Latest / truthunedited / Joe Rogan Experience #2387 - Gregg Braden - PowerfulJRE

Transcript

Joe Rogan Experience #2387 - Gregg Braden - PowerfulJRE · truthunedited

• 0:01
  Speaker 1: Go Up Podcast, Check it out.
• 0:03
  Speaker 2: But Joe Willgan Experience Trained by Day, Joe.
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: Rogan Podcast by Night, All Day. Woman just missed the
• 0:13
  fabulous conversation about your hair. That's the best hair we talked.
• 0:16
  I would not wear headsets if are we recording right now? Yeah,
• 0:19
  we're going now.
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: So did you ever know Wayne Dyer?
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: No? I didn't know Wayne Dye. Do we do? We
• 0:24
  have Wayne Dyer on the podcast ever, like, way way,
• 0:27
  way way way back in the day.
• 0:30
  Speaker 2: I was. I was on the cruise with We had
• 0:33
  the same publisher, hey House as our publisher, and we
• 0:35
  were on a cruise just off Australia. Of course, the
• 0:38
  sun's out there, and Wayne came out and he's got
• 0:40
  a very shiny head, he said, Greg Braden, I said yeah.
• 0:44
  He said you see this? And I said yeah. He said,
• 0:47
  this is a solar panel for a sex machine. Okay,
• 0:51
  And and I couldn't. I couldn't match that, you know,
• 0:53
  So I said, I said, well you see this, I said,
• 0:56
  these are every one of these every one of these
• 0:59
  hairs is a highly advanced, finely tuned and tended a
• 1:04
  higher dimensional state spaces information. And so that was our
• 1:07
  joke about hair and no hair.
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: Imagine if like that's what made you enlightened, how much
• 1:12
  are you had and no one started to fall out?
• 1:13
  You got dumber, Like.
• 1:15
  Speaker 2: I said, they they every decade in my life. They're saying,
• 1:18
  if you have it this decade, you can keep it.
• 1:20
  So when he hit my seventies, they said, that's interesting.
• 1:22
  You got this this so you can probably keep it.
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: So oh yeah, if you have been oxidal, like if
• 1:26
  you got like really good at it today. And there's
• 1:28
  a bunch of different DHT inhibitors that are topical that
• 1:31
  they could use. My friend Derek from Derek Moore plates
• 1:34
  more dates. It's a website. He got a bunch of
• 1:37
  like protocols and have to save your hair, so people
• 1:40
  want to save their hair. But we were talking about
• 1:43
  Art Bell when we came in here, because there's a
• 1:44
  photograph of art on the wall that like was one
• 1:47
  of the most important things for me to put up.
• 1:49
  Like we talked about it. Jamie and I were like, oh,
• 1:51
  you got to get it. We got to get a
• 1:52
  metal picture of Art Bell because that was the guy man.
• 1:56
  When I was driving home from the comic store at
• 1:58
  like one o'clock in the morning, I was listening to
• 2:00
  AM Radio Coast to Coast with Art Bell from the
• 2:03
  Kingdom of NYE. It was my favorite. This is like
• 2:07
  all for me. It was kind of pre internet too,
• 2:10
  like you know, the Internet existed, but it wasn't the
• 2:13
  thing that it is now. There was no podcasts, no.
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: But you know, the crazy thing is the stuff that
• 2:19
  was on that program that was all fringe is what
• 2:22
  everybody's talking about every day lunch at lunch right.
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: Now Area fifty one. Bob Lazar totally mainstream.
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: You know, he was so kind to me. He had
• 2:31
  me on this program before I had my first book.
• 2:33
  I self published my first two books, and I was
• 2:36
  doing talks all over up and down the West Coast,
• 2:41
  up in the Vancouver and he had heard somebody in
• 2:43
  his shop had been one of those talks, and he
• 2:45
  invited me on no book and then he had me
• 2:49
  on a number of times after that, and so I
• 2:52
  was very honored to be on there. And you know,
• 2:55
  we talked about everything. Man, he could. That was the thing.
• 2:57
  You could talk about anything, anything you wanted to do.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: It was also like art was a show or you
• 3:03
  could get real information and you could also get complete
• 3:08
  horseshit and you had to be able to discern what
• 3:11
  is what. But Art treated everyone with equal respect, like
• 3:15
  you could call him up art, I'm a werewolf, like interesting,
• 3:18
  tell me more? Is never like bitch, You're not a
• 3:22
  were wolf. You're just mentally ill. You need to get
• 3:25
  some prozac or whatever they give you.
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: Well, you still you still got to be discerning today.
• 3:29
  You know, I think I say it's well.
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: Today you more so than ever because of AI and
• 3:33
  because of bots.
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: And you know what's going on, and it's important to
• 3:37
  have an open mind, but not a gaping mind. And
• 3:41
  and there.
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: Are a lot of unfortunate use of terminology.
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: But yes, I agree, Well you know part of the
• 3:48
  reason for that. And you know this, We we have
• 3:50
  a global audience. A lot of those people are very hurt, unresolved, hurt.
• 3:55
  They're right on the edge, very fragile personalities.
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that's true.
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: And what they hear on the radio can be interpreted
• 4:02
  in a million different ways. And it's you know, I
• 4:06
  think there's responsibility. It comes with saying things. If you're
• 4:10
  going to say it, make sure it's accurate.
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and your intention, like what are you trying to do?
• 4:15
  Like I'm never trying to hurt someone's feelings. If someone's listening,
• 4:19
  I want you to have a better life. I want
• 4:21
  your life to be better. You know, this is an
• 4:24
  interesting thing about, whether it's bots or whether it's you know,
• 4:28
  an actual human being talking about stuff. The way you
• 4:32
  approach life and the way that people around you approach
• 4:36
  life is very contagious. And if you're doing it in
• 4:39
  a very positive and a loving way, in a friendly
• 4:42
  way and a communal way, that's contagious. It's really good.
• 4:46
  It's good for everybody. But if you're bitter and shitty,
• 4:50
  it's bad for everybody. What Art was was like very
• 4:53
  friendly and you know, and fascinated by all these things.
• 4:58
  And he was a real pro, you know what I mean.
• 5:01
  It's just like so when I did his shows like
• 5:03
  well the Highlights of My Life and I got to
• 5:05
  do the internet version. I never got to do the
• 5:07
  radio version. So he was on the internet at the time.
• 5:10
  At the time, I don't think he was. Maybe he
• 5:12
  was on some radio stations, but mostly I think it
• 5:14
  was an internet thing. But I was like, yes, I'm
• 5:16
  on with our bell.
• 5:17
  Speaker 2: Mine was all my phone. It was all landlines.
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I was on my phone too. I didn't Yeah,
• 5:21
  I did it. From my house on the internet. You know,
• 5:24
  I think I did it, you know, with a headset
• 5:25
  or something, but I did.
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: Well, he paved the way and we're here today.
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: Well he made interesting subjects, you know, like I remember
• 5:32
  when they were talking about things like the face on
• 5:35
  Mars and you're like, what that sounds so cooky And
• 5:39
  then you see pictures you go, hey, man, what is that? Well,
• 5:42
  I don't I hear about that in school?
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well he had Richard Hogland on the night after
• 5:46
  night after night after night for weeks on end. Yeah,
• 5:49
  when that came out, And actually that face on Mars
• 5:52
  had a lot to do with my my career path.
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: Actually, So what is your take on all this, Because
• 5:58
  one of the things that happened was with the on Mars.
• 6:00
  It's the initial images were very grainy, but fascinating because
• 6:05
  it did kind of look like a face. But maybe
• 6:08
  even more remarkable because sometimes there's faces, like in the
• 6:11
  side of a rock, it looks like a face. More
• 6:13
  remarkable was the geometric pattern of the base of it.
• 6:18
  And so I kind of dismissed that when the second
• 6:22
  images came out. So this is the original image. This
• 6:24
  is the original image that freaked everybody out. They were like,
• 6:27
  oh my god, there's a face on Mars. And then
• 6:30
  they came up with these upgraded images and I was like, well,
• 6:33
  that's not a face, it's just weird shadows and it's
• 6:36
  probably just a mountain. But man, that's an odd.
• 6:39
  Speaker 2: Shape or that face has been doctored.
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: It could be true. But also then I looked at it,
• 6:44
  it was like that shape is interesting, like it almost
• 6:48
  looks unnatural. Then the new images from very close to side,
• 6:53
  don you that show a very clear square. This one's
• 6:57
  nuts because this one is somewhere in the neighborhood of
• 7:00
  between three it's plus three hundred meters, Like they don't
• 7:04
  know how much longer it is than three hundred meters,
• 7:07
  but it's the minimum size of this thing is three
• 7:09
  hundred meters across, and it's a full on square right angle,
• 7:15
  right angle, right, It's like, what the hell is that?
• 7:18
  Speaker 2: Well as picture As a geologist, I was fast in
• 7:22
  when Hogland first started talking about what was happening here?
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: What's up? Jamie? Oh that one? Yeah, yeah, the one
• 7:29
  that we bring up all the time, which one though,
• 7:32
  oh it don't matter on any of them from though, yeah,
• 7:35
  the non doctored one the one next to it, like there,
• 7:37
  look at that. That's absolutely graze.
• 7:40
  Speaker 2: So I don't know if you I'm very familiar with
• 7:42
  this image, I don't know. If you can see with
• 7:45
  your mind's eye, you're looking the lower left at the
• 7:47
  ninety degree angle. If you can see the rest of
• 7:50
  the ninety degree angle up at the top and over
• 7:52
  at the side, if you can trace out that is
• 7:54
  one massive right there. Now you can see it. Yeah,
• 7:57
  the computer has cleaned it up. Nature does not work
• 8:01
  in ninety degree angles. You're not going to get wind erosion.
• 8:04
  Wind is called aeolian erosion. Fluvial erosion is water erosion.
• 8:08
  You're not going to get ninety degree angles from wind
• 8:11
  or water. So one of the tenants in archaeology when
• 8:14
  you see ninety degree angles, there's an intentionality underlying that
• 8:18
  that structure. If it were a one off, you could
• 8:21
  say maybe it's a fluke, and it's not. And this
• 8:24
  is on Mars Jamie. I don't know if you can
• 8:26
  do this through freedom of information. NASA had to release
• 8:30
  all of the lunar images up through the Clementine Mission,
• 8:36
  and they didn't want to do that, and when they
• 8:39
  did release them, they end up pixeling out a whole
• 8:41
  bunch of stuff, which made it look even more obvious
• 8:45
  than it was. So you got to say, what is
• 8:48
  it on the lunar surface that we paid for with
• 8:51
  our tax dollars that we're not supposed to be seeing?
• 8:54
  And these were these were tower structures. Can you see
• 8:59
  the Clementine?
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: I don't know which are there any undoctored, unblurred versions
• 9:04
  of it that.
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: I haven't seen them in the public office. I haven't
• 9:07
  seen them in the public domain.
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: You've seen them privately.
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: No, what I'm saying is what through freem information, whether
• 9:14
  you know what they were forced to release, why in
• 9:18
  the world would they be pixelating the images that are
• 9:22
  on there that that actually make them look even even
• 9:25
  more obvious than they are. So, so what we're seeing,
• 9:27
  what Hoagland was talking about, what you're seeing on Mars
• 9:30
  is not happening in the vacuum. It's happening. We're seeing
• 9:32
  the same thing on the lunar surface to varying degrees.
• 9:35
  On Mars there were three sided, four sided, five sided
• 9:39
  pyramids with.
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: The one the upper right had corner. That's odd. I
• 9:43
  think it's the same thing. Yeah, yeah, that's very odd.
• 9:47
  Speaker 2: So here's here's the kicker. We're sending the Viking probes.
• 9:51
  Viking one, Viking two in the seventies went to Mars.
• 9:55
  Nineteen thousand images were captured from the orbiting UH part
• 10:00
  of the mission. The other craft landed on the surface,
• 10:04
  and I can just imagine being on the surface seeing this.
• 10:07
  It's like this, This thing's like a spider comes down
• 10:10
  the cloud of dust and this little tube pops up
• 10:14
  and some sticky dental floss stuff shoots out, and then
• 10:18
  they reel it in to collect dirt and microbes, and
• 10:20
  they reeled into broth because they're looking for evidence of
• 10:25
  life on Mars. And it's happening next to massive monuments
• 10:29
  and geometric structures that are now dated about fifty thousand
• 10:33
  years BP before present. So they're looking for microbes and
• 10:36
  signs of life next to the most massive signs of life.
• 10:40
  You know that you could imagine these.
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: You said they're dated to fifty thousand BC, the BPPP
• 10:47
  four present. Yeah, so how do they know that those were.
• 10:52
  Speaker 2: When the Sidonia mission, that's the Sidonia scientists are estimating
• 10:56
  fifty fifty thousand years and the same with the lunar
• 11:01
  I'm hesitating Sidonian.
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: How do they estimate that if they're using probes.
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: From that fact probes and I think geologically they're they're
• 11:09
  using its relative dating. You know, they're looking at strata
• 11:12
  and things like that. And from the lunar sites, you know,
• 11:15
  they brought back samples and yeah, i'm hesitanings. I don't
• 11:19
  know how deep you want to go with all this,
• 11:20
  but these well that you know, the samples that came
• 11:23
  back from the lunar surface had traces of of metals
• 11:28
  that do not occur naturally in nature. Naturally in nature.
• 11:31
  They are the product of you know, advanced machinery.
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: And that's what metals are.
• 11:39
  Speaker 2: These these were metals that came back when they brought
• 11:42
  back from the Apollo mission. And I think they brought
• 11:46
  back Oh I don't even remember the names. That's one
• 11:49
  Jamie can look up with the metals were that it
• 11:52
  came back and they don't know where those those metals.
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: So is this metals from Sidonia?
• 11:57
  Speaker 2: From this is from the lunar sites?
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: And the crew the structures on the moon, how old
• 12:03
  they think they're the same issue structures?
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: They're estimating fifty thousand vp. You know, there's a race
• 12:09
  for the Moon right now, and I'm fascinated by this.
• 12:13
  You know, there was a time only two nations on
• 12:16
  Earth had the money and the technology to go to
• 12:21
  the Moon. It was a former Soviet Union and former
• 12:24
  United States. Because neither one is the same country anymore,
• 12:27
  and both those countries have been so broke they haven't
• 12:30
  been able to do it. India and China are now
• 12:34
  sending the probes to the Moon. We were going the
• 12:37
  Moon during the Cold War, and it was a crazy time.
• 12:40
  Is actually a very civilized war. I mean, the governments
• 12:44
  were at war, but the scientists were still cooperating, and
• 12:48
  there was an agreement that we would not share publicly
• 12:52
  what was found on the lunar surface, and Russia did
• 12:54
  the same thing. China was never part of that agreement.
• 12:58
  So China has said when they like, and they're going
• 13:00
  to televise live what they find on the lunar surface
• 13:05
  to the people of the Earth. My sense, Joe, and
• 13:08
  this is this will lead into a whole conversation we're
• 13:11
  going to have here. I think they'll find the archaeological
• 13:16
  structures that we know are there, that we've seen in
• 13:18
  the photographs, the inscriptions on those on those structures, we're
• 13:23
  going to be able to read because there's a thinking
• 13:27
  that those structures are from ets from another time, but
• 13:32
  the evidence suggests they're from us, from a time in
• 13:35
  our past, a cycle of civilization where we did great
• 13:39
  and beautiful things by working together until we destroyed one
• 13:43
  another through war, and that we're repeating that cycle again.
• 13:47
  So when they send out.
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: Like drawing a lot of conclusions there is there are
• 13:49
  other possibilities for what happened in.
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: That Well, here's this is where I'm going with this.
• 13:53
  When they when they see what's on those temple walls,
• 13:55
  they're going to see inscriptions and languages that we already recognize,
• 13:59
  and that will be the smoking gun, like CuNi, because
• 14:06
  this is what the this is what the researchers who
• 14:13
  are working on these projects right now, and they're combining
• 14:19
  this with so many of what the ancient texts have
• 14:22
  always told us. And this is where, you know, it
• 14:24
  gets into a really kind of a sticky conversation because
• 14:30
  it depends on how you know, people interpret these things.
• 14:35
  I'm excited for it for this reason. This is obviously
• 14:38
  no ordinary time in the history of our world, and
• 14:41
  they're pushing for war. We're on the verge of global war.
• 14:45
  What would it mean if we found on the surface,
• 14:49
  on the lunar surface, evidence of us humans from another
• 14:53
  time leaving a message in our own languages, cuneiform, Sanskrit,
• 14:59
  those kinds of things. It could be one of the
• 15:01
  most unifying factors right when we're on the precipice of war.
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: I completely agree, but we have to make a lot
• 15:08
  of leaps in order for that to be real. Like,
• 15:11
  we haven't seen any writing, so why would they assume
• 15:13
  that there's a bunch of different kinds of writing?
• 15:15
  Speaker 2: And actually I think they have seen.
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: Who's that?
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: Well, when our Space program, I think you've had guests
• 15:25
  on they've talked about this in the past. I think
• 15:27
  when our space program was active, there were broadcasts from
• 15:34
  the lunar surface that were cut off, and astronauts had
• 15:39
  seen things that they were not allowed to see and
• 15:41
  not allowed to share.
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: That's what it hurt. It sounds fun, It sounds really fun.
• 15:45
  I want to believe that.
• 15:46
  Speaker 2: Well, and some of them are leaving this world now
• 15:49
  and on their you know, on their deathbed, they can't
• 15:52
  believe that this hasn't been made public already. So there
• 15:57
  have been you know, recordings and videos and things, and
• 16:00
  I think they're authentic.
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: Right, but this does it. They're like, we haven't got
• 16:03
  boots on the ground at Sidonia, right, So no, not
• 16:08
  well exactly, So how are they seeing these inscriptions? Are
• 16:12
  you saying these inscriptions are on the moon lunar surface?
• 16:14
  I'm okay, yeah, I was confused. So these astronauts are
• 16:19
  saying that on the surface of the Moon they saw writing.
• 16:23
  Speaker 2: They've seen structures, structures, massive structures.
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: But what about the writing there?
• 16:28
  Speaker 2: They there were reports that they had seen the writing,
• 16:35
  but we can't verify those. We can't verify those.
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: Okay, so this is just podthead talk. Well, you know, yes,
• 16:43
  kind of a little bit, a little bit, because we
• 16:46
  if there's no evidence at all, that is not even
• 16:49
  an interview with a guy who talks about when I
• 16:52
  was on the Moon, I saw writing.
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: Well, then this is where you start going into the
• 16:57
  ancient texts, okay, and the traditions that are relating our
• 17:04
  relationship to intelligences from from beyond this one. Yes, there's
• 17:08
  a lot of that, and there's there's a lot of that.
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: There's a lot of that in various religions too. It's
• 17:13
  very fascinating.
• 17:13
  Speaker 2: Well, this is this is what I think is important there.
• 17:15
  It is in religions, but I think you can break
• 17:17
  out their historical text and there's religious texts. So if
• 17:21
  you're reading the Bible, there's religion and history in the Bible.
• 17:25
  If you're looking at Sumerian, Acadian, Babylonian text from the
• 17:31
  Mesopotamian era, they're telling similar stories. And you've had guests
• 17:36
  on talking about this where the stories are similar, but
• 17:39
  the religion is not part of that. And so I
• 17:44
  think what we're doing, we're kind of beating around the
• 17:46
  bush to a deeper conversation here. And that's why I've
• 17:50
  hesitated a couple of times, because I just don't want
• 17:52
  us to, you know, to get so far down one
• 17:57
  side that, oh.
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: Don't worry about that. That's what this show is all.
• 18:01
  We should call the show rabbit holes because people are
• 18:05
  always in the middle of talking about one thing and
• 18:07
  they pivot it doesn't matter.
• 18:09
  Speaker 2: Well, I think this is all tied into disclosure and
• 18:11
  what's happening. The reluctance to have the full disclosure.
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: Right, We've talked about that multiple times. I'm sure were
• 18:17
  you in that documentary The Age of Disclosure? No, No,
• 18:22
  you've been in a lot of documentaries.
• 18:24
  Speaker 2: I have been in a lot. I've been in a
• 18:26
  lot and a lot of what I said was left
• 18:28
  on the cutting.
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: Room floor always.
• 18:30
  Speaker 2: And there's a couple of reasons for that. One thing
• 18:33
  I learned, Joe, and maybe you've learned this as well.
• 18:35
  If you're going to be in the documentary, ask if
• 18:38
  you are on the front end of the filming or
• 18:40
  the back end of the filming, what does that mean?
• 18:42
  Here's the reason. Are you one of the early interviews
• 18:45
  or are you one of the later interviews? Okay, and
• 18:47
  here here's the reason. They'll develop an arc in a storyline,
• 18:51
  and if you were early on, they're going to ask
• 18:54
  you questions to support that arc in that storyline. Five
• 18:57
  interviews down, somebody's going to come on and they're going
• 19:00
  to introduce something, and the producer going to say, oh,
• 19:03
  there's a new arc and new storyline, and now everything
• 19:05
  that you interviewed for may not be relevant in that
• 19:09
  conversation anymore.
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: So, well, I don't think you can control that, So.
• 19:15
  Speaker 2: You can ask you gu just asked me, say where
• 19:17
  am I in the shooting process? And if you're the
• 19:19
  first one, say, you know, maybe come back and interview me.
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah, this episode is brought to you by Happy Dad
• 19:26
  hard Seltzer. Most hard beverages over complicate everything. Happy Dad
• 19:31
  keeps it simple, low carbonation, gluten free and only one
• 19:34
  hundred calories in every can. Barbecues, golf rounds, hanging by
• 19:39
  the pool, chilling after work. Happy Dad is perfect for
• 19:43
  whatever you're up to. Everyone is drinking all these skinny
• 19:46
  cans loaded with sugar, but Happy Dad only has one
• 19:50
  gram of sugar in a normal can. You can grab
• 19:54
  a variety pack featuring lemon, lime, watermelon, pineapple, and wild cherry,
• 19:59
  and don't sleep on the grape. Collab with death Row Records.
• 20:03
  It's a fan favorite for a reason. Happy Dad is
• 20:06
  now available nationwide in the USA and Canada. Go to
• 20:11
  your local liquor store or visit happydad dot com. For
• 20:15
  a limited time, use the code Rogan to buy one
• 20:18
  Happy Dad trucker hat and get one free. Enjoy a
• 20:22
  cold Happy Dad. Must be twenty one plus. Please drink responsibly.
• 20:27
  Happy Dad, hart Seltzer and Tea malt alcohol, Orange County, California.
• 20:32
  So a little bit later on, is it your belief
• 20:35
  that there was a civilization on Mars that were us
• 20:38
  and that we migrated to Earth and then eventually populated Earth.
• 20:43
  Is that what you're thinking, or that we co existed
• 20:46
  in both places.
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: I think we did.
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: And it sounds so crazy to say, and yeah, yeah
• 20:56
  it does. It does. Well, you probably travel in different circles.
• 21:00
  But I mean to the rational, rational people, most people
• 21:02
  hear that and they go, what there are people on Mars.
• 21:04
  But as time goes on and more and more discoveries
• 21:08
  we find out just about the structures that are on
• 21:11
  Earth and how old they might be, and the actual
• 21:14
  age of Homo sapiens, like how old we might actually
• 21:17
  be where a lot like they found that skull in
• 21:20
  China the other day. That was they just have you
• 21:22
  seen this? It's a million year old Homo sapien skull.
• 21:25
  But apparently there's some debate about it. It's going they're
• 21:29
  going back and forth. At the very least, it's in
• 21:31
  the conversation of human beings possibly have existed at least
• 21:36
  in this form for a million years, which is kind
• 21:38
  of nuts.
• 21:39
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I.
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: Oh they found it at night.
• 21:43
  Speaker 3: Yeah, they found it in nineteen ninety what, Yeah.
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: What I follow the other day? No, I've read it
• 21:48
  on the beat. I know. I was going through the
• 21:49
  story yesterday.
• 21:50
  Speaker 3: What happened was some team reconstructed parts of that skull
• 21:55
  with new methods that are now available, and they suggest
• 22:00
  that it could say that it was I think it
• 22:02
  was actually one of those we've talked about, the big head,
• 22:03
  the long Gi.
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: It's one of those longer One's fascinating because that's a
• 22:08
  larger human being.
• 22:10
  Speaker 2: Was it Homo sapiens?
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: Yeah, well they're a branch from the Denisovans.
• 22:14
  Speaker 2: So this is this is the thing.
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: What is it called? I get confused.
• 22:21
  Speaker 3: I remember long Gi was the thing that they were
• 22:23
  saying this, that's it, that's the big headed one.
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: Uh.
• 22:28
  Speaker 2: I'm I'm skeptical about those because they find one fragment
• 22:33
  and there's a lot of interpretation that's going on there.
• 22:36
  The the consensus has been for a long time that
• 22:40
  we we appeared. I'm just gonna preface this by saying
• 22:44
  I'm a degree geologist. I believe in evolution. Evolution is
• 22:47
  a fact. I've seen it in the fossil record for plants, animals, insects.
• 22:52
  Darwin's theory of evolution breaks down when it comes to humans,
• 22:55
  and it breaks down for this reason. We now can
• 23:00
  do what used to sound like science fiction. If you
• 23:02
  ever saw the first Jurassic Park where they pulled the
• 23:05
  DNA out of the fossilized remains of ancient forms of
• 23:09
  life in the movie, they brought them back to life.
• 23:12
  To the best my knowledge, we haven't done that. What
• 23:14
  we have done is we can extract that DNA from
• 23:18
  the bone marrow of fossilized remains of beings that we
• 23:22
  used to believe were our ancestors. And what's happening is,
• 23:25
  and if this is a mind blower, we know that
• 23:27
  we didn't descend from Neanderthal. We shared the earth with them, certainly,
• 23:31
  and some people have some Neanderthal DNA because of that,
• 23:34
  but we did not descend from them, and we didn't
• 23:38
  descend from many of the other forms that you see
• 23:40
  on those traditional trees. You know, you've got modern humans
• 23:44
  here and all these lines connecting, but if you look
• 23:47
  close at the lines, most of them are broken lines, Joe,
• 23:49
  because there's no solid evidence. It's called inferred or speculative relationships.
• 23:56
  I've got a picture of it here if we want
• 23:59
  to see that. But but what they're showing is that
• 24:03
  we showed up about two hundred thousand years ago. Now
• 24:07
  there's a little evidence that may have been back as
• 24:09
  far as three hundred thousand. But the kicker is that
• 24:14
  we can now look at the DNA and reverse engineer
• 24:17
  and say what did it take to get where we are?
• 24:20
  And what scientists are now calling the smoking gun, and
• 24:24
  there's still a lot of controversy around this is human
• 24:27
  chromosome number two. Human chromosone number two, the second largest
• 24:32
  chromosome in every cell of the body. It's got about
• 24:35
  twelve hundred or so genes in that chromosome, and just
• 24:39
  one of them, gene TBR number one, is responsible for
• 24:44
  most of the brain that we have, for our neo cortex,
• 24:46
  so our humanness, our empathy, sympathy, compassion, love, our cognitive abilities,
• 24:54
  the mirror neurons, all these kinds of things are because
• 24:57
  that one gene. Where this gets really interesting is where
• 25:00
  did chromosome two come from? And scientists have the answer,
• 25:06
  but they don't like the answer, because chromosome two is
• 25:10
  the product of a fusion. Proceedings from National Academy of Sciences,
• 25:15
  the volume Genetics says this very clearly. We conclude that
• 25:20
  the origin of human chromosome two is the product of
• 25:24
  an ancestral fusion of telomere to telomere fusion of two
• 25:30
  pre existing chromosomes. That does not happen in nature. It
• 25:34
  can't happen in nature. So here's what they're saying. You
• 25:37
  got fully too, fully formed, fully functional chromosomes. And on
• 25:44
  the end or the telomeres that protect those chromosomes, when
• 25:48
  the cells divide, and that's why they're on the end,
• 25:53
  they take the hit. It's a trauma in a cell
• 25:55
  when those when those chromosomes are pulled apart, and some
• 25:59
  of the DNA does make it, so nature puts telomeres
• 26:03
  on the end to take the hit so the good
• 26:05
  DNA remains intact. And that's why it's on the ends
• 26:08
  human chromosome two. Those telemeres are right in the middle
• 26:11
  of the chromosome where they shouldn't be because those chromosomes
• 26:15
  were fused together about two hundred thousand years ago when
• 26:20
  we when we appeared. And if that was the only one,
• 26:24
  you could say, well, maybe it's a fluke chromosome number seven.
• 26:28
  I'm a musician when I'm not doing what I'm doing now,
• 26:31
  long before I was a researcher, and one of the
• 26:34
  things I always used to wonder about You know, we
• 26:37
  share ninety eight percent of our DNA with chimpanzees, but
• 26:41
  you don't hear chimpanzees sing. You know, you're never gonna
• 26:44
  hear chimpanzee saying leads up on stairway to heaven, And
• 26:48
  you ask, well, why not? I mean, ninety eight percent
• 26:50
  of the DNA is we share with them, But it's
• 26:53
  because of chromosome seven. And for about one hundred and
• 26:57
  seventy five million years, this chromosome was stable, and all primates,
• 27:02
  all of them, orangutang, guerrilla chimps, all the primates. All
• 27:07
  of a sudden there was this little, this little switch
• 27:10
  of a couple of genes that connected our tongue and
• 27:13
  our brain and our jaw, and we can sing, and
• 27:17
  we can have complex speech like no other form of life.
• 27:20
  It happened two hundred thousand years ago. What are the
• 27:22
  odds of that happening when chromosome two is fusing. So
• 27:29
  I've worked with scientists my whole life, both in academia
• 27:34
  and in the corporations. I was a problem solver for
• 27:37
  fortune five hundred companies through the late seventies, eighties, and nineties,
• 27:43
  and one of the things I've seen about scientists is
• 27:46
  fascinating is that there is one way of thinking that says,
• 27:52
  we take all the evidence and we force it into
• 27:55
  a pre existing model like all the new discoveries trying
• 27:59
  to force that in the Darwin's theory of evolution, or
• 28:03
  we allow the new evidence to lead to the story
• 28:06
  that it tells. And this is where science is stuck
• 28:09
  right now because the old theory, Darwin's theory of evolution,
• 28:12
  is in trouble, and it's the DNA is the reason
• 28:16
  it's in trouble. It's no longer superficial or you know,
• 28:19
  fossil evidence. I mean, the DNA is telling the story.
• 28:23
  And the new story suggests at the very least a
• 28:27
  scientist has to say, there's been some kind of intelligent intervention.
• 28:31
  And this is where science gets stuck because science says
• 28:34
  it's not equipped to talk about any kind of an
• 28:37
  intelligent intervention, but that ties in to everything that's happening now.
• 28:42
  You know, if we're going to talk about ancient civilizations,
• 28:45
  or if we're going to talk about we've been here before,
• 28:47
  are we going to talk about you know what it
• 28:51
  is that is the disclosure all of those kinds of things.
• 28:56
  So science is kind of at the crossroads right now.
• 28:59
  There there is something called the standard model, and that
• 29:04
  applies to evolution. And what the evidence suggests is that
• 29:08
  we are the product of an intelligent and an intentional
• 29:11
  act who or what that is. That's where it gets
• 29:16
  it can get sticky the universe. We've had physicists on here,
• 29:21
  and really good physicists, and some of them are not
• 29:24
  aware of some of the new information that's come out now.
• 29:27
  But when I was in school back in the fifties,
• 29:29
  sixties and seventies, I was taught that the universe is dead, inert,
• 29:35
  just cold, and we happen to be lucky biology, you know,
• 29:40
  that's kind of what they used to teach. Now physicists
• 29:44
  are suggesting universe is alive, it is intelligent, and it's conscious.
• 29:49
  And one of the reasons for this. And you can
• 29:50
  know the NASA website and you can look at some
• 29:53
  of these images the James Webb Space Telescope. They're showing
• 29:58
  galaxies that are in proximity of something that is dangerous
• 30:04
  to them, like an exploding you know whatever. And what
• 30:08
  they'll do is they'll create jets from the center both directions.
• 30:14
  These jets that actually move them out of the way.
• 30:16
  I talk about it. I've got a new book, and
• 30:18
  I talk about that in the new book. So it's
• 30:21
  documented in the book. They actually move them to a
• 30:25
  safer place. And you say, well, maybe that's a fluke,
• 30:28
  it's a one off and now, but they have found that,
• 30:31
  They've found that happens time and time again.
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: So space itself is conscious in.
• 30:36
  Speaker 2: Conscious Okay, conscious and intelligent, and those are two very
• 30:41
  different things, but that is a very different story. If
• 30:45
  our universe is alive and intelligent and conscious, and we're
• 30:49
  the product of an intentional act, we solve our problems, Joe,
• 30:55
  and we build our world based on the way we've
• 30:56
  been taught to think about ourselves. We use our resources,
• 31:00
  we apply our technology based on the way we've been
• 31:03
  taught to think about ourselves. And we have been taught
• 31:08
  that we are a flawed form of life, that we
• 31:14
  are powerless victims of the world around us. And because
• 31:17
  of that, this is going to lead into this whole conversation.
• 31:21
  Because of that, we need a savior, and that savior
• 31:24
  is being touted this technology. So now we are living
• 31:28
  at this time where we're being encouraged indoctrinated, coerced, mandated
• 31:34
  sometimes to embrace the technology outside of our bodies because
• 31:40
  we have been conditioned to believe that we are a broken,
• 31:44
  flawed form of life. And you're seeing this play out
• 31:47
  in the AI conversation. You're seeing it play out in
• 31:52
  what's called the transhuman movement, the intentional movement to replace
• 31:57
  our humanness with computer chips in the brain and the
• 32:00
  blood r if id chips under the skin. And it's
• 32:05
  all playing out right now, Joe. I mean, this can't
• 32:07
  go on for you know, another twenty years, because it's
• 32:11
  moving too fast. This is the generation right now. I'm
• 32:15
  very passionate about this. The experts are saying, unless we
• 32:18
  change our trajectory right now, we very probably are the
• 32:22
  last generation of pure humans that the world will ever
• 32:25
  know that by twenty thirty two, when you go to
• 32:28
  the supermarket or go to the airport, the people you
• 32:33
  talk to will be some hybrid, maybe some more and
• 32:36
  some less, but will have some kind of technology embedded
• 32:40
  into their bodies. Now, I was on the panel recently,
• 32:45
  and I was with a group of scientists and they said, well,
• 32:47
  what's wrong with that? You know, isn't that the next
• 32:50
  step isn't that our natural step in our evolution? And
• 32:55
  I said, no, it is not. And here's the reason.
• 32:59
  When we replace our natural biology with synthetics, our natural
• 33:05
  abilities begin to atrophy. Cells will let me just give
• 33:09
  a perfect example. We used to be taught when I
• 33:16
  was in school. I was taught that we're born into
• 33:19
  this world with a fixed number of brain cells. And
• 33:21
  every beer I drink in.
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: College, yeah I remember that.
• 33:24
  Speaker 2: All right, I'm going to lose some brain cells. Well,
• 33:26
  what I'm going to say next is not a reason
• 33:27
  to drink the beer. But what they found there's a
• 33:30
  part of the human brains, to hippocampus that is producing
• 33:33
  new brain cells until the last breath we take on
• 33:37
  this earth. But there's a ketch, and the ketch tells
• 33:41
  the story. If we do not use those new brain
• 33:45
  cells in a meaningful way, within about seven to ten days,
• 33:50
  the body says, oh, you didn't use it, so you
• 33:53
  must not need it, and those cells will atrophy and die.
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: That makes sense because I always feel dumber when I
• 33:58
  come back from vacation.
• 34:01
  Speaker 2: Are you drinking beer on the b one vacation?
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: Not this time? No tough times? Yeah, Well, in the
• 34:05
  octon it only takes one second to change everything. One punch,
• 34:09
  one choke, one shock, no one saw coming. And at
• 34:12
  UFC three twenty, Draftking Sportsbook, the official sports betting partner
• 34:16
  of the UFC, puts you right in the middle of
• 34:19
  the action. Uncle Ive versus Pereira, two headlines a stacked
• 34:24
  night of fights. New customers, This one is for you.
• 34:27
  Bet just five dollars and if your bet wins, you'll
• 34:30
  get paid out in two hundred dollars. Instantly download the
• 34:34
  Draftking Sportsbook app and use the code Rogan. That's code
• 34:37
  Rogan to turn five bucks into two hundred and bonus
• 34:41
  bets if your bet wins. In partnership with DraftKings, the
• 34:45
  Crown is yours.
• 34:46
  Speaker 4: Gambling problem called one eight hundred gambler in New York
• 34:49
  call eight seven seven eight hope and wire text hope
• 34:51
  and WY four six seven three six nine. In Connecticut,
• 34:54
  help is available for a problem gambling called eight eight
• 34:56
  eight seven eight nine seven seven seven seven, or visit CCPG.
• 35:00
  Please play responsibly on behalf of Boothill Casino in Resorting, Kansas.
• 35:04
  These may apply in Illinois twenty one and over. Agent
• 35:06
  eligibility varies by jurisdiction. Boyd and Ontario. Bet must win
• 35:10
  to receive reward minimum minus five hundred odds required. Bonus
• 35:13
  bets expires seven days after issuance. Four additional terms and
• 35:16
  responsible gaming resources see dkanng, dot Co, slash audio.
• 35:20
  Speaker 2: But that principle, so it's called use it or lose it.
• 35:24
  We've all heard that that principle applies to every system
• 35:27
  in the human body. It applies to our cognitive abilities,
• 35:30
  to our reproductive system. And when we replace our natural
• 35:34
  biology with these synthetics, this is exactly what's happening. And
• 35:39
  we've been doing this long enough. Virtual reality goggles, for example,
• 35:43
  they've been around long enough. Psychology Magazine has published article
• 35:48
  after article. If you take young kids with malleable brains,
• 35:52
  parents are busy, they want to entertain them, so they
• 35:55
  sit them on the floor, put a virtual VR goggle
• 35:57
  on that three or four hours a day and say, hey,
• 36:00
  so here's the kid. They're just sitting there like this,
• 36:03
  and they're seeing images that they would never see in
• 36:06
  their backyard, and colors and sounds and situations. But here's
• 36:12
  the thing, it's all being done for them. They are
• 36:15
  not using their imagination like you and I did when
• 36:18
  we were kids. They're not using their imaginations. So now
• 36:22
  what's happening is they're parts of their brain that are atrophying.
• 36:26
  So they are diminished cognitive abilities, diminish language skills, diminished
• 36:31
  communication skills. But listen to this. The visual cortex, which
• 36:35
  is what they're using to watch everything, is enlarged in
• 36:39
  the brain. The visual cortex gets bigger because that's what
• 36:45
  that's what they're doing now. Because of epigenetics, all of
• 36:49
  that can be reversed when the kids are put into
• 36:51
  a healthy environment. Go outside and play with your friends.
• 36:55
  You know, they're young enough that they can reverse that.
• 36:57
  I spend a lot of time with shamans in in
• 37:01
  the Yucatan and in Peru, Costa Rica, places like that,
• 37:06
  and they found the same thing. The shamans that maybe
• 37:09
  do you know five thousand Ayahuasca journeys because they're leading
• 37:16
  groups and every time the group does it, they do it,
• 37:18
  So you know they're doing that. Their visual cortexes are enlarged,
• 37:24
  but their other abilities are diminished. Now, if you're a
• 37:27
  shaman in the jungle, maybe that's no big deal. But
• 37:29
  if you're a software engineer in Silicon Valley writing code
• 37:34
  for nuclear triggers and on the weekends, you know, this
• 37:38
  is what you're doing every weekend chronically, it could be
• 37:41
  a problem.
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: Have they done studies on that where they've shown the
• 37:44
  declined ability or yes, cognitive function due to psychedelic us. Yes,
• 37:50
  they have any specific psychedelics.
• 37:53
  Speaker 2: Ayahuasca was one, and I hesitate because they're different, different
• 37:58
  kinds of ayahuasca different, that's called a brew, different kinds
• 38:01
  of a brew.
• 38:02
  Speaker 1: So is the idea that people are overdoing it, they're
• 38:04
  doing it too much?
• 38:05
  Speaker 2: Well, I want to be clear about this one off.
• 38:08
  I don't think there's any any problem if it's done therapeutically.
• 38:11
  I'll give you a perfect example. I was speaking at
• 38:15
  a facility. I was invited as a guest speaker to
• 38:18
  go with a cohort through seven day programs, and part
• 38:23
  of that program was ayahuasca. Part of it was breath work,
• 38:26
  part of it was body work. Part of it was
• 38:28
  natural raw food, you know, the whole gamut. And there
• 38:34
  was a woman and her husband who came and they
• 38:38
  were both healthy. They couldn't have a baby, they couldn't conceive.
• 38:41
  Her eggs were good, his sperm was good. The doctors
• 38:44
  couldn't figure it out and they said, there's something else
• 38:47
  going on. So they came to this program and the
• 38:52
  woman and one time she had a plant medicine experience,
• 38:58
  and in that experience, came to her and reached in
• 39:03
  and pulled her heart out and it was all black
• 39:06
  and had stuff all over it, and the being cleaned
• 39:08
  it off and put it back in did the same
• 39:10
  thing with the womb. And she had had she had
• 39:13
  been traumatized as a child, had been abused, had not
• 39:17
  resolved that apparently, you know, on a deep emotional level,
• 39:21
  and so there was a part of her that felt
• 39:23
  that she wasn't worthy to conceive, and it was being
• 39:26
  it was shown up that way, and in her plant
• 39:29
  medicine experience, this is what worked for her, and they
• 39:34
  conceived shortly. I think they conceived that week while they
• 39:36
  were there when they did the numbers backwards. Now, as
• 39:40
  a scientist, can you prove that or you can say
• 39:42
  there's a high correlation between the time that an individual
• 39:47
  has an experience like that and when you know when
• 39:50
  they successfully conceive. But that's a one off, and I
• 39:53
  don't therapeutically, I don't think there's anything It's not gonna
• 39:56
  be harmful went off. It's the chronic use, right, recreation,
• 40:00
  that's where.
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: We get well, it seems to me the people that
• 40:03
  I have encountered that use it maybe a little bit
• 40:06
  too much. They seem to have a loss of a
• 40:11
  perception of how other people see them. They they they
• 40:15
  get slippery, like the world gets slippery. They act weird
• 40:19
  and they don't know they're acting weird. And it seems
• 40:23
  like there's like a piece of the interface has been damaged.
• 40:28
  If that makes any sense.
• 40:29
  Speaker 2: It makes total sense. And I need no matter where
• 40:32
  we go in this conversation to start with, it's going
• 40:34
  to bring us back to the same place. And I
• 40:38
  can show you exactly where that slipperiness comes from in
• 40:41
  just a moment, Okay, when when we get there, because
• 40:45
  and I'll just I'll say it right now, there's a
• 40:47
  part of us that doesn't live inside the body, but
• 40:51
  that the body tunes to. And I'm using that from
• 40:57
  an engineering perspective, that the body tunes to through the
• 41:01
  antenna of neurons and DNA. And this is where it
• 41:07
  gets the fascinating conversation scientists. Now they's a segment of
• 41:13
  scientists are beginning to look at the human body as
• 41:16
  more than soft, sticky, wet, newy mushy, you know, cells
• 41:20
  and skin Joe. They're actually looking at us from an
• 41:23
  IT perspective, And this sounds crazy, but they're looking at
• 41:27
  the human body from the perspective of information passing through
• 41:34
  and communicating with the world around us. That we are
• 41:39
  such an advanced form of life. We're not primitive computer
• 41:45
  chips and wires and chemicals. We're more than that. We're
• 41:48
  neurons and sell membranes and ion potentials moving across cell walls,
• 41:55
  and the ability for us to self regulate it is
• 42:00
  now being called soft. We are a soft technology. The
• 42:04
  ability to do that is the core of all the
• 42:08
  ancient and cherished spiritual traditions in the mystery schools how
• 42:13
  we go about regulating this technology. So now let me
• 42:19
  just break that down a little bit. I mentioned during
• 42:22
  the Cold War as a very civilized war. I remembers
• 42:25
  the nineteen eighties I was working. I was civilian, working
• 42:31
  on a contract for the DoD and with a civilian
• 42:35
  security either yellow badge. It was not high it's secret clearance.
• 42:38
  It wasn't like top secret or anything. But we have
• 42:41
  access to research papers that were coming in from the
• 42:44
  Soviet Union. Even though we were at war on one level,
• 42:48
  the scientists were still cooperating, and the Soviets were the
• 42:51
  first that sent these diagrams of a human cell as
• 42:56
  a circuit diagram. Now this is a mind blower. I mean,
• 43:00
  it wasn't a metaphor. Literally, every human cells a gated circuit.
• 43:05
  It's got an input and output. It has transistor the
• 43:08
  equivalent of transistors and resistors and capacitors. Every cell produces
• 43:14
  about point zero seven volts of electrical potential. And you say, well,
• 43:19
  that's not very much, and I agree, and then you
• 43:21
  do the math. We got about fifty trillion cells in
• 43:24
  the body. Fifty trillion cells times point zero seven volts,
• 43:28
  it's about three and a half trillion volts of electrical
• 43:31
  potential in the human body. Every cell is the equivalent
• 43:35
  of a transistor, Every cells equivalent of a resistor of
• 43:39
  a capacitor. Where photon emitters, and there's a whole science
• 43:43
  now about reading the photon emissions from humans and where
• 43:47
  photon receivers. And we store information just like a computer chip,
• 43:51
  and this goes on blockchain technology. Our DNA stores information
• 43:58
  and the way that it's described is that it is secure,
• 44:03
  it's transparent, and it's immutable, and it's distributed. And those
• 44:07
  are exactly the terms being used for blockchain technology today,
• 44:12
  because blockchain technology in the world actually mirrors the technology
• 44:17
  of human DNA. We have as a record and you
• 44:22
  and I, every human body, we have a record of
• 44:24
  every successful genetic transaction for our species. It is transparent,
• 44:31
  it's immutable if you know how to look for it.
• 44:33
  It's not hidden, it's secure, and it's distributed across all
• 44:37
  the nodes that we call humans. This goes on and
• 44:40
  on and on. The point is that we are the
• 44:44
  only form of life that can consciously self regulate all
• 44:48
  of this technology and apply it to our healing, to
• 44:52
  our intuition, to our resilience to change, to any of
• 44:58
  these kinds of things. The ability to do that is
• 45:02
  the secret that has been hidden within the mystery schools,
• 45:08
  within the religions, and it is the reason for everything
• 45:15
  you're seeing happening in the world today. There's a concerted effort, Joe,
• 45:20
  to deny us our ability to express our humanness, and
• 45:25
  part of that effort is replacing our humanness with technology.
• 45:30
  So that's a big statement, and I know.
• 45:32
  Speaker 1: But that's fairly recent, right, the effort to stop people
• 45:36
  from expressing their human humanness, that's not recent.
• 45:41
  Speaker 2: Well, so now now we're going to get to the
• 45:44
  crux of it. Okay, So here's And I wasn't sure
• 45:47
  how we'd get into this. I lost my mom to
• 45:52
  COVID just a couple of years ago, and right before
• 45:56
  she died, she looked at me and she said, Greg,
• 45:59
  the world is going to hell in a handbasket. And
• 46:02
  I always got the go in the hell part, and
• 46:04
  I never knew exactly what the handbasket.
• 46:06
  Speaker 1: I never understood that phrase. Is that phrase?
• 46:09
  Speaker 2: I don't know, but I knew what she meant. And
• 46:11
  what she meant was that the world looks scary to her, Joe,
• 46:14
  and there's a lot of people. It looked like things
• 46:17
  were happening for no reason, for no apparent there was
• 46:21
  no parent structure. It looked like things are just popping
• 46:25
  off here and there out of the control. Looked crazy.
• 46:27
  And she said, you know, this isn't my world anymore. Well,
• 46:31
  we are in the middle of a process. The process
• 46:34
  has a beginning, it has an end. We're in it.
• 46:36
  The only way out of it is to go through it.
• 46:38
  And that's why I'm excited to have this conversation with you.
• 46:41
  The two parallel themes that are playing out on our
• 46:47
  world right now, and we can explore both of them.
• 46:51
  One there is a concerted effort for the first time
• 46:55
  in the history of our world to remake the stated
• 46:58
  intent to remake our world and to remake our bodies.
• 47:03
  Now we've never had the technology to do that, but
• 47:07
  we do now. So that the intent to remake the
• 47:10
  world and remake our bodies, that's one conversation. The other conversation,
• 47:15
  the best science of the modern world is showing us
• 47:18
  that we're not what we've been told. We're so much
• 47:20
  more than we've been led to believe. And we're about
• 47:23
  to give our humanness away to the technology before we
• 47:26
  even know what it means to be human if we
• 47:29
  remake our bodies. So this is and this is in
• 47:33
  this generation. This cannot drag on for five years, ten years,
• 47:39
  because all the tech is being pushed on us so quickly.
• 47:43
  I'm a systems thinker, and rather than get into the
• 47:46
  weeds of the Democrats and the Republicans and liberals and conservatives,
• 47:52
  and which is all important, and we can have that conversation.
• 47:55
  But there's something much much bigger that's playing out here,
• 47:59
  and that literally we're in a battle for our humanness,
• 48:03
  and if we don't claim our humanness, there are powers
• 48:07
  and forces that will stop at nothing to deny us
• 48:10
  our humanness. One of the reasons they're denying it is
• 48:14
  what we just said, because it's through our humanness that
• 48:17
  we have these extraordinary potentials that empower us. Is sovereign,
• 48:23
  critically thinking, self regulating human beings. And it's very difficult
• 48:30
  to play out the agendas that are proposed for the
• 48:34
  world upon populations that are sovereign, critically thinking, self regulating
• 48:40
  human beings.
• 48:41
  Speaker 1: So just like well, the problem seems to be power
• 48:43
  and control. That's the problem, and the only way to
• 48:46
  have power and control over people is to limit their
• 48:49
  ability to express themselves and then keep them at each
• 48:52
  other's throats. Well, that is those are two things that
• 48:56
  are happening all the time with social media. The people
• 48:59
  that matter edge social media are consistently trying to limit
• 49:03
  the reach of people that have voices or narratives that
• 49:07
  don't approve that they don't approve of, and ultimately what
• 49:12
  you're seeing in other countries is moving to digital IDs.
• 49:16
  This is just implemented in Europe. In the UK, you're
• 49:19
  seeing in a lot of places where you're going to
• 49:21
  have to need that to work and vote and travel,
• 49:24
  and it'll be even more of a constriction on your
• 49:27
  ability to express yourself, particularly when you think about the UK,
• 49:31
  which has had more than twelve thousand arrests for very
• 49:36
  mild social media posts.
• 49:37
  Speaker 2: Isn't that crazy? I can't believe that. I've been watching
• 49:40
  this stuff play.
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: Out fascinating, and the fact that our mainstream media is
• 49:46
  relatively silent on this is insane. You're seeing a complete
• 49:51
  total attack on one of the most fundamental principles of
• 49:56
  the Western world, which is your ability to express yourself
• 50:00
  and your ability to call out that you think that
• 50:03
  the policies that are being implemented in your country are destructive.
• 50:07
  People have always been able to do that. These people
• 50:09
  are not calling for violence, They're not They're being arrested
• 50:12
  for wild things. People are being arrested for liking posts,
• 50:16
  being arrest some people were investigated for viewing posts. Twelve
• 50:22
  thousand people arrested by the police in the UK, the
• 50:26
  same place that just implemented digital ID. I mean, this
• 50:29
  is an or well nightmare coming to life right in
• 50:32
  front of our face, and no one's flinching. No one
• 50:37
  in America is freaking out about what's happening in the
• 50:39
  UK at all. I mean, you get people online that
• 50:41
  are kind of freaked out by it, but they're way
• 50:43
  more freaked out by nonsensical things like whether or not
• 50:48
  what Jimmy Kimmel said in his monologue was offensive. They'll
• 50:52
  go to the ends of the earth to fight that.
• 50:55
  Speaker 2: Well, they're programmed, that's the programming.
• 50:57
  Speaker 1: Well, it's easy, that's a simple thing. And it doesn't
• 51:00
  freak out like if you could get Jimmy Kimmel canceled,
• 51:03
  fock him, if you could do that, Like you have
• 51:05
  some power, you have power, but you really don't if
• 51:09
  you look at what's going on like in the UK,
• 51:12
  what they're learning over there is that they are in
• 51:16
  a tyrannical government and it's slowly but surely it's got
• 51:20
  its back. It's got the hooks in, it's putting the
• 51:22
  rear naked choke in, it's got them locked up and
• 51:25
  they've got to do something about what.
• 51:26
  Speaker 2: What do you think that's happening?
• 51:28
  Speaker 1: Why? Because of what we talked about power, power and
• 51:31
  control and resources and a very limited amount of people
• 51:34
  are controlling a huge amount of people, a limited amount
• 51:37
  of people with fantastic access to resources and the ability
• 51:41
  for the first time in human history where you have
• 51:43
  individuals that are in charge of companies that are they
• 51:47
  can shift the entire narrative of the world. So they're
• 51:52
  doing it through these tech companies for the first time ever,
• 51:55
  totally unanticipated. Twenty years ago didn't exist.
• 51:58
  Speaker 2: So I'm saying for the first time that tech allows
• 52:01
  for the remaking of our humanness.
• 52:04
  Speaker 1: What it allows for new methods of control and resource extraction.
• 52:07
  And we found out that data itself is a fantastic
• 52:10
  resource and worth billions and billions of dollars. So some
• 52:13
  of the richest companies that have ever existed, they're data companies.
• 52:16
  Now that's kind of nuts, and that's like, we miss that.
• 52:20
  But this is all the same thing that happens with
• 52:23
  kings and with emperors. It's control. You got to limit
• 52:27
  the people's ability to rebel, limit their ability to gather resources,
• 52:32
  keep them at each other's throats ideologically, keep them fighting
• 52:36
  over the dumbest shit possible, including the color of their skin,
• 52:40
  fight over everything, what good gods you believe in? What
• 52:43
  foods you eat, what fucking computer you use, keep them
• 52:46
  fighting over everything, and then get social media bots to
• 52:50
  continue that fight going all day long. Meanwhile, closer and
• 52:54
  closer and closer to total control of the population, where
• 52:58
  they're even openly stating it, Hillary Clinton said in an interview,
• 53:02
  if we lose, if we can't control social media, we
• 53:07
  lose control. Like, yeah, you're not supposed to have control
• 53:11
  over other human beings. Yeah, you're gonna lose the thing
• 53:15
  you're not supposed to have. An elected official is supposed
• 53:17
  to be a representative for the people. You're supposed to
• 53:20
  be a person who's a public servant, where you go
• 53:23
  out and you do this incredibly moral and ethical and
• 53:27
  beautiful thing where you sacrifice your time for the betterment
• 53:31
  of your community and your society, instead of just a
• 53:34
  means of extracting fantastic wealth that is totally unprecedented and
• 53:39
  that shouldn't exist in the first place. You shouldn't be
• 53:41
  able to take that fucking job and then immediately go
• 53:45
  and start working for some fortune five hundred company making
• 53:48
  billions of dollars, Like that's crazy. If you're a government
• 53:52
  employee involved in any regulatory fashion, and then you go
• 53:56
  and work for the very industry you were regulating. Or
• 53:59
  if you're a person who runs for office and you
• 54:02
  get in office and then all of a sudden you're
• 54:04
  worth hundreds of millions of dollars when your salaries one
• 54:06
  hundred and seventy thousand dollars a year, it's real obvious
• 54:09
  what's going on. It's just wealth extraction. And the way
• 54:13
  to do that is with control. You have to have
• 54:16
  control over people, and you have to be able to
• 54:17
  censor them.
• 54:18
  Speaker 2: They're going to call that shut out everything. Yes, and
• 54:21
  everything you're talking about is part of a bigger picture.
• 54:24
  So how deep you want to go all the way
• 54:26
  to the bottom.
• 54:28
  Speaker 1: But do you think the bigger picture is natural? Like
• 54:31
  these are natural patterns that human beings follow when they
• 54:34
  get power and control over people, Because that does seem
• 54:37
  to be the case. It's just on a much grander scale.
• 54:40
  Speaker 2: Now, I think what you're talking about power and control,
• 54:44
  lust and greed. There are individuals that have a propensity
• 54:49
  for those things that are going to fall into those
• 54:52
  roles very easily. They're pawns. They don't even know that
• 54:56
  they are supporting something much.
• 54:58
  Speaker 1: Darker way you think is the source of this much
• 55:01
  darker thing.
• 55:01
  Speaker 2: Okay, so this will open the door to answering Sedonia
• 55:06
  and everything else that we've done. So we're not totally
• 55:10
  beating around the bush. We're going to bring this all together.
• 55:13
  I wasn't sure how deep you want to go with this, Joe,
• 55:15
  And what I'll say is, I'm going to acknowledge things
• 55:19
  we're talking about. For a lot of people, is a
• 55:20
  very different way of thinking, and it certainly is different
• 55:22
  from what I was conditioned. I was born and raised
• 55:25
  in northern Missouri, a rural community. My first degree is
• 55:30
  in geology and computer science. This a very different way
• 55:34
  of thinking, and it's where the evidence is leading us.
• 55:39
  What the our most ancient and cherished texts, whether you're
• 55:44
  talking about religion or or not religion, they say that
• 55:49
  we are born into an ancient struggle that began long
• 55:53
  before we ever got here. Uh and for lack of
• 55:57
  a better term, and this is where words. Words are
• 56:00
  powerful and they carry a lot of baggage. It's a
• 56:03
  struggle between good and evil, all right. We're born into
• 56:06
  the struggle between good and evil. It's not a religious struggle.
• 56:10
  When we talk about evil, I think it's important to
• 56:14
  quantify what that evil is and to do that, we
• 56:19
  have to talk about who we are. There's something inside
• 56:23
  of us, Joe, and this is where science is stuck.
• 56:26
  This is where science and spirituality come together in a
• 56:29
  beautiful way, and this is where language may fail me.
• 56:31
  So I'm going to do my best. There is something
• 56:33
  inside of us that is so rare and so precious
• 56:38
  and so ancient and sacred and powerful and beautiful that
• 56:42
  there are forces that have in history and are currently
• 56:47
  working to deny us access to this force. The force
• 56:54
  is the reason for the ancient texts, the spiritual traditions.
• 57:00
  And there's two ways that we can have this conversation.
• 57:04
  You can say we can do it from a biblical
• 57:07
  perspective and talk about angels and demons. We could do
• 57:10
  it from a high tech perspective and talk about advanced
• 57:13
  civilization from another world in another time, and you're talking
• 57:16
  about the same thing, exactly the same conversation. As to
• 57:21
  our origin. There was an intentional intervention that created us.
• 57:27
  Biblical traditions are giving us one perspective. The Mesopotamian texts
• 57:33
  are telling us that we are the product of the
• 57:37
  blood of a higher form of life. And now the
• 57:41
  archaeological sites are revealing that those what's reported in those
• 57:45
  Sumerian texts actually existed. I was a member back in
• 57:50
  the nineties.
• 57:51
  Speaker 1: Specifically that they're reporting those suit well archaeologically.
• 57:55
  Speaker 2: Well, let me say I was in the nineties. I
• 57:57
  was a member of an organization called b ARE Biblical
• 58:00
  Archaeology Review. And the idea is that you follow the
• 58:07
  instructions in the text, and you go someplace and you dig,
• 58:11
  and there is what the text is talking about from
• 58:13
  three thousand years ago. So they use that to try
• 58:16
  to validate the events, not the religiosity, but the events
• 58:21
  in the Mesopotamian texts. When we talk about the King's List,
• 58:25
  You've had guests on that talked about the King's List
• 58:30
  in Sumeria that talks it literally says when the kingship
• 58:35
  descended from the heavens to the earth, and then it
• 58:37
  gives the list of the kings, and then there was
• 58:40
  another flood and they evacuated and they came back and
• 58:43
  then they created humans and that it actually lines up
• 58:47
  date wise with the two hundred two hundred fifty thousand
• 58:50
  years of when we were created. But there's no religion involved.
• 58:55
  So two different languages are we talking about an advanced
• 58:59
  civilization and our relationship to them. A long time ago.
• 59:03
  We talked about angels and demons from a long time ago.
• 59:05
  Are we talking about beings with wings in the religious tradition?
• 59:12
  Or when you look at the Sumerian traditions, the kings
• 59:15
  all had wings as well. But they're telling the same story.
• 59:18
  And what the story is is that we are an
• 59:22
  intention were the product of an intentional act, and we
• 59:25
  were imbued with a force that was greater even than
• 59:29
  those who created us. And there has been an effort
• 59:31
  from that time to deny us that force.
• 59:34
  Speaker 1: Well, how do you know that our force is greater
• 59:36
  than those that created us?
• 59:37
  Speaker 2: I don't know this.
• 59:38
  Speaker 1: Where where are you getting that from?
• 59:39
  Speaker 2: That is from if you're familiar with the Gnostic texts?
• 59:43
  In the Gnostic texts, So the Dead Sea Scrolls were
• 59:48
  discovered in nineteen forty six forty seven the oldest unedited
• 59:52
  records of the Old Testament push pushed the date back
• 59:55
  a thousand years and forty five and forty six the
• 1:00:01
  oldest records of the New Testament and the texts that
• 1:00:05
  were excluded were discovered in the Little Village along the
• 1:00:08
  Nile in Egypt called nag Hamadi. It can I just
• 1:00:12
  tell it's a crazy story. There's not much firewood along
• 1:00:17
  the Nile in Egypt, and there was a woman who
• 1:00:23
  needed kindling to feed her family, to build the fires
• 1:00:26
  to feed her family and heat their home. And she
• 1:00:29
  told her son go find some kindling. And he was
• 1:00:31
  very resourceful, and no trees. So he found an old
• 1:00:33
  tomb and in the tomb were clay vases and he
• 1:00:37
  opened those vases and there were documents that were very
• 1:00:41
  dry and brittle and made great kindling. Oh no, And
• 1:00:44
  we don't know how many were lost before the authorities
• 1:00:47
  were noted, but right now they're thirteen bound.
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 1: They cooked a bunch of them, they burned, and they
• 1:00:53
  used them for fuel. Oh my god.
• 1:00:55
  Speaker 2: But so here's what's left. What's left. There were thirteen
• 1:01:02
  bound books representing over fifty texts. They were the oldest
• 1:01:06
  records of the New Testament, and they were the records
• 1:01:12
  that were excluded by the Catholic Church.
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 1: Is there any images of these books? Yeah, Jamie, can
• 1:01:18
  you find those?
• 1:01:18
  Speaker 2: Well, I've got him on my I brought this for you,
• 1:01:21
  all right, oh, Jim, Yeah, So there's there's the thirteen
• 1:01:27
  bound texts. So among these were things like the Gospel
• 1:01:31
  of Thomas, which is considered the second most heretical book
• 1:01:36
  UH in the nagh Hamadi Library. There's the Gospel of John,
• 1:01:40
  also called the Secret Book of John, also called the
• 1:01:42
  Apocryphon of John, which is considered the first most heretical book.
• 1:01:49
  There are books from gnostic women. Thunder Perfect Mind is
• 1:01:54
  a book by a Gnostic woman that's in there. The
• 1:01:56
  Gospel of James is in there. So these these and
• 1:01:59
  I'll be very very clearer if you had Wes Huff here,
• 1:02:02
  I know you've had before, and I think he's he's
• 1:02:04
  a brilliant scholar. He would say that these are not
• 1:02:07
  accepted because of they're not accepted by the church because
• 1:02:12
  of dating, and because of you know, there's a lot
• 1:02:15
  of reasons. But there's a lot of new research showing that, ah,
• 1:02:22
  that these are worthy of of exploring with the same
• 1:02:29
  validity that we give to the other text. The words
• 1:02:32
  to the their day of the late first early second
• 1:02:36
  century somewhere right around there, some some of them later.
• 1:02:41
  The the the Book of John, the Secret Book of John.
• 1:02:46
  What makes it so exceptional is that he believes, he
• 1:02:52
  said that it was dictated to him by Jesus of
• 1:02:56
  Nazareth after his crucifixion. It wasn't before, it came after.
• 1:03:02
  But the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas is
• 1:03:04
  one of the probably the most controversial. It's one hundred
• 1:03:06
  and fourteen sayings that were recorded by Thomas, and the
• 1:03:16
  book says did the miss Thomas was the name, And
• 1:03:20
  it's almost like it's different from all the other books
• 1:03:23
  in that it is each saying is a teaching unto itself,
• 1:03:29
  and what he is saying are Again I'm hesitating because
• 1:03:35
  we're just covering so much ground here. What Yeshua was
• 1:03:41
  his name. What he was teaching was so profound for
• 1:03:45
  his time. There were outer teachings and inner teachings. The
• 1:03:48
  outer teachings were for the masses, and it's primarily what
• 1:03:51
  you see in the gospels. The inner teachings were for
• 1:03:55
  those initiates that could really understand what it was he
• 1:03:58
  was saying. And that's what the Gospel of Thomis appears
• 1:04:01
  to be. It did come from a later time. I
• 1:04:04
  don't think it then validates that.
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 1: You know what it is that is being said in
• 1:04:10
  that what is being said that's so controversial there's one.
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 2: Hundred and fourteen sayings in there, but the bottom line,
• 1:04:14
  and this is when I think that is probably one
• 1:04:16
  of the most well known, where he says what you have,
• 1:04:21
  what you bring forth from within, you will save you,
• 1:04:23
  and what you don't bring forth from within you will
• 1:04:26
  destroy you. He's saying, there's a power inside of us
• 1:04:29
  that has to be expressed, and these texts are all
• 1:04:33
  about how we awaken that power. Okay, So the name
• 1:04:38
  I'm going to use a word and then i'll define it.
• 1:04:40
  The name that has given to that power traditionally is
• 1:04:42
  called divinity, but it has nothing to do with religion.
• 1:04:46
  So that association is made because there are schools of
• 1:04:49
  divinity that make that and they're great schools, they do
• 1:04:52
  great things. But the contemporary definition of divinity, I love this.
• 1:04:57
  The ability to transcend perceived limitations. And that's it. So
• 1:05:02
  the ability to transcend to become more than perceived. Joe,
• 1:05:07
  you and I, our listeners, we are living limits that
• 1:05:11
  probably aren't even real. We're living within limits that we
• 1:05:15
  have been indoctrinated to accept about ourselves. Divinity is our
• 1:05:20
  ability to become the best version of ourselves. Expressions of divinity, imagination,
• 1:05:27
  I mean, no other form of life can do what
• 1:05:29
  we do with imagination, and I want to talk about
• 1:05:31
  that in just a moment. It's more than just a
• 1:05:33
  picture in your mind, and an image in the mind
• 1:05:36
  is setting in the motion a cascade of chemical effects
• 1:05:40
  in the human body that literally change as we are
• 1:05:43
  changed in the presence of the right kind of imagination.
• 1:05:46
  And the books tell us how to do that. So imagination, creativity, innovation, empathy, sympathy, love, compassion, healing, forgiveness.
• 1:05:57
  These are expressions of human divinity. It's what sets us
• 1:06:00
  apart from all our forms of life. It makes us
• 1:06:04
  such powerful beings. The purpose of evil, and this might
• 1:06:09
  be the most important thing that we say today, because
• 1:06:13
  it's a nebulous concept good and evil until you give
• 1:06:17
  it a benchmark. The purpose of evil is to deny
• 1:06:21
  human divinity. The purpose of evil is to deny us
• 1:06:25
  our greatest expressions. Imagination, creativity, the ability to communicate and
• 1:06:30
  share our ideas, empathy, sympathy, self, healing, all of those things. So,
• 1:06:34
  in a very real sense, Joe, anything that denies those
• 1:06:39
  things is an expression of evil. So when we find
• 1:06:43
  that algorithms are denying us the ability to communicate our
• 1:06:47
  ideas from this perspective, that's an expression of evil. When
• 1:06:50
  we find we put something into our bodies that prevents
• 1:06:53
  us from healing our own bodies, that is an expression
• 1:06:56
  of evil. What the gnostic texts are saying is that
• 1:07:00
  we are in the process that has a beginning and
• 1:07:03
  an end, and the purpose of the process is to
• 1:07:07
  deny humankind, our own humanness that has been playing out
• 1:07:13
  over eons, and now the technology is allowing it to
• 1:07:17
  play out to a greater degree because things like AIS misused.
• 1:07:23
  I'm not anti AI, it's how it's used. Things like
• 1:07:27
  computer chips in the brain, computer brain interface, all these things.
• 1:07:31
  What they're doing, Joe, is they are denying our humanness.
• 1:07:36
  Use it or lose it if we're using technology in
• 1:07:41
  place of our imagination, for example. And the psychology journals
• 1:07:46
  are full of articles about this. People that chronically use artists, musicians.
• 1:07:52
  My wife is a voting member of the Grammys, and
• 1:07:55
  we just had this conversation. You've got musicians who go
• 1:08:01
  to chat GPT and say, hey, write me a song,
• 1:08:03
  and now put some music to that song. And now
• 1:08:05
  you enter with the Grammys and you are competing against
• 1:08:08
  a human who has labored thirty or so years to
• 1:08:12
  master their voice and an instrument. And you say, is
• 1:08:15
  that fair? Well, they're struggling with that right now. So
• 1:08:20
  these are all expressions of anything that denies our humanness.
• 1:08:28
  From that perspective, is an expression of evil. Who is
• 1:08:31
  doing that? That is what those texts are all about.
• 1:08:36
  That's what the text are talking to us about. Here's
• 1:08:39
  that interesting?
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 3: Ah, this is Gospel of Thomas one fourteen.
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 1: As how it ends, Simon Peters said to them, let
• 1:08:47
  Mary go away from us, for women are not worthy
• 1:08:49
  of life. Jesus said, look, I will draw her in
• 1:08:53
  so as to make her male, so that she too
• 1:08:56
  may become a living male spirit similar to you. I
• 1:09:00
  say to you, every woman who makes herself male will
• 1:09:03
  enter the kingdom of heaven.
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 2: Okay, so what they're talking, pull up I'm not sure
• 1:09:12
  why you chose that one. Can you pull up number?
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 3: Very well?
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 2: We can talk about it because he it's in code.
• 1:09:19
  He and he's talking about the marriage, the sacred marriage
• 1:09:22
  of masculine and feminine. And it's when you, he said,
• 1:09:26
  when you make the two to one and the inside
• 1:09:28
  like the outside, then you will say the mountain move,
• 1:09:30
  and the mountain will move. And what he's talking about
• 1:09:32
  is is honoring the masculine and the feminine. And that's
• 1:09:38
  more than just a metaphor. I mean, there's a whole
• 1:09:41
  the thing that goes with that. Can you bring up
• 1:09:43
  saying number seventy seventy sure or number ten?
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 1: Oh start seventy hmm, So seventy says Jesus says, if
• 1:09:57
  you bring it into being within you, then that which
• 1:10:01
  you have will save you. If you do not have
• 1:10:04
  it within you, then that which you do not have
• 1:10:07
  within you will kill you. Jesus says, I will destroy
• 1:10:11
  this house and no one will be able to build
• 1:10:13
  it again.
• 1:10:14
  Speaker 2: This is the thing he's in the Christian doctrine. We're
• 1:10:18
  led to believe that he was a peacemaker. And what
• 1:10:21
  it says very clearly in the Gospel of Thomas, he says,
• 1:10:24
  and if you go to the early.
• 1:10:26
  Speaker 3: So when I was looking it up this the Catholics
• 1:10:29
  say that some of this stuff Jesus did say, oh
• 1:10:33
  he said it, they love it. He did not say,
• 1:10:34
  and some of it's flat out and made up.
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 2: They have a problem with the dating, but they also
• 1:10:38
  have a problem it doesn't support the narrative that was
• 1:10:41
  this is what. So there were two councils. There was
• 1:10:44
  a Council of Carthage and the Council of Niciah, and
• 1:10:47
  this is where they excluded these documents, but they had
• 1:10:50
  been accepted prior to that, just like Enoch. You've had
• 1:10:55
  people in here talk about the Book of Enoch. Yeah,
• 1:10:57
  that was accepted before these as well. So what these are.
• 1:11:01
  They're inner teachings, not meant for the masses, based upon
• 1:11:06
  the concepts that he's sharing. And this is where he's saying,
• 1:11:09
  there is something inside of us and the rest of
• 1:11:13
  the gospels. This is what Philip and Thomas are talking about,
• 1:11:17
  is that we are imbued with this force given the
• 1:11:19
  no other form of life. It's a light, it is
• 1:11:23
  an intelligence. And when we are fully empowered in this intelligence,
• 1:11:32
  we are sovereign, critically thinking beings, and we are no
• 1:11:35
  longer susceptible too and vulnerable to the agendas and the
• 1:11:40
  ideas of others. And there are multiple agendas that are
• 1:11:43
  out there. So from this time and then when you
• 1:11:47
  go to the Sumerian text, they say the same thing.
• 1:11:49
  They're saying. When it beheld what it was they created,
• 1:11:54
  it had more light, more power than those that created it.
• 1:11:59
  Then you get into the whole conversation Genesis, you know
• 1:12:03
  where it says God created man. But that's a translation
• 1:12:08
  there because the original texts say Alohim and Aloheim is
• 1:12:14
  a plural. Some people will say it's not. There's exceptions
• 1:12:18
  to that, but it says Alohim said, let us create
• 1:12:24
  man in our image. So even if Alohim is not plural,
• 1:12:28
  us implies more than one God. So the point of
• 1:12:31
  all of this, and we can drill down into the
• 1:12:33
  weeds and all these but it appears that there was
• 1:12:36
  a collective of intelligence that is responsible for us. Okay,
• 1:12:44
  that's not science. That's the text. Now you look at
• 1:12:47
  the science. The DNA is telling us that two hundred
• 1:12:51
  thousand years ago there were mutations that cannot happen in
• 1:12:55
  nature that imbued us with the ability to communicate with
• 1:13:01
  one another and all of these things that we're talking about.
• 1:13:05
  And almost from the moment that we were imbued with
• 1:13:08
  these things, there was an attempt to deny us our power,
• 1:13:13
  and that attempt continues today. So I think a good
• 1:13:17
  case can be made. Everything you're seeing happen in the world,
• 1:13:19
  it's all important, the wars, the economies, all the conversation
• 1:13:26
  of climate. It's all important, and there's a level where
• 1:13:29
  it has become a distraction to keep us spun up
• 1:13:32
  and in fear, so that we because we're so close, Joe,
• 1:13:36
  We're so close as a species to awakening this fundamental
• 1:13:41
  force within us. The closer we get to that awakening,
• 1:13:46
  the more chaos you see in the world to keep
• 1:13:48
  us distracted. And I'll give you a purpocse.
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 1: What is causing this awakening?
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 2: I think consciousness is so here's Is this.
• 1:13:56
  Speaker 1: The battle that we have to fight? Though? Is this
• 1:13:58
  like because it seems like there's always a pull and
• 1:14:01
  a push, right.
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 2: I think it's it's a battle or a struggle, depending
• 1:14:06
  on what language you want to use. There's a deeper conversation,
• 1:14:11
  and I think we're going to get to this in
• 1:14:13
  a minute. But what I want to go back? I
• 1:14:15
  said I would I would elaborate on this. There's a
• 1:14:18
  part of us that doesn't live in our bodies. Science
• 1:14:21
  is struggling with this. But there's a scientific experiment. I've
• 1:14:24
  got it here, but if you can bring it up,
• 1:14:26
  let me just let me just tell you about it.
• 1:14:32
  Labeled each one and I've got a sheet here, but
• 1:14:38
  you'll be able to see when it's on there. So here,
• 1:14:40
  this is a mind blower. If you haven't heard this,
• 1:14:42
  and if you have, let me know. I don't want
• 1:14:44
  to be a redundant, but well tell everybody else that
• 1:14:46
  I have. Okay, So twenty twenty two, let me ask this. Okay,
• 1:14:50
  do you remember when you were a kid a game
• 1:14:52
  called pong Pong Pong was a key I think came
• 1:14:57
  out in seventy two and and it was so primitive, Joe.
• 1:15:01
  It's like a it's like a tennis game on the screen,
• 1:15:06
  but computers were new and we'd never seen anything like.
• 1:15:09
  I would go to work. I was in a secure
• 1:15:13
  area d O D working on the Peacekeeper missile project.
• 1:15:16
  After lunch, guys would come in on their CRT screens
• 1:15:20
  and they'd be mesmerized. They couldn't help it. They were
• 1:15:23
  mesmerized with this game of pongs. A little boom boom,
• 1:15:27
  boom boom, and that's all it was.
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 2: So the point is pong was pervasive in our culture.
• 1:15:33
  Everybody knew what it was, all right. Twenty twenty two,
• 1:15:37
  Signus did an experiment and I've got it. He can
• 1:15:39
  find it or I've got it done that. You can
• 1:15:41
  bring it up if you want to see it. Actually,
• 1:15:43
  Pong is on there if you bring up the pong file.
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 3: As part of the problem with the PowerPoint stuff. This
• 1:15:48
  kind of stuff happens. I don't think that's what you
• 1:15:49
  intended to show.
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 2: Is it. Well, you can see you can see part
• 1:15:52
  of it, but can you back up. It's to pack
• 1:15:56
  up a couple of slides and there's there is the there.
• 1:16:00
  It is right there, and you should be able to
• 1:16:01
  Is it going to animate it for us?
• 1:16:04
  Speaker 1: Well, I think most I know how works.
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 2: I'm trying to say.
• 1:16:09
  Speaker 3: The thing you were trying to get me the show,
• 1:16:10
  which is the next slide, is it's it's got an
• 1:16:12
  error in the well.
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 2: So here's what they did. Twenty twenty two. Scientists took neurons,
• 1:16:19
  but there was no human attached, and they put him
• 1:16:22
  into a petri dish to keep them alive, and they
• 1:16:26
  hooked up the neurons to a computer chip. So now
• 1:16:29
  you've got a biology technology interface, all right. So the
• 1:16:34
  neurons are hooked up to a chip. The chip was
• 1:16:38
  put into a computer that was loaded with Pong. The
• 1:16:42
  neurons began playing the game of pong. Even though there
• 1:16:47
  was no human attached to the neurons, and the longer
• 1:16:50
  they played, the better they got. They were actually learning
• 1:16:54
  how to play pong better. And now the scientists are
• 1:16:58
  struggling with a question, how does a neuron not attached
• 1:17:02
  to a human in a Petri dish know how to
• 1:17:05
  play pong? Where are the instructions? Okay, so I remember
• 1:17:10
  when I was a kid. Einstein had died and they
• 1:17:14
  had his brain thin sections in a University of Kansas
• 1:17:19
  because they wanted to see what made his brain different
• 1:17:21
  from everybody else, And it looked pretty much like everybody
• 1:17:25
  else is, with one exception. He had a whole lot
• 1:17:27
  of folds in his brain. So when you stretch those
• 1:17:31
  folds out, he had more surface area, he had more neurons.
• 1:17:36
  So they're thinking, but there was equals mc square wasn't
• 1:17:40
  in the brain, all right, So now they're looking at
• 1:17:42
  those neurons. They're saying, where's the instructions for pong? You know?
• 1:17:46
  And they're trying to figure out where it is or
• 1:17:48
  here's what this experiment is telling us. The instructions aren't
• 1:17:51
  in the neurons. The neurons are a biological antenna, a
• 1:17:56
  molecular antenna that tune to the place in the field
• 1:18:02
  where pong is pervasive. All right, the field. There was
• 1:18:06
  a time when the field was a metaphor, you know,
• 1:18:11
  metaphysical people, spiritual people. You say, oh yeah, you know,
• 1:18:14
  it's out in the field. July fourth of twenty twelve,
• 1:18:20
  the CERN super Conducting super Collider made an announcement that
• 1:18:25
  they had discovered a field that had been predicted by
• 1:18:29
  Peter Higgs, the physicist Peter Higgs. Well, they found the
• 1:18:33
  Higgs boson, and what that implied was that there was
• 1:18:36
  a field supporting the boson. And now it's accepted science.
• 1:18:39
  They say, oh, yeah, there's a field. So here's the thing.
• 1:18:43
  I was at the conference recently. Here's what scientists are doing.
• 1:18:46
  This is a whot. They're still saying this. They're saying, oh, yeah,
• 1:18:49
  there's a field out there that connects everything in their
• 1:18:52
  hands are doing this. The field's not out there, we're
• 1:18:56
  the field. Okay, fifty tree and cell. The human body,
• 1:19:01
  every one of those cells has about one hundred trillion
• 1:19:04
  atoms emerging from the field and collapsing into the field.
• 1:19:08
  Speaker 1: Right now.
• 1:19:09
  Speaker 2: You and I, we're constantly the atoms in our bodies
• 1:19:12
  are emerging and collapsing into that field. We are the field,
• 1:19:17
  and that is what makes us so powerful. This is
• 1:19:19
  why we can heal our bodies almost instantaneously when we
• 1:19:24
  know how to access this part of ourselves, because we
• 1:19:29
  hold the blueprint that tells those atoms how to express
• 1:19:36
  when they come into the body. So if you've got
• 1:19:39
  something you don't like in your body, what you do
• 1:19:41
  is you are using the gift of imagination to create
• 1:19:44
  a new blueprint for that adam to come into. And
• 1:19:46
  that sounds crazy to some people, and there's a lot
• 1:19:50
  of science that's struggling with us. But when you get
• 1:19:52
  into the quantum world, you get into the fact that
• 1:19:55
  the Higgs field exists, You get in to the fact
• 1:19:58
  that imagination in the mirror neurons of the human brain.
• 1:20:03
  Mirror neurons were only discovered in two thousand and four.
• 1:20:08
  And the thing about mirror neurons is they don't know
• 1:20:12
  the difference between watching and experience and having experience. So,
• 1:20:17
  for example, you can be on the couch on a
• 1:20:19
  Sunday afternoon watching the Joe Rogan Show with an exciting guest.
• 1:20:25
  You're just laying there, but your heart might be racing
• 1:20:28
  and your body's perspiring, your muscle, or maybe you're watching soccer,
• 1:20:32
  because your neurons don't know the difference between watching and
• 1:20:35
  having the experience. This is why porn is so addictive.
• 1:20:40
  Because the mirror neurons don't know the difference between having
• 1:20:45
  and witnessing the experience. They're going to kick up the
• 1:20:49
  same addictive chemicals, the same dopamine, the same levels of
• 1:20:52
  adrenaline watching the image that they are having the image.
• 1:20:56
  Here's where a power comes from, because the image can
• 1:21:00
  be imagined when we are able to hold an image
• 1:21:03
  of ourselves, fully enabled, fully capacitated, fully healed, fully awakened,
• 1:21:09
  hold that image. What we're actually doing is we're programming
• 1:21:12
  the body. And this is something Shamans know this, and
• 1:21:16
  I live in northern New Mexico. Our indigenous healers all
• 1:21:20
  know this. I spend a lot of time in Peru
• 1:21:22
  and the Andes, the Andean Peruvians thing these different language.
• 1:21:27
  So the point of all of this is we're not
• 1:21:30
  we've been told, and we're so much more than we've
• 1:21:32
  been led to believe. And it is the attempt to
• 1:21:35
  deny that power that is driving so much of what
• 1:21:40
  we're seeing happening in our world today.
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 1: And so the motivation of that attempt is evil. Yes,
• 1:21:48
  that that's an actual force that and this is giving.
• 1:21:51
  This is why they're enacting all these levels of control,
• 1:21:55
  and that's why they're suppressing people, releasing bots on the internet.
• 1:21:59
  It's literally an expression of evil.
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 2: And evil's not necessarily darkness. A lot of people confuse
• 1:22:05
  these Darkness is simply a polar force. We we live
• 1:22:09
  in a binary world. We've got to have light and
• 1:22:11
  dark plus and minus boys and girls. You know, we
• 1:22:13
  live in the Darkness is a passive polarity. Evil has
• 1:22:20
  an active, stated purpose, and the purpose of evil has
• 1:22:24
  always been, whether you're looking at those ancient texts or
• 1:22:26
  the Sumerian texts Mesopotamian texts, has always been to deny,
• 1:22:32
  to deny us the greatest expressions of our humanness. And
• 1:22:37
  now we live in the time. This is nowhere in
• 1:22:39
  our time in history. None of this is happening in
• 1:22:41
  the vacuum. We're barreling down the road toward this convergence
• 1:22:46
  of so many natural cycles and the date twenty thirty
• 1:22:51
  that has been identified by the United Nations, by the WEF,
• 1:22:54
  by a number of corporations by Ray Kurzweil. In terms
• 1:22:59
  of AI implemented, they're all looking at twenty thirty, and
• 1:23:02
  what you're seeing are the powers and the forces of
• 1:23:06
  the world jocking to be in the best position when
• 1:23:10
  this date is upon us. And I'm not saying this
• 1:23:14
  like January first, twenty thirty. But the United Nations, for example,
• 1:23:17
  they've got and again I don't know if I'm being
• 1:23:19
  redundant here, but they've got the un SDG twenty thirty,
• 1:23:23
  the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals they want implemented by
• 1:23:26
  the year twenty thirty. They're not getting much traction because
• 1:23:30
  they're not good ideas. The goals if you read them
• 1:23:34
  on the outside, Joe, they're deceptively beautiful. Who doesn't want
• 1:23:40
  food security, who doesn't want the end of poverty, who
• 1:23:43
  doesn't want the end of disease? Now you look at
• 1:23:46
  the fine print, how will they achieve those goals? And
• 1:23:51
  that's where it gets very concerning, right, they haven't had
• 1:23:54
  much traction because the idea, the way to get there
• 1:23:59
  is concerning. They're not good ideas. Now we look at
• 1:24:02
  World Economic Forum. I know you've had people talking about WEF.
• 1:24:05
  They've been around since nineteen seventy one. They meet once
• 1:24:10
  a year in Davos. You know, they talk about what
• 1:24:13
  they would like the world to look like, and they
• 1:24:16
  have every right to do that. Some of their ideas
• 1:24:18
  are very dystopian in my opinion, things like you will
• 1:24:22
  own nothing and be happy. You know, we've heard that,
• 1:24:25
  or the Great Reset is the term that they coined,
• 1:24:29
  or the Fourth Industrial Revolution. They haven't gotten much traction,
• 1:24:35
  but they recognize that their goals were similar to the UN.
• 1:24:38
  So in twenty nineteen these two organizations joined forces. They
• 1:24:43
  signed a formal document. So now the WEF ideas have
• 1:24:50
  traction through the UN implementation of these sustainable development goals,
• 1:24:56
  and the goals can be beautiful. I'm not against the
• 1:24:59
  goals at all. It's how we go about do we
• 1:25:02
  honor ourselves and do we honor our humanness as we
• 1:25:05
  achieve those goals. And they're very different ideas about what
• 1:25:09
  you know what it is? That means? I have a
• 1:25:11
  video clip w ef do you see that on there?
• 1:25:17
  Can we bring that video clip up? Because in one sentence,
• 1:25:22
  Klaus Schwab states the goal for the Fourth Industrial Revolution,
• 1:25:27
  and if he doesn't have I just wanted to hear
• 1:25:29
  it in his voice. He said, the goal is the
• 1:25:31
  merging of the natural world, the digital world, and the
• 1:25:37
  biological world, our biological identity. He said, the goal of
• 1:25:42
  this fourth Industrial Revolution is to merge all of those
• 1:25:46
  into this massive database run by AI. And here you
• 1:25:55
  can hear it should be the next it's at the end.
• 1:26:05
  What the FOSS evolution will lead to is a fusion
• 1:26:11
  of our physical, our digital, and all biological identities. Did
• 1:26:20
  you hear how he paused before he said biological. Yeah,
• 1:26:24
  did you catch that? So he's saying, Okay, the physical
• 1:26:27
  world's already tokenized. We already we have a digital ID
• 1:26:30
  for every elephant, all for us, the oceans, all of
• 1:26:34
  the energy resources. That's that's already tokenized. The digital world
• 1:26:39
  is already digital, So that's tokenized. Then there's a pause,
• 1:26:42
  he said, and of course our biological identities because he
• 1:26:46
  knows the implication of what he's saying. That's us and
• 1:26:50
  right now we are not fully implemented into that system.
• 1:26:55
  But that statement and the reason I wanted to share
• 1:26:57
  that that is what's driving everything you're seeing happening in
• 1:27:01
  the world. What all the the the implementation of the
• 1:27:05
  technology with that statement is driving the implementation of that technology,
• 1:27:09
  the AI. Uh, the way that we are being indoctrinated
• 1:27:16
  to accept it, first accept it in our lives, and
• 1:27:20
  then develop a dependency upon that AI. Ultimately there will
• 1:27:24
  be some kind of compliance, will be told we need
• 1:27:27
  to use the AI in order to you know, accomplish
• 1:27:31
  certain things, do our banking or you know, whatever it is.
• 1:27:34
  It's all being driven by AI. That sentence is a
• 1:27:36
  very very powerful sentence.
• 1:27:38
  Speaker 1: He's also couldn't have been delivered by someone who looks
• 1:27:41
  more like a villain in.
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 2: A movie or or sounds like one. Well, yeah, you're
• 1:27:46
  familiar with class swab.
• 1:27:47
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah. We have a photo of him in the
• 1:27:48
  bathroom where it was wearing that crazy Darth Vader outfit.
• 1:27:51
  Speaker 2: I saw that in the bathroom and it was dark
• 1:27:55
  in the bathroom.
• 1:27:57
  Speaker 1: Who the hell would dress like that? Who would say
• 1:27:58
  the things that that guy jamieson find that photo please?
• 1:28:01
  Who would say the things that that guy has said
• 1:28:04
  like that with that accent and dress this way?
• 1:28:07
  Speaker 2: Well, this is exactly well, this is this is why
• 1:28:09
  we're having this conversation. Joe. You know, I'm I'm advocating
• 1:28:13
  for our humanness. I believe we are like what what
• 1:28:19
  are you wearing?
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 1: Bro, Like, don't go out dressed like that. You talk
• 1:28:22
  like that. When you talk like that, you got to
• 1:28:24
  wear suits and you got to look real normal.
• 1:28:28
  Speaker 3: What are this?
• 1:28:28
  Speaker 2: What are the implements? What are the emblems on an.
• 1:28:30
  Speaker 3: Event where everyone was wearing that?
• 1:28:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah? Whatever, don't wear it. If you talk like Darth Vader,
• 1:28:35
  don't wear it.
• 1:28:37
  Speaker 2: But see, all of this is happening from people. This
• 1:28:40
  is happening from people that are afraid of our humanists.
• 1:28:45
  They don't know what it means to be human. They're
• 1:28:47
  afraid of dying. The trans humanists are afraid of dying,
• 1:28:49
  so they want to live forever.
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 1: Right, Well, they're also extremely wealthy and they want to
• 1:28:53
  control the masses and is.
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 2: Doing this again? Yeah, there is a fundamental to very ancient.
• 1:29:01
  If you don't know this, the world looks like it's
• 1:29:02
  spinning out of control for no reason when you begin,
• 1:29:05
  and you don't have to think about it every day,
• 1:29:07
  But when you look at the big picture, and you
• 1:29:09
  can see there's a fundamental struggle between if you want
• 1:29:12
  to use the language good and evil, it's a charge
• 1:29:15
  language and I know that, and that's the language that
• 1:29:18
  we're using. But the denial of our human potential. And
• 1:29:25
  so the best way what do we do about that
• 1:29:27
  is if the purpose of the evil is to deny
• 1:29:31
  our humanness and our divinity, we triumph by living the
• 1:29:35
  best version of ourselves. We triumph by imagining freely and
• 1:29:39
  sharing ideas and creating and don't be afraid to have
• 1:29:43
  empathy and sympathy and compassion. And now you have a benchmark,
• 1:29:48
  because when something comes up on social media or something
• 1:29:51
  we're asked to do something, we say, well, I don't
• 1:29:54
  know if this is a good thing or not. You
• 1:29:55
  ask yourself, does it affirm or does it deny my
• 1:29:58
  humanis deny my ability to imagine, to create, to love,
• 1:30:04
  to forgive, empathy, sympathy, compassion, to share ideas, deep intuition.
• 1:30:08
  Does the firm or deny those And then that'll tell
• 1:30:10
  you what you need to know. What you choose after
• 1:30:13
  that is up to the individual, but it won't be
• 1:30:15
  a blind choice. And I think this is this is
• 1:30:18
  up for us right now. Okay, So now, evil in
• 1:30:22
  technology and the algorithms of social media that are designed
• 1:30:27
  to break the social bonds that have always held us
• 1:30:31
  together as communities. And you know this, this began right
• 1:30:35
  around twenty eleven, I think was the Occupy movement, and
• 1:30:39
  it pitted the rich against the poor, ninety nine percent
• 1:30:41
  against one percent. That's a very real issue, and Joe,
• 1:30:45
  we could have used that and come to the table
• 1:30:49
  and had a conversation and a healing that would bring
• 1:30:53
  us closer together as a society. But it was weaponized
• 1:30:57
  to drive us apart. And then the same thing happened,
• 1:31:00
  men against women, Blacks against whites, Christians against Muslims, Jews
• 1:31:06
  against Muslims. Now it's male against female and the genders
• 1:31:09
  are being blurred. All of this by design, breaking the
• 1:31:14
  social bonds that hold families and communities and societies together,
• 1:31:18
  because we're more vulnerable when we lose these these bonds.
• 1:31:25
  And the algorithms that do that, I mean, I'm fast.
• 1:31:27
  As a computer scientist, I'm fascinated by this. We have
• 1:31:30
  what are called information silos. So say there's parents and
• 1:31:38
  their kids, and the mom goes to work, and you know,
• 1:31:42
  she goes on YouTube and queries a bunch of stuff,
• 1:31:46
  and you know what happens is the algorithm just starts
• 1:31:48
  feeding you. And it's everywhere You're feeding one perspective of
• 1:31:53
  what it is that you've just queried. Meanwhile, dad's work,
• 1:31:58
  he's doing the same thing. His algorithm has given him
• 1:32:01
  a separate perspective. The kids are doing the same thing,
• 1:32:03
  and now they meet at the family dinner table, and
• 1:32:05
  everybody believes that their story is the real story. It's
• 1:32:09
  the right it's the true story that breaks the social bonds.
• 1:32:13
  And we're seeing this happen. We're seeing this happen in
• 1:32:16
  our society. And you know, there is a it's following
• 1:32:20
  an algorithm that's very easy. Familiar with saw Alenski. I
• 1:32:23
  think you're probably yeah, rules for radicals. This is exactly
• 1:32:27
  what it's following. He said. You choose a target, you
• 1:32:30
  freeze that target, you isolate it, you personalize it, and
• 1:32:35
  you polarize it. And that's exactly what's being It's it's
• 1:32:38
  a simple algorithm, and that's exactly you think of all
• 1:32:41
  those things we just talked about. All of a sudden,
• 1:32:43
  it's all you see in the news. You're freezing it
• 1:32:46
  for everybody to see, you're personalizing it.
• 1:32:48
  Speaker 1: What is that?
• 1:32:49
  Speaker 2: How are you getting ripped off? And how's it hurting you?
• 1:32:51
  If you do that? And then and you polarize that,
• 1:32:55
  and it just drives people apart because they believe they're
• 1:32:59
  what there being shown. And so my invitation add.
• 1:33:02
  Speaker 1: That to the fact that people are addicted to social media,
• 1:33:04
  so they're addicted to being inundated by all this propaganda
• 1:33:08
  and all this all these various competing narratives. Yeah, you
• 1:33:12
  can't leave your phone alone. It's more and more addictive
• 1:33:15
  every time you pick it up. The newer ones are
• 1:33:17
  even better, the screens are even bigger. Now you've got
• 1:33:19
  a foldable one. It opens up to a tablet's in
• 1:33:21
  your pocket. And people are just full on addicted to
• 1:33:25
  what is a lot of negative information, far more than
• 1:33:28
  you would get just living your ordinary life.
• 1:33:30
  Speaker 2: You don't see much information. You don't see joyous information
• 1:33:35
  that brings us together very often, do you do you
• 1:33:37
  see anything?
• 1:33:37
  Speaker 1: Well, you can if you curate your feed. Well, but
• 1:33:42
  the problem is, if you spend any amount of time,
• 1:33:45
  you're gonna be you're gonna be impacted by some ideas
• 1:33:48
  that you don't like. You know, there's gonna be a
• 1:33:51
  lot of negativity. Like there's a lot of things that
• 1:33:54
  X shows me that I did not sign up for
• 1:33:57
  this person's page. I do not know. They just showed
• 1:34:00
  up in my feed. I do not follow them, but
• 1:34:02
  all of a sudden it appears and I read it
• 1:34:05
  and I'm like, oh, this is fucking horrible. This is
• 1:34:08
  what a terrible take. And you see people arguing and
• 1:34:10
  the worst, most evil way possible for celebrating people's deaths
• 1:34:15
  and hoping more people die, and you're like, oh, my god,
• 1:34:18
  I got to get out of here. That is evil
• 1:34:22
  if you I mean, I'm not saying that those human
• 1:34:24
  beings are evil. I think most of those human beings
• 1:34:26
  don't even know what they're doing exactly. They don't even
• 1:34:29
  think of it as real life. They think of it
• 1:34:30
  it's called shit posting. You know what shit posting is,
• 1:34:33
  And when people just post things for the lulls, They
• 1:34:36
  just posted to get reactions out of people. And there's
• 1:34:38
  a lot of that going on. There's a lot of
• 1:34:40
  people expressing their boredom with negativity, expressing their frustration with
• 1:34:44
  their station in life with negativity online and then feeding
• 1:34:48
  into it arguing with other people. Instead of addressing their
• 1:34:50
  own individual real life problems, they start looking at all
• 1:34:54
  these things that they're creating online. That's the primary focus,
• 1:34:57
  like throughout the day is these stupid ideological bas are
• 1:35:00
  having with people that might not even be real people.
• 1:35:03
  It is, and it's robbing what you're saying, it's robbing
• 1:35:08
  you of your opportunity to achieve a higher level of humanity.
• 1:35:11
  Speaker 2: Well, I think what you said is really important. That
• 1:35:13
  many people are naive because they have are participating, doesn't
• 1:35:19
  mean that they're evil people, right, And even that even goes.
• 1:35:22
  Speaker 1: For for most people, even people that do a lot
• 1:35:24
  of horrible acts.
• 1:35:25
  Speaker 2: I agree, because they're trapped. But see, then, this is
• 1:35:28
  why I said what I said earlier. We can tie
• 1:35:30
  into this people who have a propensity, they have a
• 1:35:36
  spiritual weakness. This is a This is a spiritual battle,
• 1:35:40
  not religious, but it's a deeply spiritual battle that's playing
• 1:35:44
  out on earth right now, and it's showing up in
• 1:35:46
  every facet of our lives, whether we want to think
• 1:35:49
  about it or not. People that have a propensity for
• 1:35:52
  greed because that's their spiritual weakness, or a propensity for
• 1:35:58
  power or control, they will fall into those roles they
• 1:36:02
  don't even know. And I've worked with people, and I've
• 1:36:04
  been in the organizations, and I've seen it happen. They're
• 1:36:07
  naive and many of them, some of them know exactly
• 1:36:10
  what they're doing. There are some that know exactly what
• 1:36:12
  they're doing, but most of them are very naive and
• 1:36:15
  they want to be relevant, and so they will follow
• 1:36:18
  the pack is what they will do. And so this
• 1:36:22
  is where I think you can recognize. This is where
• 1:36:24
  discernment comes in, to recognize it without judging it, because
• 1:36:31
  this is a spiritual battle. And at the end of
• 1:36:35
  the day, what matters, Joe is what do we become
• 1:36:42
  in the presence of what the world shows us? What
• 1:36:46
  do we allow the events of the world to make
• 1:36:49
  us into. Do we allow an election that didn't turn
• 1:36:53
  the way that we had wanted to reduce us to
• 1:36:57
  the most primal levels of hate and revealing and anger,
• 1:37:02
  something we never do in a million years, but we
• 1:37:04
  succumb to that.
• 1:37:06
  Speaker 3: Or do we.
• 1:37:10
  Speaker 2: Recognize what it is that has happened and doesn't mean
• 1:37:14
  we have to agree with it. But the question is
• 1:37:18
  do we make the decisions from our love of the
• 1:37:22
  families behind us and our friends and our community, or
• 1:37:27
  do we make our decisions from the fear of what
• 1:37:29
  we perceive as our enemy in front of us? And
• 1:37:32
  that happens every moment of every day I've been in
• 1:37:35
  I have been in a business meeting with someone who
• 1:37:38
  is pure evil, pure evil, And the first time it happened,
• 1:37:44
  it caught me off guard, and then I learned, and
• 1:37:47
  it will never happen. Actually, can you tell me what
• 1:37:50
  the meeting was.
• 1:37:52
  Speaker 1: I can't give me some details.
• 1:37:55
  Speaker 2: It was a business. It was in this industry that
• 1:37:58
  we're in right now, in the information industry, the publishing industry.
• 1:38:02
  And I was with an individual who I'm hesitating the
• 1:38:12
  words that I use here, I found myself saying things
• 1:38:16
  that I would never say in a million years, while
• 1:38:20
  that individual was looking at me and smiling because he
• 1:38:23
  was somehow inciting me to say those things. It was
• 1:38:31
  almost like, in some way there was a force that
• 1:38:36
  I had not learned to reckon with I have since learned.
• 1:38:40
  Were you young at the time, I was an adult.
• 1:38:43
  I was younger than I am now. Yeah, And and
• 1:38:47
  you know this is this comes up for all of
• 1:38:49
  us in different ways.
• 1:38:50
  Speaker 1: So, but you're not taking responsibility for the words that
• 1:38:53
  are coming out of your mouth.
• 1:38:54
  Speaker 2: I couldn't stop it. That was the weird thing.
• 1:38:56
  Speaker 1: I couldn't think that was anxiety.
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 2: I mean, I don't I don't know what it was.
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 1: Joe.
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 2: I heard him, I heard myself say I was dissociated.
• 1:39:03
  I heard myself saying them, and I didn't want to
• 1:39:06
  say him.
• 1:39:07
  Speaker 1: Couldn't you attribute that to a lot of psychological factors
• 1:39:10
  like anxiety and stress and and you know, the anticipation
• 1:39:14
  of this moment.
• 1:39:15
  Speaker 2: I could accept power structures. I could, except that he
• 1:39:18
  was looking right at me and he had this this smile.
• 1:39:22
  And when I saw him again, he tried to do
• 1:39:23
  the same thing again and it didn't work.
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 1: And I tried to do it. But see, this is
• 1:39:28
  my problem with this is taking personal responsibility for the
• 1:39:31
  words that are coming out of your mouth. I did right,
• 1:39:34
  But you're saying that this guy forced those words to
• 1:39:36
  coming out of you, and that that is where it
• 1:39:40
  gets a little slippery, because why do you why would
• 1:39:43
  you not just assume that it was your own anxiety,
• 1:39:46
  your own stress level. People behave out of pocket. Sometimes
• 1:39:49
  they think outside of their own character. Sometimes they talk
• 1:39:53
  out of character, and then they go, I don't even
• 1:39:55
  know why I was saying that. I'm sorry. You know
• 1:39:57
  that happens.
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 2: I agree. I agree with you one hundred percent, Joe,
• 1:39:59
  and that's there are other circumstances that I just can't.
• 1:40:04
  Speaker 1: Talk to it. But you think this person was actually
• 1:40:06
  an evil Oh, I know, yeah, I know that I know.
• 1:40:08
  Speaker 2: That this person was, and and other people have had
• 1:40:11
  similar experiences that continue to have similar experience.
• 1:40:16
  Speaker 1: Well, I don't doubt that there are legitimately actually fully
• 1:40:20
  evil people in the world, and I think there's a
• 1:40:22
  lot of evidence that those people have existed historically. When
• 1:40:25
  you think about some of the atrocities that people have
• 1:40:27
  done throughout history. Just I mean the obvious one is Hitler,
• 1:40:31
  but I mean you could go through history, you get
• 1:40:34
  Jenghis Khan. I mean you could. There's so many people
• 1:40:37
  that have done unbelievably evil things in this world.
• 1:40:40
  Speaker 2: When that happens, and it's happening to I mean, it's
• 1:40:42
  happening today right now. You don't have to look at
• 1:40:44
  look at history those Yep, that's a perfect example to
• 1:40:48
  do what is happening there When it comes human to
• 1:40:52
  human the only way that a human, one human can
• 1:40:55
  perpetrate that onto another is to sever the relationship to
• 1:41:00
  their divinity, all right, And we have the choice to
• 1:41:03
  do that. We can deny our divinity, we can have
• 1:41:08
  it taken from us by those who have power over us,
• 1:41:11
  or we can technology can deny our divinity, but someone
• 1:41:15
  who and as closely linked to the soul, which is
• 1:41:19
  not the spirit. So the soul is our localized you know,
• 1:41:23
  lifetime experience. When when we sever that relationship, that is
• 1:41:33
  what allows individual to carry out those kinds of atrocities,
• 1:41:37
  because an individual who is connected to their definity and
• 1:41:43
  their soul could never look at another human in the
• 1:41:46
  eye and hurt them the way that we know that
• 1:41:49
  it has happened in our lives, and that has it's
• 1:41:53
  happened throughout history. So my focus what I'm really passionate about,
• 1:42:00
  and it's not just like any old time in the history.
• 1:42:04
  We're on the prespice, Joe. I mean, the decisions are
• 1:42:06
  being made within the next couple of years as to
• 1:42:12
  whether or not we will give our humanness away to technology,
• 1:42:17
  or if we will allow the technology to serve us
• 1:42:19
  but not enslave us. AI is an example of that.
• 1:42:24
  The brain computer interfaces that are going on BCI. That's
• 1:42:27
  a big conversation going on right now. And if we
• 1:42:31
  get lost in the weeds of just AI or just
• 1:42:35
  the BCI, it's easy to do that, but I think
• 1:42:38
  it's important to keep there's a bigger picture. There's a struggle.
• 1:42:42
  There's an ancient struggle going on here, and it is
• 1:42:45
  because this is what's so powerful. It's because there's something
• 1:42:50
  inside of us that's worth the struggle. And our children
• 1:42:53
  are not being taught that. Our young kids are being
• 1:42:55
  told that they're a flawed form of life. They need
• 1:42:58
  something outside of our bodies. We need to text our.
• 1:43:00
  Speaker 1: Kids, what do you think that thing is? Do you
• 1:43:05
  think that's what the soul is?
• 1:43:06
  Speaker 2: I think it's our divinity is the ability to express.
• 1:43:12
  And this is going back to the Gnostic text. This
• 1:43:15
  is why they were heretical, because the Gnostic text said
• 1:43:19
  that we have a hotline to a higher realm that
• 1:43:25
  we don't have to go through in intermediary, That we
• 1:43:29
  are imbued with this spark or whatever language you want
• 1:43:33
  to use, given the no other form of life, and
• 1:43:37
  that when we awaken that that we become god like,
• 1:43:43
  not God, but god like. And this was the message
• 1:43:45
  of Yeshoa in the Gnostic texts, and that's the message
• 1:43:49
  that was denied and called heretical because if we are that,
• 1:43:57
  then we don't need an intermediary. So I think what
• 1:44:04
  we're looking at right now is do we love ourselves enough?
• 1:44:08
  Do we love ourselves enough to accept the gift of
• 1:44:11
  our humanness and what it means to be human and
• 1:44:14
  what it means to be divine, and not bring religion
• 1:44:19
  into the conversation, but maybe just find another word if
• 1:44:22
  if people aren't comfortable with that word. But I really
• 1:44:25
  want people to know, and especially you know, I do
• 1:44:28
  live events with these young kids, Joe, and they've been
• 1:44:32
  taught to worship technology. The computer chip is God. AI
• 1:44:36
  is God. And then I show them I've showed some studies.
• 1:44:44
  Salk Institute in Northern California did the study and they
• 1:44:47
  compared a human brain to a microprocessor. And you say, well,
• 1:44:53
  how can you make that comparison. I said that the
• 1:44:57
  microprocessor has about the same number of transistors that the
• 1:45:00
  human brain has. Of synapses in the brain. Interestingly, it's
• 1:45:04
  about the same number. And so they ran all these
• 1:45:07
  tests and what they found literally the human brain. Okay,
• 1:45:10
  the computer chip.
• 1:45:11
  Speaker 1: Is it fast? Yes?
• 1:45:12
  Speaker 2: Is it efficient? Yes? Is it scalable? You can only
• 1:45:17
  scale the chip. It will only run as fast as
• 1:45:20
  the physics that of the stuff it's made of will
• 1:45:23
  allow of the silicon or whatever it is, and then
• 1:45:26
  it tops out. The human brain. Is it fast, Yes,
• 1:45:31
  is efficient?
• 1:45:32
  Speaker 1: Yes?
• 1:45:32
  Speaker 2: Is it scalable? What is the top end of a
• 1:45:35
  human brain? And the answer is we don't know, because
• 1:45:38
  every time we push a human brain to what we
• 1:45:41
  think is the limit that we've been taught to accept,
• 1:45:44
  this is the beauty of our divinity. What we do
• 1:45:48
  is we morph and adapt and open up a whole
• 1:45:52
  new vista of potentials. Tibetan monks a perfect example of this.
• 1:45:58
  When I was in school again back fifties and sixties,
• 1:46:02
  we were taught that the human brain maxes out about
• 1:46:06
  forty hertz forty cycles per second. All the medical books, textbooks, everything,
• 1:46:12
  And then these Tibetan monks came along and they said, wow,
• 1:46:15
  if we do a certain kind of meditation, you know,
• 1:46:17
  we'll exceed that. And then they bumped, ay, doubled it.
• 1:46:19
  They went to eighty hertz, and the signs said, okay,
• 1:46:22
  so maybe we got it wrong once, but the human
• 1:46:25
  brain can't possibly do any more than that. And the
• 1:46:27
  monks said, well, you know, if we do a different
• 1:46:30
  kind of meditation and you know where this is going,
• 1:46:32
  then they push it up to one hundred herts. And
• 1:46:33
  then they had to come up with another brain state
• 1:46:36
  called gamma, and then they push it to one twenty
• 1:46:38
  and one thirty and one fifty and they two hundred
• 1:46:41
  cycles per second. Now they have to call it hyper gamma.
• 1:46:46
  But then they even went the other direction. Joe, this
• 1:46:48
  is a mind blower. We typically think when the human
• 1:46:53
  brain shows less than one cycle per second of processing,
• 1:46:58
  less than one hurts that person and is not there anymore.
• 1:47:01
  And the monks were able to consciously drive their brain
• 1:47:05
  state to zero point five hurts less than one. They're
• 1:47:10
  very conscious, they're very awake. They're just in a way
• 1:47:13
  different state of mind. And that opens the door to
• 1:47:17
  a lot of questions about you know, what does it
• 1:47:20
  mean when you see low brain activity? Is someone actually
• 1:47:24
  in a healing state? Or are they really not there?
• 1:47:27
  Or you know, I think it deserves more study. But
• 1:47:30
  the point of all of this, and there is a point,
• 1:47:34
  is that true nothing more than breath and focus, so
• 1:47:39
  nothing external, no chemicals, no machines. Those Tibetan monks demonstrated
• 1:47:46
  that we not only meet, but we are exceeding the
• 1:47:49
  brain capacity that we thought we had in the past.
• 1:47:52
  Speaker 1: The fascinating thing about them is you would have to
• 1:47:55
  do what they do to be able to understand how
• 1:47:57
  their brain functions. You would have to have meditated for
• 1:48:01
  thirty plus years in the same exact way to achieve
• 1:48:04
  these states that they achieve. Otherwise you're just guessing about
• 1:48:07
  what that's like.
• 1:48:08
  Speaker 2: I'd led groups in the Tibet from the from the
• 1:48:13
  mid nineties to the early two thousands, and we would
• 1:48:16
  go to twelve monasteries and two nunneries over twenty six
• 1:48:19
  days and we would sit with these people and through
• 1:48:22
  the translators, they would teach us. And you don't you
• 1:48:26
  could spend that kind of time. But the beauty is
• 1:48:28
  you don't have.
• 1:48:29
  Speaker 1: To so to get to their level. It's not like
• 1:48:31
  other things, like you get really good at guitar by
• 1:48:33
  practicing for years and years. It's not the same thing.
• 1:48:36
  It is.
• 1:48:36
  Speaker 2: No, there is practice and there is discipline. Absolutely, I'm
• 1:48:39
  not denying that at all.
• 1:48:40
  Speaker 1: What I'm saying is like there's an Eddie van Halen
• 1:48:42
  of being a monk, you know what I mean? Yeah,
• 1:48:45
  like a regular guy can't shread like that, right, But
• 1:48:48
  Eddie van Halen played guitar for thousands and thousands and
• 1:48:52
  thousands and thousands of hours with an incredible focus and
• 1:48:57
  became Eddie van Halen. If you're a monk, you know it.
• 1:49:00
  Speaker 2: I love this analogy.
• 1:49:01
  Speaker 1: I do you know what I'm saying. To be a virtuoso,
• 1:49:04
  to be a Steve Ray Vaughn, to be a Jimi Hendrix,
• 1:49:07
  like it requires immense amount of time. Yes, I would
• 1:49:10
  imagine to get really good at that kind of meditation,
• 1:49:13
  it would be a similar thing.
• 1:49:14
  Speaker 2: There's a discipline. There's a discipline, and.
• 1:49:18
  Speaker 1: What are there levels they get reached, Like when someone's
• 1:49:20
  like a true sure master, they've been doing it for
• 1:49:22
  twenty years. They can do something. They can get to
• 1:49:24
  a state that other people can't get to.
• 1:49:26
  Speaker 2: There are Joe, And what I want to say is
• 1:49:28
  there are levels that you and I can do Right
• 1:49:31
  this minute, I think. I don't know if you've had
• 1:49:33
  any of the folks from the Institute of Heart Math.
• 1:49:36
  It's a pioneering research organization Northern California, been around since
• 1:49:40
  nineteen ninety four. I've worked with him since ninety five.
• 1:49:44
  They explore the power of the human heart beyond being
• 1:49:49
  simply a pump in the body. That's probably the least
• 1:49:52
  of what it does. And what they have done and
• 1:49:56
  made very accessible to the average person is the ability
• 1:49:59
  to create coherence between the heart and the brain, and
• 1:50:02
  that can happen in a heartbeat. So here's what I
• 1:50:05
  mean by that. Nineteen ninety one. By the way, I
• 1:50:07
  want to honor your time. Are we okay on time?
• 1:50:09
  I've seen it? Yeah?
• 1:50:10
  Speaker 1: Okay?
• 1:50:11
  Speaker 2: Has it been an hour yet?
• 1:50:12
  Speaker 1: More than an hour? Yeah, we're almost two hours.
• 1:50:14
  Speaker 2: I know, I'm kidding.
• 1:50:16
  Speaker 1: Don't worry about anything. Just let's talk, all right, I'm
• 1:50:19
  having a great time. Ninety to thank you, thank you. Yeah.
• 1:50:23
  Speaker 2: Ninety one scient is discovered in the human heart. I mean,
• 1:50:28
  ninety one is not that long ago. And scientists are thinking, okay,
• 1:50:32
  we got the body nailed. You know, we know how
• 1:50:34
  this works. We do heart transplants, they're successful, so we
• 1:50:37
  must have this all figured out. They discovered forty thousand
• 1:50:42
  specialized cells in the human heart called sensory neurites. And
• 1:50:47
  when I say discovered, they've always been there, but nobody
• 1:50:50
  looked because they're like neurons, Joe, but they're not in
• 1:50:53
  the brain. And you think, why they're neurons in the heart.
• 1:50:57
  They think independently, they feel independently, and they process independently
• 1:51:02
  from the neurons in the human brain. And so right, there,
• 1:51:06
  there's a whole conversation about when we have trauma are
• 1:51:10
  trauma is recorded in two different places. You can do
• 1:51:13
  talk therapy in the brain. If you don't address the heart,
• 1:51:16
  it may feel incomplete. I have that therapy. So here's
• 1:51:19
  why I'm sharing this now. We've got two neural networks,
• 1:51:22
  one in the heart, one in the brain. An institut
• 1:51:25
  of heart mouth made available the techniques three very simple
• 1:51:30
  steps to harmonize two neural networks into a single potent system.
• 1:51:38
  And we are the only form of life that can
• 1:51:41
  do this at will, on demand. We choose. We're the
• 1:51:44
  only form of life that can sit in the chair
• 1:51:46
  and say, in this moment, I choose to create. The
• 1:51:50
  term is coherence, and the coherence optimum coherence is a
• 1:51:53
  low frequency zero point one hurts. So we're the only
• 1:51:57
  form of life that can choose to create zero point
• 1:52:00
  one hurts between the heart and the brain. Harmonizing two
• 1:52:05
  organs become one potent system in the body. And when
• 1:52:09
  that happens, man, there's a whole cascade of things. So
• 1:52:13
  let me two categories passive passive benefits. Just from harmonizing
• 1:52:19
  the heart in the brain, you supercharge the immune system,
• 1:52:23
  and this is something I've done at least once a
• 1:52:24
  day since ninety ninety five when I learned it, and
• 1:52:27
  sometimes multiple times a day. Super Immune response you awaken
• 1:52:32
  longevity enzymes that everybody has in the body but often
• 1:52:36
  go dormant. For some people they as they age. You
• 1:52:41
  can wake them up pretty quick. Stem cells, you can
• 1:52:43
  wake them up pretty quick. Resilience to change, and this
• 1:52:48
  is fascinating me because when young, we all know this.
• 1:52:51
  Young kids are really resilient to change. I come from
• 1:52:56
  a very dysfunctional, alcoholic family. Moved. My father left when
• 1:53:01
  I was ten. We moved every year, and I went
• 1:53:04
  to a different school every year and had to make
• 1:53:05
  new friends every year, and it took a lot of
• 1:53:07
  resilience to do that. I could do that then. I
• 1:53:11
  probably have problems doing something like that now because typically
• 1:53:15
  as we age, we lose resilience. That is directly linked
• 1:53:20
  to what's called heart rate variability HRV. So you know
• 1:53:25
  every heartbeat that goes boom boom, boom boom, it's the
• 1:53:29
  QRS complex, and the time from one peak to the next,
• 1:53:34
  to the next to the next varies. When we're young,
• 1:53:38
  it varies a lot, and that gives us resilience. When
• 1:53:41
  we age it becomes more regular, we lose our resilience
• 1:53:45
  set in our waves. Through harmonizing heart in the brain,
• 1:53:49
  you can actually reset that heart rate variability to the
• 1:53:55
  point where it was when you were younger. And it
• 1:53:57
  doesn't take long to do that. So those are our
• 1:54:00
  passive benefits now active benefits. Once you're in that space,
• 1:54:06
  and this is where the really juicy stuff happens deep intuition.
• 1:54:10
  So this is where you do precognition. You have the
• 1:54:14
  ability your heart will sense an event before it actually happens,
• 1:54:18
  and there's science showing why that is. Like so many
• 1:54:22
  people knew nine to eleven was going to happen before
• 1:54:25
  it happened. And I'm not saying they did this, but
• 1:54:27
  they knew intuitively. This is a way to awaken that
• 1:54:30
  kind of intuition on demand, deep intuition on demand. There
• 1:54:38
  are thirteen hundred positive biochemical reactions from harmonizing the heart
• 1:54:44
  in the brain. All right, and what is the method
• 1:54:46
  you used to harmonize Three steps. One is to shift
• 1:54:49
  your focus from your mind and your heart. And I've
• 1:54:54
  led groups with indigenous people all over the world for
• 1:54:57
  forty years, and the way they all do this is
• 1:55:00
  they'll always touch their heart to bring their awareness to
• 1:55:04
  their heart center. Some people use a finger or two.
• 1:55:07
  If you're in the Mayan cultures in Mexico, they use
• 1:55:11
  a full palm. You see this in the Middle East,
• 1:55:15
  people will greet one another with a full palm, or
• 1:55:17
  Buddhist will do it like this and nestle that prayer
• 1:55:21
  mudra right there. And the point is that your awareness
• 1:55:25
  will always go to the place on your body where
• 1:55:26
  you feel the touch, like if I touch my arm
• 1:55:29
  or my awareness went there. This first step, so.
• 1:55:32
  Speaker 1: You meet someone, you put your hands on your heart
• 1:55:34
  to bring awareness to your heart.
• 1:55:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, you can do it that way. This is
• 1:55:37
  what they do. So the first step in heart brain
• 1:55:40
  coherence developed by the Institute of Heart Math, you shift
• 1:55:45
  your awareness from your mind into your heart. First step.
• 1:55:49
  Second step is to slow your breathing and make the
• 1:55:52
  key here. It's not just enough just to slow it,
• 1:55:56
  but you exhale for a period of time longer than
• 1:55:58
  you inhale because we all breathe a different rate. So
• 1:56:02
  for example, if we inhale four counts and release six, Okay,
• 1:56:08
  that might work for me. Somebody at you know, higher
• 1:56:11
  elevation might do it differently, but the point. The point
• 1:56:14
  is when you release, when you exhale for a period
• 1:56:17
  of time longer than you inhale, that triggers the relaxation
• 1:56:21
  response parasympathetic nervous system. You're telling your body. It's a language,
• 1:56:26
  and what you're doing is you're telling your body I
• 1:56:28
  am safe because that's the only time.
• 1:56:30
  Speaker 1: You write, and hyperventilating is the opposite of it.
• 1:56:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, you don't want to hip feel safe at all.
• 1:56:34
  So second step is your breathing slower, longer on the exhale,
• 1:56:41
  focusing as if your breath is coming from your heart
• 1:56:43
  while your focus is on your heart. Two steps. The
• 1:56:47
  third step is where you create point zero one hurts.
• 1:56:51
  You feel a feeling, a positive feeling because you choose
• 1:56:55
  to feel the feeling. And this is deceptively powerful, Joe,
• 1:57:00
  because most forms of life, including humans, only have a
• 1:57:05
  feeling in response to what the world shows to them.
• 1:57:10
  We have the ability to have a feeling because we
• 1:57:13
  choose to have the feeling. And what the science is
• 1:57:16
  showing is that the feeling of gratitude almost one hundred
• 1:57:20
  percent works for everyone. We all can sense gratitude. I
• 1:57:25
  mean you can think of words like compassion that means
• 1:57:27
  different things different people. Love means different things, but we
• 1:57:31
  can be grateful for our children, our families, our lives,
• 1:57:35
  something like that. And when we feel that feeling, it
• 1:57:39
  sends a signal, a very low frequency point zero point
• 1:57:44
  one hurts from the heart to the brain and the
• 1:57:48
  presence of the slower breathing, and that harmonization between the
• 1:57:53
  heart and the brain is what gives all the benefits
• 1:57:57
  that we just shared everything, you know, super immuner spons themselves,
• 1:58:02
  longevity enzymes, all of those things. And it's also if
• 1:58:06
  people do affirmations, this is the place and affirmation is
• 1:58:12
  a message to the subconscious, and you have to speak
• 1:58:16
  in the language that the subconscious recognizes, and the coherence
• 1:58:22
  between the heart and the brain is like a hotline
• 1:58:25
  to the subconscious. But you don't have to be hypnotized.
• 1:58:28
  So when you're saying affirmations, if you do it during
• 1:58:32
  that time, they're even more potent. And you know, we
• 1:58:36
  could spend a lot of time talking about the role
• 1:58:38
  of imagination, mirror neurons, all of that happening within the
• 1:58:43
  presence at the point, going back to what you were
• 1:58:46
  mentioning about, it's about in monks. Yeah, you can study
• 1:58:52
  years learning what they're learning, and there are benefits that
• 1:58:57
  we can access pretty quickly. And it's science based. I mean,
• 1:59:01
  this is all peer reviewed. This is the beauty of
• 1:59:04
  the Institute of Heart Math. They publish peer in peer
• 1:59:06
  reviewed journals and and they've done much more. I'm just
• 1:59:10
  scratching the surface. If anyone is not familiar with that,
• 1:59:13
  I invite people to go to www. Heart Math h
• 1:59:17
  E A R T M A t h dot org
• 1:59:19
  and it's all free. You can check it out.
• 1:59:21
  Speaker 1: So do you believe that the connection between the heart
• 1:59:24
  and the mind when you achieve that state, that increases
• 1:59:26
  your intuition?
• 1:59:28
  Speaker 2: Absolutely, between the heart and the brain. But I say
• 1:59:33
  the heart, heart in the mind, the heart the mind,
• 1:59:36
  And what you said, this is such a good question, Joe.
• 1:59:38
  And here's the reason. And this is one of the
• 1:59:41
  places where it's so powerful. I mean, you can use
• 1:59:43
  this stuff in a business environment for this very reason.
• 1:59:48
  When we look at the world and solve our problems
• 1:59:52
  from our mind, our brain brains left and right brain,
• 1:59:56
  so you know you've got logic and intuition over here.
• 1:59:59
  Those are the ego loops and the brain will always
• 2:00:04
  work in polarity. That's where you're gonna get you right
• 2:00:07
  and wrong, good and bad, success, failure, worthy, not worthy,
• 2:00:12
  and the ego. Man, it'll spin you up in those
• 2:00:14
  loops for hours. But here's the thing. The heart is
• 2:00:19
  non polarity. It's not a polar organ So when you
• 2:00:23
  harmonize the heart and the brain, what you're doing is
• 2:00:25
  you're bypassing the ego loops. And here's where that can
• 2:00:30
  be powerful. I did this in the corporate boardroom. I
• 2:00:33
  was the youngest, so I was the first tech tech
• 2:00:37
  ops manager at Cisco Systems nineteen ninety when they got
• 2:00:42
  the RFP for Protocol converter so that all the branches
• 2:00:46
  of the Armed Services could computers could talk to all
• 2:00:49
  the others. Before the first Gulf War, and when I
• 2:00:53
  would go into the boardroom with an idea and I
• 2:00:58
  knew that I was going to be criticized. I'm also
• 2:01:01
  a Kancerrian male. And if you know any about it, yeah,
• 2:01:07
  well that's my that's my sign. My birth signs in
• 2:01:09
  cans and very emotion plays a big role. Now it
• 2:01:16
  doesn't have to, you know, it's a it's a stereotype,
• 2:01:18
  but that happens to be true. For me, emotion plays
• 2:01:21
  a big role criticism. Coming from an alcoholic family. Uh,
• 2:01:25
  my father was the the abuser and the criticizer. And
• 2:01:29
  I've spent my whole life, you know, working to I'm
• 2:01:32
  still healing, you know, from that. So when somebody would
• 2:01:35
  criticize my ideas, you know, it'd be hurtful. I'd take
• 2:01:38
  it personally. When you move into the coherence and you're
• 2:01:43
  not taking that criticism through good, bad, right, wrong, success, failure.
• 2:01:49
  Now you can be much more objective and you can
• 2:01:52
  listen to it, and when they're finished, you can say, well,
• 2:01:56
  you know, have you ever considered this because you haven't reacted,
• 2:01:59
  And it's a really powerful place to.
• 2:02:02
  Speaker 1: To well, it's certainly worse even talking to a good
• 2:02:04
  faith actor, someone's really wants to talk about stuff, and
• 2:02:07
  as a legitimate criticism. But most of the time when
• 2:02:09
  people are criticizing you, they're trying to hurt your feelings.
• 2:02:11
  Speaker 2: Here, I never read my book reviews that.
• 2:02:16
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's not that criticism is bad. Criticism is critical.
• 2:02:19
  Like you, you can learn a lot from intelligent people
• 2:02:22
  from their perspectives of things. I've learned a lot from
• 2:02:25
  other people's criticism but the difference between that and dwelling
• 2:02:31
  on criticism, that's the part where people get wrapped up
• 2:02:35
  in their own identity and also interpersonal conflicts. If you're
• 2:02:39
  a kind of person who, like you're naturally argumentative and
• 2:02:43
  then someone says something like that's not fucking true, and
• 2:02:45
  you want to say something back, but it's just it's
• 2:02:48
  a lot of negativity and a lot of wasted time.
• 2:02:51
  And the way I try to describe it, especially to
• 2:02:54
  emerging famous people, and I'm like, you have to think
• 2:02:57
  of your life as if like you're energy is a number,
• 2:03:01
  Like you have one hundred energies for the day, Like
• 2:03:04
  it's a unit. And if you're spending thirty or forty
• 2:03:07
  of those energies on thirty or forty of those units
• 2:03:11
  on social media and of criticism, of negativity, it's gonna
• 2:03:15
  rob the sixty percent that you really enjoy. It's gonna
• 2:03:18
  rob your time with your friends, your family, your hobbies,
• 2:03:21
  your job, your community, whatever you really love. Hanging out
• 2:03:25
  with your dog. You know, like the people right now
• 2:03:29
  that are going on a walk with their sweet sweet
• 2:03:31
  dog and they're thinking about some mean post that someone made,
• 2:03:34
  and the mean shit they're gonna say to give back
• 2:03:36
  of that person. Meanwhile, they're with this beautiful animal and
• 2:03:39
  that if you got on your knees you going. Are
• 2:03:41
  you having a good time? They give you kisses and
• 2:03:42
  they put their pawing like you're having so much fun.
• 2:03:45
  It's so beautiful and loving, and you're thinking about something
• 2:03:47
  stupid that has no bearing on this moment, and you
• 2:03:51
  can't escape. You can't escape. You're like psychically connected to
• 2:03:56
  this negativity.
• 2:03:57
  Speaker 2: That's a tool. It's a powerful tool.
• 2:03:58
  Speaker 1: Let's try tell them it's not worth bring. Well.
• 2:04:00
  Speaker 2: This helps to be objective so you can hear the critics.
• 2:04:03
  I'm open to criticism on constructive honestly constructive.
• 2:04:08
  Speaker 1: One on one with compassionate people.
• 2:04:11
  Speaker 2: I've got my Amazon book review.
• 2:04:14
  Speaker 1: Well, there's people out there that are critics, and this
• 2:04:16
  is an important distinction their critics because they don't have
• 2:04:21
  anything to contribute, and they didn't want to be critics,
• 2:04:25
  especially professional critics. A lot of them wanted to be
• 2:04:27
  professional writers, but their work was not good. Like Roger
• 2:04:31
  Ebert wrote one of the craziest scripts of all time.
• 2:04:34
  Have you ever read it? No, you ever heard of it?
• 2:04:36
  Speaker 2: I know rogerber the.
• 2:04:38
  Speaker 1: Very strange like out there wasn't it like hyper sexual?
• 2:04:43
  What was it about anyway? Widely panned as being fucking terrible.
• 2:04:47
  But this is the guy that is the guy that
• 2:04:49
  back in the day was the guy to a few movies,
• 2:04:52
  and it would be so snarky and so by, but
• 2:04:55
  you have to realize, like, look at him, look at
• 2:04:59
  these people, look at the the way they talk. Is
• 2:05:01
  this the kind of opinion you value? Like why is
• 2:05:05
  this the thing that gets elevated? Wouldn't you rather have
• 2:05:08
  the opinion of someone who really enjoys going to the
• 2:05:12
  movies and has great things to say about performing. It's
• 2:05:15
  like someone who's enjoying it, not someone who wants to
• 2:05:19
  be pissed off. So they could say the snarkiest, shittiest
• 2:05:23
  And have you ever seen the videos of the two
• 2:05:24
  of those guys arguing with each other on camera?
• 2:05:28
  Speaker 2: They call them bloopers. Then I like the bloopers better.
• 2:05:30
  Speaker 1: Than the reviews better because that's the real guys. They're
• 2:05:33
  really shitty guys. They're they're super shitty to each other.
• 2:05:35
  They're both so nasty to each other. It's like, so
• 2:05:38
  those are the people that are dictating what is good
• 2:05:41
  and bad in culture. That's nuts. That's the problem with criticism.
• 2:05:46
  That's the problem with critics. A lot of them are shitheads.
• 2:05:48
  Speaker 2: Yep.
• 2:05:49
  Speaker 1: So you're getting the opinions primarily of shitheads.
• 2:05:52
  Speaker 2: Let's see. But what you're doing through coherence is that
• 2:05:55
  you're defusing that the shithead critics from having the impact
• 2:06:02
  on you. So you're thinking about it while you're out
• 2:06:04
  walking your dog on a beautiful day.
• 2:06:06
  Speaker 1: Well, that's a beautiful thing. If you can do that,
• 2:06:08
  if you could separate yourself from what they said, do that.
• 2:06:10
  But the only way you could really do that is
• 2:06:12
  if you are one hundred percent happy with what you've done.
• 2:06:16
  So if you write a book and that book you're
• 2:06:18
  you nailed it, you love it, it's amazing. If someone's like,
• 2:06:21
  really critical, love it, suffer you. But the thing that
• 2:06:24
  I made is perfect for the people who liked the
• 2:06:27
  thing that I made, you know, And that's if you
• 2:06:30
  can get to a place where you could do that,
• 2:06:32
  that's great. But you have to know that you put
• 2:06:34
  your all into what you did so that you don't
• 2:06:36
  feel bad about other people's negative opinion of it. I agree,
• 2:06:39
  But if you have something I got kind of half
• 2:06:41
  past that I should have spent more time on this.
• 2:06:44
  I wasn't really committed to that. If you're doing that,
• 2:06:47
  then the criticism hurts because you know it's valid.
• 2:06:50
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, well, if you're going to do so, I
• 2:06:53
  think whatever we do, book or you know, music or
• 2:06:56
  whatever it is, we do, put a million sent into it.
• 2:07:00
  I learned this, you know, my dad left when I
• 2:07:04
  was ten and our family was devastated.
• 2:07:07
  Speaker 1: My mom, it was my mom.
• 2:07:10
  Speaker 2: I have a younger brother four years younger, and myself
• 2:07:12
  a mom all of a sudden was raising, you know,
• 2:07:14
  two boys, and we knew we were in for some
• 2:07:16
  pretty rough ties. Man. We were more than broke. We
• 2:07:19
  end up living in government subsidized housing, and you know,
• 2:07:24
  it was. It was a tough time. And mom gave
• 2:07:26
  me a book at ten years old. She handed me
• 2:07:28
  this book and she said, I think that this is
• 2:07:30
  going to be useful to you in your life. And
• 2:07:33
  you may know this book. It was by a man
• 2:07:35
  named Khalil Gabron. It's called The Prophet and I read
• 2:07:41
  it to this day and there are different pieces that
• 2:07:43
  mean different things to me throughout my life. But there
• 2:07:46
  was one piece where he talked about work and in
• 2:07:50
  the environment I grew up in. My father hated his job.
• 2:07:53
  He hated the work. My friends all hated their work.
• 2:07:55
  They just wanted to make money. And Khalil this is
• 2:07:58
  on every email that I write, right the bottom. Khalilga
• 2:08:00
  Bron said, work is love made visible. And I like
• 2:08:04
  that because it means that when we're going to do something,
• 2:08:10
  you do it to the best of your ability and
• 2:08:12
  even more, or don't do it at all. If you're
• 2:08:14
  going to do it, do it really, really well, and
• 2:08:17
  find a way to give meaning to what you're doing.
• 2:08:20
  So you know, I went to work. I used to
• 2:08:22
  work midnight to six am and a warehouse loading. I
• 2:08:27
  don't talk about this a lot, but I was loading
• 2:08:28
  fifty pound bags of purina catch out on the box
• 2:08:34
  cars so they could go out in the morning to
• 2:08:36
  this distribution. And the guys I work with man they
• 2:08:39
  hated their job. And I said, you know what, if
• 2:08:42
  I do this just right, fifty pound bags, if I
• 2:08:45
  use my legs, I can get a pretty good leg
• 2:08:47
  workout out of this, and then when I'm done with
• 2:08:49
  that after dinner, I'll come back and I can need
• 2:08:52
  a good upper body workout and I can use my arms.
• 2:08:54
  And all of a sudden, I was getting paid for
• 2:08:57
  a great workout and they had a box car full
• 2:08:59
  of purina catch out and it was love made.
• 2:09:02
  Speaker 1: Visible and that that's great perspective.
• 2:09:05
  Speaker 2: Well, it has stayed with me. And I'm saying this
• 2:09:07
  because if I write a book, or if I do
• 2:09:09
  an event, anything I do, if I'm going to do it,
• 2:09:12
  I'm going to do it really to the best of
• 2:09:14
  my ability. If I can't do it to best my ability,
• 2:09:17
  I'll just if I don't believe in it, I won't
• 2:09:18
  do it.
• 2:09:18
  Speaker 1: It's hard for young people to hear that, because you
• 2:09:21
  know they're doing a job that sucks. They just want
• 2:09:23
  to get out of there and go do what they love.
• 2:09:25
  And sometimes a job that sucks is really good motivation
• 2:09:29
  to get you to work harder, to go out and
• 2:09:31
  do the thing that you want to do that you love.
• 2:09:33
  Because I don't think I would ever appreciate the life
• 2:09:37
  that I have now if I didn't have a bunch
• 2:09:39
  of really terrible jobs when I was young.
• 2:09:42
  Speaker 2: Well we all did, and I think there is there
• 2:09:45
  is something to be said if for a young person.
• 2:09:47
  I mean I used to I used to do lawns,
• 2:09:50
  I was a cook. None of it was my dream,
• 2:09:54
  But I said if I'm going to do it, I
• 2:09:55
  want to do it really, I'm going to do this
• 2:09:57
  really well.
• 2:09:57
  Speaker 1: That's great attitude. And I think that was like, oh
• 2:10:00
  my god, this drains you of your life force.
• 2:10:03
  Speaker 2: We're better for it if we can approach it in
• 2:10:05
  that way. And then when you don't do it anymore,
• 2:10:07
  you stop doing it.
• 2:10:08
  Speaker 1: Well yeah, I mean if you have a negative attitude
• 2:10:10
  about something that you're doing versus a positive attitude, you
• 2:10:13
  could do the exact same thing with a positive attitude
• 2:10:15
  and actually enjoy it. Yeah, and just have fun, and
• 2:10:18
  especially if you're working with good people.
• 2:10:21
  Speaker 2: So I have a question for you. Okay, when you
• 2:10:24
  invited me here, I've got forty years of work. Was
• 2:10:29
  there one particular facet of that work that you wanted
• 2:10:32
  to explore it and talk.
• 2:10:34
  Speaker 1: In your work for a long time? And I've seen
• 2:10:36
  you say a lot of really interesting things for a
• 2:10:38
  long time. It wasn't any one thing. Although there was
• 2:10:43
  a conversation that you had recently that I thought was
• 2:10:46
  very interesting. I don't know if it was recently, but
• 2:10:48
  it made it into my social media feeds recently where
• 2:10:51
  you were talking to someone about climate change and you
• 2:10:53
  were talking about carbon in the environment and it's actual
• 2:10:57
  effect versus a lot of a lot of the narrative
• 2:11:01
  that you hear about this Green New Deal stuff and
• 2:11:06
  just the climate the freak out, the climate freak out
• 2:11:10
  from the al Gore film, which by the way, freaked
• 2:11:14
  everybody out and was totally inaccurate. It was horribly inaccurate.
• 2:11:19
  This was a film An Inconvenient Truth from two was
• 2:11:25
  in two thousand and five, it was it before that. Yeah,
• 2:11:29
  so this film freaked literally freaked everyone out of PowerPoint.
• 2:11:33
  Speaker 2: He did a PowerPoint presentation and six oh it was
• 2:11:36
  oh wow. Yeah, he gave a PowerPoint presentation and recorded it.
• 2:11:39
  Speaker 1: And this film was all about how we are fucked
• 2:11:43
  and by this time, the time we're living in right now,
• 2:11:46
  twenty twenty five, the Earth's supposed to be unliveable. I
• 2:11:49
  mean it's not I'm exaggerating, but like Miami's underwater the coast. Meanwhile,
• 2:11:53
  the coasts haven't moved at all, and some of the wealthiest,
• 2:11:56
  most influential people in the world by property on the coastline.
• 2:12:01
  So like that, by the way, I should tell you,
• 2:12:02
  you know, if the billionaires are buying beach houses, I
• 2:12:06
  think it's gonna be okay in that regard, but it's
• 2:12:09
  also like he made a lot of money off of it.
• 2:12:12
  It became really weird because it became he was speaking
• 2:12:15
  everywhere and he made hundreds of millions of dollars carbon credits.
• 2:12:18
  Speaker 2: He created the carbon credits system.
• 2:12:21
  Speaker 1: The whole thing is kind of nuts when you're that
• 2:12:23
  wrong and nobody even calls you out on it, Like
• 2:12:26
  you freaked everybody out. From when I saw it in
• 2:12:29
  two thousand and six, all my friends were like, oh
• 2:12:31
  my god, we got to do something. Now we're all
• 2:12:33
  freaked out twenty years later, very little difference. It's not
• 2:12:38
  what he said wasn't true, And there's a lot of
• 2:12:41
  weird inconvenient things. One of the things that Randall Carlson
• 2:12:44
  brings up is one of the things about carbon is
• 2:12:46
  there's more green now on the surface of Earth, and
• 2:12:50
  there has been absolutely how many years How many years
• 2:12:53
  has it been twenty?
• 2:12:54
  Speaker 2: Well, NASA says, I have some slides called climate if
• 2:13:00
  and we want to look at any of these.
• 2:13:01
  Speaker 1: People don't know why that would be able. Plants eat
• 2:13:04
  carbon dioxide.
• 2:13:05
  Speaker 2: So here's I mean, we could do a whole three
• 2:13:09
  hours on this so they would come back. I'm a
• 2:13:12
  degree geologist, and I began looking climate nineteen seventy nine
• 2:13:17
  when I was in the energy industry in Denver, Colorado.
• 2:13:21
  Climate change is a fact, and I want to be
• 2:13:23
  on record. I want to say it is a fact.
• 2:13:27
  It's constantly changing, and Earth is warming, and if we weren't,
• 2:13:33
  I would be concerned because the warming is cyclic. And
• 2:13:36
  if we weren't warming now, I wonder why we're not
• 2:13:39
  warming now. And I want to be very clear. We
• 2:13:44
  need to find clean, green, sustainable forms of energy, and
• 2:13:48
  we've had them, Joe, for seventy years. If we were
• 2:13:52
  it goes even beyond thorium. I don't know if you're
• 2:13:54
  familiar with thorium.
• 2:13:56
  Speaker 1: No, what's that?
• 2:13:57
  Speaker 2: So the Manhattan Project.
• 2:13:59
  Speaker 1: Sounds like an antidepressant.
• 2:14:00
  Speaker 2: No, No, this is It's a mineral. It's an element.
• 2:14:05
  During the Manhattan Project, when they did the crash program
• 2:14:10
  for the weapon, they went through the periodic table to
• 2:14:14
  find out what elements could possibly be used to create
• 2:14:19
  the energy, and they chose uranium because the byproduct was
• 2:14:24
  the plutonium that they needed for the weapons and for
• 2:14:27
  the nuclear reactors. But it's not the only element that
• 2:14:30
  would work. Element number ninety is thorium. Thorium is abundant
• 2:14:38
  in the Earth's crust. It's inexpensive, it's almost every nation
• 2:14:41
  has access to it, so it's very easy to get.
• 2:14:45
  It cannot melt down like a Fukushima. It cannot be weaponized,
• 2:14:50
  which is one of the reasons that they're not using
• 2:14:53
  at The waste can become the new fuel. It can
• 2:14:56
  be recycled as the fuel what element number ninety And
• 2:15:01
  if you look it up, this is why Wikipedia is
• 2:15:03
  a problem. If you look up Wikipedia and some of
• 2:15:06
  these other things, they'll say, well, it's theoretical. We had
• 2:15:10
  thorium reactors back in the eighties, China, Russia, the United
• 2:15:13
  States had them. In Colorado, there was an Indian river
• 2:15:15
  facility that was largely the run on. It's called thorium
• 2:15:21
  salts is what they were doing. And that's just one example.
• 2:15:26
  So what I'm saying is if we were serious about clean, green,
• 2:15:29
  sustainable energy, there are technologies that they would have allowed
• 2:15:35
  us to have that we haven't. All right, So I
• 2:15:39
  just I want to say that when it comes to
• 2:15:42
  this is part of our earlier conversation. We are being
• 2:15:46
  taught to demonize carbon in general, and our young people
• 2:15:50
  are frightened of carbon. They think carbon is bad, Carbon
• 2:15:53
  is evil. Carbon is what we're made out of. And
• 2:15:56
  so they have no problem relinquishing their car been based frail, fragile,
• 2:16:02
  flawed bodies for the technology because they've already been taught
• 2:16:06
  that carbon.
• 2:16:07
  Speaker 1: Is bad, which is bananas.
• 2:16:09
  Speaker 2: Well, it is banana.
• 2:16:10
  Speaker 1: So here's the thing I can't believe it worked.
• 2:16:12
  Speaker 2: Well, we've got with psychology. There's a whole story behind that.
• 2:16:15
  So I've got some images. I don't know if we
• 2:16:16
  want to bring them.
• 2:16:17
  Speaker 1: Up, but that's this narrow view of carbon so crazy.
• 2:16:21
  Speaker 2: First, right now, So CO two levels right now about
• 2:16:23
  four one hundred and eighteen four to twenty parts per million,
• 2:16:27
  which is higher than it's been in ten years, twenty years,
• 2:16:31
  fifty years, that's true. Is it dangerously high? No? And
• 2:16:35
  as a geologist, here's why I can say that when
• 2:16:38
  we go look at the geologic record. There are times
• 2:16:41
  we've had CO two levels have been one thousand parts
• 2:16:45
  per million, two thousand parts per million, and earth was lush,
• 2:16:49
  Earth was green, it was definitely a little warmer. The
• 2:16:52
  ice melted, the sea levels did rise. Okay, that's a
• 2:16:56
  problem for people that build ten feet from the sea,
• 2:17:01
  thinking that the sea is always going to be ten
• 2:17:03
  feet away. All right, some of the most abundant times
• 2:17:10
  for life during Jurassic period, Cretaceous, during these periods, and
• 2:17:16
  what's interesting is you can have very high carbon dioxide
• 2:17:20
  levels historically and the temperatures are low, and vice versa.
• 2:17:24
  You can have high temperatures in the CO two is low,
• 2:17:28
  and then one of the kickers is from the Vostok
• 2:17:31
  ice cores, so we recognize warming was happening. The scientists
• 2:17:38
  went to antarcticas Okay, I'm going to back up for
• 2:17:42
  people may not be familiar with this. Every year there's
• 2:17:44
  a new layer of ice that is laid down in
• 2:17:48
  Greenland and Antarctica, and in that layer of ice is
• 2:17:53
  captured little air bubbles of the atmosphere and particle of
• 2:18:00
  pollen and particles of volcanic dust. And we can tell
• 2:18:04
  from that layer what the temperatures have been, with the
• 2:18:08
  magnetic strength of the Earth has been, how strong the
• 2:18:10
  sun has been. I mean, all this stuff amazing, it is.
• 2:18:13
  It's a mind blow. I'm just amazed. We actually have
• 2:18:16
  ice core libraries, so I mean very cold refrigerated rooms
• 2:18:21
  where they they take Yeah, so scientists recognized the ice was.
• 2:18:28
  Speaker 1: Video of that up. It's so fascinating to look at.
• 2:18:30
  If people hadn't seen.
• 2:18:31
  Speaker 2: It, I may have some pictures and it's under climate
• 2:18:34
  on the power the power points. So what they did
• 2:18:38
  was they said, let's we don't know what's happening, is
• 2:18:41
  what Sinas said, Let's capture as much information as we
• 2:18:45
  can before the ice melts. So they drilled in Vostok, Antarctica,
• 2:18:50
  and they ended up going back four hundred and twenty
• 2:18:54
  thousand years of layers of ice, continuous layers.
• 2:18:57
  Speaker 1: Who how deep is that?
• 2:19:00
  Speaker 2: I'm not sure how deep that is. They drilled below
• 2:19:04
  that was Vostok Lake, so they went down as far
• 2:19:06
  as they could before they hit the lake. That's a
• 2:19:09
  hell of a pipe, it is, and you can see.
• 2:19:12
  So here's here. And this was in the eighties and
• 2:19:16
  nineties they were doing this, and the real scientists know
• 2:19:20
  what I'm going to say, the real geologists that are
• 2:19:23
  not politicized and are not beholden to academic or corporate
• 2:19:30
  interests that are paying their paychecks. One of the problems
• 2:19:34
  is in those ice cores, the temperature actually rises before
• 2:19:40
  the CO two levels. If the CO two is causing
• 2:19:45
  that rise. That's a problem because you would expect the
• 2:19:48
  CO two to rise first and then the temperature, and
• 2:19:51
  that's not what the ice corees. I do have a
• 2:19:53
  slide of that if he wants to bring that up.
• 2:19:57
  So it suggests that something else is happening. And when
• 2:20:01
  we look at it's it's this one, right, it's on
• 2:20:09
  the lower left, the second second slide from the lower left.
• 2:20:19
  I can't see.
• 2:20:22
  Speaker 1: There's a lot of slides, folks. Yeah, there's twenty eight slides.
• 2:20:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah, there's a present presentation that I gave. Okay, right there.
• 2:20:30
  So what you're seeing is the the red is temperature blue. Yeah,
• 2:20:36
  and you can see that the the red. If you're
• 2:20:40
  coming from the past to the present, the red is
• 2:20:44
  rising first and then the blue follows. So the temperatures
• 2:20:47
  are rising first and then the carbon dioxide is rising.
• 2:20:51
  Now there's a reason for that, and a lot of
• 2:20:54
  people don't like this. So what's driving climate change is
• 2:21:02
  under our feet. Humans are not causing it, all right,
• 2:21:05
  And no, that's a big statement, and it's different than
• 2:21:07
  what a lot of people have heard. And I'm going
• 2:21:09
  to acknowledge that. NASA said. I've got a slide showing
• 2:21:13
  that NASA is showing ninety percent of the CO two
• 2:21:15
  in the atmosphere. Joe is coming from the outgassing of
• 2:21:20
  the oceans. All right, we know from high school science. Yeah,
• 2:21:26
  from high school science. The cold water holds more gas.
• 2:21:32
  The oceans are warming, and that's a fact. And as
• 2:21:35
  they warm, they're releasing that CO two into the atmosphere.
• 2:21:38
  The kicker is they're warming from underneath, not from top, So.
• 2:21:42
  Speaker 1: They're not You don't think they're warming from whatever we're
• 2:21:46
  doing to the atmosphere.
• 2:21:47
  Speaker 2: No, we now, we are definitely contributing to CO two
• 2:21:52
  in the atmosphere, but it would.
• 2:21:53
  Speaker 1: Be the fact that what would be the cause of
• 2:21:56
  the warming.
• 2:21:56
  Speaker 2: Facts say, we're going to go through this, I should
• 2:21:59
  probably just go. I have another one on there on
• 2:22:05
  magnetic migrations. Okay, so here's jesus, here's no no, And
• 2:22:12
  I don't see any evidence of all the things to
• 2:22:15
  be concerned about. Before the polls can shift, which they
• 2:22:18
  do occasionally, three factors have to be in place, and
• 2:22:21
  they're not there right now. So let me just say
• 2:22:22
  that right now.
• 2:22:24
  Speaker 1: Thank you for that, because I've been freaking out about that.
• 2:22:26
  Speaker 2: No, they they But however, we're asking the wrong question.
• 2:22:30
  They're not shifting, they're migrating. And the migration what happens,
• 2:22:40
  I'm not sure how far back to go. So what
• 2:22:43
  we know is Paul Leviolette in the nineteen eighties, I
• 2:22:47
  knew him before he passed. He was a brilliant, brilliant physicist.
• 2:22:51
  Wrote a book called Earth under Fire that was ridiculed
• 2:22:55
  a lot in the eighties. And what he said is
• 2:22:57
  that every once in a while, on a clockwork basis,
• 2:23:02
  there's a volley of cosmic cosmic rays that comes, cosmic
• 2:23:08
  rays that come from the center of our Milky Way,
• 2:23:12
  and cosmic rays like they're passing through you and me
• 2:23:15
  right now because we're mostly empty, you know, we're ninety
• 2:23:18
  nine point nine nine percent nothing, neutrinos and stuff exactly.
• 2:23:22
  And when they pass into the crust of the Earth,
• 2:23:25
  nothing happens. In the core. The core is so dense, Joe,
• 2:23:29
  because of the pressure of the earth that's iron nickel,
• 2:23:32
  and it's so dense that those they can't pass through,
• 2:23:37
  and it actually causes what's called perturbations, uh, And it
• 2:23:40
  begins to heat the core of the Earth, and that
• 2:23:45
  causes it shifts rotation, and right now, Japanese scientists are
• 2:23:49
  saying that the core is slowed or possibly even stopped.
• 2:23:52
  I don't know if your guests have talked about that.
• 2:23:55
  And as the core goes through these cycles, so you
• 2:24:00
  look at the cross section of the Earth, there's the
• 2:24:02
  inner core that's solid, the outer core is molten, then
• 2:24:07
  the mantle is about eighteen hundred miles thick and it's magma,
• 2:24:10
  and then the crust is only about thirty six miles thick.
• 2:24:14
  So in the textbooks, the inner core always looks like
• 2:24:19
  it's floating right in the middle of the Earth, but
• 2:24:21
  that's not what's happening. When it goes, when those particles
• 2:24:24
  are hitting it and heating it up, it actually bumps
• 2:24:28
  up against the outer core, causing ripples perturbations is what
• 2:24:34
  they're called, against the mantle, and the mantle begins to
• 2:24:40
  seep into the crust, and it's the mantle that is
• 2:24:44
  heating the oceans from underneath. Because of that happens about
• 2:24:49
  every well about every twelve five hundred years, and that
• 2:24:53
  number if you talk to Randall, we just do the
• 2:24:56
  conference in Boulder. He was in the conference that we
• 2:24:58
  did up there. And that has to do with the
• 2:25:02
  younger dryis if I think you've had guests talking about
• 2:25:06
  So the last the younger dryais was the last time
• 2:25:08
  that this happened. It happened twelve five hundred years before that,
• 2:25:12
  twelve thousand, five hundred years before that. You can I've
• 2:25:14
  got a chart. You can see it's like clockwork.
• 2:25:16
  Speaker 3: I'm looking at that, that massive thing, and it said
• 2:25:18
  I went to the website. It says that it's rising
• 2:25:21
  because the ocean is absorbing the gases, causing the water
• 2:25:26
  to rise over time.
• 2:25:28
  Speaker 2: The ocean is that's the equilibrium. It's out gassing.
• 2:25:33
  Speaker 1: Uh.
• 2:25:34
  Speaker 2: And it's also there's a an equilibrium between what we're
• 2:25:38
  creating in the atam and we are creating in the atmosphere.
• 2:25:40
  You have to be honest about it. We're creating carbon
• 2:25:42
  dioxide and it the ocean is what's called the sink.
• 2:25:45
  It's the CO two sink. That is is he that's
• 2:25:47
  soaking that up. So what's happening, Joe, is the mantle
• 2:25:53
  is being disturbed. It is heating the oceans from underneath,
• 2:25:56
  releasing the carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. And that's where
• 2:26:00
  that's coming from. When we look into the geologic history,
• 2:26:05
  we've seen this happen before, and it's intense, it's brief,
• 2:26:11
  and it's what comes after that usually is a problem.
• 2:26:13
  It's not the warming, it's the way.
• 2:26:14
  Speaker 1: Could you put that quote back up please? This was
• 2:26:18
  what was interesting underneath it said, covering more than seventy
• 2:26:21
  percent of the Earth's surface, our global ocean has a
• 2:26:24
  very high heat capacity. It has absorbed ninety percent of
• 2:26:29
  the warming that has occurred in recent decades due to
• 2:26:32
  increasing greenhouse gases. So this is acknowledging though that there
• 2:26:38
  has been an increase in the temperature because of our civilization,
• 2:26:43
  because of greenhouse gases.
• 2:26:44
  Speaker 2: There's an increase in CO two, But it's saying.
• 2:26:48
  Speaker 1: An increase in warming. Warming has occurred because of increasing
• 2:26:53
  greenhouse gases. So what you're saying is these greenhouse gases,
• 2:26:57
  we're contributing.
• 2:26:58
  Speaker 2: To it, but it's not the not the primary and
• 2:27:01
  the modeling is the problem, Jamie, would you please?
• 2:27:03
  Speaker 1: So well you can go, but before we're going to
• 2:27:06
  if we didn't exist at all, if there was no
• 2:27:09
  industrial civilization, we existed like hunter gatherers, would we have
• 2:27:13
  no impact. Would it be the exact same thing or
• 2:27:16
  would it be a fraction of a degree warmer because
• 2:27:20
  of human Sez.
• 2:27:21
  Speaker 2: I think we have to be honest. I don't have
• 2:27:24
  the numbers on this. I think we have to just
• 2:27:26
  be honest and say we are contributing to some degree.
• 2:27:28
  Speaker 1: So we have something, but you feel like it's a
• 2:27:30
  minor degree. And if even if we were a hunter gatherers,
• 2:27:33
  the same pattern of earth warming would still be going on.
• 2:27:36
  Speaker 2: All we need to do is go back. There's an
• 2:27:38
  orange chart on there, Jamie. You look at the Jurassic
• 2:27:41
  plesisine we weren't right here, yeah, and you can see
• 2:27:44
  the black I think is the is the black the
• 2:27:48
  CEO two.
• 2:27:49
  Speaker 1: Yes, it says atmospheric COEO two and the blue is
• 2:27:52
  global temperature?
• 2:27:53
  Speaker 2: How high its?
• 2:27:53
  Speaker 1: Man?
• 2:27:53
  Speaker 2: And look at the temperatures times when it's it's high.
• 2:27:59
  Look in the orange over here when the CO two
• 2:28:01
  is temperature.
• 2:28:02
  Speaker 3: Five hundred million years ago?
• 2:28:04
  Speaker 1: I know, nuts?
• 2:28:05
  Speaker 2: Right? Yeah, So we weren't there, and this is what
• 2:28:07
  you can see from Again.
• 2:28:08
  Speaker 3: You don't have like a lot of data from back then,
• 2:28:09
  do we what was going on?
• 2:28:11
  Speaker 2: Data comes from different sources. You've got ice cores and
• 2:28:14
  then I mean, yeah.
• 2:28:16
  Speaker 1: How are they getting data from five hundred million years ago?
• 2:28:18
  Speaker 2: Do you get it from seafloor? Settlements. Geez is one
• 2:28:21
  of the things you can do there. There's a little
• 2:28:24
  sea creature called the Global Jurina.
• 2:28:27
  Speaker 3: Test, getting better as we get and like more recently.
• 2:28:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I guess so, So I'm we can go into
• 2:28:35
  this is as deep as you want. What I want
• 2:28:37
  you to see here is there's not a direct correlation
• 2:28:39
  between CO two and temperature in the past. We can
• 2:28:42
  say that, and we can also see that CO two
• 2:28:45
  levels have been higher in the past than they are now. Uh,
• 2:28:49
  and Earth was lush, it was green, life was flourishing.
• 2:28:54
  Speaker 1: As Randall Carsonoway says, global cooling is what's really right now.
• 2:28:58
  Speaker 2: Here's now, Here's now. I'm going to tie it back
• 2:29:01
  in to what we began this conversation with. There's a
• 2:29:05
  concerted effort to remake the world and to remake our bodies.
• 2:29:10
  If I did a little experiment in January of last
• 2:29:13
  year and I said, Okay, what if we met all
• 2:29:18
  of the climate goals, what would earth look like? Now,
• 2:29:21
  I'm not going to push back against them. I'll just
• 2:29:23
  take what we'll say. If you just zero, Ok, we're
• 2:29:27
  only at two hundred and forty parts per million right now,
• 2:29:30
  which historically is low we're on the low end right now.
• 2:29:34
  If we were to meet those goals they want us
• 2:29:36
  to go back to, we would meet the goals, it
• 2:29:40
  would push it back to about one hundred and or
• 2:29:43
  two hundred and thirty six parts per million is what
• 2:29:46
  they're looking at. One hundred and eighty parts per million
• 2:29:51
  is dangerously low. So there and this isn't something like
• 2:29:55
  you can just take a dial and adjust a little
• 2:29:57
  bit here and there. They are are pushing if we
• 2:30:01
  were to meet those goals, Earth would have. By the way,
• 2:30:06
  they're also pushing for global cooling of ten degrees global average.
• 2:30:10
  We're at fifty six fahrenheit global average right now. They
• 2:30:14
  want forty six degrees. The last time on Earth we
• 2:30:18
  had those kinds of temperatures and that kind of co
• 2:30:20
  two was the Pleistocene era. It was not good for us.
• 2:30:25
  It's not good for life, it's not good for humans.
• 2:30:28
  Speaker 1: Who are they they are? Why would they want to
• 2:30:32
  do such a self destructive thing? Do they know this?
• 2:30:34
  Do they know this data?
• 2:30:35
  Speaker 2: Well, let's break it down, Joe. Let's just let's step
• 2:30:38
  through this.
• 2:30:38
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's step through this. Climate.
• 2:30:40
  Speaker 2: Yes, if we were to meet those climate goals, it's
• 2:30:44
  not good for us.
• 2:30:45
  Speaker 1: All right, let's put that as a human species.
• 2:30:49
  Speaker 2: As a human specilet's put that over here. We're being
• 2:30:52
  pushed for war and I think you can see that.
• 2:30:57
  And the nations of the Earth that have the capability
• 2:31:01
  for war are waging that war. And what's happening is
• 2:31:04
  we're depleting our resources as nations. We are and I
• 2:31:08
  just did a search on this the other night. The
• 2:31:11
  superpowers are dangerously low on weapons and on the ability
• 2:31:17
  humans to fight in those wars if Earth ever needed
• 2:31:20
  to fight. We don't have what we need right now.
• 2:31:24
  So our weapons are being depleted. Okay, let's put that
• 2:31:27
  over here. Now, there's a concerted effort to break the
• 2:31:31
  social bonds that have held us together as societies, as nations,
• 2:31:35
  as communities, and that is working very successfully. We're breaking
• 2:31:40
  down those borders. That's not good for us, that's not
• 2:31:43
  good for anyone. Now you look at the transhuman movement
• 2:31:47
  to replace us with technology, with machines to debilitate our
• 2:31:57
  ability for critical thinking, our ability for imagination, for creativity,
• 2:32:03
  for all the reasons that we just talked about, use
• 2:32:05
  it or lose it. When we give our power away
• 2:32:08
  to that technology, we're not the best version of ourselves.
• 2:32:11
  That's not good for us. None of those are good
• 2:32:14
  for us. So if I said that to you, what
• 2:32:17
  would you say to me? Who would that be good for?
• 2:32:21
  If it's not good for us, who's it good for?
• 2:32:23
  Speaker 1: Satan?
• 2:32:25
  Speaker 2: Well, now is where you go back and you look
• 2:32:27
  at all those ancient texts you look at and depending
• 2:32:31
  on what language you're using, if you're looking at Sumerian texts,
• 2:32:36
  this world was never ours to begin with, is what
• 2:32:40
  those texts say. And there is a good argument that
• 2:32:45
  can be made the Earth is being modified in ways
• 2:32:49
  that are not necessarily good for us. Who are they
• 2:32:51
  good for that? There's a whole conversation that we can
• 2:32:53
  have you around that.
• 2:32:57
  Speaker 1: So you think climate is a part of this whole
• 2:33:00
  agenda of control? I do.
• 2:33:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, I think there's a compellion and it's not
• 2:33:05
  just my opinion. I think the evidence supports that, because
• 2:33:08
  why would we want to push this planet back? I mean,
• 2:33:13
  NASA says we're greener now than we have been in
• 2:33:15
  twenty years. Why would we want to push this planet back?
• 2:33:19
  To uh to the environment that the place to see in.
• 2:33:23
  Speaker 1: Ear Well, we want to have control over things all
• 2:33:25
  the time, and when you see certain areas that become
• 2:33:28
  too hot for a certain kind of agriculture, or things
• 2:33:31
  change or certain lakes dry up. There's things like that
• 2:33:35
  that happen that people freak out about because we want control.
• 2:33:38
  That's why we want to bring animals back from extinction.
• 2:33:41
  Like we want control over everything around us because it
• 2:33:44
  makes us feel better. But the problem with this one
• 2:33:46
  is you're getting people that are saying we're going to
• 2:33:49
  lower the earth temperature. Like you didn't, we didn't vote
• 2:33:52
  on that, Like just because it's your idea and you
• 2:33:56
  people are moving in this direction. You have so much money,
• 2:33:58
  you're making a decision for literally eight.
• 2:34:00
  Speaker 2: These elected unelected official It's nuts.
• 2:34:03
  Speaker 1: It's nuts that they think they could spray things in
• 2:34:06
  the sky to reflect particles, reflective particles to dull out
• 2:34:11
  the sun and lower the temperature of the Earth. That's
• 2:34:14
  an insane notion.
• 2:34:15
  Speaker 2: And especially if we're moving in the cooler anyway. But
• 2:34:18
  all of this, I mean, so now we've identified these things,
• 2:34:22
  I think it's useless to be angry. I think what
• 2:34:25
  we do is we recognize, Joe, that all of these
• 2:34:28
  applications of technology are a reflection of the way we've
• 2:34:32
  been conditioned to think about ourselves when we wake up
• 2:34:36
  to become the best version of ourselves. Then we recognize
• 2:34:40
  it makes sense to go clean and green, It makes
• 2:34:43
  sense to grow our food differently, It makes sense to
• 2:34:46
  have different kinds of energy because we recognize our relationship
• 2:34:51
  to ourselves in the world around.
• 2:34:53
  Speaker 1: Us, right, not because we're being manipulated exactly exactly, so
• 2:34:56
  this could be done the right way. Like, the real
• 2:34:58
  issue that we have as a society, one of the
• 2:35:01
  not the but war is obviously the but one of
• 2:35:04
  the big ones is pollution, Like that is undeniable. When
• 2:35:09
  you see like what's going on in India with some
• 2:35:11
  of those rivers where it's just the entire river is
• 2:35:14
  just choked up with We've seen that that is insane
• 2:35:20
  that as a as a human race, that we allow
• 2:35:23
  that that's insane. Like, but then you look at places
• 2:35:26
  like is it Singapore, Jamie that we watched that video
• 2:35:29
  where it was fascinating there. I believe it's Singapore where
• 2:35:34
  they have like the most sophisticated recycling program, like unbelievably efficient,
• 2:35:42
  and they take that stuff and use it to pave
• 2:35:44
  the roads. They burn things down, specific materials they have
• 2:35:48
  I mean, it's an insane job they do of taking
• 2:35:52
  the garbage. So we know it's possible.
• 2:35:54
  Speaker 2: It is possible. So everything we're talking about is a
• 2:35:57
  consequence of what happens when we give our huge in
• 2:36:00
  this way and we believe that we are a flawed
• 2:36:03
  species and that we need something outside of ourselves to
• 2:36:07
  be the best version of ourselves, or that we believe
• 2:36:10
  we're powerless, so we say to someone else, fix it
• 2:36:13
  and make it better. We're now right now, and the
• 2:36:16
  AI is driving this conversation. We are at the point
• 2:36:19
  where we are being asked by the conditions of the
• 2:36:25
  world to accept the deep truth of what it means
• 2:36:29
  to be human. And in that humanness, when we accept
• 2:36:33
  our ability that there's a part of us that doesn't
• 2:36:36
  live in here. What that means is the more that
• 2:36:39
  we can honor the antenna, the gift of the body,
• 2:36:44
  to access that we become healthy, We become the best
• 2:36:47
  version of ourselves. We begin to live differently, We begin
• 2:36:50
  to eat differently, we begin to recycle differently, we use
• 2:36:53
  energy differently because we're living in the world a reflection
• 2:36:58
  of the new honor and respect that we have for
• 2:37:02
  the gift of our bodies. And nobody's telling our young
• 2:37:05
  kids anything like this. No, we have to protect our children.
• 2:37:08
  Speaker 1: It would help everybody just to think that way, It
• 2:37:11
  would help everybody. Well, this is no matter what you're
• 2:37:13
  trying to do with life.
• 2:37:15
  Speaker 2: Well, this is the AI right now is the tip
• 2:37:18
  of the spirit. This is what they're using. They again,
• 2:37:22
  the powers that be, because we're so close, Joe, for
• 2:37:29
  the first time in the very long time, on a
• 2:37:31
  mass level, to awakening to what it means to be human.
• 2:37:35
  There are pockets that are coming together, and we're saying no,
• 2:37:40
  no to war. We're saying I think in this generation,
• 2:37:43
  I think you will see us walk away from the
• 2:37:45
  use of war to solve our problems. What happens if
• 2:37:48
  they throw a war, nobody goes. I think you're going
• 2:37:51
  to see that happen because people are saying, this isn't right,
• 2:37:54
  this isn't right.
• 2:37:55
  Speaker 1: Well, that's a very powerful message, and I hope you're right.
• 2:37:59
  But if there was one thing that I feel like
• 2:38:02
  most people would bet on is that there's always going
• 2:38:04
  to be war.
• 2:38:06
  Speaker 2: I think not the way, not the way we're seeing it,
• 2:38:08
  not the way we're seeing it right now, not the way.
• 2:38:11
  This ties into the disclosure conversation, because when you talk
• 2:38:15
  to the people behind the scenes and disclosure, we obviously
• 2:38:19
  I don't think anybody would have a problem with a
• 2:38:23
  flying saucer in an Air Force hangar somewhere. We've seen
• 2:38:28
  it in movies where you know, I don't think anybody surprised,
• 2:38:30
  But I don't think anybody's got a problem with with
• 2:38:33
  a gray alien, you know, in an Air Force conference
• 2:38:38
  room somewhere. But the implications if we've had this relationship
• 2:38:43
  for so long, we know they didn't get here on
• 2:38:47
  a Chevy v eight engine. I mean, they've got some
• 2:38:49
  pretty high tech, right, And what the part of the
• 2:38:54
  implications are that we are being asked to step up
• 2:39:01
  to become a different species to meet the intelligence that
• 2:39:08
  is being offered to us. And there are different forms
• 2:39:14
  of that intelligence. Some of that intelligence is prone to war,
• 2:39:17
  and that's not the ones that we want to.
• 2:39:21
  Speaker 1: Necessarily, that's hard to believe that they get so far,
• 2:39:25
  they could travel from other places in the universe, Hey,
• 2:39:28
  they still have war.
• 2:39:29
  Speaker 2: That's the disappointing thing for me. And so this is
• 2:39:32
  where we go back the ancient texts. They begin with
• 2:39:34
  a war in the heavens, or with the Bible calls,
• 2:39:38
  you know, the fall and the war is what destroyed
• 2:39:42
  a planet in our Solar system. I think Randall's probably
• 2:39:45
  talked about that.
• 2:39:46
  Speaker 1: Well, that's the Kookie theory about Mars too, right.
• 2:39:49
  Speaker 2: Mars used to have an atmosphere. It doesn't anymore, and
• 2:39:51
  they believe that there is a compelling argument that could
• 2:39:58
  be made for war destroying. I think when we get
• 2:40:02
  there and we see the archaeological remnants that are there,
• 2:40:06
  I think we'll have the answer to that. But that
• 2:40:08
  is scary, isn't that, Joe? That you have be so
• 2:40:11
  advanced and still have the still allow differences to be
• 2:40:19
  so great that the only way to solve them is
• 2:40:21
  to hurt one another and destroy one another.
• 2:40:23
  Speaker 1: But also makes for great science fiction movies because without
• 2:40:27
  the war in space, you have no Star Trek, you know,
• 2:40:30
  you have no Star Wars.
• 2:40:32
  Speaker 2: Well, maybe this is where we break that cycle. Maybe
• 2:40:35
  we wake up our humanness and we accept the power
• 2:40:38
  of human divinity and we accept what it means, and
• 2:40:42
  we imbue our children with a deep sense of a
• 2:40:47
  healthy sense that there's something very special about them worth
• 2:40:50
  preserving so that they care about themselves. And then that
• 2:40:54
  begins to inform the way we live in the world,
• 2:40:58
  we would be living in a very very different world.
• 2:41:00
  Speaker 1: I think you're right, and I think you saying that
• 2:41:03
  is very important because it gets that word out there
• 2:41:05
  and people start to consider it and think about it.
• 2:41:08
  And I think that's the only way people find these
• 2:41:10
  things is for people like you come out and have
• 2:41:13
  these conversations and spark thoughts in people's head like maybe
• 2:41:17
  I'm thinking and behaving and living the wrong way, and
• 2:41:19
  maybe maybe we could just become more united and more
• 2:41:23
  positive and recognize this incredible gift that we have of
• 2:41:26
  this life.
• 2:41:26
  Speaker 2: But look with the science. See the science, the science
• 2:41:30
  is so compartmentalized. And I saw this when I was working,
• 2:41:34
  even in the industry. So a discovery is made in
• 2:41:38
  genetics and it stays in that genetics box and it
• 2:41:42
  gets published in some obscure. The new way of thinking
• 2:41:47
  is looking at humans from an IT perspective. So there
• 2:41:50
  are journals like the Journal of Soft Computing. I didn't
• 2:41:53
  even talk about that. The Journal of Soft Computing has
• 2:41:56
  just come out and said that human DNA three dimensional
• 2:41:59
  human debas is a fractal antenna. Now what's that mean?
• 2:42:03
  And antenna tunes of a signal, A fractal antenna tunes
• 2:42:07
  to a vast array of signals across the broad spectrum.
• 2:42:10
  We got fifty trillion of them in our bodies. And
• 2:42:13
  the journal is saying it. But who reads that? Who's
• 2:42:15
  reading the Journal of Soft Compute? Who has?
• 2:42:17
  Speaker 1: God you are?
• 2:42:17
  Speaker 2: Who has who has a beautiful hardbound copy of the
• 2:42:21
  Journal of Soft Computing next their bed?
• 2:42:23
  Speaker 1: Like I do? Well the fact that you know what
• 2:42:26
  you just told people?
• 2:42:27
  Speaker 2: Now people know Yeah, So it's a very different way
• 2:42:29
  of thinking. But if we can begin seeing ourselves, and really,
• 2:42:33
  I think the greatest task that we're cherished, that we're
• 2:42:37
  that we're tasked with right now is to cherish and
• 2:42:41
  honor and care for the gift of the human body,
• 2:42:45
  because I believe it is a gift because there was
• 2:42:49
  an intervention that created the mutations that give us what
• 2:42:53
  we have today. We don't know who or what, but
• 2:42:56
  we're not the product of natural evolution. And until we
• 2:43:00
  understand fully what that is, Joe, why would we want
• 2:43:02
  to give that away to technology before we even know
• 2:43:06
  what it means to be human? Then once we give
• 2:43:08
  the way, we can never go back. This is how
• 2:43:10
  you lose a species and I think we're worth preserving.
• 2:43:13
  And my that's my message. I'm advocating for our humanness,
• 2:43:17
  for our divinity, for our our love, because that's what
• 2:43:21
  sets us apart from all our forms of life, and
• 2:43:24
  I think we're worth preserving.
• 2:43:26
  Speaker 1: I agree with you, and I appreciate you very much,
• 2:43:30
  and thank you very much for coming on here. It
• 2:43:32
  was a lot of fun. Hey, let's do it again.
• 2:43:34
  Speaker 2: Are you saying we're finished?
• 2:43:36
  Speaker 1: We are almost three hours?
• 2:43:37
  Speaker 2: Oh wow?
• 2:43:38
  Speaker 1: Okay, crazy?
• 2:43:38
  Speaker 2: All right, Joe, Well, thank you, I thank you, know,
• 2:43:41
  thank you are just an amazing listener, and I appreciate
• 2:43:45
  the long format and the opportunity to flesh out these
• 2:43:47
  ideas in their entirety, So thank you for that.
• 2:43:50
  Speaker 1: Well, it's my pleasure. Thank you for being interesting so
• 2:43:52
  I could just listen. It's like, but it's you know,
• 2:43:55
  I only have people in the podcast that I'm interested in.
• 2:43:58
  So when I saw a lot of your stuff online,
• 2:44:01
  like this guy is fascinating and it was great. I
• 2:44:03
  really enjoyed it. Thank you for before next study so much.
• 2:44:05
  All right, all right, thank you Mary. We'll do as