one zero presence absence and
it's timeless. It's spaceless. But it
contains all the information in the
universe from the beginning to the death
of the universe. And then what we
experience in terms of human experience
could be
what that grows up into. So this can you
know sparkling water and these
microphones and our headphones and our
bodies those are all the ones and zeros
growing up into that. So the
informationational substrate sort of
from that arises our bodies and and the
things that you know we have and that we
can see and feel and touch and taste and
hear. And so if that is the case then
what is the mind? Where does the mind
live? Is the mind in physicality? No.
You can't point to the mind. It has no
mass. It doesn't behave like a physical
thing. It's not in a place. It's not
really in a time. You can shift your
mind around all over in time. So the
psychological
sort of sense of time or the sense of
events in time doesn't live in the
physical world. That's the mind. And so
that mind really lives in this
information space. Mind really is almost
equivalent with this information space.
So should we be surprised when things
happen in your mind where you have an
intention or even subconsciously you
have an intention and something just
shows up, some miracle occurs or like in
your magic, right? Something just comes
together. Um should we be surprised?
Probably not,
>> right? Because the mind is constantly
living in that impossibility.
>> It is of that.
>> Yeah.
>> It is of that information.
>> It's just kind of leaking into the
physical versus the opposite.
>> The opposite. Right. Exactly. The
physical the the brain is sort of this
byproduct of the mind. That's how it
shows up to us.
>> Yes.
>> You know, in a in a bug, it shows up in
a different way.
>> So,
also should we be surprised by
telepathy? Should we be surprised that
um people like autistic non-speakers who
haven't been able to express themselves
through speech start to learn to access
the information directly without having
to hear it from someone else? Right?
Should we be surprised by that? I think
all these things are sort of
>> going to be reframed in the next decade
where we're going to start recognizing
because of this error where we decided
mind had to be physical. Sure.
>> Which is nuts. But anyway, I I bought
into it, too. So, I was nuts, too. But
because of this error, um we've we
become surprised by these things and say
they can't be true when in fact it's
like the essential nature of how
everything is working. So, I don't know
how we started talking about that.
>> I mean, I love it. [laughter] Whereas,
um so I'm really interested in this
because it begs so many questions, so
many new questions for me. Like is there
a positive goal or a necessary
throttling of
our access to the mind or to where the
mind is by our physical body? Like why
is that a necessity? It seems like
>> wait throttling
>> what does throttle mean in a car? Like
this is like
>> okay like dialing back the
>> probably like one of the two way you
have [laughter]
and I feel embarrassed to ask.
>> I don't know much about cars and and uh
>> but what does it mean? um just the
dialing back of access to um the the
substrate is clearly
>> um present like we're clearly
>> we're we're clearly being gatekept from
having access to a certain extent
>> and when you say clearly I want to
provide some evidence for that like so
it's not just the opinion
>> I can't actively use my mind to uh peer
into the future and the past at will um
you know well perhaps I can but I just
don't know how but it feels like if we
go if we look throughout history
humankind has not been able to do that
in a way that is uh repeatable or at all
like measurable. So there has to be a
benefit to us not being able to do that.
What is that benefit?
>> Got it. Filter theory of consciousness,
right? There's this idea that the brain
actually acts as a filter and a reducing
valve is the original term. So that you
just get way less and then the
information's there because you can't
handle you can't handle the truth.
Exactly. So you get this picture of the
truth and then we develop all sorts of
theories based on this picture which is
wrong but nonetheless helpful.
>> So yeah um that's like Donald Hoffman
type stuff, perceptual interface,
cognition or perception. Um so what
benefit is there? Um, if you want to
make individual creatures, like if if if
the universe, I don't know, feels like
something else has to want this.
If if there are going to be individual
creatures that have different
dispositions
and solve things in different ways,
which is actually very beneficial to a
species to have widely divergent minds
>> to data collection as well.
>> Yeah. and data collection. If you want
to see each individual as like an
observer who's going to just send it up
to the mother ship,
>> like if you want that, then you better
not know that you can just get all that
information all at once.
>> Yeah.
>> In one second, [laughter]
>> right?
>> And that all the information can be
shared cuz why have more more than one
person? So this points to
a creator
>> to I mean if we're going to go down this
road I think it does because it's like
why else it's like this idea this sort
of a mystical idea of the creator wanted
to know you know its own creation
and so the creator makes
>> incarnates into
>> it incarnates into all these separate
beings and it wants to know its own
unity but the only way to really know
its own unity is by feeling separate
truly feeling separate and not having
access to the unity and then it can
learn the unity and that's much more
valuable than just knowing I'm one.
>> Mhm.
>> Because then you haven't really learned
it, right? So it's just it's a really
beautiful story
and
>> it makes sense too.
>> It's a it's a story that makes sense.
It's very compelling, you know, and then
when when if you want to ask is it real?
Is it correct? Like can any story like
that be correct? I mean, can what does
it even mean to be correct when you're
talking about a mystical story? So, it's
sort of to me by default correct because
it's so compelling and it and it helps
lead people at least it helps me go
towards the good,
>> you know, it makes me feel like there's
a reason there's meaning. It helps my
relationship with God. So, I say it's
correct because what is correctness when
it, you know, it's untestable. So what
is correctness when it comes to these
deep mystical ideas? I think that what
correctness is is that which leads you
towards the good,
>> right? Just something that is just or or
>> or full of love.
>> Yeah.
>> But then you would, you know,
simultaneously need the other half to to
even to even experience love, right?
>> Which other half?
>> I mean the the the the love,
>> not you. the well no the the part of the
universe that is uh that seems to be the
opposite of love you know you would need
that as well in contrast to to even
create it wouldn't you
>> yeah no so there's conditional love that
would be more like that contrasty thing
and there's unconditional or divine love
or universal love you don't need
>> there to be any other thing right it's
like this giant love bubble that encases
everything including the
informationational substrate
And um there's no downside to that.
>> So that's
there's no shadow there. That's like so
that is truly foundational. So in so as
we're going down this rabbit hole in
this cosmology underneath the
informationational substrate is the one
true substance of which the universe is
created which is love.
>> Okay?
>> Which is really that which connects.
And so ones and zeros can only exist.
duality
>> can only exist in a substrate of that
which connects. You can only have this
separation between a one and a zero if
you if you know that there's something
from which they both emerge. And and for
for you, you've seen that that in your
studies that love is the
foundational substrate underneath
information below everything around
everything that the glue that binds it
all. So not in my studies because that's
just I don't know how to test that
>> right yet and yet not yet but
aesthetically it sounds right to me
>> right
>> and I think there should be a physics of
love to explore it but in my studies
what I can test is the idea of okay if
there's there is this you know
foundation of love and if people can
experience unconditional love I know
it's a peak experience it doesn't happen
all the time but if when people are
experiencing unconditional
If there's a kind of a sense I have that
if you're experiencing unconditional
love, you're basically accessing this
foundational. You're aware that this
foundational piece exists. You're kind
of always accessing it because it's
foundational to everything, right? But
you're aware of that access. And when
you're aware of that access, that can
allow you to access this
informationational substrate that's
growing out of the love.
>> So imagine the love are like the roots,
right? The love is like the root and
then the little bushes are the
informationational substrate, right? The
ones and zeros are like yellow bush,
green bush or whatever. And then the
fruit from that is space and time and
matter and energy. So the fruits that
grows on those trees. So if you can
access, if you can be aware of your
access of that unconditional love,
you're at the very base. So you have now
access to the whole system. So the idea
that I tested was if people are feeling
unconditional love, are they better at
accessing that information? Can they go
into theformational substrate and
predict predict the future for instance
which is in there as much as the past,
right? And so I tested that first um by
mistake by doing this other experiment.
Uh, and I but I just happened to notice
that the the folks who were rated
themselves as feeling a higher level of
unconditional love, which was part of
the experiment for another reason, um,
were also significantly better at
pre-cognitive remote viewing.
>> How significant?
>> Um, I forget what the p value was, but
we only had 36 people, so it was
significant enough that with 36 people,
you saw it.
>> Wow.
>> Then I did it with online. Um, that was
an in-person experiment. Then I did it
online with 305 people and um you could
still see that difference. So in other
words, people who didn't feel the high
levels of unconditional love were just
at chance. People who did were
significantly above chance and
significantly better than the people who
didn't feel that love.
>> Wow.
>> So if you want to do pre-cognitive
remote viewing, there's probably other
things that can help. binaural beats
maybe even um you know need I think need
is really important belief is really
important personality type is really
important your nature but also being in
a state of unconditional love seems like
it could help and maybe that's because
of this access to these roots of the of
the trees
>> right like you're going you're closer to
the source
>> yeah it's like you're more it's like
you're speaking the language of the
trees of of the roots of the trees right
you're speaking that language when
you're feeling unconditional love. And
so it's like you're in, you're allowed
in.
>> That's interesting because it does also
relate to a lot of the uh alien
encounter stuff. I mean, we talk whether
it's you're talking about like the the
sort of
>> blonde, you know, blue-eyed, blar,
Nordic, you know, benevolent sort of uh
people that George Damsky spoke about
and all these other people or whether
you're talking about a lot a lot of
cases as well is even whether they're
these insect mantis looking creatures or
whether it's the grays or whatever, but
they always feel flooded with this sense
of a familiarity, but then this sense of
love and and compassion like they mean
you no harm and they feel the sense of
calming. And so do you think like
hypothetically like that's what they're
also using to communicate is they just
have access to that substrate and for
them to communicate it's just like a
natural more
>> that's a really I love that
interpretation. So it wasn't it wasn't
Jacob what's his name who was on
Skywatcher didn't he like
>> uh Jake Barber
>> Jake Barber didn't he just sobb with a
feeling being overwhelmed with
unconditional love when he was picking
up that one egg? No, it wasn't it wasn't
the egg. Um, it was the eightgon this
octagonal sort of craft that he felt
when he was piloting
>> that it was like Yeah. this overwhelming
sense of feminine energy
>> that's very sacred feminine the the
octagon. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Wow. Yeah.
>> And the egg is also very feminine.
Yeah.
>> I mean, obviously I I've always found
that to be really interesting as well
that if you're dealing with some type of
uh and you know, not to get too much
into like the Jacqu Valet stuff, but
like if you're dealing with some type of
control system that is toying with you
or that is like, you know, controlling
everything. If you were this big
masculine energy shooting guns and
blowing up in the desert at a
range, you know, for these nefarious,
you know, contractors or whatever, like
and you were trying to like beam
something down and get, you know, your
psionic assets and microwave cannons and
>> and what would you get, right? What
would you get? Well, you'd get an inert
feminine egg.
>> That's what you'd get, right? Like good
luck. And there's nothing in it. to me.
>> It's inert and it just plopped in the
sand.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I I um
I think that
many times this goes back to the
sovereignty thing. Many times people
I've talked to who are in that
community, the shooting things in the
desert community who are really good
guys, they're scared of not being in
control. And so the their response to
Jacob Barber's experience is he was
being mind controlled
>> like that was that's the way they get in
is through making you feel love. They're
controlling your mind, right?
>> As opposed to which could be true, but
also I kind of think it's just fear of
of the of being out of control and and
the sacred feminine. I think that
there's also your interpretation which
is if you actually are a sophisticated
enough culture, you're not interested in
war. Like war is so primitive. It's just
not interesting. You're aware that we're
all interdependent. You're aware that
consciousness is everywhere. You're
aware that there's this
informationational substrate and that
love underlies it in this world picture.
And so you're just giving people a
taste. You're just trying to give people
a taste,
>> a nudge in the right direction
>> just like folks like this is the key. So
I do think of it as a medium. I I talked
about this in my I wrote an article on
medium called um how to avoid the time
wars. It's about different kinds of time
travel and about you know the
possibility for time wars and the and
the way that we have to relate to oursel
our future selves. We assume for
instance that there's at least
anformational time travel machine where
you could send information back in time.
So let's assume that. So in order to
relate to our future selves who are
sending us messages,
the we don't trust ourselves right now.
We we wouldn't trust ourselves to send
us messages. And if we got the message
and it was really clear, we'd be like,
"Well, this is Someone's
trying to pull one over on You know, and
so the only way to really move forward
and avoid those kind of time wars across
time is to move into unconditional love
and use it as a medium to send these
messages to use those roots as a medium
to send that information.
>> And so that's that like dominating
principle. I hate to use the word
domination in this context, but in any
case, primary principle in um my
startup. Can I tell you about my
startup? Yes, please.
>> Okay. So there's different kinds of time
travel. mental time travel,
informationational time travel, physical
time travel, right? And when I say these
with such confidence, it's just because
I made them up. So, I'm really confident
that I made them up. [laughter]
>> Okay? Information mental time travel is
like precognition.
>> You're and it's also like memory, but we
don't think of memory as time travel
because it's in the normal direction,
right? We're used to being able to know
about the past even though we don't
really know about the past, but we're
used to thinking we do. Um, but
precognition is like mental time travel,
knowing something about the future that
you can't know through other means. Um,
there's informationational time travel,
which is just getting information sent
back to you in time,
>> uh, without using pre-cognition. So,
like potentially using a device like if
we could reconfigure this this
soundboard to give us informationational
time travel, it would tell us about the
sounds in the future by sliding up and
down according to what would happen in
the future. Yeah, that would be
informationational time travel. And then
physical time travel is what, you know,
all the sci-fi stuff is about, like you
actually send a chicken back in time and
then a person. And um I do wonder a lot
about once you develop
informationational time travel, why you
would want to develop physical time
travel? Because with physical time
travel, if your goal is to send a
message back in time or to go to the
future and and get
>> change the past
>> or change the past, it's all
informationational, right? You could do
that if you understand the
informationational substrate. I don't
see why you'd want to go up to the
physical level.
>> Yeah. Other than tourism.
>> Other than tourism. But even that you
can just insert in someone's mind a
memory of having done that.
>> Yeah. Or VR.
>> Yeah. And that speaks to alien
visitations where people just have these
things potentially inserted into their
mind that didn't actually physically
happen.
>> But they're insertions because if you
understand theformational substrate, you
can do those insertions,
>> right? Like downloads.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Or uploads in a Yeah. So anyway,
so sorry to dis physical time travel,
but I do think there's this problem of
being able to keep your memory with you
as you do physical time travel. I I
think that if you were able to do that,
there's a memory issue there.
>> So in any case, maybe I'm wrong. Who
knows? Um I about 12 years ago, I got
inspired. I'm a neuroscientist, right?
Not trained in physics. My dad's a
theoretical physicist, but I kind of
ignore that. I'm an empiricist. I like
to do experiments and build things and
um so I got inspired to do this
experiment that I couldn't let go of and
I finally was able to do it and I did it
and it showed what I suspected which is
that photons at room temperature
play the same games together. It's like
they're friends.
And let me unpack that for a second cuz
you look blank. No, I'm I'm waiting to
see what the friends do. [laughter]
>> The friends play together who stay
together. So, if you turn on a
flashlight and you turn it off 5 minutes
later, those friends are the ones that
were emitted from that flashlight during
that period of time.
And they start to behave as if the
system knows it's going to be on for 5
minutes.
So it's like for the photons,
they know that they're in this group.
It's called boundary conditions in
physics. The boundary condition of the
on and the boundary condition of the off
and the future are both
um shaping this group's behavior.
>> Okay?
>> And so it's like they ignore the fact
that one of those is in the future,
>> right?
>> And they ignore the fact that I'm a
different photon than you are. we're all
just going to act like we're part of
this big same group cuz we're in this
group that at the macro level is called
what happened in that 5 minutes.
>> Mhm.
>> Right? So it's like this is looking at
the building blocks from the
informationational substrate that has
the on and the off time to how it ends
up manifesting which is this behavior of
this group of photons in the physical
world.
>> It's already aware of the substrates uh
intention.
>> That's all that's what it does, right?
Yeah. And so you can then look at the
first minute of this 5 minutes and know
that at a relatively high accuracy rate
that it's going to be on for 5 minutes
even if the person who's holding the
flashlight doesn't know that in 5
minutes they're going to turn it off.
>> H
>> because it behaves differently than
something that's going to be turned off
in two minutes.
>> That's so interesting.
>> Yeah.
So
that's my startup is we're creating
technology that can then look at that
first chunk of time to predict the
future.
Period. [laughter]
>> That's really interesting.
>> Yeah.
>> Um photons are interesting, aren't they?
>> Photons are super interesting. They're
not really physical.
>> Yeah. They're almost Fineman, Richard
Feineman, the physicist, used to call um
used to think there was only one
electron in the universe.
>> I think that that photons are kind of
like that. They're like a story and you
pull them out when you need them. Like
when an electron needs to
>> you pull them through spaceime.
>> Yeah. You pull Yeah. They show up.
>> You pluck them.
>> You pluck them when you need them. Like
to balance a chemical equation.
>> Sure.
>> Yeah.
>> Whoa. So I think they're very related to
mind. Like I think they're in that one
zero space almost more than the physical
space.
>> And I think maybe that's true of all
bosonic particles. Photons are bosonic
particles which are which are very uh
I'm sorry I'm getting really nerdy. We
can go. Is that okay?
>> Yeah. Absolutely.
>> So there's fair
>> learning so much right now.
>> Okay. Enriomy. So there's pheromionic
particles that behave like electrons. um
neutrons, um protons for the most part
are framionic. They're behaving like
almost like things that we expect are
physical. You can't have two of them in
the same place at the same time. That's
ridiculous. Bonic particles are like,
haha, we're very different. They they um
like the Higs Bzon is a bonic particle
for instance. So, or photons um they can
stay in the same place at the same time
that you can get an infinite number of
them in the same place at the same time.
Not a problem.
Also, their identity does not depend on
the location or the time in which they
exist. So, a photon that's coming here
from your lights above us,
at least probably a million of them, are
exactly the same photons that occurred
back in 1723 when, you know, some
historical thing was happening that I
would know if I was a historian.
[snorts]
>> So,
they're playing a different game.
They're not playing this like march
through time in a linear way game at
all.
>> So, but why not use that?
>> Interesting to think as well that even
through, you know, religious text, they
were, you know, if even if you look at
like some of the Renaissance paintings
of uh God or Jesus or the angels, the
light is always emanating from the
source, God or like, you know, it's
always the light.
>> You always have to look at where the
light is. in the absence of light will
also detect like the uh the people who
are not enlightened, the people who are
you know trying to persecute Christ or
whatever like this is like in these
paintings there's this really vivid
interesting history of light acting as
like the you know as God. Yes.
>> And so to to to also have that be the
case in physics you know after
>> Yeah.
>> Uh is really interesting to be like no
you guys were on to something with those
paintings.
>> Yeah. No, we're always coming up. You
know, you know this idea of the Soran
hypothesis where there's been another a
completely it's like from Star Trek. Um
it was another completely technological
um civilization.
>> Mhm.
>> That got as ramped up as we did and then
destroyed themselves maybe through
global warming. Who knows, right?
Through something. Through something.
and we can't find the remnants because
actually it's really hard to find
remnants of of civilization because
nature just does away with them really
quickly. So, one thing I keep thinking
about is the story that we have is like
it's just been progress and progress and
progress, but and and when we think of
um like native indigenous communities,
we often think of them as like well, you
know, we've progressed past that level,
like that's more primitive. But I keep
thinking, what if this hypothesis is
true? There is this civilization,
you know, millions of years ago that
died out. We have no record of them. And
but what we do have is a record of those
insights of the mystical insights that
came from the degradation. In other
words, maybe a few people survived and
maybe those people are the indigenous
people who carry some of these mystical
insights and then have turned those into
these world religions.
Maybe we that is the future instead of
the past. And that is what progress
looks like when we begin to understand.
Of course, science comes up with this
same thing because it came from science
millions of years ago. Technological
society that discovered this, got to
this level, something happened and it
starts to grow up again, right?
>> It's like it's the truth.
>> Mhm.
>> Emerging its head in in an infinite
number of ways.
>> Yeah. Yeah. No, that that does seem to
be the case. And also even just a
natural swing of the pendulum as well
like where you know we were once
entangled with spirituality or what have
you or religion and science was all sort
of one and then after you know the age
of enlightenment we kind of started
separating from that and then the
pendulum now you know swung as far as it
could on this side where we're like hey
we're away from all that religious
nonsense and it's all science now and
well we're discovering we can't build a
microscope that looks, you know, we keep
finding smaller things like it just
never ends, right?
>> And so now we have to ask like, oh, is
this the microscope? Is this like the
instrument that we now we're coming back
to that swing
>> that same mystical stance
>> if you if you were to send uh this is a
question I've wanted to ask and that I
do ask um uh people who who know a
little bit about the stuff but like do
you think it would be possible if
you know cuz these these photons or
whatever they can be entangled through
time and and and space and there's no
real limitation there. So, if I were to
want to send information back, could I
not simply, you know, entangle some of
these or use the entangled photons um
and sort of have them in an onoff
position?
>> Mhm.
>> Um,
suspended in this location or whatever,
and then if you come to that same
location in 40 years, could you not just
like pull that information
>> and and communicate?
>> Yeah.
>> Through time, would that not be
possible? I mean there's something
called the no signaling theorem in
physics that says that you can't use
entanglement to send information to do
what you just said.
>> Okay.
>> Okay. But the there's a lot of
challenges to that hypothesis.
So and part of me when you when when you
go back to the literature on that
hypothesis part of it was motivated by
the statement we don't see telepathy
>> in nature. Therefore you can't signal a
non-starter. Yes. And so if you trace
back those ideas, there's a lot of
motivation to to build to build up that
theory or that theorem. Um, and I always
doubt when their motivation is like,
well, we don't see this in nature. Well,
you know what? We do.
>> Yeah, we do.
>> There's people who are really gifted at
telepathy. And um, so how are they doing
it? Well, entanglement seems like a
really good explanation. Doesn't mean it
is the explanation.
>> Sure. But
>> and ones and zeros seems like a really
uh seems like a great way to send
information as well. Like
>> Exactly. And I don't know that you need
entanglement at the physical level for
that. If you're working at the mind
level, that could explain it even a
deeper way. So, it's just that there's
the world is opening up now as people
are starting to recognize just as you
said that we're coming across these
discoveries by necessity
because we're finding things that we can
do that shouldn't work but they work,
>> right? Yeah. That's why I'm so into
building stuff is like
>> I've had people read in the especially
physicists just red in the face when I
talk about just just like yelling at me.
Do you not understand the second law of
thermodynamics?
And it's just um
there there's a feeling among some
physicists that there are science cops
like we're going to tell you that this
that look there's a law can't happen. No
signaling theorem or this or that or the
other thing and it's that's not where
we're at now. We're past that. We're
moving towards what can we build that we
didn't think we could build because the
science cop said we shouldn't be able
to. So, I think this might be a little
bit of my brushing up against my
theoretical physicist dad
>> who would say things like, "Well, you
can't do that." You know, like there was
ball lightning in our house and he would
say, "Well, that's impossible, so that
didn't happen." It's like, "Well, it did
happen." [laughter]
>> So, how did it happen?
>> Wow. Yeah. So, that's that's the dogma
of scientism. Yeah.
>> Of this this idea of of uh there are
certain things you just can't challenge.
And that's something that you've brushed
up against as well with a lot of your
pre-cognitive studies, I take it as
well, where
>> the you know the variance or or or what
you found to be precognitive happened in
such a small time frame that they feel
it negligible.
>> Yeah.
>> Um they think it's instrumental error or
you know they just kind of brush it off
because there's no way that that is
allowed
>> to be true.
>> Well, yeah. And when you find it on the
seconds or minutes time scale or with
remote viewing, precognitive remote
viewing, it could be days, weeks, years.
>> Could you uh could you talk a little bit
about some of these experiments uh for
the audience that you've done in terms
of
>> um looking into, you know, uh instances
of precognition and how you tested for
that and what the results were.
>> Sure. Yeah. I've I've sort of gone to
two scales. I've gone to the really
unconscious uh physiological scale and
doing things um at the seconds to like
100 milliseconds to seconds time scale.
And then on the other end, the more
conscious um more deliberate
precognitive remote viewing, you know,
minutes, days, weeks, etc. scale. So,
I've studied both of those. I I kind of
like to do the extremes and then figure
out what I can figure out. And so if you
want to study precognition in the body
physiologically,
uh it's called pre-centiment generally.
It could also be called these other
things. I made up other terms for it to
try to get it published like predictive
anticipatory activity. So it didn't
sound scary to people and it worked. I
got it in a mainstream journal. But then
I regretted it because it's so much
easier to talk about presentiment. It
means prefeing. So it's the idea that uh
your body can change its heart rhythm,
respiration,
EEG, you name it, whatever sensor you
want on the body before an event occurs.
And the event is random. So your body's
responding to a future event that it
can't know about according to the usual
means. So that's present. And the way
you test it is exactly the way you would
think. You hook someone up to whatever
monitor you're using and you have some
stimula. Um, some that are maybe going
to make them scared or excited and some
that are going to just be neutral and
you don't know and the person doesn't
know. No one on the planet knows which
stimulus is going to show up. But just
before the stimulus shows up, there will
be a amping up. Uh, like your heart rate
might go up or your skin conductance
might go up. you might sweat a little
bit more if it's going to be an arousing
stimulus that's going to, you know,
raise your attention. Um, and it will
just be neutral or maybe go down if it's
just a neutral stimulus. And that's the
result. And it's been shown just a lot.
So, one of the first studies I did was
bringing people in and showing them like
a picture of a gun versus a picture of a
sunset and then they started crying
because it was kind of emotional. So, I
stopped that experiment because the gun
is scary. And I had them just decide if
they I tried to ask them to be psychic.
I said, "There are, you know, four
doors. Click on a door and have that be
um we're going to find out if you won $2
or something." I did this on a
smartphone. And
that was the winning was an amazing
stimulus.
So if they were about to win, their
bodies would get excited. This was
really, really, really obvious among
men. Among women, not so much. Among
men, if they're about to win, they're at
$2. It's only $2. But if they're about
to win, there's an excitement that
happens. And it's all random. There's no
cue as to whether they're about to win,
>> but their body knows it.
>> And this this goes right into some of
the literature on uh day trading. So
looking at people who are really good
day traders, they I think there's this
wonderful paper called um inter
reception and surviving a London trading
floor or something and it's about that
the really good day traders are the ones
who can hear their own heartbeats.
And so it's almost like they're they
don't even need a sensor.
They're sensing into their own body's
wisdom about what's about to happen.
>> Wow.
>> Yeah. So that's the physiology side. And
then on the other side is the
precognitive remote viewing side, which
is draw a picture, write down some
words, do whatever you need to do um to
describe the target you're about to see,
you know, and you have in my studies, I
tend to say like you have two minutes to
do this because I'm working with people
who aren't very good and they're going
to just do
>> is the target already chosen.
>> Oh no.
>> Okay. So it's a random target that will
be generated. In all cases, I should
have said that in all cases, you don't
select the target until just before it's
shown. So, the person has to already
have all the data that you're gathering.
>> Yeah. Before the target is selected.
>> Absolutely. Because no one should know
what that is.
>> That's right.
>> Yeah. So, but you might have a target
pool like we had a target pool of like
89 targets.
>> Okay.
>> And so, they were going to get one of
them, but they didn't know what those
and you know, we didn't either know
which one would be selected. So they
they draw their picture, they do their
words or whatever, they submit it, they
wait whatever period of time, then
they're able to see the target. Then
what you do with that in the past, what
we used to do, and in most of my
studies, what we used to do is you take
how do you score it, right? Because
they're going to like draw a smiley face
and some trees or whatever they draw,
right? And you have to figure out that
is that most like a picture of a atom
bomb or is it most like a shoe,
[laughter]
>> right? And those are very different than
what they drew because these are not
gifted remote viewers. These are just
regular folks.
>> So what you have to do is take them, you
give them to an independent judge who
doesn't know what the target was. They
don't know that the atom bomb was the
target,
>> right?
>> So you give them the atom bomb and the
shoe and you give them the person's
little drawing and you say, "Which one
of these is this most like?" And then
they make a judgment and that's how you
do that. And so you can do statistics on
their judgments. So you get two
independent judges and you can compare
etc. And then you show the results. And
so the results look like people can do
this. Not great but like a rate above
chance. You know they can do better when
they're in a state of unconditional
love. So that's interesting. They can do
better especially if they're women if
they're a little bit anxious. So that's
interesting.
>> So that just you can learn a few things
about it.
But sort of my favorite thing about it
is that in the more recent work, we've
been able to use AI, so LLMs, to do that
judging, to take away some of the human
bias and to find actually better and
bigger effects that we didn't know were
there. So, we recently worked with a
lucid dreamer who is also an artist,
Dave Green in the UK. He he actually
asks people, you know, would you like me
to do a portrait for you? And then he
can lucid dream practically at will.
>> Wow.
>> And then he dreams the portrait. He asks
in his lucid dream. He So here's the
person, show me the portrait. And and it
imposes over their face the portrait.
And then he goes back to sleep. And then
the morning he wakes up and sketches it
out. And so we thought, well, can we
teach him to be a pre-cognitive remote
viewer in his lucid dreams? [laughter]
And so we did that kind of experiment
with him. And the human judges couldn't
it was they could not find really much
correspondence except for one case which
was really striking out of 10 dreams.
And so of course good human judges found
that case. Good good AI judges found
that case. We tried five different
models found that same case but also
found all these other cases
>> and correspondences and then we could do
statistics on that. So now we could use
that in my work with non-speakers to
look at the similarity between how
they're describing things telepathically
and what the target is and get
statistics on that. So it's really been
helpful to graduate from uh human
judging.
>> Yeah.
>> To AI judging and that's largely been
driven by Damon Abraham on our team
who's just
>> really involved in understanding the
phenomenon at all levels and wants to
bring AI into that kind of remote
viewing scoring. It's kind of it's uh
something else.
>> Do you think in terms of academia and I
know that that's like that's you know
the bad word here but um uh do you think
that AI is a deterrent for them to want
to uh acknowledge this type of study or
do you think it's it favors their
interest? Cuz you know
you say you know we're eliminating bias.
we're eliminating human error by uh
getting rid of these judges and having
AI uh part of it. But do you see that as
being a benefit to the people who are
reluctant into looking in this or or or
>> well they hate it more?
>> They hate it more.
>> Yeah. I think um well certainly you're
not getting completely rid of human bias
because AI has that baked in.
>> Yeah.
>> You're almost using human bias to do the
scoring.
>> Sure.
>> Uh but you get rid of things like
positional bias.
>> I see. Because you can give the same AI
the two images in an opposite position
>> and it doesn't remember that it saw it
in the other position. So you could get
right
>> you could get both. Whereas with a human
you'd have to give two different humans.
It's a lot of humans.
>> Yeah.
>> Um will it make people hate it more? I
think the people who already hate this
stuff will hate it and say, "Oh, well
they used AI, right?" And the people who
don't will be like, "Cool, they used
AI." And the the depth I mean I think we
should talk about this. The depth of the
bias
>> and where it comes from.
>> Yes.
>> Is really interesting to me because this
is what I've been trying to work with
for ever. I mean, in in my professional
career since
I think maybe 1996, I've been trying to
work with this and just notice and try
to understand
what is it really that makes people
think this can't be true and upsets me
so much and it almost hurts me. Like
I've had professors tell me it hurts
them for me to feel that that this is
the way the universe works. like it
hurts their feelings because they
appreciate my mind and I have so much to
offer blah blah blah. And if only I
would just, you know,
present the more mainstream side of my
work.
>> Yeah, that might also reflect just
where, you know, they might I'm assuming
they're older than you as well. So, you
know, when you get to perhaps the later
stage of your life, you're a little more
reluctant into changing your
foundational
uh you know, and you and you want
everything to be nice and neat before
you leave this place, perhaps.
>> Maybe. Maybe. Or Yeah, I think that's
part of it. I mean, I'm not necessarily
like that, but I also have a a high
capacity for uncertainty,
>> which I think a lot of people don't
have. Yeah, you do, too. Yeah. And so we
can talk about these things in some kind
of a generous way to be generous to the
ideas without shutting them down.
>> Yes.
>> And without latching on to them either.
>> Without Yeah. And without latching on to
them because who knows? I They're
probably all wrong.
>> Yeah.
>> I mean, we just have these little idiot
human minds, you know? Oh, it could be
like this, you know? It's just like,
okay. Um maybe um we can do experiments,
but even the what we perceive from the
experiments could be wrong. So, but
I keep coming down to
there's this basic
fear
of
well there's that the sort of
superficial thing about ego like if I'm
wrong about the way the universe works
then I guess I'm not as smart as I
thought I was and I was sort of basing
my identity on being smart so there's
ego
but I think it's more basic in that and
I think it speaks to this fear we talked
about of losing control with the love
feeling. I think it's um
sort of I want to call it fear of being
subsumed
>> like fear of Freud talks about this.
Freud was right about a couple things.
And one thing I think he was right about
is the fear that both men and women
have, this is not just a male thing, of
the mother bringing her you back into
her womb. Like not being separate.
>> Like finding out that you're just
not separate.
>> Yeah. That you're a pinched node and not
a detached.
>> Yes.
>> Yeah. And then what is the implication
of that is like
>> there's no individuality.
>> Yeah. Is like I don't matter.
>> But that's not really the implication.
That's the ego implication.
>> Yeah. That's the ego's belief like oh
then I will die. And it's like no
actually
>> you know if your identity is not that
you have to be an individual node but
that you're this whole ocean or this
whole thing
>> like that's awesome.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. there. It's really a matter of uh
your own perception of the same thing
cuz you know I guess some people would
say oh if everything is one and we're
all connected then nothing matters.
>> Yeah.
>> You know then we don't then I don't
matter and where my perception would be
no you matter as much as everything
else.
>> Yeah.
>> Like we all matter equally. Like that's
a great
>> to do your job and be be your person
like be who you are. But we matter as
much as everything. Like this this this
matters as much as that and we're all
equal. That's amazing. But some people
would see that as oh if we're all equal
then I don't matter. And and it's just a
matter of perception.
>> Yeah. It's like which side of the ego
are you?
>> Exactly.
>> Yeah. But it's all ego because there's
this attachment to mattering.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. I guess I guess you know the one
thing that comforts me in this thought
experiment would be well I mean I find
it comforting just generally but I think
the one thing that provides a little
more comfort is the idea that memory
however might be retained. You know this
seems to be the thing um that we hear is
that sure you the loss of individuality
might be you know a factor here uh
through throughout your your life. You
know, you maybe you lose individuality.
Okay. But what if memory doesn't go
away? What if memory is still retained
somehow?
>> Yes.
>> You know what I mean? Wouldn't that be
enough? I think it would.
>> To feel like you exist or to feel like
you matter?
>> Yeah. Or to feel like your experiences
mattered?
>> Yeah. Is it enough if it's retained?
I I don't know the answer to this. I'm
so curious what you think. Is it enough
if the memory is retained in the whole?
>> Yeah. Without your individuality. Like
it's hard for us to separate individual
memory from our individuality. But I
think memory perhaps
>> uh exists in a in in this infinite
substrate.
>> Yeah.
>> Right. Where individuality certainly
does not uh it's just this body or
whatever it is. But the memory does seem
to be information. It does seem to be
>> well the body would though because
that's more information that grows into
the body. But there but the import of
the body is not there. Yeah. But if so
this goes back to your idea of sort of
all of us are observers gathering like
different eyes gathering data
>> and then putting it into the
informationational substrate but funnily
enough it arrived from the
informationational substrate in the
first place. So it's extremely circular
but also awesome.
>> So it's almost like we're building a
hologram.
>> Yeah.
>> Where we have different views of this
information
>> and making it more real. It's like we're
it's this idea of co-creation and coming
alive. What are we missing from that? I
feel like we're missing
as we play with this idea.
>> Um
I mean we're well I mean we're only
talking about the information here.
We're not talking about you know what
what you were what you were saying prior
to this uh to the substrate of love sort
of existing around the information.
We're just talking about the information
being passed on and
>> and uh so there is the glue I suppose.
Well, so this reminds me of that picture
you have on your wall of um
>> the Bazaar.
>> Bazaars, like the heart-shaped
>> Yeah.
>> field around the UF.
>> Yeah. And so it's like Yeah. If that's
basically like the nest.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. That's what we're That's what
we're missing. Almost the nest from
which this grows, right?
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Like feeding it.
>> Or even like um like a Taurus.
>> Yeah. more less less like a heart but
more like a Taurus where it just keeps
coming in.
>> How high do you think people think we
are? [laughter]
>> I mean they might be getting high at
this very moment just by listening to
us.
>> Um
>> cuz we're actually not high but I mean
like I'm not I think looking at your
eyes they're not that dilated. I think
you're not high either.
>> No defin and and um
>> I hope that it's this conversation is
followable. I think there's I think
there's people
>> part of it parts of it might not be as
much but
>> it's fun.
>> Yeah. I guess you could always wonder.
I think that there's something that I'm
wanting to say which is that there's
that it really matters to me anyway and
I think it matters to you that different
people
part of the purpose of podcasting is to
bringing is to bring these different
people who have the such different views
together. It's almost like you're
creating
that
hologram.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, like that's almost like
>> at least mapping it out.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. And I I think it's
>> it's a really important metaphor for us
as we're moving into the new um the new
media.
>> Like we often use media as a metaphor of
the mind. You know, the mind works like
the radio. We used to say, "Oh, the mind
works like a computer." I'm wondering if
the mind works like a podcast. You know,
if that's an even better metaphor.
and we're moving [clears throat] into
that
>> um about that that's that's an
interesting thought that I had as well
where um you know I've always thought
the body as being some type of
processing machine right like some
processor like you know if information
exists non-locally and sort of
omnipresently and then we somehow filter
suck pull or whatever pluck information
out of the substrate and and then apply
it to this physical ical reality, right?
This is the processor.
>> Yeah.
>> What is the processor once the body goes
away? Because information still exists
and we hear stories of people having uh
or at least, you know, through
near-death experiences or through
out-of- body experiences. Uh we hear
about them being aware that I'm still
here, but my body's there, but I'm here.
Well, then you're processing something.
>> Where's the processor? So we talk about
the body as the processor. It's a
processor and a sensor of physical
reality.
The mind is a processor of the
information it's receiving right from
physical reality but also of
non-physical reality. In other words,
like this information.
>> So the mind is the process.
>> The mind is the processor and it doesn't
go away when the body dies is the idea,
>> right? And so now it's able to process
more directly because it doesn't have
that filter and have access to the
informationational substrate more
directly.
>> So the mind is is oh is separate from
the information then
>> so no I think the information
is the mind
>> h
>> like this informationational substrate.
So we got we're moving between
individual mind and mind sure
>> with a capital M or individual
consciousness and consciousness with a
capital C. So the informationational
substrate itself you could call it the
mind of the universe
>> because it has all the information from
the birth to the death of the universe
in this worldview that we're making up.
Okay. So that would be like the
universal mind. The individual mind,
this individual consciousness of which
we are aware is the filtered down
um access to both that and indirectly
through physicality,
right? If physicality is born, if this
cup, if everything that of our bodies
are born out of this mind, this
universal mind, then
our little little C consciousness is
this separate sort of thing that gives
us this theater of separation,
>> this illusion of separation based on
physical reality and whatever filters in
whatever leaks in from the
informationational substrate.
So
>> and that ceases when the body goes away.
>> That individual mind I think ceases when
the body goes away. Well although the
the big mind the universal mind would
have awareness
of oh that body is dead but someone
could see a ghost or someone you know
what I mean like that that person did
exist in physical form.
>> Yeah.
>> Like we we're so used to thinking of
this is I was thinking about this. I was
at in this hot tub today and I was
looking at the rain come down on the on
the water and I was just noticing we're
so used to assuming that the universe is
random and that there's no meaning for
instance to the pattern of the drops on
the water that we're not going to look
for a message in the pattern of the
drops on the water. Like that would be
silly and kind of crazy um right now in
the way science is thought about. But so
when we talk about the ones and zeros,
it's easy for people because it's it
feels like it has no intention. It has
no there's no mind there. It's just ones
and zeros.
But
it kind of feels to me like
intention is that love seeping through.
Like that's love is an active
force.
>> Mhm. that seeps through and then that
intention is real. It's like the
intention of a creator or something
>> and it could affect the ones and zeros.
>> Well, yeah. And it circles back. We can
affect the ones and zeros with our
minds. So, it's this
>> this co-creative process.
>> Yeah. Ones and zeros might just be like
a modern divination tool that uh you
know, we might pick up on.
>> Yeah. Might have been might have been an
old bird bones back in the day, but now
it's
>> more sophisticated
>> or whatever
>> or less. Yeah,
>> they were just the same.
>> They were just the same. [laughter]
Um, you know, you were talking about the
uh the experimentation for uh the
pre-cognition. Was that um because I
know I there's Daryl Bem as well, Dr.
Daryl Bem, who who
>> Yeah, he did a bunch of pre-cognition
studies. He he did a bunch of them and
what I can say about those is the real
upshot at a meta analysis that came
after him is that the ones that were
more replicable were the ones that were
unconscious.
So they were the ones that were like
fast, unconscious,
not trying to do things. The slower ones
that took more time in between the
information and when it was given in the
future, they did not replicate as well.
>> Okay.
>> And so I think that's very telling. None
of them were remote viewing.
>> No.
>> And um there's been a lot of takedowns
of his work and that's okay. like I
think there were some errors in there
and I think it's okay to criticize work
and try to do better. What I noticed is
that the pre-cognitive remote viewing
effects which are big and um I think I
think I did pretty good statistics on
those. People just don't talk they
prefer not to talk about them
>> and and it's hard to find them in Google
Scholar. Um they're sort of buried
somehow. Uh, and so I feel like if you
can't take it down, it can get buried.
Yeah.
>> And that's where we're living right now.
So I just like to talk about them
because they're there.
>> Of course,
>> they're real. And we know, we know, and
Ed Edme, Dr. Edme, as you call him,
talks about this all the time.
>> We know that there's a big effect size,
especially for gifted remote viewers.
>> Yes. And Yeah. and and um sesthesia as
well seems to be a factor that was
unexpected in measuring what a good
remote viewer is when they when they did
that initial 600 person yeah
>> sort of test to get that 1% down that 1%
yeah and and turned out they were all
sin I really want to do an experiment
where we look at time synesthesia
>> because I'm a decent remote viewer and
and I notice that I have I mean I know
the way that the that the um the week
looks and I know the way that the year
looks. Like right now we're in July and
I know where that is in space and it has
since I was a kid it's always been that
way.
>> Yeah.
>> Like a sesthesia using perception of
time the calendar. Wo.
>> Yeah. So it goes like January, February,
March, April, May, June, and then you
turn a corner, you start going down.
>> Okay. So it's not like looking at a
calendar and seeing like
>> No, no, no. Then it goes to September
and then now you're going this other
direction. You go to December and
there's this big gap between December
and January. So like the years are
really clear to me because there's all
this space here.
>> Are you do you have synthesia in any
other form or is that
>> I do with um numbers and personalities
like each number has a personality uh up
to about 25.
>> What's what's an example? 13.
>> I get a lot of gritty
>> gritty and 11 and male. 11 also male but
kind. Huh.
>> Generous.
>> Interesting. It's very interesting. I
mean, that could be,
>> you know, has that ever served you in
your life?
>> Well, when I was born,
>> like instinctively like when you Yeah.
Yeah. Like
>> or but I mean more so in perhaps like
relationships or
>> meeting someone and
>> Well, if I hear that [laughter] if I
hear that they're born in a certain
month, it might be a little bit
>> biased.
>> Yeah. Against or for them.
>> And and is and is that proven itself to
be the case?
>> No. No. No. That's just my own little
crazy. Your own little That's my crazy.
>> Yeah. Okay.
>> Yeah. Yeah. But it's um it does help me
remember like
>> I can remember my hotel room or phone
numbers or things cuz it's like well
that number what's that doing with that
number? And then
>> it's a natural pneummonic.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly.
>> So yeah.
>> Um
>> but I would love to find out if other
precognitive remote viewers tend to be
uh temporal sinthets.
>> That's the first time I've ever heard
that term. That's a really interesting a
really interesting thing because
senesthesia itself is interesting
>> in terms of because it it does seem
>> it it's really easy to categorize people
who are neurode divergent in today's by
today's standards because and not
there's a spectrum of neurode diverency
but I mean those on the extreme sides of
the spectrum it's very easy to be like
oh this person's clearly autistic or
whatever you know what I mean but like
sesthesia is more subtle because it
seems to really pop up. You don't have
to be um overtly neurode divergent to to
have synthesia. And yet those people
seem to be really in tune with uh this
remote viewing stuff. And so
>> yeah, it's really interesting. The there
there was a really cool sesthesia story
in my post posttock lab. I worked at
Northwestern and um in cognitive
neuroscience in for my postoc and I was
doing EEG and I was helping out with
another experiment that was looking at
um these like body lights on the body
you know what they call them like body
lights if you can you how much how many
lights do you need to detect movement
you know they use those lights in like
animation I see
>> they put it on the joints and so how
many of those need do you need to
correctly figure out the movement so
that was the experiment so I was helping
out. It wasn't my experiment, but I got
to be there when this one participant
comes in. And she's like, "All right,
yeah, I see the lights and you want me
to respond about the movement, but can
you turn off the music?"
>> Oh, wow.
>> And we're like, "There's no music." And
she's like, "You know, no, I mean, just
turn off the can you just turn it down?"
You know, and we're like, "What are you
talking about?" And it turns out, and
she didn't know this before, but that
with those lights, she gets music
>> that particular frequency of light.
>> Yeah. She's like, "It's going
>> [laughter]
>> This is so cool. So yeah, I think this
this um this way of integrating
information, it's it's almost like the
filter has failed a little bit,
>> right? And it's just letting more
information through and your body's
dealing with it in this way and your
mind is dealing with it
>> and that's like sudden savant syndrome
or that's also like these these these
non-verbal children who are
>> maybe that's like that
>> there's like a glitch in the in the
physical brain that allows you know more
information to leak through. I think so.
I think because I've been working with
um the telepathy tapes folks. I'm in
their documentary
because I have this amazing team working
with Jeff Terren and Maria Welch and
Natalia man and Damon Abraham and Paulie
Washburn and we're we're really trying
to understand not just this telepathy
thing but also just what is the waking
daily experience of a non-speaking
autistic person and it is wild. I mean
it's very different but I keep coming
across this sort of sense that that
their right hemispheres are unfettered
that their right hemisphere where you're
doing intuition you're doing creativity
you're doing music you're doing
emotional social connection um
is just not suppressed
as in a regular in a normal person
whereas their left hemisphere
clearly there's something going on there
because they can't speak and you
Generally we think of speech in the left
hemisphere. So there's something going
on with a different kind of wiring in
the left hemisphere the current
hypothesis of mine that is and probably
other people's that is also
making the right hemisphere unsuppressed
and that's kind of supported by this
work by Morris Freeman this guy at
Bayrust that I think I mentioned early
on. Do you know about his work?
>> No.
>> Yeah. So he's a neurologist and he
starts to have this experience that
maybe some of his patients can do
psychic stuff and there are patients who
have left frontal hemisphere lesions.
And so he designs this experiment where
he asks people to move an arrow on a
computer screen with their minds and he
asks his patients to do it. And it's he
finds this directional effect where the
ones with the left frontal hemisphere
lesions. So just background front of the
left lobe is actually suppressing the
right hemisphere the front of the right
hemisphere. So if you have a lesion
there which means maybe you had a stroke
there or something happened those cells
are dead.
>> That inhibitor is no longer there.
>> That inhibitor is no longer there. It's
releasing the right frontal. So they're
able to do this you know better than
controls. In other words, statistically
significantly better controls at the
direction that makes sense for the left
frontal.
>> So then he repeats it in a different
experiment
>> and he uses transcranial magnetic
stimulation to suppress
to to reversibly suppress the left
frontal activity to release the right
hemisphere. He finds the same thing. So
that's very interesting. So yeah, I kind
of think
that's a little bit of what's going on
there.
>> Like there's a physical anomaly.
>> There's a physical anomaly that's making
the right frontal lobe unsuppressed. And
so that stuff is coming through.
>> And so that being said, then there is a
way where you can induce this.
>> Apparently you can use reversible TMS,
although that's a little bit scary to
me.
>> Sure. Yeah. I mean scare. As soon as you
mess with the brain, it's very scary.
>> Yeah. But like hypothetically, you could
you could induce these these things. Is
that something you think that they were
attempting to do through like the gate
program? And and
>> I knew you were going to ask that. Yeah.
Right. It's obvious question. Um I
>> It's funny because I've been vehemently
against doing myself any experiments
about stimulation, including
transcranial direct uh current
stimulation, which is much lighter.
>> Yeah.
>> It's more like a 9volt battery kind of
thing. Um, and then lately I started
getting interested in it, but I haven't
done it. Um,
>> but
>> if I were if I were I mean they knew
that if I was a government official who
was charged with this and was a
neuroscientist, I would I'd be like,
"Yeah, let's try that."
>> I mean, it seems obvious.
>> It does seem obvious.
>> And that you hear about that too a
little bit, right? the um
>> cuz there is there is
>> well the like merciful Martin Jordan
Jose yeah
>> there's there seems to be two opposing
ends of this of of a way to interact
with the substrate and on one end the
end that that you speak of which is this
loving intention this calming of the
mind this like but then on the other
side there seems to be like this
opposite way of inducing
similar effects through trauma and is
>> is that because it I
>> I agree. I just give a big sigh.
>> Yeah. But it does seem like both of
them, it seems at least to me, like both
of them have valid outcomes, although
you know, one is preferable and probably
takes longer is the love one and
probably takes more nurturing where the
other one is like we can get instant
access if we just like prod and poke
this person um and hurt them and and
sort of uh and and you know
>> this is devastating. So this is this is
the way people have I believe been
thinking. Yes, I think you we I think
you can get people to dissociate from
their bodies if your goal is to get them
out of their body and to go get
information uh assuming the
consciousness can float around like
that, which I think we all kind of at
this point we think that may happen. Um
it's kind of like when people say um so
it really works, you know,
we know that abusing your child is bad,
but it really works to make them stop
their behavior. Like if you hit your
child
um that it's really true that they will
probably stop doing the behavior that
makes you hit them. Like yes, you're
treating them like a dog. They will
learn like a dog. Like that that is true
and it's efficient.
Um and the long-term impact of that is
to often ruin people's lives.
>> Yeah.
>> So now they're no longer efficient at
anything. and the behavior that you were
trying to shape is um probably trying to
make them what you believe to be a
better person, but it's hard for them to
do that. And I think the same thing goes
here. It's like, yeah, so for this one
moment, you got what you wanted. And if
you're really trying to make someone who
um can help you in the future and
doesn't crack up or go nuts or you know
eat themselves alive with some amuno
uh what do you call it? Autoimmune
disease or something um you've failed
because
it really doesn't take that long to put
people into a state of unconditional
love and yourself.
>> Mh. But what happens is this trauma is
passed down. The people that get to do
these things have been traumatized for
themselves. It's it's generational. And
so those are the people who are going to
be motivated to do it and they're going
to cause the trauma. Then they're going
to create people who cause the trauma.
And so it's devastating. I really I
don't know any details about this except
for what's talked about among survivors.
And um but that's enough for me to say
like we're going to have to look at a
different way. I feel the same way about
the polygraph. I feel like it's a tool
of trauma that is passed down in the
intelligence community like a hazing uh
tool that people don't realize is
um doing damage while it's also being
not very effective at what it's supposed
to do. Um
>> how so?
>> Well, it's not effective at
>> Well, how is it damaging?
>> How is it doing damage? Well, because
people it's it's screening for
sociopathy.
>> So, it's like if you're really good at
just saying yes, no when people accuse
you of things. So, in the polygraph
process, someone's using these tools,
but they're also doing theater, right?
This is all public information. They're
all doing theater to say, "Oh, no. Well,
why did you put that on your forum if
you did this or, oh, you must lie to
people or whatever." They're accusing
you of things to try to see how you
react.
>> I see. is like stress inoculation at the
same time.
>> Yeah. But it doesn't but either if
someone's if someone has no problem with
that and they can lie because you kind
of have to lie to get through that
because you're basically saying, "Okay,
I never lie." Which is not true. No one
never lies. Right.
>> Yeah.
>> So
if you're able to do that without any
level of stress, you're probably on the
sociopathy spectrum, right? So now
you're through that. Subconsciously,
some part of you has been essentially
tortured
and you're just going to ignore that and
say, "Well, that's what I have to do for
my work, etc." But it comes up later
like a flower and [laughter]
and you can have insider threat and you
can have um people who don't know why
they're feeling frustrated at their
employer, but they are and they're going
to maybe be able to be,
>> you know, turned in some kind of way.
So, to me,
>> it's going to fester.
>> It's going to fester. there's a wound
that's going to fester.
>> So, um, how would you reconcile then,
you know, the ability to access this
substrate information through trauma
with your theory of having it be
accessible through love?
>> Well,
um, you can do both.
>> So, you have access to it through both.
I think you have access to it through
both because
because
if you go out of your body like to
dissociate then you are more aware that
you are you know not the body and then
you can have access to the
informationational substrate but also I
think you can do both because the
universe is compassionate.
>> I see. So it's like if the universe is
aware or this informationational
substrate is aware in some kind of way.
I think of this as God like is a is
aware then it's like
I'm compassionately going to
>> grant access
>> grant access. And many many people
who've had those disassociative
experiences can access states of
unconditional love because it's healing
because it's where you can go. It's like
it's the difference between it's it's a
very short leap between disassociation
and self-trcendence.
And self-trcendence can be this amazing
feeling of like I'm helping this thing
bigger than myself. I am, you know, I'm
in a state of universal love and none of
this matters and I'm doing this thing.
Kind of like that dream I had where I'm
like, yes, I can do this thing. I can,
you know, go rise through the ceiling
and I can,
>> right? And then I look back and I go,
"Oh, but I'm doing it for this person
who's not okay." That
>> that is exactly that. And so what we
need to ask ourselves is when if you can
get this from unconditional love and you
can get this from inducing trauma, what
is what is going to help us in the long
run better?
>> Sure. [laughter] Yeah. Yeah. And and
yeah, as I as I listen to you, I also
realize that, you know, this is
happening not due to the trauma, but due
to the traumas creating dissociation
from the trauma.
>> Yes. This is this is
>> you're dissociating from the trauma in
order to have access.
>> Right. Exactly.
>> Not because of the trauma.
>> It's the healing of the trauma. And so
you could just cut out the trauma part
and just do the healing part because
everyone can feel healed with
unconditional love. You can still get
there.
interesting. This is very interesting,
stimulating conversation and all all all
of which I'm I'm looking forward to. Uh
this this is one of those things like
when I went to contact in the desert, I
had this happen to me as well where uh
even my buddy Michael Phillip, he asked
me towards the end, we had a little
interview thing and he he talked to me
and said, "So where you where have you
landed with all of this?" You know, and
this is after I spent I don't know. I
It's weird because in these places
you're having these existential
conversations with complete strangers in
the most liinal transient like hallways
and and they're just, "Hey, what do you
think about death?" And you're like,
"Blah." And then you go, "Okay, I got to
go get a sandwich." And then you turn
here and then someone else is like, "I
think aliens are this." And you're like,
"All right, let's go there." And and
you're having just a multitude of like
the craziest conversations where like my
hard drive felt like it was overheating.
Yeah, it's like the mundane and the
completely etheric and everything all
together.
>> And it's all of this and so many
different paths from so many different
people. And by the end of it, I I
literally felt like my my hard drive was
like it's so so full.
>> Yeah.
>> And I told Michael, and this is the same
feeling I'm having right now. I said, I
don't know where I stand with any of
this, but I look forward
to 2 3 days from now. like like a
workout at the gym, you know, where you
get sore the next day and you just can't
move. I look forward to two three days
once I've recovered from this
conversation in a positive way. Um to
then feeling stronger
>> um in in my mind and and and being more
like I I guarantee you I'm going to have
so many better questions and so many
better connections to be made because of
this conversation.
>> Same.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. This is really fun for me to have
a thinking partner in this and the
willingness to just zip around.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. I hope we I
hope we were cogent to some extent here
for for the audience.
>> No idea. I have no idea if that's the
situation.
>> Yeah. Um I do want to bring up some
questions from the audience because uh
and this is you know normally we get I
don't know between 10 and 20 qu I think
50 people within a matter of an hour.
>> Oh cool. were asking questions and they
were and m and multiple questions and so
I had to pick a bunch. Normally I just
pick three, but I picked like maybe half
a dozen
>> because they were all so interesting. So
I'd like to bring a few of those up.
>> That's great.
>> Okay. Would you like to take a break
before we do that?
>> Yeah. Yeah. I'm looking for more um
>> Yep. Right.
>> All right. I only have
>> Do you have any um
contact experiences?
>> No. No. other than, you know, seeing
some things in the sky.
>> Yeah.
>> And then that one time throughout the
out of- body experience, hearing a
female voice.
>> Oh, so that wasn't an actual person that
was in the house.
>> No, no, no.
>> Oh, that wasn't clear. I didn't know.
>> Yeah. Yeah. It was uh And it was an
indistinct voice. I've never heard it,
but it was stern. It felt very stern.
Like uh
>> Put back on your body. It it it so I was
trying to go through the window and I
couldn't get my hand through the window
like they taught me at Monroe. Yeah.
>> And then I went to go open the window in
the out of body state.
>> And then as I was leaping out halfway
through I hear right here this female
voice go, "What are you doing?"
>> Oh.
>> And I went I shuddered like I my I
froze. I I remember tensing up like this
and going
>> Yeah. And then like looking at my body
and just I didn't want to look where
that was coming from cuz it scared me. I
>> you feel like you're in a place where
you don't belong instantly. You feel
like I'm not supposed to be here.
>> But you didn't before that voice.
>> Yeah, I did.
>> You did. Even before that voice.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'm instantly.
>> You felt like you were sneaking around a
little
>> instantly. As soon as you cuz like when
this happens, when the out of body
happens, your physical body's here. This
is happened for me and some other people
as well. describe this, but like this is
I'm inside my body and I'm like this.
>> Mhm.
>> Now I'm like free floating inside my
physical body.
>> Yeah.
>> Where I'm like, oh, I could just like
I'm
>> going to lie. I'm not bound. I'm not I'm
like unbound to my body. And you feel
that.
>> Wow.
>> And so that's what makes you want to
just get out
>> and just play around
>> because you're
>> because you can.
>> Why am I just lying here if I'm not
attached to my body? And you just kind
of like you can just sit up, right? And
so I get out, but as soon as you're out,
you realize there is this tone, at least
for me, like a like the entire time, and
it's very ominous, like almost dreadful,
like like for me
>> because you feel like you're in the
upside down. You feel like, oh, this is
not my room.
>> Yeah.
>> Um this is a projection of of my memory
of my room,
>> but you're not in your room. This is
this is a different place that you're
not supposed to be here. Uh, this isn't
this isn't a dream. This isn't your
room. This isn't reality. This is a
different place. You're in a different
place where there's there could be other
things here. Yeah.
>> And you know that instantly. Instantly I
know that I am not alone in this world.
>> Yeah.
>> And I don't know if they're here. I
don't know what. I don't want to see
them. I don't want to talk to anybody. I
just want I wanted one foot in front of
the other. And I'm literally just like
moving looking here. Blinders. I'm like
I don't want to look at anything else,
>> right?
>> In case. And then as I go I hear this
voice like, "All right, back in bed."
And yeah, instantly up.
>> And yeah, all of that for me was really
trippy because it happened during a
waking state. There was wasn't one
millisecond where I fell asleep. And I I
looked at the time when I put my
headphones down was 6:30. It was 6:30.
Uh 6:30 and it was like 6:32. Like it
was
>> every second was accounted for.
>> Yeah.
>> Um
>> when you came back in your body,
>> do you feel like anything else was
there? Do you feel like you did you feel
safe back in your body?
>> Yeah. I never for once uh felt like that
could have happened. I also feel like I
don't know but I feel like
when you have an out-of- body experience
we call it an out of body experience. I
don't know that that's what's happening.
>> Mhm.
>> Um we call it that because we can see
our body and see our room and wander
around. But as even Robert Monroe talks
about and as I I've experienced, it's
not your room.
>> Yeah. It's like an 80%. It's your memory
of your room.
>> Yeah.
>> So, who says that you're out of body at
all, first of all?
>> Right. You could be your your brain
literally has a construction of where
your body is in space and what your room
looks like and you could be wandering
around in there. Correct.
>> So, it could be giving you weird
feelings
>> or billocating.
>> Yeah. Right.
>> You know, who who says I can't be in and
out of my body at the same time.
>> Right. And also I mean I get that and
that's why this thing about getting
veritical information like looking in
the envelope ends up being important but
it's not important because you can
literally just remote view while you're
having an out-of- body experience if
you're gifted at it. So it doesn't
actually
>> prove that you've left your body. No.
Exactly. So that's that's where I'm like
I don't really
>> I don't know what I'm experiencing when
they say out of body. I think it's the
easiest thing to say cuz that's what it
feels like.
>> Well, and there's certain uh like
neurological disorders that will give
you that experience,
>> right?
>> Yeah. And so like and and even it
reminds me of my dad's wife who has
Alzheimer's and um she came home after
after getting surgery to her room and
she said, "This looks just like my
bedroom,
>> but I know it's not." And I just wonder
how much of that the dementia processes,
>> right,
>> are similar to like losing the tether
>> to spaceime or
>> spaceime or to being in your body.
>> Yeah.
>> Just that that because the the brain is
being impacted in this way that
constructs these things. We forget that
they're all constructed.
>> Yeah.
>> And so it's a reminder that all this is
constructed
>> and you need an anchor.
>> Yeah.
>> You need some type of uh anchor to
anchor you into that moment. Yeah.
>> And if that anchor, whether that's space
or time or the illusion of of where you
are,
>> if that anchor isn't there, then you're
just kind of like, this feels familiar,
but it's not.
>> Yeah.
>> Wow.
>> Yeah. So, I don't know that that's what
anybody's experiencing. And that's why I
don't have a fear of like somebody else
taking over my body because I don't
fully think I'm even out of my body.
>> Right. That makes sense.
>> But I do feel like this is a
non-physical reality that I'm currently
experiencing. I just don't know that
it's separate and I don't know that I'm
not in both. Right.
>> At the same time, like perhaps part of
my consciousness is projecting
>> uh this, you know, simulation of of a
reality that I'm in now and the other
part of the consciousness is well intact
in my body.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, I I don't know.
>> Yeah.
>> When you look down at your body, though.
>> Yeah.
>> Does it look like you're
>> it? You you you don't recognize yourself
be Well, I at least I don't because like
when have you ever seen yourself with
your eyes closed?
>> Yeah. No, I My husband takes a picture
of me.
>> Right. Exactly. But you look different.
Yeah.
>> So you look at yourself like is that me?
Like like it really is like it feels
like is that a stranger? Like and then
you get the realization that it's you
but you're just not familiar with
>> So the body doesn't look dead or
>> No. No. It and it's um it's not entirely
in detail. Like it's a little fuzzy too
like just because of everything I guess.
But
>> yeah,
>> I think what I heard was the more you go
out of body, the clearer it gets. Like
you upgrade to like the HD version of it
like if you've done it enough. Um so I
had the very low res version.
>> Wow. for my first few experiences.
>> I wonder who that woman was. If that was
like your mother or
>> No, it didn't sound like my mother. It
didn't It uh No, it was
>> It didn't sound like anyone.
>> No, not
>> Was it human?
>> Yeah. Well, sounded like a human woman.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh but like stern.
>> Yeah.
>> Is the only way I can put it. Not I
didn't feel like
>> Maybe it was me. [laughter]
>> Maybe.
>> Get back on your body. What are you
doing?
>> It was like It was like what are you
doing? Like it it sounded like what do
you think you're doing? Yeah,
>> like is what the feeling I got was and I
was just like I'm not going to even
answer that.
>> Yeah.
>> And it was it was funny too. I don't
even know if I mentioned this in the
video, but when I went to the window,
beside the window, there was a rosary.
>> I don't have a rosary in my house.
>> Yeah.
>> That's interesting.
>> Yeah. Beside the window. And so that but
that was one of the things where I was
like, "Oh, this is not my room."
>> Or it could have been some weird
space-time journey.
>> Yep. Exactly. Or some projection of my
subconscious or something.
Yeah. So,
>> oh, there's these amazing ghost stories
about ghosts who meet each other from
different times.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Who knows? Um, you know, and and
all of the above might be true
>> at the same time.
>> All very [clears throat] difficult to
test, but super interesting.
>> Yeah. Very interesting.
>> Okay, we got questions.
>> Yes, we got these questions here that I
will pull up. Um, we're just going to
start anywhere here.
>> Oh, I like this one a lot from JKP.
Oh, cool.
>> How important is synchronization? So,
maybe synchronicity in this field of
research.
>> Um, I'm taking it in a different way.
Not synchronicity, but synchronization
like between people or synchronization
of different parts of the brain
>> or like oscillations, you know, coherent
oscillations in different parts of the
brain. Are you thinking synchronicity? I
was but I'm happy to happy to go that
down that road as well.
>> Yeah. So I think synchronicity is our
experience of synchronization. So when
we're something synchronized whether
it's our brain waves are synchronized
with each other um within our mind or
within our brains or within my brain and
your brain or our movements are
synchronized. Our blinks are like when
we're looking at each other right now
our blinks are getting synchronized. Our
respirations are getting synchronized.
Our movements we're both nodding our
heads. It's just unconscious stuff that
helps us connect, right? Um, then I
think more synchronicities happen.
So I think that is it's almost like when
we were talking about theformational
substrate coming up and showing us
through our individuation that once
again we are connected.
It's like when we synchronize it's the
synchronicities that show us that we're
connected are going to come up. So I
think it's important but it also doesn't
need to be bothered with like unless you
really want to study synchronization and
which is amazing and there's wonderful
people who do that it's just going to
happen
>> right
>> and so yeah so I just sort of like go
straight to the next step but everyone
has their point at which they're most
interested in looking
>> do you feel more synchronicity
um in a certain area of your work or a
certain area of your life? If do you
feel like synchronicity or
synchronization has ramped itself up uh
apparently uh during certain times or or
adversely maybe a lack of
synchronization when things weren't
going well. Is that ever?
>> Yes.
>> Yeah. [laughter] Yeah.
>> Yes. I mean when I when I talk about
when anyone talks about being in the
flow and and in my own personal
experience of being in the flow, it's
this um
it's this is a synchrony between myself
and myself. So everything has integrity
in the moment. Uh it's a synchronous
synchronousness or synchronization
between myself and someone else. When
I'm working with the team members, I'm
really interested in how teams work
well. And synchronizing between teams
doesn't mean everyone's doing marching
the same time that not that at all. It's
more like the person who's really gifted
at X. So like on your podcast team, the
person who's really gifted at video
editing and the person who's really
gifted at dealing with the guest and the
person who's really gifted at figuring
out what is going to be a stupid topic
and a great topic. synchronization
there. Obviously, you can't do the same
thing. Your tasks are different, but
there's a feeling of right action at the
right time that occurs
when a team is buzzing along,
>> right? And so, yeah, in that case, u
synchronicity would or synchronization
would be more frequent when things are
going well obviously.
>> Yeah. And then synchronicities would
occur and synchronicity is here defined
in the Yian sense of
>> Yeah. things that seem to appear
completely
disconnected but end up having great
meaning when put together.
>> Yeah, exactly.
>> A coincidence with a lot of meaning. Um
yeah, because I I often I have certain
synchronicity engines in my life. Yeah.
>> That I purposely uh insert.
>> Um
>> like what?
>> Um so I have one which is just an app
and it's an app that sends me a new word
every hour that I want to learn. It's
just random words, but the words are
like words that you normally wouldn't
use in conversation that are quite, you
know, maybe complex or maybe very
specific words.
>> What's the most recent word?
>> I [snorts] can check right now.
>> We'll find out if there's a
synchronicity.
>> Yeah. Uh, bombastic,
[laughter]
excessively confident and pompous.
>> Oh, am I like that?
>> No, I I wouldn't say so at all. Um, but
these are these are the type of things
that I'll get on the hour and not
always, but I'll get a notification. I
don't have very many notifications, but
that one's on.
>> Yeah.
>> And so sometimes in the throws of a
conversation, I'll get a notification.
I'll just glance at my phone to see what
the word is.
>> Yeah.
>> And sometimes it'll be very synchronous
to what we're what we're talking about.
And I've learned that if I follow up on
that
>> Yeah.
>> in terms of my attitude or my decision-
making.
>> Yeah. at least personally that it uh it
always favors like um a more I guess I
favor whimsy in my life generally
>> and so when something whimsical like a
synchronicity pops up I tend to alter my
course to favor the synchronicity.
>> Yeah, me too.
>> I say that it's not an absolute but
>> so I have a built-in thing like that. I
made and made it for other people too. I
do this um biblommancy, you know. Oh
yeah. Yeah. Yeah,
>> but then I made I took my book and I
asked my friend Paulie Washburn to make
code for my website where it could turn
my book into an oracle. So you put in
your question, it ignores the question
completely and just randomly chooses a
number of sentences from the book and
and strings them together. And it's so
ridiculously for me
>> sometimes insightful
>> like always like and I don't know if
that's because I wrote the book and
these are my words coming back to me but
it's just shocking but then other people
are trying it and anyway um
>> that's why I have that that book wall
that you saw over there.
>> Yes. Biblomancy.
>> So I uh when filming um B-roll Yeah.
>> Uh for an episode or whatever like we
we've been playing around with like just
filming and like you'll come across the
word you were looking for.
>> Yeah. That's fantastic.
>> Like Yeah. Yeah. So that's so but to me
that's just a demonstration of
thisformational substrate saying you
know
>> hi there free sample.
>> Yeah. Exactly.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. And I also have found that if I
stop seeing synchronization
uh it's it's a a subtle signal for me to
maybe change course as well.
>> Yeah.
>> Um so if I if I stop seeing it like if
I'm everything synchronous and all of a
sudden things aren't synchronizing
>> like what's happening? Can we get back?
>> Yeah. Exactly. And I'm looking at my I'm
looking at my clock and it's 11:12.
>> Yeah. and I go, "Well, yeah, that was a
minute off there. Something's off." You
know, and I'll just I'll take it
lightly. I won't make, you know, great
life decisions based on these things.
But subtly, I will perhaps, you know,
steer the course a little bit and until
it picks up again.
>> Might also be psychosis, but uh I I tend
to favor whimsy.
>> Yeah. Whimsy and psychosis, I think. So,
the problem is that they seem similar,
but psychosis is really a negative
experience.
>> Absolutely. Yeah.
>> Whimsy is a positive experience.
Definitely. Yes.
>> All right, let's go here. Great
question, JKP. Thank you.
>> This is a doozy.
>> I love this thing.
>> This is great, right?
>> It's like the universe revealing itself.
This is so cool.
>> This is from Tess. Great question. What
is your functional understanding of the
fourth dimension? This might be where we
use the the pad if you need it, but um
yeah. Well, the fourth dimension in
physics is just supposed to be time.
Um, it doesn't behave like the other
dimensions if if you're some physicists
because you're not only supposed to be
able to go in one direction. If you're
other physicists, you don't care about
that and it's time reversal because
reversible because most physics
equations are time reversible. So, it's
just orthogonal, which means it's not on
the same going in the same direction as
the other three dimensions of space. So,
that's sort of the classical fourth
dimension. Um, I bet you're
Oh, I bet you're also asking, does the
fourth dimension unfold the three
dimensions of space? Um, in other words,
is the reason why I don't know why I
think you're asking this. It's just a
psychic test. I'm sorry if that's wrong,
but we don't know why it should seem
like you could only go in one direction
in the fourth. That just behaves very
differently from the other dimensions of
space. You know, I can go to the left or
the right. I can go up or down, but then
there's this one dimension that's like
you can't go in this one direction, but
you can go in the other and it and
you're kind of like only at certain
times and only at a certain speed. It
just seems kind of wonky like it's not a
real dimension or it doesn't behave in
the same way. So, one explanation is
that if you're a spatialist, you might
think time is really just some kind of
folded spatial dimension, but I'm kind
of a temporal person. So, I think the
whole thing came up from time and it's
not the fourth dimension at all. And
what created these dimensions is time.
And so, like time is one of these
foundational pieces.
>> Time is what created the physical
reality. Well, informationational
substrate created physical reality,
>> but the physical reality
>> the physical reality includes spaceime.
>> Yeah.
>> And includes matter and energy, right?
And so
informationational substrate.
It's almost like there's layers and
space of spaceime. Time was the first
created
>> and then created space.
>> So the fourth dimension would be perhaps
the absence of time.
>> Oh, that's cool. Sure. I was thinking
the fourth dimension would be um like
information
>> which is also not beholden.
>> Yes. Which plays by different rules.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. And and then maybe a fifth
dimension would be time. It depends on
how you want to think about what
dimensions mean. So really I think the
question is
how do dimensions work? And I think
there's a like the string theory people
really think differently than the
standard physics people.
The way I think of it is dimensions are
only useful to think about with space
because literally dimension
>> is [clears throat] about space. And so
when you start talking about dimensions
that aren't space like information or um
time,
I think it's better to talk about them
as geometry like this is really like a
geometry
um because it has these particular rules
or these particular angles. So I guess
the answer to real answer to your
question is my functional understanding
of the fourth dimension is not very
good.
[laughter]
>> Fair enough.
All right, we got a question here from
Slug.
>> Excellent.
>> Yeah,
>> I saw Slug today.
>> That is his real name. Um, [laughter]
>> you know this?
>> No, he's it's just an actual slug asking
a question.
>> If you had a$100 million tomorrow, which
venture gets it and why? [laughter]
>> A slug.
>> Interesting existential question from a
slug.
>> I would take that 100 million and put it
into my own company.
two actually my two companies so
American electronamics my startup that
is trying to make thisformational
essentially time machine um and then
half of it and then the other half into
my nonprofit applied love labs which is
trying to build technology to help
people experience unconditional love and
use that to get beyond um beyond our
limitations and move towards human
potential.
>> I'm very interested in this. What's
what's the the proposed technology that
allows that to happen?
>> Unconditional love or time travel.
>> Unconditional love.
>> Yeah, obviously the time travel one.
That's easy.
>> Yeah. Yeah. We've gotten past that
already. I think we solved that during
this podcast.
>> Yeah. Okay. Um unconditional love. Yeah.
So, we started at like in uh 2019. And I
started this nonprofit because I was
having this experience
of remembering what it was like for me
as a kid in this really rough household
where I had these very loving parents.
Like unconditional love was present. I
could feel it almost like a force. But
there was so much dysfunction. There was
abuse. There's neglect and mental
illness going on. And um there my my
father had uh obsessivempulsive
disorder. And I'm not going to go into
too depth for anyone who might have been
traumatized in this particular way, but
he would um every night he would do this
particular he would act out a ritual on
myself and my sister um that didn't on
the face of it seem sexual, but it did
sort of seem sexual. Um and
that was hard cuz I was helpless and I
really worked on not dissociating. And
one of the things I remember
experiencing was that there was a
rocking chair near my bed. It wasn't
even a real rocking chair, but in my
mind's eye, it was a real rocking chair.
And um there was this woman in her like
40s or 50s with dark hair who was
telling me it's okay to be angry. He
doesn't know what he's doing. He's not
um in his right mind, you know, and but
it's fine to be angry. and someday
you're going to thrive
and and you're actually going to be like
more than okay.
And it was a really loving
thing. And I realized later when I was
in my 40s and went through therapy that
um my 30s and 40s and went through
therapy and then my therapist had me do
like a little time travel narrative we
call it in the therapy world um and had
me go back and hold my hand and talk to
myself. I realized that that was me in
the chair.
And I and at that point at then I
couldn't remember if I actually did for
real have this experience as a child or
if it was fabricated from the therapy.
And I didn't care because it was
incredibly healing this experience of
connecting across time with myself. And
I was like I'm connecting with love
across time. I want to create an
organization that's going to help people
do this because I know it's powerful and
I want to scale it. So, I got a grant
from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation,
which is a big health foundation, to
create a technology that would help
people do this and to measure whether it
was helpful. And we did. We call it Time
Machine. You can go to it at
timeachine.lo. It's very simple. It's
something that you could code up now in
like a day on Claude, but it took a
while back in the day. And um we showed
that if people worked at it for we had
them do it for 10 days um they the
people who had early childhood trauma
that was severe
>> improved to the point of people who
didn't have early childhood trauma in
terms of their overall well-being.
>> So they really benefited. They everyone
improved but the people who were much
worse off at the beginning
>> uh just did a lot better. So um so it
really worked. So then I'm like, all
right, what other technologies can we
build to help people like get in love
with themselves to bring this bubble of
love around themselves and others, you
know, because this is healing.
>> Like this is actually in my worldview
what everyone from the biggest
billionaires to the person on the street
who's trying to get their next, you
know, heroin hit, everyone's looking for
love. And in fact, I mention heroin hit
advisedly. There's a really great study
out about universal love showing that
when people uh when they had introduced
people to universal love and had them do
these universal love meditations who
were opio opioid addicts, they were less
likely to reuse. I mean there's
something about love as a healing a real
healing tool. So scaling that.
>> So what other technologies can we use?
So we we created a technology where you
just look at someone's eyes without any
with with an unconditional love
meditation but you can't speak to them.
It's a stranger you've never met before.
We want to give it to like Israelis and
Gazins. Um we want to give it to
um red states and blue states. I mean it
just it's a way of just not knowing who
that person is and learning how to wrap
both of you in this loving state. So it
goes on like that. There's a technology
I can't talk about that we're developing
with with a group called the micelorium.
They take ideas and they turn them into
technologies that can help people. It's
very cool.
>> Very cool. That sounds very interesting.
And and uh also when I was at Monroe,
there was a brief talk because they
they'd also mentioned something uh along
the lines of, you know, meditating on
your past trauma, going back uh healing
yourself. Um, one thing they would do is
have you go back to this like whether
it's traumatic or whether it was just an
event you would rather have a different
outcome to and live the different
outcome.
>> Yeah.
>> Like completely like make the other
decision. Yeah.
>> So you made this decision. Okay. Go back
and make the other one and play it out.
>> Yeah.
>> And you do that and and from that you
would feel better.
>> Yes.
>> And and it it isn't you know you could
you could also say that well that's
delusional. We're like okay but I feel
better.
>> Yeah. That's the thing.
>> Who cares? It's been the past.
>> It really matters how people feel. And
so we've been in this behaviorist
tradition that says that doesn't matter.
Only things that are, you know, apparent
on the outside.
>> Here take some medicine.
>> Yeah. Here's takes that that we can see
on the outside. And it's just like, no,
actually it really matters how people
feel. And so when you you do a study
where people are doing self-report and
people say, "Oh, it's just self-report."
It's like, if the question is, "How do
you feel?"
>> Yeah.
>> People are really honest,
>> of course, [laughter]
>> because they want to know if this is
helping. So yes, uh the Israeli um
defense forces were actually the ones
who who I think launched this idea. They
called it back to the future therapy or
something. And they found that it really
helps PTSD to go back with all you know
now cuz you survived the PTSD cuz you're
in therapy for it. So with all you know
now go back to the trauma
>> and sit with yourself and give yourself
idea you know an idea about what to do
and like let yourself know you're not
alone and then do it in the opposite
direction. Go back and be the one who's
alone and is having the traumatic
experience and notice that this future
person is there to help you and go take
their advice. So it's just super
powerful.
>> Very healing.
>> Yeah.
>> Cool. Love it.
>> Yeah. And thanks by the way, slug for
that 100 million. I will totally
appreciate that when that shows up.
>> I just have this visual of this slug
just going.
>> Yep.
>> You're welcome.
>> We're good.
>> We got actually um you know, Slugs got
another question here which is really
good, but we'll bring that up in a
second here. Um this is a really really
good question by spicy pineapple.
again.
>> Is this like a
>> If you need a visual,
it's just a really spicy pineapple who's
got a burning question. America, China,
and Russia all ended their public sai
research in the '9s. Why do you think
that is?
>> Oh, um, well, that's
>> was a coincidence. [laughter]
[gasps]
>> [sighs]
>> There's
um
yeah, let me think about the right way
to answer this when it comes to what I
really believe.
I want to be really
what I really believe is that there was
kind of an like they all those countries
are watching each other
and at the time I heard a story
I think it was from Ed May but maybe it
was from Joe about the Russians in the
'9s saying
you know you k to America you killed all
your psychics like referring to Pat
Price and maybe others and sort of as a
as a dig like what what are you guys
thinking?
But I think that that's I think that was
just a dig. I I think that um
I think when you realize something's
really real
and and you realize how valuable it is,
>> there's this habit because we live in
the world we live in which likes to
think that it's a good idea to divide
things up. this habit of like circling
the wagons, taking your treasure and
pulling it in
>> and we're going to hold on to this
treasure and we're going to develop it
in our way and we're not going to tell
you about the way that we're developing
it.
>> So, we're going to declassify
>> what we've done because now we kind of
get what's
>> really valuable
>> or at least part of what we've done.
>> Well, yeah, we we'll declassify part of
what we've done. But there's some really
we should talk about some really
interesting things in that. But um and
then we're going to sort of develop it
in our own way because maybe we're going
to catch on to something that's very
different. So I think it was a
recognition this is really real. It's
not a game anymore. It's not just
something that we could kind of pretend
about. This is about this is fundamental
to the nature of reality
>> and it all happened simultaneously.
>> Yeah. It's like oh we it's just the same
seems to me with UFOs. It's like oh I
see you're now going through a
disclosure process. Okay. Maybe we'll do
the disclosure. You know, it's just
>> the all playing the the game.
>> Yeah. The funny thing about this
interdependent world is it's really the
case that from a high level view, these
countries have to look at each other and
we're all dealing with the same planet
and the same people. So, we have to look
at each other and say, "Okay, is it
really in our best interest to do this
now if you're doing that?"
>> Yeah.
>> So, it makes sense to me.
>> They're hiding their psychic stuff.
Let's hide our psychic stuff.
>> Yeah. Maybe there were maybe and and
then also the other part of it is maybe
I don't say this with any particular
knowledge but it's just sort of a guess
about human nature and also I know a
little about the intelligence community
from from my friend Carmen who I do this
show with pandas playing cello
>> um and some other people there's also a
feeling of like maybe then they won't
know how stupid we are like maybe they
caught on to something
>> right
>> did you see Arrival the movie
>> yeah of course I've seen it multiple
times
>> I love that movie so at that moment when
they think, "Oh, no, they figured out,
then everyone shuts down."
>> Yeah.
>> And so it could also just be like, "We
don't want them to know how stupid we
are.
>> They figured something out." And they
could have just been bluffing.
>> We We don't want them to know that we
didn't figure it out.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Uh it's a really interesting take.
That movie is great, by the way. There's
um I I remember last time I watched I
picked up on
>> Do you remember at the end when she's
getting all the visions?
>> Yeah.
>> Of like, "Oh my god." You know, and but
there's one vision there where the
child, the daughter, she draws because
you remember the canary.
>> Yeah.
>> The canary in the cage.
>> That's right.
>> And they kept bringing the canary up.
And that that's where I realized, oh,
the child is the canary.
>> Yeah.
>> The child is the canary.
>> The child had to die. Had to die for
them to know what to do. Like
>> I was like, oh my god.
>> Yeah. When I realized that, I was like,
>> no, I didn't get that. I've seen that 13
times and I didn't get that. That is
>> cuz they kept bringing the canary up,
but the canary kept surviving. But she
drew the picture of the canary.
>> Yeah.
>> And in the flashbacks, you see the
mother
>> and the mother and the dad.
>> Yeah. You see the mother, dad, and the
canary in the middle. I was like, "Oh,
she's the canary."
>> Oh, god.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Oh, yeah.
>> Such a good movie.
>> Oh, man. And that's also good because
that is how people feel.
>> Mhm.
>> It we we feel with in relationship to
the government, I mean,
>> or when I say government in the broad
sense, um,
>> we feel like we are the canary. Yeah.
Mhm. Yeah, definitely. Yeah, they are
not the canary.
Um, okay. Gee or guy or ghee.
>> A French person probably.
>> Yes.
Kind of answered this, but I feel like
it might be good to hone in on a an
answer here. What does love actually
change in precognitive remote viewing?
>> Okay. What does love actually change in
precognitive remote viewing? And I want
to pronounce this gooey like like the
interface the interface that we all see.
Okay. Um
but does it actually change?
That's interesting. It's interesting
because so my definition of love is that
which connects and then my definition of
unconditional love is
feeling loved and being able to love
without anything needing to change.
So
this I'm I'm I'm parsing this question
because I don't think that you know that
that Bible phrase about love doesn't
change anything. I horrible with Bible
phrases.
>> I'm not familiar. But
>> I'm Jewish and and furthermore read the
Torah. So but I think there's some
phrase about like love doesn't
alteration
doesn't alter stuff. That's how eloquent
I can be. And um but I think that's
real. So I don't know that it changes
anything.
But if someone is in a loving state,
then there is no unconditionally loving.
So I want to make a distinction between
conditional love, which is kind of like
if you're a computer scientist, it's
like conditional love is like an and
statement. Both things have to be true
in order for love to happen. Like I have
to love you, you have to love me. Now
we're in love.
That's what we usually think of as love.
Unconditional love is like you could be
completely ignoring me or hate me, but I
unconditionally love
everybody. Like that's the other thing
about unconditional love is it includes
everybody, right? So it's very different
and it's more of a rare thing for that
reason. So unconditional love doesn't
change anything. But what it does do is
when you are in a already in a state of
unconditional love. I think what it
actually allows you to do is not have
any conditions on time or space. So it's
almost like a it's almost like a belief
factor. It's like if you can if you
could imagine the universe as this giant
bubble of love, why are why are you
privileging or saying that you could
only get information from this half of
the universe? but not this half of the
universe or this little area that's
right in front of you. It's like it's
all included in the bubble.
>> You're just going to a different place
in the bubble.
>> So, I think it I think if it changes
anything, it would change your
perspective
or belief that you're connected to
something that previously you didn't
know you were because you were having a
condition like I can't love that.
>> Right. Yeah. I'm just now realizing that
that's the uh it's the oneness that you
measure in quantum physics, but it's
also that oneness you feel
unconditionally through this like love,
right? So that that oneness, that
feeling of like, oh, we're all one and
this like loveydvey like sort of thing.
But that's also what scientists uh you
know and physicists observe
>> when they're looking at the quantum
vacuum or you know the zero point like
it's like oh this is all one.
>> This is all one.
>> It's all one. And that's, you know, also
what love is.
>> Yeah. And so if you can if it if it can
shift your perspective because you're
viscerally in that state,
>> then any concerns you had about like,
well, I just really can't do this go
away. It's like bursting through that
ceiling in that dream,
>> right?
>> It's like there is no ceiling,
>> right? There's no spoon. [laughter] Um,
>> and but there is a slug and he's got
another question.
>> Okay.
And shout out to everybody who's asked a
question. You know, so many questions
were amazing. I can only choose so many,
but Slug had multiple good questions, so
we chose two.
What target traits produce the strongest
signal? Emotion, novelty, or physical
contrast?
>> I think this is a UC Santa Cruz person.
Um, I wonder if I know this person. What
target traits produce the strongest
signal, emotion, novelty, or physical
contrast?
>> Because Ed May would say contrast,
right? That would be like um like as
soon as something has entropy or or uh a
high entropy would yield like a a more
accurate uh reading of a target.
>> Uh I would say none of those things.
Yeah, I I get what Ed May would say, but
I I guess I disagree. What I've found is
novelty comes the closest.
>> Okay.
>> Um but it would be what I've tested is
interestingness.
>> H
>> like how interesting is the target? Like
psychic attention is just like non-
psychic attention.
>> But would that be subjective?
>> Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. I didn't test it subjectively.
Like there I what I did was I had a
bunch of the targets and had a bunch of
people on MTurk just these are just
human raiders rate them according to
their interestingness and then I average
the scores.
>> Oh interesting.
>> And then I could show that the ones that
were like off that got the wrong target
it was because the opposite target that
wasn't the target was actually more
interesting.
>> And what is interesting based on?
>> Yeah. So interesting what I said in the
definition this is just a human judgment
call. Sure. What I said in the
definition is what seems most
intriguing, which of these targets seem
mo most intriguing and then just all the
different pair-wise combinations, right?
And so you're always trying to define
the term with some other term that's
similar to it. So basically that's how
they responded and there was this
situation and I replicated this twice
where if some target is more interesting
and you you're more likely to get it
correct and if it's if it's a target
pair like a dummy target and a real
target the d if the dummy target is more
interesting you're more likely to get
the original target wrong. So it's very
much like waking daily perception. If
something is very interesting in a
memory task and you're not a trained,
you know, memory athlete, you're gonna,
if I say, listen to these words and
remember them, church, triangle,
albatross, and cheese, you're more
likely to remember albatross
because it's the most unusual word.
>> So, the same thing just happens in the
psychic world,
>> right? even something a little more
appealing,
you know, aesthetically even even
>> but it has to have some kind of meaning
like there like when I've used pictures
that are just like I don't know AI or
>> but if you if you have like a if you're
a big rock fanatic and you collect rocks
like to me a rock is mundane but to you
>> a rock is really intriguing
>> and I've seen that with when I used to
train remote viewing I would see that
and I run a team called um intuitive
forecasting and and then I stopped
running the team and I gave that over to
the rest of the team but I'm on the team
and the people who are like we have a
guy who's a computer scientist who does
cyber security. So his remote viewings
are very much focused on the technical
aspect of whatever we're looking at.
Then we have someone who's an artist and
her remote viewings are really focused
on the aesthetic aspects. And so
whatever in fact one guy I was when I
was training he was an engineer and if
the target was a person he'd be like I
got nothing.
>> Okay. But if the target was like
>> a building,
>> a building, he'd be like, "Oh, he's got
it's got this cool thing and then what's
this thing over here?" Really?
>> Yeah. So, it's like what your interest
is,
>> what your expertise is. Yeah.
>> Ah, that's really good. That's uh it's
really interesting to think about.
>> Wow. Yeah. Because I I always had it
pegged like, "Oh, it's got to be
contrast." Like, it's got to be
contrast. Like, in my head, I was
>> That's a visual feature, but many many
many people aren't visual remote
viewers,
>> right? But only because like our brains
are hardwired to recognize uh change,
right? So like you know like the
Gansfeld effect, if like if I hear or
see light or or hear a certain sound
after a while, it's not going to hear
it. Like you walk into a room and you'll
smell
>> something foul. But if you're in that
room, you won't smell it.
>> But when you're doing a remote viewing,
you're making your own contrast by
showing up like like it's like all of a
sudden I was not doing a remote viewing
and now I'm doing a remote viewing. To
me, that's already contrast.
>> But like if you had like a remote
viewing where the target was, you know,
um something mutable or something, you
know, changing or or
>> this is the entropic thing about this is
where my head was at too. I was like, it
would make sense that my brain like a
moth to a flame would be a little more
open to noticing change than it would to
like a mundane bush or
>> also more interesting. So, it's really
hard to separate those.
>> That's right. That's what I'm realizing
now. Oh yeah, we might be talking about
one and the same thing here.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So, more work needs to be
done. There is a database that um I've
been making with uh and mostly I'm just
along for the ride on this with Damon
Abraham and Helani WAB and some other
folks um of something like a thousand
images that we that could be really good
remote viewing targets and we rate them
on all these dimensions and so I think
that work can be done now.
>> Amazing.
>> Um but it has to be done. I'm very
excited. I'm very excited for you. I'm
very excited for the future of of um you
know, looking into the whole SAI
phenomena. You know, you just came you
and this is something we didn't even
touch on, but you just came back from
SCU as well like this
>> scientific coalition for UIP studies.
Yeah.
>> Yeah. How was that briefly?
>> Oh, amazing. [laughter] You know, it's a
group of scientists and engineers mostly
who are trying to figure out what can we
learn about UAP and what's the deal with
NHI. And my favorite part of it is this
year I say the same thing whenever I go
which is you guys we have to study
consciousness like we can't just look at
race cars in the sky. Um and this year
they're like okay you're right we've got
to study consciousness. That made me
feel really good. I wasn't the only
person saying it.
>> Yeah.
>> But I think if you don't understand
that there's a relationship between the
human mind and mind itself as a
universal thing and UAP. you haven't
understood the phenomena. Like the these
are not just race cars in the sky.
There's clearly there's telepathy going
on with every person who talks about
abduction experiences. There's this um
psionic thing going on with uh intention
intentionality.
Now you see me now you don't. There's
this trickster phenomenon
>> time phenomenon.
>> There's a time phenomenon which is can
be per human perceptual time and also
physical time. And so
this this has to be part of the story.
And I know that we're staying away from
it, you know, at a cultural level
because it's much easier to say, "Oh,
look at race cars in the sky." But like
that is the big taboo and we've got to
walk towards it with our eyes open.
>> That's what I think. So that was my
favorite part of it.
>> Yeah, I would agree with that. I think
um who is the um Wilbur Smith? the
Wilbur Smith documents.
>> I don't know those.
>> 1950 he was the
>> I think the minister of transport if I'm
not mistaken in Canada here and in 1950
there is a um a declassified document
after he came back from a trip to the
United States where he said that he met
with officials and they're taking the
flying saucer uh things very seriously
over there. and he goes uh he even says
um Vanavar Bush put together uh a team
to look into this stuff you know which
is very interesting and then and this is
a this is an official document it's not
contested this is a document that was
you know written by him and then it says
he's got this list of like three things
or whatever and he goes number one
flying saucers are real period yeah
>> number two uh he says something else and
number three he goes and the phenomenon
on is mental.
>> Yes.
>> And he says this.
>> Yes.
>> And then right after that is where we
start getting into MK Ultra. We start
getting into and it happened right here
at at you know McGill.
>> Well and MK Ultra for kids which is like
Sorate. Yep.
>> Yep. And at McGill is where they did a
lot of those studies.
>> Scary acid studies.
>> Exactly. So I mean you have this
connection of this official in Canada
being like oh they already know that
it's mental. Yeah. that there is a
>> that was back in 1950 and it feels like
disclosure is just at like here are some
videos and some audio of
>> but doesn't that feel like by design?
>> Yes, that's what I'm saying. It's just
like
>> where they're like no no it is just race
cars.
>> It is just race cars
>> please.
>> Yes. Please just
>> please just race cars. Do not look over
here.
>> Yes. But it's but it the funny part is
that to me as a as a person who's gifted
at pre-cognition and telepathy, remote
viewing, that kind of stuff, and I'm
sure you have this experience, too.
Secrets are not going to last too long.
>> I mean, I think that's what it's
defending, right? When you realize that
you can use your mind to get information
and that the classification doesn't make
a single difference. Yeah.
>> Then um
>> Yeah.
>> It changes the world.
>> Yeah. It's quite threatening.
>> Yeah. It's threatening
>> to certain people.
>> That's right. And so we have to work
towards a world in which we can still
protect ourselves um you know as people
continue to grow up and learn how to be
better humans with each other. We're
going to have to still protect ourselves
um in a world where secrets can be had.
It's so interesting because you see them
you see this dichotomy of them trying to
like no you know it's stay
this mind stuff is nothing don't worry
about that meanwhile you know they're
doing all the work at sic and all these
other places where they're like you know
>> but then they're actively working on AI
which will inevitably make everything
public anyways
>> well there will be no secrecy itself you
could argue is a method for creating a
mind that channel the informationational
substrate and I think it already does.
>> Yeah, I think we need to Yeah, we need
to be there before AI though.
>> Yeah, I mean that's the hope.
>> We'll see. Yeah, that'd be great.
>> Yeah,
>> we'll see. Can we do one more question?
I have an intuition.
>> Um there's I mean I could pick one.
>> Yeah,
>> we're all Yeah, sure. I'm I'm all out of
questions on my split flap, so I'll have
to go to the thread here.
>> Okay,
>> you have an intuition. You have like an
intuitive intuition that there's like a
question that is juicy. I just have a
feeling.
>> How about this? How about we try
something a little different that I've
never done before.
>> Excellent. Never done before. We should
do the oracle.
>> Oh yeah,
>> we'll do that after this question.
>> So here
I'll let you choose a question.
>> This is the there's 46 to choose from.
Stan B. Yesterday at 133, what causes
precognition of an event that doesn't
happen anymore after you acted upon the
precognition? Excellent. I love that.
So, now we're going to draw something.
>> Great.
>> Okay.
So,
how do we hold this up to a camera? I
>> I'll film it afterwards.
>> Okay, great. So, [laughter]
thank you. Um, so we usually think about
timelines and we usually think of when
we're not like in the movie every
everything all at once, we think about
one timeline, right? So here's time
going and here's event A and here's
event B and let's give them let's make
those events. What's event A?
>> Um, uh, a sporting event.
>> Okay, sporting event. And then event B
is a a missile launch. All right, that's
pretty hasty.
>> How [laughter] do we get there?
>> Yeah. Well, so at the sporting event,
you have a um pre-cognition. You see
someone kick a football and you go, "Oh,
you know, North Korea is going to do
another test of an ICBM." Like that
comes into your head, let's say. So, you
kick a football. Football
leads to my handwriting is so crappy.
leads to idea of hey North Korea ICBM
test [sighs]
and then lo and behold a day later the
missile launch happens. So this is day
one this is day two.
What if you happen to be like head of
you know the North Korea desk at CIA or
something and you can actually and you
know that you have really good
intuitions. So, at this football game,
you go, "Oh, actually, we better think
about this and let's foil that attempt.
Let's make that attempt to fail or make
it so they don't even launch it at all
or make it so that it's not public."
Then you do some preparations here on
day one because apparently you work with
a team that's like more enlightened than
any other team because they understand
that you have this gift. And then on day
two, there is no missile launch.
So we usually think about that scenario
as if this B the missile launch has that
did happen in North Korea feeds back to
day one A being at the sporting event
and gives you that information and now
you're on a new timeline where that
event B didn't happen. It's like it
allows you to select a better timeline.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. So this is a new timeline.
The way I like to think about it,
because I hate this,
is I I just think it's ugly. Uh, and I
and I think there's one I think there's
a oneformational
substrate of the universe that has
everything that will happen and has
happened.
>> Also, someone who's in science fiction.
It's lazy.
>> It's lazy. Yeah, it is lazy.
>> It's It's Avengers Endgame.
>> Yeah. It's every It's It's It's Back to
the Future.
>> Yeah. Exactly.
>> Yeah. So, I don't like it.
So instead, what I think is is more real
is theformational substrate
knows that there's going to be this
missile launch. It gives you this
information at the football game
and you prepare to destroy the missile.
All that was destroy the uh missile
launch so it doesn't happen. All that is
part of the informationational
substrate. The knowledge that there's
this intention for the missile launch.
the knowledge that if it gives you that
information at the football game that
you could foil that intention and the
knowledge that you will foil that
intention. So when we're thinking about
the benefit of the informationational
substrate for explaining this stuff,
this is exactly where that comes in
where it's no longer that you have to
work with the events in time that
actually make it up to physical
manifestation.
You're working with this substrate that
is actually aware. It's mind. This
universal mind is aware of what needs to
happen. So what it the problem with this
that people don't like is it ends up
suggesting that whatever happens was the
best possible outcome,
>> right? Yeah. The one that favors it,
>> right? And so then it's like, oh, so the
Holocaust was so 911 was the best
possible outcome. You know, that's like
pretty horrible thing to come up
against.
>> Yeah. But then stretch that out a
million years and there might be a
reason there that you're
>> not understanding of. Yeah. Exactly. So
then that's where love comes in.
>> So it's like if you have to love
>> So there's no changing it.
>> Well, there there's this this was not a
change, right? Your activity that made
this
>> the illusion of changing it. It's the
illusion of stepping in and doing the
right thing. But all in all, that's what
had to happen.
>> It's all coming up from the substrate.
>> Yeah. That's what happened anyway.
That's what was going to happen. That's
>> Yeah. And that's just how it had to
happen.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> That is how it happened. That's how it
happened. Yeah. There's no other way.
There's no other way.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Interesting. Okay.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Great question, Stan B.
>> Thanks, Stan B.
>> All right, Julia, I want to thank you so
much for these these wild conversations
that I'm glad I'm so glad I had, and I'm
sure that um you know, my brain is now
much fuller. My heart is more full as
well, and I have a lot to ponder and a
lot to think about. Um, but I I want to
ask you as well if there's anywhere, you
know, people can go to read up more
about perhaps your work or uh maybe some
of your literature, like where's the
best place that they can go?
>> Um, best place is the inspiracy.lo,
which is hard to spell, so it's
conveniently julia mossbridge.com.
[laughter]
And um, yeah, Juliabridge.com is really
has everything
>> has everything there.
>> Also has the oracle there.
>> Great. which I'm still gonna get you to
try.
>> Yes. [laughter] Should we try now?
>> Let's try now. So, wait before you go.
>> Okay.
>> Think what's your question gonna be?
Let's tell the audience.
>> Um, my question for whom? The universe.
>> Any for you? For the universe, whatever
comes into your head.
>> Does it have to be It doesn't have to be
like a yes or no question, right? It
could be just anything.
>> Oh, for sure. I mean, like, why not?
>> Yeah.
>> Um,
>> how will
>> Mhm.
>> the upcoming tour that I'm going to be
on,
um,
how will that affect my trajectory
within the next year for this channel?
>> Okay. How will the upcoming tour that
Chris is going to be on affect his
trajectory for this channel? Yeah, his
upcoming trajectory over the next year.
>> Exactly. How will that affect the
trajectory?
>> So, go to juliabridge.com and then click
on try the Oracle.
>> Okay, I'm going to screen cap here. So,
I have it
>> and actually it'll have you type it into
the space so you can
comosbridge.com.
>> Oh, just Julia.com. And then we go on
there and we find the Oracle. It
>> says try the Oracle.
>> Try the Oracle.
All right. Ask your question or offer an
intention.
>> So, you can type it in there if you're a
fast typist or you can just say hello.
Doesn't matter because we already know
what it is.
>> All right. Hello. And do I prefer the
answer is short,
>> medium, or long?
>> I think long.
>> Okay,
>> let's go. And then time jump me some
wisdom. Boom. Here we go. You notice the
hope and fear wave over her face exactly
like it does yours. In the future, your
trash will come up as a flower. Back to
my concern about this chapter title.
[laughter]
>> Wow,
>> that's interesting. I like the middle
line. In the future, your trash will
come up as a flower.
>> And then back to my concern.
>> Yeah,
>> it's kind of like a loop.
>> It is a loop. There's a loop here. Yeah.
What's the first line?
>> You notice the hope and fear wave over
her face exactly like it does yours.
>> Wow.
>> Yeah.
>> Wow.
>> Hope and fear.
>> Hope and fear.
Okay.
>> Okay.
>> I like this.
>> What is what is your interpretation of
that?
>> Um
>> with your question
>> I think well the first part is a little
introspective
>> to be like
>> you notice your hopes and fears which is
something I think even asking the
question of you know how is this going
to affect me? There is some implied hope
and fear there.
>> Well and she might be your sacred
feminine.
>> Yeah absolutely. And then in the future
your trash will come up as a flower
>> which is great. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So
perhaps the shows that are going to be
uh maybe the rockiest
>> or the you know the maybe I miss a
flight or something and all that's going
to lead to a better outcome.
>> Yeah.
>> So and that's something I'm I'm very
much aware of and I'm in favor of
because if I tell you I had a great time
in Paris, no one wants to hear that.
>> Yeah.
>> But if I tell you I got pickpocketed,
they're going to go what happened?
Right. So it's the worst outcome is
always a better story. Yeah.
>> Uh, and then back to my concern about
this chapter title. And the chapter
title I think is a question is is the
question I just asked. And so the
question being, you know, how is this?
So back to the question.
>> Back to the question.
>> Yeah. How do you feel? I think I got my
answer.
>> Wow.
>> Yeah. Nice. Great.
>> Okay. I'm excited about your tour.
>> Great. Oracle. Uh, thank you again,
Julia, for everything. Uh, go check it
out, julibr.com. if not just to ask the
Oracle a question, but uh also to follow
along with everything you're doing. Uh
this this will go up in a few weeks, so
it'll already be too late, but you'll be
at Syame as well. You'll be talking
there. Is there any other um public
appearance that people should know
about? I'll be in Australia
if anyone wants to go to Australia for
the parasychology dialogues in a couple
weeks. And then um let's see, I'm doing
a TED uh TEDex talk in Nashville for the
TED people with a group of uh two days
of uh talks about the sacred feminine.
>> Cool.
>> And I'll be talking about unconditional
love there. And then there's the
Synapse, which is a conference uh
primarily highlighting women as speakers
and but anyone can come in this space.
It's invite only. So, we ask people to
apply, but there's no fee. But, um, in
the consciousness, cognitive science,
AI, robotics space, and that is going to
be next spring. We originally had it
done in October. Now, it's going to be
next spring.
>> And then, of course, uh, telepathy tapes
documentary.
>> Yeah. January and February, some March,
sometime.
>> Great. That Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> All right. Well, I'd love to have you
back sometime. Perhaps in the diner one
day.
>> Oh, yeah. I want to do the diner. Oh,
can I add another thing that's coming
up?
>> Yes, of course.
>> There's going to be a really great
episode on telepathy tapes um featuring
our most recent work with non-speakers
and that'll be coming up soon.
>> Very exciting. I'm excited for you and
I'm excited for the whole space and uh
so glad to have you. Thank you so much.
>> Thank you. Thank you.