BrightStar

Parcourir tous les Events

Découvre des rassemblements conscients

events

Yoga
Meditation
Breathwork
Qigong
Tai Chi
Sacred Music
World Music
Medicine Music
Sound Healing
Ecstatic Dance
Destinations populaires
BaliSedonaLos AngelesCosta RicaNew YorkSan FranciscoAustinMiamiJoshua TreeTulum
Voir toutes les catégoriesVoir toutes les destinations

Explorer toutes les fonctionnalités

Des outils puissants pour développer tes événements

Fonctionnalités de la plateforme

Tarification dynamique intelligente
Catégories de billets
Places assignées
Récupération des paniers abandonnés
Récupération des visiteurs
Dons & Prix variables
Système d'affiliation
Scanner de billets
Codes promo
Questions personnalisées
Partage de billets
Ventes additionnelles & Options
Analyses & Rapports
Séquences d'emails
Liste d'attente / Notifier / Rappeler
Personnes & Lieux
Artists & TeachersEvent OrganizersVenues & StudiosKnowledge BaseGlossaryInspiration
Voir toutes les fonctionnalitésÀ propos
TarifsBlog
Language
Saved events
Parcourir tous les événements

events

YogaMeditationBreathworkQigongTai ChiSacred MusicWorld MusicMedicine Music

Destinations populaires

BaliSedonaLos AngelesCosta RicaNew YorkSan Francisco

Personnes & Lieux

Artists & TeachersEvent OrganizersVenues & StudiosKnowledge BaseGlossaryInspiration

Fonctionnalités de la plateforme

Tarification dynamique intelligenteCatégories de billetsPlaces assignéesRécupération des paniers abandonnésRécupération des visiteursDons & Prix variablesSystème d'affiliationScanner de billetsCodes promoQuestions personnaliséesPartage de billetsVentes additionnelles & OptionsAnalyses & RapportsSéquences d'emailsListe d'attente / Notifier / Rappeler
Voir toutes les fonctionnalitésÀ propos
TarifsBlog
ConnexionChercheursCréateurs
  • Parcourir tous les Événements
  • Pour les chercheurs
  • Yoga
  • Méditation
  • Breathwork
  • Qi gong
  • Tai-chi
  • Musique sacrée
  • Musiques du monde
  • Musique médecine
  • Soins sonores
  • Danse extatique
  • Retraites
  • Ateliers
  • Toutes les catégories →
  • Bali
  • Sedona
  • Los Angeles
  • Costa Rica
  • Tulum
  • Byron Bay
  • San Francisco
  • Austin
  • New York
  • San Diego
  • Denver
  • Seattle
  • Portland
  • Miami
  • Toutes les villes →
  • Join the Movement
  • Why we list
  • Sell Globally
  • Pour les créateurs
  • Pour les équipes
  • Pour les écrivains
  • Pour les enseignants
  • Pour les artistes de kirtan
  • Pour les studios
  • Pour les festivals
  • Pour les centres de retraite
  • Pour les associations
  • Ambassadeur de marque
  • Billetterie gratuite
  • Elevate
  • Amplify
  • Réseau de 500K+ acheteurs
  • Récupération des paniers abandonnés
  • Tarification dynamique intelligente
  • Catégories de billets
  • Événements récurrents
  • Places assignées
  • Système d'affiliation
  • Liste d'attente / Notifier
  • Scanner de billets
  • Widget intégrable
  • Diffusion d'événements
  • Messagerie
  • Intégrations
  • Rapports
  • Toutes les fonctionnalités →
  • À propos
  • L'écosystème
  • Blog
  • Glossaire
  • Inspiration
  • Centre d'aide
  • Contact
  • Documentation API
  • Ressources de marque
  • Carrières
  • Presse
  • Conditions d'utilisation
  • Politique de confidentialité

Événements

  • Parcourir tous les Événements
  • Pour les chercheurs
  • Yoga
  • Méditation
  • Breathwork
  • Qi gong
  • Tai-chi
  • Musique sacrée
  • Musiques du monde
  • Musique médecine
  • Soins sonores
  • Danse extatique
  • Retraites
  • Ateliers
  • Toutes les catégories →

Destinations

  • Bali
  • Sedona
  • Los Angeles
  • Costa Rica
  • Tulum
  • Byron Bay
  • San Francisco
  • Austin
  • New York
  • San Diego
  • Denver
  • Seattle
  • Portland
  • Miami
  • Toutes les villes →

Pour les créateurs

  • Join the Movement
  • Why we list
  • Sell Globally
  • Pour les créateurs
  • Pour les équipes
  • Pour les écrivains
  • Pour les enseignants
  • Pour les artistes de kirtan
  • Pour les studios
  • Pour les festivals
  • Pour les centres de retraite
  • Pour les associations
  • Ambassadeur de marque
  • Billetterie gratuite
  • Elevate
  • Amplify

Fonctionnalités

  • Réseau de 500K+ acheteurs
  • Récupération des paniers abandonnés
  • Tarification dynamique intelligente
  • Catégories de billets
  • Événements récurrents
  • Places assignées
  • Système d'affiliation
  • Liste d'attente / Notifier
  • Scanner de billets
  • Widget intégrable
  • Diffusion d'événements
  • Messagerie
  • Intégrations
  • Rapports
  • Toutes les fonctionnalités →

Entreprise

  • À propos
  • L'écosystème
  • Blog
  • Glossaire
  • Inspiration
  • Centre d'aide
  • Contact
  • Documentation API
  • Ressources de marque
  • Carrières
  • Presse
  • Conditions d'utilisation
  • Politique de confidentialité
BrightStar
Téléchargez l'app
Télécharger dans l'App StoreDisponible surGoogle Play
© 2026 BrightStar. Tous droits réservés.
Inspiration

Near-Death at Sunset Beach: Where UFOs and the Unseen Meet

TE
Third Eye Drops
Oct 30, 2026
9 min de lecture

Source : THIRD EYE DROPS with Michael Phillip

À regarder · 6

The signs at Sunset Beach on Oahu are not subtle. They are permanent, well-made steel, and they say to be very careful, and then to be very careful again. Keith Thompson, twenty-four years old and fresh off running a marathon, read them the way young men read warnings: as meant for someone else. He and his friends were going to body surf. The day before, they had done the big thing. Now they were going to play in the water. Within minutes a rip tide had him, and Thompson, who did not yet know what a rip tide was, did the one thing that makes them worse. He fought it. Thompson told host Michael Phillip on the Third Eye Drops podcast that he was pulled down for a long time, and when he came back up, he was no longer entirely in his body.

What happened next is the spine of a conversation that runs more than two hours and reaches well past the beach. It is also the reason Thompson, a journalist and author of books including Angels and Aliens and The UFO Paradox, now describes himself as a reporter of the mysteries. The episode gave him a vantage point, and from there he has spent decades trying to map where the unseen world leaks into ours.

Lecture · 8 sections

What did a 360-degree near-death experience feel like?

Thompson's account is precise about the perception itself. He describes a 360-degree awareness frame, a sense of seeing in every direction at once, what he calls "soul sense" in the show's promotion. From that vantage he saw a body in the water.

"I said, 'That person's in trouble.' And then I said, 'Oh, wait a minute. That person is me.'" Thompson, on Third Eye Drops (4:39)

He was not frightened in the way you might expect. He told Phillip he felt the shift had already happened. On the shore, his friends were calling for him to fight harder and come in, and he was telling them, in effect, that he was fine. He had concluded he was dead, and his response was almost cheerful. He recalled saying, "Oh, dead isn't dead."

The detail that matters most for the rest of the story is that Thompson had not read Raymond Moody's Life After Life, which had already become a bestseller. He had no template for what was happening. He did not know about the tunnel, the life review, or the reunion with the dead. He experienced all of them anyway, and when he later encountered the literature, the pieces lined up in a way that unsettled him further.

Why does a dead relative's visit matter so much?

Among the figures who appeared to him was his great-uncle Sam. Thompson assumed Sam was alive. He learned otherwise only after he had survived the drowning and called his mother in Ohio, who did not yet know about the near-death experience. Thompson asked how Uncle Sam was doing. She told him Sam had died in his sleep, and the death had happened before the drowning.

"How did you happen to see somebody who you didn't know was dead?" Thompson, on Third Eye Drops (6:50)

This is where Thompson distinguishes his story from the usual retelling. Skeptics have an easy answer for the grandparents: of course a dying man sees people he knows are dead, because he is thinking about them. Uncle Sam breaks that explanation. Thompson calls this kind of event a peak-in-Darien experience, a category within near-death research in which the perceptions carry a veridical element, meaning they can be checked against facts that were not available to the experiencer. He is clear that one case does not settle anything, but for him it changed the question he was asking.

What happened when he told people?

He told the truth, and the truth did not go over well. When his friends pulled him from the water, he told one of them, "You understand I did die. And somehow I came back." The look on the friend's face taught him a lesson. Several of his friends, the more sophisticated ones, reframed the whole event as trauma. Thompson admits they were partly right. His body had nearly died, and his ego had struggled. But he also had the sense of having connected with a larger frame of what is real.

That tension, between an experience that feels more real than daily life and a culture that tells you it is only chemistry, became his working life. He learned to keep quiet. He began reading everything he could find on mysticism, meditation, and quantum questions, and he slowly built a second career around the people who had come to him with similar stories. He describes himself as having developed a kind of sixth sense for others who were living two lives: one in the everyday world, and one in touch with what he called more of reality, which neither science nor religion has agreed to accept.

What are the patterns that connect?

Thompson returns repeatedly to a line from the anthropologist Gregory Bateson: look for the patterns that connect. For Thompson, that instruction became a research method. Near-death experiences, UFO encounters, ghostly visitations, and objects that appear from nowhere are not identical in their details. But Thompson argues that they share broad structural features, and that those shared features point to something about the nature of reality itself.

"What is the nature of reality such that these events happen with regularity? What is the nature of things that they can happen and they do happen?" Thompson, on Third Eye Drops (22:09)

This is a different question from the one most public debates ask. The usual argument is whether a given sighting or experience is real. Thompson is asking what kind of universe would make such experiences recurring, cross-cultural, and consistent enough to be studied. Phillip, for his part, framed the conversation as a multimodal approach to these mysteries, one that does not sort experiences into tidy categories of folklore, fraud, and fact.

In the conversation, Thompson situates his ideas alongside a line of thinkers who have treated these phenomena as a kind of initiation rather than a set of isolated oddities. He points to the work of Jacques Vallée and John Mack, who viewed UFO encounters as shamanic initiations. The shamanic frame matters because it takes the experiencer seriously. A person who is changed by an encounter is not merely misreporting a hallucination. They are going through something that transforms who they are, much as a traditional initiate does.

Why do objects materialize at all?

The new book, Anomalous Phenomena: The Mystery of Objects That Materialize and Translocate, pushes the argument into physical territory. Thompson says he decided to chronicle as many cases as he could of objects appearing, moving, or arriving in places they should not be able to reach. The catalog he describes is broad. It includes minted coins and newspapers, and, in one example he gives, an entire newspaper dated April 1, 1944.

He also points to the Scole Experiment, a series of séance-based sittings in which materializations were reported under controlled conditions, and to the DMT realm, the territory of intense psychedelic experience that many users describe as populated and purposeful. These are not presented as settled proof. They are presented as evidence that the boundary between mind and matter may be more porous than mechanistic science allows.

That is the largest claim in the conversation. Thompson argues that the 400-year reign of mechanistic materialism is finally coming apart, and that the anomalies once dismissed at the margins are now what is pushing the framework to its limits. He is not arguing that a UFO is a dream. He is arguing that the categories themselves, physical and nonphysical, inner and outer, may not be as separate as we assumed.

What is the daimon, and why bring Plato into it?

Thompson also draws on Plato's concept of the personal daimon, an inner guiding presence that the ancient Greeks took seriously. The idea gives him a bridge between the personal and the cosmic. An encounter with a non-human intelligence can feel intimate, directive, even personal, and the daimon offers an old language for that feeling without requiring it to be merely projection.

This is also why Thompson refused to leave his own story out of the book. Early in the conversation he explained that he had been asked why he included his personal experiences, including being with his mother in hospice and witnessing what he now understands were deathbed visitations. His answer is blunt:

"I'm no longer willing to leave them out in the name of some kind of false sense of objectivity. I can talk about my own experiences and be objective toward them." Thompson, on Third Eye Drops (2:21)

Where does the argument go from here?

The honest state of Thompson's argument is that it is unfinished. He is not offering a clean theory that resolves the mysteries. He is offering a method, a set of cases, and a conviction that the pattern is real enough to take seriously. He sees mainstream disclosure developments and the growing public interest in UFOs as a possible turning point, though he is wary of how the subject gets packaged. He has also been careful not to let the story become only about him. The people he interviewed shared their own experiences, and he believes his book is stronger for taking them seriously.

What stays with a reader is not any single case. It is the image of a young man in the surf, looking down at a body he recognized as his own, and deciding that he was fine. Thompson spent the next several decades asking what that decision meant, and what kind of reality would allow it.

Where to go from here

If this conversation opened a question for you, start with the books Thompson has written, especially Angels and Aliens, The UFO Paradox, and his newest work, Anomalous Phenomena. Read Moody's Life After Life alongside them, because Thompson's own story is most vivid when you compare it to the early near-death literature he had not read at the time. Then return to Bateson's instruction and try it on your own experience: not whether a single event proves something, but which patterns keep recurring, and what they would require of the world to be true.

Comments

Loading the conversation…

Transcript

[0:00] I'm 24 years old, swimming off the shore

[0:03] of Hawaii,

[0:05] Oahu, with friends. Long story short, I

[0:08] got taken by rip tides, didn't know what

[0:10] rip tides were, thought you fight

[0:12] against them, you don't. I was pulled

[0:15] down for a long period and when I came

[0:18] back up, I was out of my body. I didn't

[0:21] know it right away, but I had a 360°

[0:24] awareness frame.

[0:26] And I saw this body of a swimmer. I

[0:28] said, "That person's in trouble." And

[0:30] then I said, "Oh, wait a minute. That

[0:32] person is me." And I developed a sixth

[0:35] sense for people who were already on

[0:37] that same page, who also were living two

[0:39] different lives. One is in the mundane

[0:41] everyday world and the other is in touch

[0:44] with more of reality that is not agreed

[0:46] by science or religion to be real.

[0:49] >> Yeah.

[0:49] >> What did I become? A reporter of the

[0:52] mysteries.

[0:53] >> So, when did you begin to suspect that

[0:55] there's a relationship between what you

[0:57] experienced in this near-death state and

[1:01] all of these other categories of the

[1:04] mysterious, the phenomenon, you know,

[1:06] what people call colloquially UFOs? When

[1:10] did all of these pieces start coming

[1:11] together for you?

[1:12] >> As Gregory Bateson said, "Look for the

[1:15] patterns that connect." What are the

[1:17] patterns that connect anomalous

[1:18] experience? No, they're not all alike in

[1:21] their

[1:22] particulars, but in the broad patterns

[1:26] anomalous phenomena have some some

[1:28] common elements. The question I ask now

[1:30] is, "What is the nature of reality such

[1:34] that these events happen [music] with

[1:36] regularity? What is the nature of things

[1:39] that they can happen and they do

[1:41] happen?"

[1:47] >> This

[1:48] weird,

[1:49] wonderful topic

[1:51] that that really, I mean, I don't even

[1:53] know if it's one topic, if it's a suite

[1:55] of topics, or if all the topics flow

[1:57] back into one topic, but whatever it is,

[2:00] we do seem to be going in the same

[2:02] direction and have

[2:04] a very similar sort of multimodal view

[2:08] of how we interact with these mysteries,

[2:11] the phenomenon, all these things that

[2:12] you and I are both interested in.

[2:15] And um

[2:16] for you, I think one of the things that

[2:18] I love

[2:19] is that it start It seems like it starts

[2:21] very personal for you with with this

[2:24] experience that you had in Hawaii, which

[2:26] kind of, you know,

[2:28] probably was a a massive ontological

[2:31] disruption to your life.

[2:33] Um so maybe we could start there. I

[2:35] think I think that would be a good place

[2:36] to start.

[2:37] >> Yeah, I will. And and I've been asked by

[2:39] some of the shows I've done, uh how come

[2:41] you put that personal experience in or

[2:44] your personal experience of being with

[2:46] your mother at the end of her life in a

[2:49] hospice and seeing what I now know were

[2:52] deathbed visitations of other dead

[2:54] people. Not prepared to see that at all.

[2:57] Why did you put that stuff in? And I

[2:58] finally said it's because I was blessed

[3:01] by

[3:02] the people that I interviewed for my

[3:03] book who described their experiences.

[3:07] Uh they shared very personally.

[3:09] And I figured I'm not going to just do

[3:11] this the third-person objective thing as

[3:14] if I don't have any experiences of my

[3:15] own. So

[3:17] my book is not primarily or solely about

[3:20] my own experiences, but I've arrived at

[3:22] a stage of life where I'm no longer

[3:23] willing to leave them out in the name of

[3:25] some kind of false sense of objectivity.

[3:28] I can talk about my own experiences and

[3:30] be objective toward them.

[3:32] So in that sense, yes. I'm 24 years old

[3:35] swimming off the shore of Hawaii

[3:38] uh Oahu with friends.

[3:40] We just run a marathon the day before.

[3:42] We'd gone to Hawaii to run a marathon.

[3:44] So we were just kind of like we had done

[3:46] the big thing. We're going to go do some

[3:48] body surfing. The signs were posted.

[3:51] They're permanent signs at Sunset Beach.

[3:54] Well-made steel signs. Be very careful.

[4:00] Be very careful. Don't go in even.

[4:03] So I said, "That doesn't apply to me."

[4:04] It goes with being 24 years old and

[4:07] having just run a marathon. You think

[4:08] you can do anything. Long story short, I

[4:10] got taken by rip tides, didn't know what

[4:13] rip tides were. I thought you fight

[4:14] against them. You don't.

[4:17] It's a larger story, how to survive

[4:19] waves. I was pulled down for a long

[4:22] period.

[4:23] And when I came back up, I was out of my

[4:26] body. I didn't know it right away, but I

[4:28] had a 360°

[4:30] awareness frame.

[4:32] And I saw this body of a swimmer. I

[4:34] said, "That person's in trouble."

[4:37] And then I said, "Oh, wait a minute.

[4:39] That person is me."

[4:41] It used to be me. It's who the people on

[4:43] the shore, my friends, think is me.

[4:46] They're saying, "Keith, fight harder.

[4:48] Come in."

[4:50] You're And I And I said, "I'm fine. I'm

[4:53] not that person." I mean, I I really had

[4:56] that sense. The shift had happened.

[4:58] And one of my friends, named Mary, on

[5:01] the side of the beach, talking no louder

[5:03] than this, to another friend of ours

[5:05] named Moore, she said, "Why didn't he

[5:07] listen?

[5:08] We told him it wasn't safe. We all got

[5:11] out before it got so bad. Why didn't he

[5:13] listen? What" And I said to my friend

[5:15] Mary, "I'm fine."

[5:17] What I meant by that was that in the big

[5:20] picture,

[5:21] I was fine, because I thought I had

[5:24] died.

[5:25] I thought this is what death is. I even

[5:26] said, I can remember, "Oh,

[5:29] dead isn't dead."

[5:31] And so, yeah. By the way,

[5:34] even though the near-death experience

[5:36] had been publicized by Raymond Moody in

[5:38] Life After Life,

[5:40] uh the book was out. It was even a

[5:42] best-seller by that time, apparently.

[5:44] But I

[5:46] hadn't read it. I wasn't interested in

[5:48] near death. I was interested in having

[5:49] near life ex- I wanted to live as big a

[5:51] life as possible. Well, guess what? I

[5:54] was living life right on the edge right

[5:55] there. And so, I

[5:58] uh

[5:59] did not know about the near-death

[6:01] experience and its stages. Didn't know

[6:03] about the tunnel that I was going

[6:04] through.

[6:06] I didn't know that I that the people I

[6:08] meeting, my grandparents, my dead

[6:10] grandparents, my dead friends, dead

[6:12] relatives,

[6:13] um were all suddenly before me. I had my

[6:17] life I had the life review process.

[6:20] >> Wow.

[6:21] >> And here's the key. The debunkers say,

[6:23] "Well, Mr. Thompson, you you you know,

[6:25] you knew your grandparents are dead. You

[6:27] saw them in this fantasmagoric

[6:31] scenario of yours. This imaginal

[6:34] scenario, let's use that word. But that

[6:36] doesn't mean much. Of course you saw

[6:38] your dead grandparents." Then I would

[6:40] say, "Well, why did I see my

[6:43] my dead Uncle Sam?"

[6:45] I don't mean the patriotic Uncle Sam. I

[6:47] had an uncle, great uncle named Sam.

[6:50] I saw Uncle Sam,

[6:53] who I thought was still alive.

[6:55] I did not know at this time till I

[6:57] survived my near-death experience

[7:00] and talked to my mom

[7:02] in Ohio. She didn't yet know about my

[7:04] near-death experience because I'd

[7:06] already learned in the interim. You

[7:07] don't casually talk about

[7:09] that. You'll get patted on the head or

[7:12] people will back away from you like

[7:13] you're contagious. That's a big part of

[7:15] the story. In any case, I says, "How's

[7:17] Uncle Sam?" She goes, "Oh, Keith, I'm so

[7:19] sorry I haven't told you. Uncle Sam

[7:21] passed away in his sleep."

[7:24] "When did he pass away, Mom?"

[7:26] And it was before my near-death

[7:28] experience. I did not know he died. This

[7:30] is called a peak-in-Darian

[7:33] experience. It is a type of near-death

[7:35] experience which really passes the

[7:37] muster of veridicality, true

[7:40] authenticity. How do you How did you

[7:42] happen to see somebody who you didn't

[7:44] know was dead? So, yes, I came back.

[7:47] Literally, when I came back on shore and

[7:49] my friends are pulled me out of the

[7:50] water, one of them said to me,

[7:53] "Keith, we thought you'd lost it out

[7:54] there. We thought you'd died." And I

[7:57] said,

[7:58] rather enthusiastically, this is my

[8:00] friend Moore. I said, "You understand I

[8:03] did die.

[8:04] And somehow I came back."

[8:06] The look on his face told me that would

[8:09] not be a fruitful line of conversation

[8:12] for me to have with many more people.

[8:14] Looked at me like I was nuts. My friends

[8:16] all did and a few of them who were quite

[8:18] sophisticated in the way that

[8:20] psychologists as we know in a certain

[8:21] reductive way, they told me that I was

[8:24] in trauma. Well, actually that part was

[8:25] true. I'd fought very hard and my body

[8:27] had nearly died and my ego had my ego

[8:30] struggled mightily. So, yes, I've had

[8:33] the ego had the trauma.

[8:36] But I had connected with the a larger

[8:38] frame of what actually is. So, I I

[8:40] learned very quickly, don't talk about

[8:42] this casually and in fact, I protected

[8:44] myself over many years. I went on a I

[8:47] became involved in spirituality, not

[8:50] surprisingly. Began to read everything I

[8:52] could read about mysticism, meditation,

[8:54] quantum mysteries.

[8:57] And I developed a sixth sense for people

[8:59] who were already on that same page, who

[9:01] also were living two different lives.

[9:03] One is in the mundane everyday world.

[9:06] And

[9:07] the other is in touch with more of

[9:08] reality that is not agreed by science or

[9:10] religion to be real.

[9:13] Yeah. So, that I had this frame, I kept

[9:15] it to myself and what did what did I

[9:17] become? A reporter of the mysteries. No

[9:20] big surprise there. I've been trying to

[9:22] figure this out my whole life but with a

[9:25] with a with a subtleness about me

[9:26] because I came back

[9:28] uh no matter what happened ontologically

[9:30] that day, I lost fear of death. I wasn't

[9:33] aware of death prior to that but I would

[9:35] learn to sit with people when they die.

[9:38] I sat with my mother in hospice when she

[9:40] died and I had an experience in the last

[9:43] 15 minutes of her life. She was on um

[9:46] pain control, morphine.

[9:48] And in that room where I sat with her

[9:50] and was actually cradling her, I saw a

[9:53] mist

[9:54] rise near her feet.

[9:56] And it and it morphed into human shaped

[9:59] forms. I heard

[10:01] melodic sounds like a dulcimer or wind

[10:05] chimes.

[10:06] And then I looked at my mother's face.

[10:09] She had a deep

[10:10] aura of contentment and tranquility.

[10:14] She died. I checked her pulse. Then I

[10:17] then came, maybe 5 minutes later, a

[10:19] polite knock on the door.

[10:21] The hospice nurse says, "Oh, hello, Mr.

[10:23] Thompson. Just checking in." I said,

[10:25] "Well, I want to let you know, Mom just

[10:26] passed away." She said, "Oh."

[10:29] And she goes, "Well, I want to tell you

[10:31] I felt drawn to your room."

[10:34] And I said, "I can understand why."

[10:37] And she then said,

[10:39] "Oh,

[10:40] I can talk to you."

[10:42] And I said, "Yes." I mean, in effect,

[10:44] she said, "We're on the same page." And

[10:46] and I said, "What did you Why did you

[10:48] come?" She goes, "I had a sense of

[10:49] something going on here.

[10:51] I had a sense of something some kind of

[10:53] some incident, something powerful." And

[10:55] I told her about the deathbed

[10:57] experiences. And then she then she said,

[11:00] "We don't get to talk about this much,

[11:02] we hospice nurses.

[11:04] But you're clearly are on the same page.

[11:07] This happens all the time.

[11:09] Families are not as open to it as you

[11:11] are." I said, "Well, I I had a

[11:12] near-death experience myself." "So did

[11:14] I," she said.

[11:16] So the nurse was able to open to her

[11:19] larger frame of reference. Hospice

[11:21] nurses are like mystics. They have to be

[11:25] cuz they live with this

[11:27] a lot. And so she next thing she said

[11:29] was very mundane. She goes, "Well, why

[11:31] don't you and your brother" My brother

[11:32] was in the other room. She says, "Why

[11:34] don't you guys go out, get a little

[11:36] something to drink or eat cuz I now need

[11:38] to prepare your mother, you know, her

[11:39] mother's body."

[11:41] So we went back into the

[11:43] the existential frame of preparing a

[11:45] dead body. But we both understood

[11:48] that the dead body was not ever the

[11:51] whole person. And that the whole person

[11:54] uh was probably still present in the

[11:56] room. My mom was probably still still

[11:59] watching. And so I've come to believe

[12:00] that the dead are not not in the other

[12:03] realms. Those realms are much closer to

[12:05] us than we know.

[12:06] >> Yeah.

[12:07] Yeah, there's going to be I think a

[12:09] running theme through this conversation

[12:12] of the way things seem to us from the

[12:16] POV that we're stuck in now and the way

[12:18] that things really are. And

[12:21] I don't and and I almost think that it's

[12:23] a necessity that when we're in the state

[12:26] that we're in right now, when we're in

[12:27] this embodied sensory state,

[12:32] we we can't perceive that this other

[12:36] realm that we perceive to be somehow,

[12:39] you know,

[12:39] dualistically binary, but there are

[12:42] times where that veil thins for whatever

[12:46] reason. Like maybe we tried to get there

[12:48] through um

[12:50] you know, deep meditation or uh

[12:52] heightened state of consciousness, a

[12:54] psychedelic state, whatever, or there's

[12:56] a death occurring, or there's something

[12:57] we can't explain, or or or whatever. For

[13:01] whatever reason, there do seem to be

[13:03] these moments where that veil thins and

[13:06] and there's this weird paradox between

[13:09] imminence and transcendence where we

[13:11] realize it's

[13:13] a different quality, but it's also here

[13:15] at the exact same time.

[13:17] And

[13:18] you know, before we get too far away

[13:19] from it, um I'm sure you've encountered

[13:22] this in your in your research since.

[13:25] But one of the things you hear about a

[13:27] lot in these near-death experiences

[13:30] or out-of-body states

[13:32] um is this 360° kind of perception that

[13:36] you said that you also had during your

[13:38] experience. And this is something that I

[13:40] remember um being discussed by one of

[13:43] the Neoplatonists.

[13:46] I don't remember which one. It may even

[13:49] be Plutarch, actually, like the middle

[13:51] Platonist, but they describe this soul

[13:53] sense, they call it. And and and they

[13:56] describe it in this way that it's almost

[13:57] like all of your senses kind of

[14:00] congealed into one

[14:03] super sense or whatever that is kind of

[14:05] like divided up amongst all of your

[14:08] um

[14:08] you know, your what we know as the five

[14:10] senses when you're when you're in the

[14:11] body. But can you

[14:14] actually recall what that was like

[14:18] or or or is it so just like a like a

[14:20] like a strange memory? You know, like

[14:21] I've I've been on ayahuasca retreats.

[14:23] I've been in like heightened states of

[14:24] consciousness. And it's like I can tell

[14:26] you what happened in those states, but I

[14:27] can't like I can't quite

[14:30] really relive it because it's so

[14:33] different than the quality of my

[14:34] everyday experiences. But what was that

[14:36] like?

[14:37] Was that burnt into your mind somehow

[14:39] that that kind of perception? And do you

[14:41] can you actually like remember what that

[14:42] was like?

[14:43] >> Yes, I can. And it and I've I'm I'm

[14:45] assisted in this by having access to

[14:47] metaphors that I've discovered since.

[14:49] And I know you have as well. It has a

[14:51] fancy term in Platonic lore, Greek,

[14:54] anamnesis. Yeah. Now, amnesis refers to

[14:57] amnesia, forgetting.

[14:59] Anamnesis means not forgetting.

[15:02] Which means you remember. It's a funny

[15:04] duality the phrase to to suddenly stop

[15:06] forgetting.

[15:08] Wow. It was like a remembering.

[15:11] This 360 was like a remembering. And I

[15:13] think what is remembered is something

[15:15] prior, but not like prior yesterday,

[15:18] prior ontologically.

[15:20] What what we what we've seemed to do

[15:22] when we we come into these bodies, which

[15:24] by the way, I I your entire description

[15:27] of the

[15:28] dualism is is accurate.

[15:31] But I don't subscribe I really never

[15:33] have to the degree that I thought about

[15:35] it. Subscribe to the part of Gnosticism

[15:38] that said it's a terrible mistake.

[15:41] It's trapped in these bodies.

[15:42] >> Agreed.

[15:43] >> So, that to me is an add-on. It comes

[15:46] from a kind of Manichaean dualism. The

[15:49] body world is bad, we must get out of

[15:51] it. No, I think that nature is doing

[15:54] something

[15:55] by by embodying human beings. I think

[15:58] it's it you know, it's it's it's

[16:01] consciousness and reality continues to

[16:03] try to learn. God continues to learn.

[16:07] In my view. And I'm

[16:09] I have no problem saying that. I know I

[16:11] wouldn't say it in certain churches

[16:13] around certain church people. I'm not a

[16:15] church person. Tried to be. Not I

[16:18] haven't found the church that holds the

[16:20] uh

[16:21] variety of things I do. And I have great

[16:23] respect, however, for the the churching

[16:25] that people do have.

[16:26] It's a It's a frame that people can work

[16:28] in. So, anyway, yes, it's like a deep

[16:30] remembering, seeing that totality.

[16:33] Seeing my friend Mary say, "Why didn't

[16:35] he listen?"

[16:36] By the way,

[16:37] when this really kicked in for me was

[16:39] the next day when I survived and had a

[16:41] night to sleep and had hot soup and

[16:43] maybe a bath at the at the house we were

[16:45] renting in Hawaii.

[16:46] I said to Mary, "Could we go for a

[16:48] walk?"

[16:50] She said, "Sure." She was a good friend

[16:51] of hers. There was her boyfriend, so we

[16:53] were never we were always platonic

[16:54] friends.

[16:55] >> Mhm.

[16:56] >> She said, "What's on your mind?" I said,

[16:58] "Well, you can imagine what's on my

[16:59] mind." And she laughed. I said, "I heard

[17:01] what you said on the beach

[17:03] yesterday."

[17:05] She said, you know, tilted her head like

[17:07] a dog,

[17:08] you know, quizzically.

[17:09] She said, "What do you mean?" I said,

[17:10] "You said, 'Why didn't he listen?

[17:13] I told him it was too dangerous. Why did

[17:15] he take the risk?'"

[17:17] Her

[17:18] blood left her face.

[17:21] It drained out of her face.

[17:23] And we were two 20-somethings who had

[17:26] not studied the philosophy of mind. We

[17:28] didn't know about the hard question of

[17:30] consciousness, how does the material

[17:33] world become conscious, none of that

[17:34] yet.

[17:36] But, she knew that if I heard her

[17:39] you're many a great distance away

[17:41] against the background of the loud waves

[17:44] and the when these waves were I don't

[17:46] know how I survived.

[17:48] The So, acoustically, I did not hear her

[17:51] locally.

[17:52] When she said with this tone of volume

[17:54] in her voice, "Why didn't he let" It

[17:56] wasn't that she said, "Why didn't you

[17:58] listen?" No.

[18:00] She said, "Why didn't Keith listen?" So,

[18:02] I was already So, she said, "If you we

[18:04] we agreed that if we had this

[18:06] experience, then this this world is not

[18:09] what we think it is."

[18:11] And she became interested as I became

[18:13] interested. She did psychedelics, she

[18:15] did meditation.

[18:17] We both I don't know if it if my

[18:19] experience was that formative for her,

[18:22] but she went on and and by the way, she

[18:24] ended up passing many years later with

[18:26] the disease, and I sat with her near

[18:27] near the very end, and she said to me,

[18:29] she said,

[18:31] "You really hurt me, didn't you?"

[18:33] I said, "What?" She On the beach that

[18:35] day. Oh, I said, "Yeah."

[18:37] She said, "And uh

[18:39] and you told me that you weren't afraid.

[18:41] You lost your fear of death.

[18:44] Is that still the case?" I said, "Yes."

[18:47] And I I said to her something like, "Do

[18:49] you remember the hardest time in your

[18:51] life?" She goes, "Yeah, I'm having a lot

[18:53] of those now. You know, I'm dying."

[18:55] I said, "How's that going for you?"

[18:57] Playfully. She said, "Oh, you know me.

[18:59] I'm such a super achiever. I'm doing

[19:01] even dying well."

[19:03] She She said, uh said, "Yes, but I know

[19:06] hard times, Key. And I said, did you

[19:08] ever give up your faith in being?"

[19:12] Did you ever lose your trust that this

[19:14] in existence? She goes, "No."

[19:17] I said, "Keep that up."

[19:19] Mhm. Keep that up. So, I've been able to

[19:22] sit with people I I don't I'm not a

[19:24] person who sits with people. I don't I

[19:26] don't get paid to sit with dying people.

[19:28] I don't have a shingle.

[19:29] But I I found I sat with my mother. I

[19:32] was the one of my brothers, three

[19:33] brothers, who was comfortable sitting

[19:35] with my mother as she became

[19:36] increasingly emaciated. I say that not

[19:38] as a uh virtue. No, it was just that I

[19:41] wasn't afraid of something

[19:43] that we're supposed to be afraid of.

[19:45] When I saw it through the fear of death,

[19:47] I think I saw through a lot of fears.

[19:50] I think I got it I think frankly, uh

[19:52] most fear is of the fear of not existing

[19:54] anymore.

[19:56] And when you realize that well, I'm out

[19:57] of my body, I'm already in the outskirts

[19:59] of death,

[20:00] you So, you didn't really die. You came

[20:02] back. I don't care about that. I I with

[20:06] with as much degree of a certainty as I

[20:08] can have, I

[20:10] I believe I I I was in the early stages

[20:12] of dying. And when people really lose

[20:14] their, you know, there's no brain

[20:15] there's no brain activity, and they By

[20:17] the way, the brain activity disappears

[20:20] in near-death experiences in the

[20:21] hospital, and the and the clarity is

[20:24] more real than real. So, when there's

[20:26] that brain bypass and there's direct

[20:29] access to awareness, they come back and

[20:31] tell the doctor. The doctor says,

[20:33] Bruce Greyson, that's how he became a

[20:36] specialist in near-death. He was a

[20:37] hardcore materialist till he came back

[20:40] till his patient came back and he said,

[20:42] "Welcome back. I'm now going to give you

[20:44] your prognosis." He said to the patient

[20:46] very probably condescendingly. She said,

[20:48] "I know exactly what my prognosis is. I

[20:50] heard you talking to Dr. Smith in the

[20:52] other wing of the hospital."

[20:55] And I And then she named some other

[20:56] things that were like And his just

[20:58] dropped, you know, he picked his jaw jaw

[21:00] back up,

[21:01] reapplied it to his face,

[21:03] and said, "What What What are you

[21:05] describing?" And she gave some other

[21:07] non-local information that she should

[21:10] not have had access to. And he then made

[21:13] a practice, "I'm now going to start

[21:14] asking." This is what a real scientist

[21:16] does, by the way. So, I'm going to start

[21:18] asking all my other patients, "When you

[21:21] were under anesthesia,

[21:23] did anything happen that you remember?"

[21:25] Whatever. You ask a question that was

[21:27] designed to give them space. He began to

[21:30] find patient after patient saying, "You

[21:32] know, yeah, I I heard things I don't

[21:33] know how I heard." Far away? Yeah.

[21:36] Anyway, there you go.

[21:38] >> Yeah. No, it's it's all incredibly

[21:40] fascinating. And And I did talk to Bruce

[21:43] Greyson a few years ago when he came out

[21:45] with that with that book. I'm forgetting

[21:47] the name of it.

[21:47] >> After? After?

[21:48] >> After, yes. Yes. Hard one to remember.

[21:50] Such such a long title. Um but yeah, and

[21:53] I mean it is so compelling. The amount

[21:55] of research, the anecdotes. And I find

[21:58] that to be

[22:00] the most satisfying aspect of it,

[22:02] honestly. Is when you Is when you hear

[22:04] just such an emotionally impactful kind

[22:07] of

[22:08] truth coming from people who

[22:11] just they don't seem to have any reason

[22:14] to do anything other than be sincere.

[22:16] And of course, we could we could sit

[22:17] here and argue about like all the

[22:18] people, you know,

[22:20] seek attention in all kinds of ways, but

[22:22] man, some of those stories that I've

[22:24] seen like there need to be Oscars handed

[22:26] out if these are if these are fictional

[22:28] stories because it's like so compelling

[22:31] it's so moving it's so

[22:33] it feels real on on such a level that it

[22:37] stirs me so deeply emotionally and I

[22:39] have a really hard time you know

[22:42] dismissing this stuff and then when you

[22:44] back it up with the research of people

[22:46] like Raymond Moody Dr. Bruce Greyson

[22:48] it's

[22:50] it's it's pretty irrefutable though that

[22:51] said I had I mean have you

[22:54] side question have you been under

[22:55] anesthesia and ever experienced

[22:57] anything? I've been under anesthesia but

[22:58] never had any

[23:00] I've never come away with anything that

[23:02] I can remember.

[23:03] >> Despite how things may seem

[23:05] I really am not a fan of overly complex

[23:07] esoteric rabbit holes where you have to

[23:09] memorize 17 new pieces of vocabulary

[23:13] just to understand what's going on. I

[23:15] really do appreciate straightforwardness

[23:18] and simplicity and let's also be honest

[23:21] money and Bitcoin can definitely turn in

[23:24] to said complex rabbit holes and for

[23:27] that reason I am a huge fan of today's

[23:29] sponsor Cash App because they cut right

[23:32] to the chase. Not only can you use it to

[23:34] send cash you can buy Bitcoin starting

[23:37] with just a dollar and if you want to

[23:39] make that a regular thing Cash App

[23:40] actually allows you to set up automated

[23:42] purchases with zero fees through

[23:44] features like auto invest or round ups.

[23:47] Just choose however much you want to put

[23:49] in and check in or change it at any

[23:51] time. It could not be simpler my friends

[23:53] and for a limited time new customers can

[23:55] get a free $10 added to their balance.

[23:59] All you have to do is use code Bitcoin

[24:01] 10 when you sign up and send at least $5

[24:05] in the first two weeks terms apply. I

[24:08] really do love Cash App my friends. I've

[24:09] been using it for years. Download Cash

[24:11] App today link is going to be in the

[24:14] description and in the pinned comment.

[24:16] Thank you Cash App.

[24:17] >> I've never come away with anything that

[24:19] I can

[24:19] >> been under anesthesia. I remember when I

[24:21] was being counted down. I did not know

[24:23] that they had already started adding the

[24:25] the

[24:26] anesthesia

[24:28] and they asked me a question. They said,

[24:31] "So what what how far do you like to

[24:33] run?" They were just doing small talk

[24:34] with it that I was around. I said, "Oh,

[24:36] I like to do you know, a good 10K."

[24:39] And then the next thing I thought I was

[24:41] continuing the same. I came I next

[24:43] awareness was, "So when are we going to

[24:44] do this?"

[24:46] He said, "The operation has taken

[24:47] place."

[24:48] >> Yeah.

[24:49] >> It was a relatively routine procedure,

[24:50] but it did require a local or a general

[24:54] anesthetic. So I it was that fast. So it

[24:56] was seamless. I I did not have the sense

[24:58] of a gap. And by the way, I want to just

[25:01] add, isn't it ironic or poetically just

[25:03] and

[25:04] just amusing and delightful that it is

[25:07] actually through the advances in

[25:09] resuscitation technology

[25:12] that account for so much near-death

[25:15] experience brought back in. It doesn't

[25:17] require that kind of procedure. I nearly

[25:18] drowned, for example. Other people were

[25:21] in a car accident. I had a friend who

[25:23] nearly didn't survive a car accident.

[25:25] Above her body, saw the crash, saw her

[25:27] body. And I didn't get, nor did she, I

[25:31] didn't get the your time is not

[25:33] finished. You must go back. I that's too

[25:36] central casting for me. I just they they

[25:39] they sent me back. Keith's not ready or

[25:40] we've got we've got things in plan in in

[25:43] store for Keith. So we need him back on

[25:45] this I don't know. And nothing that

[25:47] profound, but I came back. So yeah, the

[25:49] the the advances in resuscitation

[25:52] technology uh western medicine is undone

[25:57] by its own bill. And by the way, I'm a

[26:00] big fan of western medicine.

[26:02] I know people's lives have been saved in

[26:04] through surgery and through medical

[26:06] procedures. So it's not an accident

[26:08] either. But most doctors they get to

[26:11] admit that they don't know what the big

[26:13] questions are about, either. Yeah. And

[26:15] their job is just to open your chest and

[26:17] to do a coronary bypass patch you back

[26:20] up again.

[26:21] >> Yeah.

[26:22] So so when did you begin to expect

[26:25] suspect that there's a relationship

[26:27] between what you experienced in this

[26:30] near-death state and all of these other

[26:34] Yeah.

[26:34] categories of

[26:37] the mysterious, the phenomenon,

[26:39] um you know, what people call, you know,

[26:42] colloquially UFOs,

[26:45] um

[26:45] when did all of these pieces start

[26:47] coming together for you?

[26:49] And and what what can maybe convince is

[26:51] the wrong word, but but what led you to

[26:53] believe that this was like

[26:55] a

[26:56] a level

[26:57] an

[26:58] an inquiry that you were taking

[26:59] seriously.

[27:00] >> Well, more than 10 years before my

[27:02] near-death experience, I in the sixth

[27:04] grade, I talk talked about this with you

[27:06] last time we talked. I did a classroom

[27:08] oral report. Uh current events. And the

[27:11] I the idea was each of us would take a

[27:13] current event story and bring it to the

[27:15] class and tell I discovered my my

[27:17] destiny was to be a journalist. I loved

[27:19] it. I approached it as a correspondent.

[27:21] I grew up with Walter Cronkite and the

[27:23] CBS Evening News and who brought such

[27:26] amazing stories about the civil rights

[27:28] movement and the women's movement and

[27:30] the ecology movement. I was always a

[27:32] news hound as a kid. So, I told a story

[27:36] of a Michigan case. Uh

[27:39] the first time a a US government

[27:41] consultant used the phrase swamp gas in

[27:44] a way that was misunderstood. So, in any

[27:46] case, I was already interested in the

[27:47] UFO phenomenon. And interestingly, my my

[27:50] my classroom teacher, Mrs. Lowry,

[27:53] at the end said, "Well, Mr. Thompson,

[27:55] that was a fine report.

[27:57] You have the makings of a of a reporter

[28:00] or a a scientist or journalist or maybe

[28:03] even a detective.

[28:05] The point is to do what you've done.

[28:07] Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

[28:10] I mean, I can tell you I hear her voice

[28:12] and what a

[28:13] a a pat on the back. We're all so lucky.

[28:15] We you know, we often have teachers we

[28:17] remember who were rude and and sadistic.

[28:21] Uh you'll never amount to anything. I

[28:23] never had anything like that, but I know

[28:24] people, especially in high-end boarding

[28:26] schools, right? In England. Get the best

[28:29] education and they just there's no

[28:31] emotional intelligence at all and

[28:32] there's a kind of sadism involved. John

[28:35] Cleese is wonderfully funny about his

[28:37] experiences that which led him to

[28:39] comedy. I never had that. I had a few

[28:41] teachers that, you know, there's

[28:41] something going on in your head. Keep

[28:43] that up.

[28:45] Wow, thank you. So, in this case she

[28:47] said, keep following the evidence

[28:49] wherever it leads. So, I had had no UFO

[28:51] experience other than my

[28:53] coverage of this Michigan case, and I

[28:55] continued to follow it. So, long story

[28:56] short, I followed kept following the

[28:59] UFOs stuff and

[29:01] it was the work of Jacques Vallee

[29:04] that really did it for me. And

[29:05] specifically, he started out as an

[29:08] advocate for the ET hypothesis. It made

[29:10] the most sense at that time until

[29:14] his own diamond, you might want to say,

[29:16] led him, Jacques, don't reach that

[29:18] conclusion too strongly. I'm going to

[29:20] invite you to get interested in the

[29:22] historical and cross-cultural and

[29:24] folkloric reports. I'm not saying he had

[29:26] that kind of an encounter, but that he

[29:28] began to pay attention to folklore,

[29:31] mythology,

[29:32] reports from history, fairies who were

[29:36] abducted or humans who were abducted by

[29:38] fairies. And he said, these seem to be

[29:41] with his wonderful French accent, these

[29:43] seem to be the same archetypes involved

[29:45] in all of these, that the same

[29:47] structure, the same stories. So, I'm

[29:49] going to put aside my idea that it's

[29:51] necessarily extraterrestrial unless it's

[29:53] been extraterrestrial all along.

[29:56] That doesn't quite fit.

[29:57] So, he opened up a wider model. A lot of

[30:00] the ufologists committed to the ET

[30:03] spacecraft exclusively

[30:06] model said, oh, Jacques has lost the

[30:08] plot.

[30:09] He's gotten caught in mythology. He

[30:11] said, caught in mythology? It's taught

[30:14] me more than anything else. This is just

[30:15] another bank of knowledge, another

[30:17] source of knowledge. So, I I

[30:21] already

[30:23] was inclined to say, well, how

[30:25] follow the evidence wherever it led. It

[30:28] led me to Vallee's opening of the

[30:30] aperture. Opening of the aperture is a

[30:32] metaphor that I really recommend. Allow

[30:35] the aperture to open up, folks. Whatever

[30:37] psychedelics

[30:39] take a nice walk, watch the sunset

[30:41] tonight. Let yourself open because the

[30:45] the the keeping yourself not open is

[30:47] what takes work.

[30:48] The opening is a release of that effort.

[30:51] So, um

[30:53] that would be So, I then wrote a book

[30:55] called Angels and Aliens decades ago,

[30:58] UFOs and the mythic imagination, which I

[31:00] said that the the behaviors of UFOs can

[31:03] be uh

[31:04] they seem to be prefigured by the

[31:06] behaviors of Greek gods and goddesses.

[31:09] It seems to be what was going on is

[31:11] shamanism, where the shaman goes up and

[31:14] down the ladders of the world, the lower

[31:16] world, the middle world, the upper

[31:18] world. I said, "Well, why wouldn't we

[31:19] consider the abductions are a form of

[31:21] shamanic encounter?"

[31:23] Well, I know why cuz nobody else

[31:25] understood what I was saying at the time

[31:26] that there was Vallée and then I was

[31:28] following. I don't know Vallée well, but

[31:30] we've had some great conversations. And

[31:32] so, I I broadened the aperture on this

[31:35] and then I wrote a follow-up book called

[31:36] The UFO Paradox a few years ago.

[31:39] And with my latest book, I'll simply say

[31:41] it was when I finally said, "I want to

[31:43] now draw this as Gregory Bateson said,

[31:46] 'Look for the patterns that connect in

[31:48] any enterprise. Look for the patterns

[31:51] that connect.' So, I said, 'What are the

[31:53] patterns that connect anomalous

[31:55] experience?' No, they're not all alike

[31:58] in their some particulars,

[32:00] but in the broad patterns,

[32:02] anomalous phenomena have have some some

[32:06] common elements. And it's taken me

[32:09] writing this book to um

[32:11] to actually see that and to understand

[32:14] to to to to gain new insight into what

[32:16] is The question I ask now is what is the

[32:19] nature of reality such that these events

[32:23] happen with regularity.

[32:25] What is the nature of things that they

[32:26] can happen and they do happen? That's

[32:29] not Do they happen or do they not?

[32:33] The debunkers offer inquiry. No, it's

[32:36] What is the nature of reality such that

[32:38] these events happen and they have these

[32:40] parallels and that's what

[32:42] I go right up to that edge and I discuss

[32:44] in the epilogue some thinking I have

[32:46] about that which is

[32:48] wonderfully consonant with your own

[32:50] perspective.

[32:51] >> Yeah. Yeah, did you by chance see

[32:54] there's a clip that's been going around?

[32:56] I put it in that video I shared with

[32:58] you, but it's not until later on so you

[32:59] may not have seen it, but it's a clip of

[33:01] John Mack talking to Terence McKenna

[33:04] and John Mack is is talking

[33:07] essentially laying out the exact same

[33:09] argument that I think

[33:11] you and I harmonize with which is that

[33:16] his view of the phenomenon gradually of

[33:19] course you and I both know he took it

[33:21] seriously

[33:22] but he gradually also settled into this

[33:24] position where

[33:28] he really began to believe that what was

[33:31] happening was an extension of something

[33:34] non-physical

[33:37] extending itself temporarily into the

[33:39] physical realm essentially to a point

[33:43] where yes, it can it can leave marks on

[33:45] the ground. It can leave marks on

[33:46] people. It can even physically seemingly

[33:49] interact with people to some degree, but

[33:51] it's really

[33:52] like something from the world soul, the

[33:54] transcendent what like what whatever you

[33:57] want to call it

[33:58] reaching down into this realm on a

[34:02] like a limited basis.

[34:03] >> So it's as if the divinity say okay, if

[34:06] that's all you understand, I'll give it

[34:08] to you in the material world. I'll give

[34:10] you

[34:11] physical manipulations. I'll give you

[34:13] reproductive connection. I'll give you

[34:15] cuts, scars, scoop marks. I'll give you

[34:18] burned earth where the UFOs land. It's

[34:21] showing up in the physical world. It may

[34:23] not be of the physical world as we know

[34:25] it, but it communicates in the physical

[34:28] world and when something shows up in the

[34:30] physical world it belongs in the spirit

[34:33] world that gets

[34:35] the stiff-necked

[34:37] materialist very exciting.

[34:40] >> Yeah. What he was getting at is is

[34:42] that's

[34:43] almost what it has to do because as you

[34:46] were just pointing to, you know, we did

[34:49] have these maps in the past, these

[34:50] shamanic maps, these mystical maps that

[34:52] I think all of us I think everyone at

[34:54] some period

[34:56] of human history probably agreed on and

[34:59] probably took these maps very seriously.

[35:01] But now that we don't have those maps,

[35:04] what what choice is there but to

[35:05] represent as technological and physical

[35:08] and you know, you know, these things

[35:09] that that fit within the sort of

[35:12] zeitgeist or the the palette of concepts

[35:14] that we have at our disposal now, which

[35:17] which is really only material and

[35:19] scientific concepts. So I thought I

[35:21] thought that was just a

[35:23] just a fabulous exchange between those

[35:25] two. If you if you haven't seen it, I'll

[35:26] I'll send it your way. But um

[35:28] >> Thank you.

[35:28] >> But anyway

[35:29] >> Well, John, let me just say about John

[35:30] Mack. I I got to know John Mack.

[35:32] Interestingly, he was

[35:33] few years older than me. I was his

[35:35] junior, but he had written a marvelous

[35:37] book about Lawrence of Arabia.

[35:41] National Book Award, I believe. Or

[35:42] Pulitzer. I believe he won a Pulitzer

[35:44] Prize.

[35:45] And he did not intend to pursue this

[35:47] subject. He did not intend. And

[35:49] interestingly, it was when a Dr. Stan

[35:51] Grof,

[35:52] the premier LSD researcher went on to

[35:55] develop holotropic breathwork when the

[35:58] um

[35:58] when the cultural support for

[36:00] psychedelics waned, to put it mildly,

[36:03] when it was everything from

[36:06] all all of the substances including

[36:08] marijuana were schedule one drugs all of

[36:10] a sudden people go to jail prison for

[36:13] long time. So he

[36:14] he he

[36:16] John John Mack crossed paths with Stan

[36:19] Grof. And I had written an article that

[36:21] was going to be an anthology Grof was

[36:23] publishing. And it was in which I was

[36:25] developing the parallels between

[36:28] UFO encounters, including abductions,

[36:31] and rites of passage.

[36:34] Ceremonies of initiation. There I said,

[36:36] there is an initiatory structure to

[36:38] these. Regardless of what's going on. I

[36:40] did the classic phenomenological move.

[36:44] Put in brackets the question of the

[36:46] various theories about what could be

[36:48] going on in reality and it's what do

[36:50] people report?

[36:51] >> Right.

[36:52] >> And what are the structures of their

[36:53] experiences? And the parallels to

[36:57] initiation rights as developed by Joseph

[37:00] Campbell was very strong. So I developed

[37:02] this

[37:02] that idea. Stan Grof gave the article to

[37:05] John Mack. He said, I need to get in

[37:07] touch with Keith Thompson.

[37:09] So he gave him my phone ring. He told me

[37:11] Stan told me that that's that I'd be

[37:14] hearing from John Mack who I knew of

[37:15] through his book and through his

[37:17] marvelous Physicians for Social

[37:18] Responsibility, his fight against the

[37:20] nuclear

[37:21] um

[37:22] disaster that we were headed toward as a

[37:24] as a planet.

[37:26] And he called and said, Keith, I've read

[37:27] your piece. I keep coming back to this

[37:29] initiatory structure, initiatory

[37:31] structure. It's a fine move you made.

[37:33] But then he said,

[37:35] but you certainly must also be

[37:37] interested in what you bracketed off.

[37:40] What's actually going on in these

[37:43] experiences? I said, oh, I'm not not

[37:46] interested in that. I'm decidedly

[37:49] interested. I just wanted to use the

[37:51] frame of reference of initiation to

[37:53] provide an additional way to talk about

[37:55] it. That's great. We need more ways to

[37:57] talk about it. Have you compared it to

[37:58] the shamanic frame of reference? I said,

[38:01] man, we we are on the same path. Cuz he

[38:04] was too. And he by the way, he he did

[38:06] holotropic breathwork with Grof.

[38:08] >> Oh, wow.

[38:08] >> He did psychedelic

[38:10] experiences on his own.

[38:12] >> Wow.

[38:12] >> I don't know where he did them all, but

[38:13] ayahuasca and others and anything, his

[38:15] own initiation during that brief charmed

[38:18] period of his life when he nearly lost

[38:21] his career at Harvard when they

[38:24] mistakenly said, I let's fire this guy.

[38:27] And I don't know if you know the

[38:27] backstory there, John Mack's attorney,

[38:29] Danny Sheehan

[38:31] >> Yes. Yes.

[38:31] >> called called him privately or maybe

[38:33] went to see him and said, you want to

[38:34] ruin you want to really get in deep

[38:36] do-do?

[38:38] Fire John Mack.

[38:40] We actually invite you to.

[38:43] Because we'll see you and we'll raise

[38:45] you on that. Harvard is committed to

[38:47] academic freedom, is it not?

[38:48] >> Right.

[38:49] >> And they said, yes, but but there's you

[38:51] know,

[38:52] there have to be standards. Well, who

[38:54] determines the standards? Alan

[38:56] Dershowitz has said, you know, Harvard

[38:58] Divinity School studies angels,

[39:00] but aliens are somehow too far out.

[39:03] What's that about? So, Harvard backed

[39:05] off. So, John Mack was wonderful.

[39:08] He left this world much too soon, but

[39:10] he's he left behind a manuscript that

[39:12] was unfinished. And there's some talk in

[39:15] the

[39:16] in the Mack family of finding a way to

[39:18] get that manuscript in print, because he

[39:20] was he went further beyond the work of

[39:23] Bud Hopkins and David Jacobs, beyond the

[39:26] level one interpretation of abductions.

[39:30] He didn't say that's not going on, but

[39:31] his interpretive frame had continued to

[39:34] advance.

[39:35] >> Wow.

[39:36] Do Do you have any idea what's in that

[39:37] manuscript?

[39:39] >> Only further reflections along these

[39:41] same lines. If you've studied the work

[39:42] of Jeff Kripal,

[39:44] >> Yeah.

[39:45] >> have, you talked with him, and my work,

[39:48] uh it's very McKenna-like. It goes

[39:50] further into

[39:53] the death by astonishment by Gallimore.

[39:56] I don't know if John ever did DMT,

[39:58] which is a chapter in my book. It's my

[40:00] favorite in many ways my favorite

[40:01] chapter, because it something just

[40:02] seemed seemed to click in which uh

[40:04] people ask me, well, what what you've

[40:07] created a book about materializations,

[40:09] largely, anomalies with an decided skew

[40:13] toward how things appear materialize and

[40:17] aren't supposed to. What's that got to

[40:19] do with DMT? I said, well, uh maybe just

[40:21] the fact that people take a hit from a

[40:23] pipe or take uh an injection under

[40:26] controlled circumstances if they're

[40:28] fortunate enough to have a medical frame

[40:30] or a

[40:31] uh that kind of a frame, and they find

[40:33] their way in regardless of their set and

[40:35] setting.

[40:36] They find their way into these these

[40:38] worlds with uh geometric rivers of

[40:40] geometry. One

[40:42] One person told me, said, I I mean, I

[40:44] can't I mean,

[40:45] this place on a DMT, and the beings

[40:49] didn't speak, but they but they that

[40:51] their whole being was language. We stood

[40:54] in a We stood in a river of language and

[40:56] symbols. And so, in any case, how where

[41:00] is that realm? What is that realm? The

[41:03] DMT is a

[41:05] By the way, it it's it's another study

[41:07] It's another another phenomenon. The DMT

[41:09] research

[41:10] There's Steven Zara, very similar to

[41:12] Stan Grof with LSD. Steven Zara,

[41:15] biochemist, went to the Amazon. And he

[41:19] said, "I'm going to take this drug

[41:20] myself." And he was not reductively He

[41:24] was not inclined to dismiss it. He had

[41:26] the same experiences as the indigenous

[41:29] people did. So, there's some wonderful,

[41:32] you know, Janus-faced, two-sidedness to

[41:34] the fact that both modern science and

[41:36] the indigenous worldview are

[41:38] increasingly corroborating

[41:40] corroborating. And in the middle between

[41:42] the two is this weird 400-year period of

[41:45] reductionistic, mechanistic materialism,

[41:48] which I hope that in my lifetime I live

[41:52] long enough to to see it turn even

[41:54] further. Because it's an embarrassment.

[41:57] Anomalies are embarrassment not to

[41:59] nature,

[42:00] cuz nature is already being itself. I

[42:02] often say, "Nature's already voted on

[42:04] its own

[42:06] contents." It does It's

[42:08] It is possible. Telepathy is possible.

[42:11] Clairvoyance and precognition and

[42:13] psychokinesis are all possible, but

[42:15] they're not possible in our maps. So,

[42:17] when I say I I wrote a book about

[42:19] impossible phenomena,

[42:21] by that I mean the phenomena are

[42:23] officially impossible.

[42:26] But ontologically, they're happening all

[42:28] the time.

[42:29] >> Right. Right. Man, we're we're

[42:31] introducing so many of my favorite

[42:34] topics here, but let's let's take them

[42:36] sort of piece by piece or let's choose

[42:38] which one we want to go deeper on. I

[42:40] know I know before you did email me

[42:42] yesterday saying that this this in

[42:43] particular is a topic that you wanted to

[42:45] go deeper on. You specifically

[42:47] mentioned, you know, there's this

[42:48] notion, of course, that's become very

[42:50] popular, right? Regarding DMT, that DMT

[42:54] is like some sort of

[42:56] um

[42:57] portal or or widens the aperture into

[43:01] another realm, right? Into another

[43:04] um

[43:05] I don't know, mode of mode of reality,

[43:07] higher reality. There There's different

[43:08] ways to think about it. But But again, I

[43:10] think it's like uh an artifact again of

[43:12] the dualism of language that that is

[43:14] making it seem

[43:16] like it is somehow external or different

[43:18] rather than partic- like something that

[43:20] we're actively participating in now, at

[43:23] least in some

[43:24] remote way.

[43:27] But you said you think the conversation

[43:28] needs to go further than that. And And

[43:30] there are connections sort of begging to

[43:32] be made that you that you do to a degree

[43:35] make in the book. But yeah, expand on

[43:37] that. And And what did you mean by you

[43:38] think the conversation needs to go

[43:40] further than that and in what direction?

[43:42] >> There's an exciting but challenging

[43:43] moment where something you're creating

[43:45] starts to become bigger than just you.

[43:48] It's a moment that I'm admittedly going

[43:50] through right now that I'm always coping

[43:51] with. Like, let's say you're teaching a

[43:54] course, you're building a community,

[43:56] people are showing up, conversations are

[43:58] happening. You've got your material, but

[44:00] now everyone needs a place to access the

[44:02] lessons or the content and keep track of

[44:04] where they are. You know how you want it

[44:06] to work, but you have no idea how to

[44:08] make the software to match. Well, that

[44:10] is where our sponsor Base44 comes in.

[44:13] Base44 is an AI platform that lets you

[44:15] build real working software by

[44:17] describing what you need in your own

[44:19] words. For this course, for instance,

[44:21] you could say, "I want users to be able

[44:23] to log in to one central location, track

[44:26] their progress, find their lessons." You

[44:29] describe what happens when someone joins

[44:31] and what they should instantly have

[44:32] access to. Base44 turns all of that into

[44:35] a working build with the database,

[44:37] login, backend, and hosting already

[44:40] handled. And you stay in control the

[44:41] whole time. You can change the layout.

[44:43] You can add what's missing. Keep shaping

[44:45] it as the community grows. And

[44:47] admittedly, this is something I want to

[44:49] do. This idea really appeals to me to be

[44:51] able to build something around the ideas

[44:53] that are important to you and that

[44:55] people want access to. Anyway, get to

[44:58] transmuting that creative energy

[45:00] yourself, my friends, by going to our

[45:01] link base44.com/thirdeye

[45:06] and get 30% off the builder plan for

[45:08] your first year. Again, that is

[45:10] base44.com/thirdeye.

[45:15] Thank you so much, base44.

[45:17] >> Gallimore and Strassman, whose works I

[45:19] very much like and and respect and

[45:22] admire. I made, by the way, chapter

[45:24] seven of my book is devoted to the DMT

[45:27] phenomenon.

[45:28] They both say this is This appears to be

[45:31] the gold standard. This phenomenon has

[45:33] to be explained. It cannot be explained.

[45:36] Gallimore, particularly, really yoeman's

[45:38] work in trying all the

[45:41] hypotheses, including Jungian. He even

[45:43] found the Jungian hypothesis too tame

[45:46] for what goes on in DMT. So, I I didn't

[45:50] set out to do this, but it took

[45:52] finishing my book to say, "DMT and DMT,

[45:56] yes, is a gold standard, but there's

[45:58] many

[45:59] ways this gold glimmers. And every other

[46:02] phenomenon that I happen to deal with in

[46:04] my book is also an equivalent entry

[46:07] point. The experiences of physical

[46:10] materialization at Scole, England, and

[46:12] other places. The the manifestation of

[46:16] physical objects in a way that is not

[46:18] possible according to reductionistic

[46:21] mechanism mechanistic science. The

[46:24] and the appearance of the dead in

[46:27] ancestral dreams.

[46:29] The appearance of in one of my chapters,

[46:32] apartment 14 of Chico, California, a

[46:35] woman and her young daughter moved in

[46:38] and and they didn't know when she moved

[46:40] in when they moved in that it was still

[46:41] inhabited by the previous resident, the

[46:44] spirit of the previous resident

[46:47] who did who shook heaven and earth,

[46:50] created poltergeist effects in the

[46:52] apartment. She'd been murdered

[46:55] while she was living in that apartment

[46:56] and she had not ceased to inhabit it.

[46:59] So, she communicated with the new

[47:00] tenants, help me find my murderer. These

[47:03] are all in some sense

[47:06] they all untie, they all unravel

[47:09] mechanistic thinking, material. There's

[47:12] a deep what I say is

[47:14] I said to you in my email yesterday, you

[47:16] know, at the end of the book I kept my

[47:18] explanatory hypotheses to the end. I

[47:21] came up with eight. I'll just

[47:23] like one is maybe what we call reality

[47:27] is a projection.

[47:28] Yeah, the holographic sense. Maybe it's

[47:31] a simulation.

[47:32] Maybe our four-dimensional universe is a

[47:34] membrane that floats in a larger

[47:36] dimension. So, I

[47:37] eight different speculative hypotheses.

[47:39] Then I said, "No, wait a minute. Those

[47:41] are all kind of imply that if we have

[47:43] invoked this hypothesis and more

[47:45] dimensions we can somehow explain some

[47:48] this is still a certain kind of

[47:49] mechanistic this will solve it."

[47:52] >> Right.

[47:53] >> And I finally said, "Human beings are

[47:55] inherently capable of a connectedness."

[47:59] An essential connectedness to each other

[48:01] and to the world at large that runs so

[48:03] deep it overturns our sense of what's

[48:06] possible. There's an inherent

[48:08] connectedness. Whitehead had a term

[48:11] >> Yes.

[48:11] >> prehension.

[48:13] Not perception, prehension. He He didn't

[48:16] say every part of reality from the

[48:18] atomic to the to the cellular to the

[48:21] molecular, organic, inorganic that all

[48:24] are equally ability to perceive are able

[48:26] to perceive. He spoke of prehension as

[48:30] everything has a feeling

[48:32] for everything else that exists.

[48:35] There's an inherent feeling quality, a

[48:37] sentience to to and degrees of

[48:41] sentience. This is where Neoplatonism is

[48:43] very good. Degrees of the one emanates

[48:46] out into

[48:48] so far away it forgets itself.

[48:51] >> Yeah.

[48:51] >> And then has remembering experiences.

[48:53] This is why remembering is such a

[48:55] powerful metaphor on psychedelics or

[48:57] meditation

[48:59] or in group therapy, or family therapy,

[49:02] something is remembered. It isn't just

[49:04] what happened two years before. It's a

[49:06] remembered

[49:07] remembered in a deeper sense. So, I

[49:11] came I've come to feel that that sense

[49:13] of inherent connectedness is part of the

[49:15] structure of reality, and that

[49:18] materialism in the mechanistic vein that

[49:20] it takes simply decided we would exclude

[49:23] that because we saw what happened when

[49:24] we allowed the church to run things. And

[49:27] we've got to get away from that. Well,

[49:28] yeah, and science I'm I'm a big fan of

[49:30] science. Science did come in Let's

[49:33] remember it was the the Vatican that

[49:35] knocked on the door of Galileo and said,

[49:37] "You've got to stop saying that the

[49:39] Earth orbits the Sun. You've got to stop

[49:41] saying it." So, there it was the church

[49:43] that was trying to stop science. Now

[49:45] it's science

[49:46] that is trying to say that matters of

[49:48] the soul

[49:50] soul-sized matters. Oh, we don't talk

[49:53] about this. We can't do science on it.

[49:56] You can't be empirical toward the kinds

[49:59] of things you're interested in, Mr.

[50:00] Thompson. Well, yes, you can. Have you

[50:02] not read William James? He was a radical

[50:04] empiricist. He said, "If there's an

[50:06] experience, that experience can be

[50:08] studied

[50:10] to see what it says about reality." All

[50:12] it takes, he said, is one white crow to

[50:15] disprove the idea that all crows are

[50:17] black. Well, my book This isn't to pat

[50:20] myself on the back, but my book is

[50:22] filled with flocks of white crows. There

[50:24] are many white crows that that show us

[50:27] that the generalization that all crows

[50:29] are black, that there can't be There's

[50:31] good evidence for paranormal phenomena,

[50:33] to say the least.

[50:35] >> Yeah. Yeah, and we should tell some of

[50:37] those individual stories. I mean, the

[50:39] the skull stories are great.

[50:42] Um I'm tempted to spend a little bit

[50:44] more time on Whitehead because he's just

[50:45] such this

[50:46] brilliant

[50:48] singular thinker, I think, who did such

[50:51] an incredible job of

[50:54] you know, in many ways he he is kind of

[50:56] like he is almost like a neo-

[50:58] neo-Platonist because he preserved so

[51:00] much of Plato's metaphysical ideas and

[51:03] Platonic metaphysical ideas, but he also

[51:05] evolved them and and modernized them in

[51:09] ways that truly intimidate me that I

[51:10] don't fully understand. I'll be totally

[51:13] I I approach Whitehead very prostrated

[51:15] and just like I I don't I don't even

[51:16] know how deep I'm ready to go on this

[51:18] man because he's just

[51:20] so brilliant in such a multitude of

[51:23] ways, but um yeah, that idea of

[51:25] prehension was something I spent some

[51:27] some time trying to uh apprehend

[51:31] um before this conversation. And and I'm

[51:34] not even really sure that I fully

[51:35] understand it.

[51:36] >> Well, I I have to say I I agree with

[51:38] you. I often say that Whitehead

[51:39] unfortunately apparently English was not

[51:41] his first language. Well, of course it

[51:43] was. He was studied at Oxford or

[51:44] Cambridge or wherever he studied, but he

[51:46] had not he did not have a literary

[51:49] finesse about him. It's very hard to

[51:51] understand what he's saying. So So

[51:53] that's where the Whiteheadians come in.

[51:54] Uh he he was so far you could say

[51:57] involved in the intelligibles. He lived

[52:00] in the higher realms of of the of nous,

[52:03] the Greek idea, n o u s.

[52:05] >> Yeah.

[52:07] >> Higher forms of intelligibility and

[52:09] intellection that are go transverbal,

[52:13] transrational. So he was trying to put

[52:15] it into words right at the level where

[52:17] it

[52:18] was beginning to be comprehensible. So

[52:20] yeah, and I and what I what I say too is

[52:22] that that anomalies, if there is this

[52:25] pervasive, inherent interconnectedness

[52:30] that we override by the way, we're

[52:32] ability that the embodied life is very

[52:34] good at overriding that. I'm a separate

[52:36] self. You're a separate self. There's

[52:38] truth to that,

[52:40] but it's not the final truth. And to

[52:42] never get beyond the sense of separate

[52:44] self is to be totally buy into the

[52:48] separation idea. But we it is it is

[52:51] marvelous that

[52:53] with this connectedness as the given

[52:56] uh anomalies of the kind that I describe

[52:58] in the book are not only signal, but

[53:00] herald

[53:02] this connectedness. It's It's a truth

[53:04] that speaks before words form. There's

[53:07] there things we see out of the corners

[53:09] of our eye. And so

[53:12] yeah, I I decided to chronicle as many

[53:15] of these certain number of these, go

[53:17] into them with some depth. They have

[53:19] some differences about them.

[53:22] The the Skull experiment was basically

[53:24] four people, two of whom were uh

[53:27] mediums. And they sat 466

[53:30] times over five years in Skull hole, a

[53:34] basement in an old house as old as the

[53:37] Magna Carta in Skull, England. And they

[53:41] voices came, uh lights came, sense of

[53:45] being physically touched by beings, um

[53:48] and then physical objects called

[53:50] apports.

[53:51] >> Yeah.

[53:52] >> That word apports is in my subtitle.

[53:53] Objects that materialize mysteriously,

[53:56] ways that are not explicable, and that

[53:59] translocate. The number of people I'm

[54:02] getting to start The book's been out

[54:03] about 10 days. I'm already hearing from

[54:05] people who picked up the book

[54:07] and are telling me that they've had

[54:09] their own lost objects that have come

[54:11] back,

[54:13] that they don't know what they were

[54:14] where they went. And I I did a a show

[54:17] the other night that was on national

[54:19] Coast to Coast.

[54:21] >> Yeah, cool.

[54:22] >> And uh

[54:23] the number of people who have emailed me

[54:25] since

[54:26] with their stories of lost objects. So

[54:29] it's it's In some sense, it's

[54:30] outrageous, the idea that coins, fully

[54:34] formed coins,

[54:36] fall from the sky.

[54:37] In one case, a camera that the spirit

[54:40] team, if you will, from the other the

[54:42] voices from the other side said, "Bring

[54:44] in a camera.

[54:45] Put it on the table for the next

[54:46] session." Okay? They did.

[54:50] And what happened, according to the

[54:51] people who were the participants in the

[54:53] seance, as well as the British Society

[54:55] for Psychical Research, which the

[54:58] mediums had decided we need to get this

[55:01] supervised. We need to have some

[55:03] corroboration. And they're good. They're

[55:05] skeptics. So the skeptics who there for

[55:07] to the camera loaded with film rises off

[55:11] the table that doesn't happen too much.

[55:13] In a period of 10 seconds 20 shots were

[55:16] taken and

[55:18] they were developed pictures

[55:20] allegedly of the dead of wartime World

[55:24] War settings. One more I'll just give

[55:26] you one more on scale and we can maybe

[55:27] then move on.

[55:29] An entire newspaper from April 1st, 1944

[55:33] during World War landed

[55:36] on the table. Now by the way couldn't

[55:38] one of them have had the newspaper under

[55:40] the table?

[55:41] Especially because the room was dark.

[55:43] Good question. This is I'm a true

[55:45] skeptic. That's a skeptic question. But

[55:48] when a debunker assumes fraud there's no

[55:50] longer skepticism. That's using the uh

[55:54] the appearance of authority. So uh they

[55:56] all had wristbands luminous wristbands.

[55:59] So whenever you move their arms in the

[56:01] dark you could see you could see what

[56:03] they were doing. So the uh

[56:06] camera did that and then the next next

[56:09] thing it did was the the um beings from

[56:14] the spirit team said next time just

[56:16] bring in film. Don't open the boxes.

[56:19] Bring in photographic film. The team the

[56:22] humans not only brought in film they

[56:23] brought it in in a locked wooden box

[56:25] unlocked it there in front of the

[56:27] skeptics. The skeptics noticed the the

[56:30] British Society for Psychical Research

[56:32] noticed that the uh the film was not

[56:36] open. The boxes were unsealed. They

[56:38] watched them unseal it and then they had

[56:41] the film developed as the spirit team

[56:43] said don't even need a camera.

[56:45] Images on the film.

[56:47] Now again this is an oddities. These are

[56:49] oddities.

[56:51] And I Keith has really gone slumming

[56:53] with this book.

[56:54] If this is what he's been reduced to. I

[56:56] can

[56:56] I love that. I love it.

[56:58] Cuz I've gotten it on many all

[57:00] throughout my life Keith and his

[57:01] near-death experience which by the way I

[57:03] haven't

[57:04] It's been a long time not telling people

[57:05] cuz I was not interested in that kind of

[57:07] dismissive feedback. But in any case I

[57:10] chose that

[57:12] case, the Skull England materialization

[57:15] case, precisely because it was in many

[57:17] ways the most well-researched case, the

[57:20] Society for Psychical Research, and I'll

[57:22] end this here, unless you have unless

[57:24] you ask question. They published a

[57:26] report of 400 pages. They said, "We find

[57:29] no signs of fraud. We find it

[57:31] incredible. We find it beggars the

[57:33] imagination, begs

[57:35] but we find no evidence of fraud,

[57:38] chicanery.

[57:39] These appear to be real phenomena." So

[57:41] that's the opening chapter of the book,

[57:43] the idea of the S coins, fully formed

[57:45] minted coins, newspapers. By the way,

[57:47] the newspaper was examined by the

[57:49] authorities on newsprint in contemporary

[57:52] life, and they said, "This is consistent

[57:54] with the newsprint that has that was no

[57:56] longer that is no longer used, but was

[57:59] used at that time. This appears to be a

[58:01] real newspaper."

[58:03] So from there, that's chapter one, I I

[58:05] go into a lot of other forms of things

[58:08] that should not happen. If materialism

[58:11] loves matter, but only if it behaves.

[58:14] When matter misbehaves

[58:17] in

[58:17] in these kinds of forms, oh, then

[58:19] they're not interested in that anymore.

[58:21] Well, maybe the material world is open

[58:25] to these you know, there's a there's a

[58:27] quality to

[58:28] matter

[58:30] that is inclined to reveal its

[58:32] connection with what we call mind. So

[58:34] the line between them is very porous.

[58:38] >> Yeah.

[58:39] Yeah, and I don't have anything to

[58:40] comment on particularly with with Skull

[58:42] because I don't I don't know the story

[58:44] extremely well. I don't know the

[58:46] skeptical takes extremely well. But but

[58:48] for me, it's just an interesting example

[58:51] of

[58:53] phenomena that I think

[58:55] has to be involved in the kind of things

[58:58] you and I are interested in

[59:00] somewhere, someway. You know, like even

[59:03] even if that particular case, someone

[59:05] came out tomorrow and was like, "Oh,

[59:07] found definitive proof that whatever was

[59:09] going on there was was totally faked. We

[59:11] found in this person's journal how they

[59:13] did all the tricks.

[59:14] I wouldn't even be remotely surprised,

[59:16] to be honest, because I know people fake

[59:18] things. I know people do things for for

[59:19] all kinds of different reasons. But,

[59:21] that doesn't mean the phenomenon of

[59:23] apporting has been, you know, debunked.

[59:26] That doesn't mean the phenomenon of

[59:29] using consciousness to connect with

[59:31] whatever spirits, the other side, other

[59:34] intelligences. It doesn't mean that has

[59:36] been, you know,

[59:37] completely debunked by by any stretch of

[59:40] the imagination. And and I think

[59:43] the topic of apports, in particular, is

[59:47] something that I'm really interested in,

[59:50] but I'm also I I also ex-

[59:53] I explore with extreme trepidation,

[59:55] because I know how good I have a friend

[59:58] who's a professional magician.

[1:00:00] And he can do things that

[1:00:03] would will legitimately look miraculous

[1:00:05] to people who don't know how he's doing

[1:00:07] them.

[1:00:08] And then you see the trick and you're

[1:00:09] like,

[1:00:11] "Wow, it's that simple, yet it's that

[1:00:13] skillful." Like, you people truly can do

[1:00:16] things that will would blow your mind

[1:00:19] through absolutely, you know, mundane

[1:00:22] mechanisms.

[1:00:23] But, I have a feeling

[1:00:25] >> in that very vein, it was the British

[1:00:27] Society for Psychical Research that many

[1:00:29] skeptics liked back in the day when they

[1:00:32] were busting Theosophy. You know, early

[1:00:34] Theosophy had its share of

[1:00:37] um mischievous claims that didn't pan

[1:00:40] out. So, yeah, I I agree. I have

[1:00:42] trepidation too toward apports. When my

[1:00:44] publisher decided they wanted the phrase

[1:00:47] "The Mystery of Objects That Materialize

[1:00:50] and Translocate" as the subtitle,

[1:00:53] I argued back. I said, "I've only got

[1:00:55] one good case of apports." And they

[1:00:57] said, "Your book is about all kinds of

[1:01:00] apports. You establish with the skull

[1:01:02] case a

[1:01:04] a frame for the idea of materialization.

[1:01:07] And then the rest of your book has

[1:01:09] different kinds. So, we think that

[1:01:11] there's actually something to be said

[1:01:13] for for putting apports up front. So,

[1:01:15] no, not every claim of apport works out.

[1:01:18] The old cases, the old the old um

[1:01:21] uh

[1:01:21] apport the old materialization seances,

[1:01:25] the the leaders of the seance would

[1:01:26] sometimes confabulate. And in yet, so

[1:01:30] that because they said, "Well, we've

[1:01:31] seen it real some of the time. Let's

[1:01:33] make it real for this case, too. Let's

[1:01:35] keep people interested." Well, that's

[1:01:37] not how I am interested in proceeding.

[1:01:39] So, I wouldn't write Be very frank, my

[1:01:41] publisher came to me and said, "Would

[1:01:43] you like to do a book on apports?"

[1:01:45] I said, "No."

[1:01:46] Cuz first of all, the the phenomenon the

[1:01:48] frame is the word apport is a French

[1:01:50] word for to bring.

[1:01:52] These these are bringings. These objects

[1:01:55] are brought from some other realm. But

[1:01:57] it's a it's sort of an antiquarian term.

[1:01:59] It's an outdated term. If we had a

[1:02:01] robust culture where apports were

[1:02:03] happening all the time, and maybe they

[1:02:04] are. Maybe many lost objects

[1:02:07] They're not because they were misplaced,

[1:02:09] it's because they moved. I don't know.

[1:02:11] I've had a lot of people write to me

[1:02:13] since my book has been out saying, "I

[1:02:14] have objects that move." Um Dean Radin

[1:02:18] has said, you know, a marvelous

[1:02:20] researcher, he held up a bent spoon one

[1:02:22] time on a video. He said, "I don't

[1:02:24] believe I don't believe people can bend

[1:02:27] spoons with their mind. I didn't believe

[1:02:29] it until I did it."

[1:02:31] And he put himself out there. He said,

[1:02:33] "I bent this spoon. I don't know how."

[1:02:36] Well, good for you, Dean. I mean, that's

[1:02:37] that's a courageous move because

[1:02:38] fortunately Dean's work doesn't depend

[1:02:40] on those kind of one-off anecdotes. He's

[1:02:42] a very skilled researcher.

[1:02:44] So, anyway, I said, "No, I We We agreed

[1:02:47] to make apports the subtitle.

[1:02:49] But there are many other examples of

[1:02:51] phenomena. If uh if a if a debunker

[1:02:54] says, "Well, give give us something more

[1:02:56] than this apport business in Scoland,

[1:02:58] England. What else you got?" I said,

[1:03:00] "Well, let's look at my other chapters."

[1:03:01] The thing is an the average scoffer

[1:03:04] who's committed to re- you know, pulling

[1:03:06] the chestnuts out of the fire for

[1:03:08] materialism

[1:03:10] committed to debunking in the name of

[1:03:13] skepticism. I won't name any, but there

[1:03:14] are a few of them out there that are

[1:03:15] well-known and very good at it.

[1:03:17] They're They're not going to be

[1:03:18] persuaded. Somebody said in in

[1:03:21] relationship to Thomas Kuhn's work that

[1:03:24] science proceeds one funeral at a time.

[1:03:27] I'm not here to be morbid, but those who

[1:03:29] don't believe this stuff will die.

[1:03:32] They'll They'll shuffle off the mortal

[1:03:34] coil. Meanwhile, a bunch of

[1:03:36] neuroscientists

[1:03:38] who are now in their 30s, who have

[1:03:40] studied the UFO phenomenon, who maybe

[1:03:43] have taken DMT, they don't have these a

[1:03:46] priori prejudices against that which

[1:03:49] doesn't fit. They're inclined to say

[1:03:51] things like, "Well, maybe if stuff

[1:03:53] appears

[1:03:55] in the territory

[1:03:57] and it's not on the maps,

[1:03:59] maybe we shouldn't blame the territory.

[1:04:01] Maybe our maps are not up to date. When

[1:04:04] phenomena don't fit our maps, we don't

[1:04:07] push away the phenomenon. That's not

[1:04:08] really what science is supposed to We

[1:04:10] draw better maps. So, my book is an

[1:04:12] attempt to support the the contemporary

[1:04:15] effort. Let's put more stuff on the map,

[1:04:17] but let's analyze it. Let's be truly

[1:04:20] skeptical. I don't I didn't choose an

[1:04:22] apports case that could be easily

[1:04:24] debunked. I chose one that had really

[1:04:26] passed the muster of skeptics, but I

[1:04:28] didn't make the book entirely about

[1:04:30] apports by any means.

[1:04:32] >> Yeah. Yeah, and it's it's so I mean

[1:04:34] unless you're just going to like

[1:04:35] journalistically catalog, you know,

[1:04:38] purported cases of things happening that

[1:04:40] you can neither prove or disprove,

[1:04:42] there's really no way you can because

[1:04:43] it's one of those phenomena that we we

[1:04:45] have no idea how it works, right? Like I

[1:04:48] can't I can't just like I want to study

[1:04:49] apports. Let's go to all the, you know,

[1:04:51] like what's You can't make one appear

[1:04:54] unless, you know, that this is one of

[1:04:56] the reasons I'm interested in it.

[1:04:58] Is because some of these guys who claim

[1:05:01] to be able to do the psionic thing, you

[1:05:03] know, or CE5 thing, are convinced that

[1:05:06] whatever is manifesting physically has

[1:05:09] something to do with apporting. And even

[1:05:11] So, so I was told this by by one guy on

[1:05:14] the show, um who was part of the whole,

[1:05:16] you know, Jake Barber Skywatcher thing.

[1:05:19] So, so that's one example, but also Karl

[1:05:21] Nell, who I'm assuming you you're

[1:05:23] familiar with,

[1:05:25] he gave a talk at

[1:05:26] Archives of the Impossible in which he

[1:05:29] brought up kind of a whole, you know,

[1:05:30] grab bag of things that he seemed to be

[1:05:33] open-minded to, and Apports is one of

[1:05:35] them. So, it's just, you know, it's it's

[1:05:37] tempting to connect the dots because

[1:05:39] it's not like he provided

[1:05:41] um

[1:05:42] major connective sinew on all of these

[1:05:44] ideas and explained exactly how it all

[1:05:46] fits together and, you know, whether or

[1:05:48] not this is a the

[1:05:50] the

[1:05:51] the thing that's so frustrating yet

[1:05:53] intriguing about people like him is that

[1:05:55] this is a guy who's been cleared at the

[1:05:56] highest levels on all kinds of things.

[1:05:58] So, it's always tempting to wonder,

[1:06:00] like, does does he think there's a there

[1:06:02] there that this is a thing because of

[1:06:04] something he saw

[1:06:06] on the other side of this classified

[1:06:08] wall or is it an interest that he

[1:06:11] um

[1:06:11] just has independence of all of that?

[1:06:13] It's one of those things that I that I

[1:06:14] don't know, but I did find it

[1:06:16] interesting that

[1:06:18] he seems to be interested in, you know,

[1:06:20] all the things we're interested in. He

[1:06:22] seems to be interested in

[1:06:24] um going beyond materialism. In the same

[1:06:26] talk, he talks about, you know, not

[1:06:28] being a fan of

[1:06:30] you know, mechanistic computational

[1:06:33] views of consciousness. He talks about

[1:06:35] Apports. He talks about non-locality. He

[1:06:38] talks about

[1:06:39] kind of a

[1:06:40] multi-dimensional

[1:06:42] metaphysical predilection that sounds

[1:06:44] very hermetic platonic um

[1:06:48] So, yeah, it's it's one of those things

[1:06:50] that

[1:06:51] serious people seem to be taking

[1:06:53] seriously. So, I take it at least

[1:06:55] somewhat seriously, even though I don't

[1:06:58] I don't need I don't think I'm at the

[1:06:59] point where I need to take one

[1:07:00] particular case and say, "Yes, this is

[1:07:02] my proof." Um I I think until I have an

[1:07:05] anomalous experience on the

[1:07:07] concerning Apports, I don't know if I

[1:07:09] will be

[1:07:10] personally convinced, but I'm I'm

[1:07:11] certainly open-minded, for sure.

[1:07:13] >> Yeah, in my book, in my prologue, I tell

[1:07:15] the readers that we're going to go for a

[1:07:16] wild ride here. I'm going to ask all

[1:07:19] kind of questions, and I mean questions,

[1:07:20] and the questions are not answers.

[1:07:22] They're headlights. So, hop in,

[1:07:26] buckle up.

[1:07:27] We're going to cross different domains.

[1:07:29] I'm going to mix metaphors. I'm going to

[1:07:31] cross different disciplines. And that's

[1:07:34] to me what is required. Disciplines are

[1:07:36] wonderful things. Go to college camp.

[1:07:38] Where's the this department? Where's

[1:07:40] that department? And separation of

[1:07:42] departments allows for specialization.

[1:07:44] But when we lose the ability to

[1:07:46] generalize, remember we used to call

[1:07:48] liberal arts?

[1:07:50] The attempt to find the broadest frames

[1:07:53] of reference for existence. That's not

[1:07:55] in vogue anymore. So, again, I never met

[1:07:59] Andrew Gallimore nor I don't nor

[1:08:02] Rick Strassman. And I will not disagree

[1:08:05] with them that the DMT material is

[1:08:07] incredibly promising, raising important

[1:08:10] questions. And I would just simply wait

[1:08:11] for my turn at the conference that I

[1:08:13] might be attending with them if I if

[1:08:15] there were such a thing. And I'd say,

[1:08:17] "And I'm saying that a lot of the other

[1:08:19] topics that I happen to deal with in my

[1:08:21] are also the kind of Rubicons. How do we

[1:08:24] explain the dream that comes to a

[1:08:27] 3-year-old boy in East Texas who did not

[1:08:31] even know he ever had a

[1:08:32] great-grandfather, let alone that his

[1:08:34] great-grandfather was dead, came to him

[1:08:37] in a dream with a pre with a powerful

[1:08:40] prophetic message. He said, "I have a

[1:08:41] message for your dad."

[1:08:44] His grandson. So, that's that's my

[1:08:47] chapter two. So, the the the crossing

[1:08:50] the border from life to death is another

[1:08:53] major one.

[1:08:55] Leslie Cain's book, Surviving Death, is

[1:08:58] very good. She attended many

[1:09:00] seances herself and has touched some of

[1:09:03] the material that came through. I give

[1:09:05] her great credit for that because that's

[1:09:08] not an smart way to necessarily advance

[1:09:10] your career, but she's not interested in

[1:09:12] she's in she's truly a journalist.

[1:09:14] That's what I am. I consider this

[1:09:16] journalism. People say, "How did you

[1:09:17] make this your specialty of journalism

[1:09:19] given that you started writing lots of

[1:09:21] conventional articles like how to run a

[1:09:23] meta how to run a meta I wrote one

[1:09:26] article some years ago, how to run a

[1:09:28] mara- how to train for a marathon

[1:09:30] smarter, not harder. How to train

[1:09:32] smarter, not It was at a time when the

[1:09:34] marathon training techniques were up for

[1:09:37] grabs. How did you go from that to

[1:09:38] covering this? I said, I'm interested in

[1:09:40] everything.

[1:09:41] >> Yeah.

[1:09:42] >> I'm interested

[1:09:43] Why would I put something I'm

[1:09:44] increasingly interested in these kinds

[1:09:46] of topics because I think it's where I

[1:09:48] stand partly from my own personal

[1:09:51] experience um uh of the time we don't

[1:09:54] that I described my NDE and and others.

[1:09:56] Those kind of experiences put put my my

[1:09:59] skin in the game.

[1:10:01] >> Yeah, how can you not be? How can you

[1:10:03] not be?

[1:10:03] >> Yeah, so I'm going to ask this the rest

[1:10:05] of my life these questions.

[1:10:06] >> Yeah, me too. Me too. And I don't know

[1:10:09] speaking of Gallimore, I don't know if

[1:10:11] you've seen um he has definitely kind of

[1:10:15] matured at least in his public-facing

[1:10:19] willingness to interface with certain

[1:10:21] ideas. Like he openly more so calls

[1:10:23] himself um an idealist now and I don't

[1:10:26] know if you saw that he was

[1:10:27] collaborating with Don Hoffman with Don

[1:10:29] Hoffman's new uh Trace Institute

[1:10:32] venture.

[1:10:33] And he and Don were kind of you know

[1:10:36] very cool to watch the two of them

[1:10:38] um

[1:10:39] dialogue because you know Don is taking

[1:10:42] seriously. I'm assuming you're you're

[1:10:43] familiar with

[1:10:44] >> Well, I am and I know I know of your

[1:10:45] treatment of Don's work too which Don

[1:10:48] were and then Bernardo Kastrup. I'm

[1:10:49] probably the only person who's ever

[1:10:51] written a book on UFOs who brings up

[1:10:53] Kastrup. Like what's he got to do with

[1:10:55] it? He He stays away from stuff like

[1:10:56] this. Well, his his worldview is very

[1:10:59] his especially his book on the absurd

[1:11:02] was very definitive for me or very

[1:11:04] defining. So yeah, I I love I'm I'm glad

[1:11:07] to hear that Gallimore, not surprised

[1:11:09] because he's he's an empiricist and he

[1:11:12] so beautifully describes in Death by

[1:11:15] Astonishment. He said, "Okay, I'm going

[1:11:17] to try You know, for example, the idea

[1:11:18] that these are hallucinations. Well,

[1:11:20] hallucinations, whether of the

[1:11:21] schizophrenic or mystical type um

[1:11:24] generally involve pas- patching together

[1:11:27] phenomena from the ordinary world. Like

[1:11:29] if you have a dream of a flying car or

[1:11:31] hallucination

[1:11:33] of a flying car, well, they at least

[1:11:35] have a frame of reference of what a car

[1:11:37] is

[1:11:38] >> Right.

[1:11:38] >> conventional world. So, you will have a

[1:11:40] hallucination based on a flying car. But

[1:11:44] uh

[1:11:44] Elon Musk is apparently on the verge of

[1:11:46] flying car even as we speak. So, in any

[1:11:49] case,

[1:11:50] um the uh his argument was where do we

[1:11:53] get hallucinations based on fractal

[1:11:56] geometric cities? For agents, aliens,

[1:12:00] the trolls, whatever they're called,

[1:12:02] robots, um

[1:12:04] uh

[1:12:05] machine elves and so forth, who when you

[1:12:08] show up for the first for you think for

[1:12:10] the first time on your first DMT trip,

[1:12:13] they'll say, "Hello Michael. Welcome

[1:12:15] back. Let's continue where we left off."

[1:12:18] What?

[1:12:19] So, they recognize you by name and they

[1:12:21] they believe you've been there before.

[1:12:22] Well, you probably had been. Again,

[1:12:24] remembering. They remember more than we

[1:12:26] do.

[1:12:27] >> Yeah. Yeah, it's it's extremely

[1:12:31] um

[1:12:32] not just refreshing, but also

[1:12:35] it gives me a lot of hope for for the

[1:12:38] future of science, physics, because

[1:12:42] you know,

[1:12:44] I don't know with somebody like Don

[1:12:45] Hoffman,

[1:12:47] it's a really interesting development to

[1:12:49] watch him go from extremely strict,

[1:12:54] rigorous, and you you could tell he's

[1:12:56] always been open-minded to these kinds

[1:12:57] of questions and these things that you

[1:12:58] and I are interested in, but he would

[1:13:00] always sort of kind of bluntly cut the

[1:13:02] conversation off and say, "You know,

[1:13:05] this is why we need theories so that we

[1:13:07] can actually um

[1:13:09] lay these things out logically, test

[1:13:11] them, um apply them to the peer-review

[1:13:13] process, etc. etc." But now with this

[1:13:16] latest development with this Trace

[1:13:17] Institute bringing people like Don

[1:13:19] Hoffman or sorry, bringing people like

[1:13:21] Andrew Gallimore in and having more

[1:13:23] speculative conversations like, "Hey,

[1:13:25] maybe what people are encountering in

[1:13:27] the DMT realm is the same thing that

[1:13:29] we're talking about in our theory with

[1:13:30] this realm of conscious agents. Maybe

[1:13:32] maybe this is

[1:13:34] um

[1:13:34] man like a to try to use their their

[1:13:36] terminology, it's something like the the

[1:13:39] human qualia kernel is is like

[1:13:43] interacting with some other qualia

[1:13:45] kernel that has other capabilities that

[1:13:48] ours doesn't, but we still have the

[1:13:50] ability to sense and interact with on a

[1:13:53] on a limited basis when we enhance our

[1:13:55] qualia kernel with DMT or or whatever.

[1:13:59] But I mean I think as

[1:14:01] to people that aren't initiated into

[1:14:02] this stuff, as outlandish and out of

[1:14:04] left field as it's going to sound, I

[1:14:06] think this is going to become more

[1:14:08] normalized for for better and for worse.

[1:14:11] But I think clearly with people like Don

[1:14:13] Hoffman and Gal- Galmore for the better.

[1:14:15] Because if we don't start pushing the

[1:14:17] boundaries of what we can conceive of

[1:14:20] and and what it really means to go

[1:14:22] beyond materialism not just in a

[1:14:24] uh

[1:14:25] hand-wavy way or a conversational

[1:14:28] philosophical way, but in a way that's

[1:14:29] going to lead to breakthroughs in real

[1:14:32] understanding and applied science. Like

[1:14:34] we're going to have to start mixing all

[1:14:36] of these things together. And and I

[1:14:37] truly think somebody like Don Hoffman,

[1:14:40] you know, 50 years from now, I think

[1:14:41] people are going to look back on him and

[1:14:43] be like, "This guy was so far ahead of

[1:14:46] his time." And he's he's done I think he

[1:14:48] will do more to you know, whether or not

[1:14:51] his his personal theories right now bear

[1:14:53] fruit, which I I think they may. But

[1:14:55] whether they do or not, I think people

[1:14:57] are going to continue the tradition that

[1:14:59] he's starting to to knock the dominoes

[1:15:01] over for right now. And you know,

[1:15:03] speaking of um

[1:15:05] Kastrup, it's really interesting because

[1:15:07] there was a time where he was interested

[1:15:09] in openly talking about UFOs. He he

[1:15:11] wrote a paper on it. Um we had a

[1:15:14] conversation about it. I think it was

[1:15:16] either the last

[1:15:18] episode we did or maybe the one before

[1:15:20] that. But he

[1:15:22] he basically got frustrated because I

[1:15:24] think what ended up happening is

[1:15:27] you know,

[1:15:29] you're try- you're trying to have a

[1:15:31] a targeted conversation based on

[1:15:34] evidence and and very quickly it spirals

[1:15:37] out. And people like you and me are

[1:15:38] great with spiraling out and I think

[1:15:40] with people like Bernardo he becomes

[1:15:42] frustrated because he he wants to stick

[1:15:44] to a premise and he wants to he wants to

[1:15:48] logically and rigorously stay on this

[1:15:51] vector and investigate this thing that

[1:15:54] very quickly goes out into all of these

[1:15:56] directions that make him very

[1:15:58] uncomfortable as a as an academic

[1:16:00] thinker. So um

[1:16:03] yeah, but but I know he does he does

[1:16:05] have a an essay out there on

[1:16:07] on UFOs and I and I don't off the top of

[1:16:10] my head I don't think I could even

[1:16:12] recite the thesis.

[1:16:14] Um but but yeah, he he was open to it

[1:16:17] for a time but I think he he became

[1:16:19] disenchanted.

[1:16:20] >> And and one of his books I've the word

[1:16:22] is the absurd or absurdity is in the

[1:16:25] title of the book and he deals with uh

[1:16:28] sort of an attempt to come to the UFO

[1:16:30] frame. But but you're right. He's He's

[1:16:32] often you know, he's what

[1:16:34] he is sort of poo-pooed the idea that we

[1:16:37] need anomalies to point us to what's

[1:16:40] wrong with materialism. And he makes a

[1:16:43] logical point. He says we don't need the

[1:16:45] anomalies. We don't need near-death

[1:16:47] experience. Don't get me wrong. I'm not

[1:16:48] a debunker. I'm not here to dismiss

[1:16:50] those phenomena. But we cannot even

[1:16:52] explain ordinary consciousness with

[1:16:55] questions like how does consciousness

[1:16:56] develop from uh

[1:16:59] material substrate? How does matter give

[1:17:01] rise to consciousness? By definition if

[1:17:04] matter is completely devoid of

[1:17:06] intelligibility, how does it just give

[1:17:08] birth to

[1:17:10] a consciousness? And he said that that

[1:17:11] there's no evidence that it does.

[1:17:13] There's every evidence that it's

[1:17:14] backwards. So he

[1:17:16] for better or worse has thought his way

[1:17:19] to idealism. He is simply

[1:17:22] logically and with critical thinking

[1:17:25] come up with this. And but he has come

[1:17:27] increasingly to say, "Look, I I will

[1:17:29] tell you I love I love the near-death

[1:17:31] experience as an additional support."

[1:17:34] But he said, "I want to make the case

[1:17:36] that if we can't even explain ordinary

[1:17:38] confident consciousness, then I don't

[1:17:40] want to start with anomalies." That's

[1:17:42] one way to do it. Um

[1:17:44] Jeffrey Mishlove says, "I disagree." And

[1:17:46] he says, "I disagree with Jeff with

[1:17:48] Jeff." I think that actually the largest

[1:17:50] frame

[1:17:51] that includes the supernormal,

[1:17:53] that includes the anomalous, is the best

[1:17:56] place to begin to under

[1:17:58] to go back to how even ordinary

[1:17:59] consciousness is a mystery. And Jeff

[1:18:01] Kripal is the same with his emphasis on

[1:18:04] the impossible down at Rice uh

[1:18:07] University. So, there's different ways

[1:18:09] into it. But, and then that that

[1:18:10] actually suggests that the robustness of

[1:18:12] the efforts to show the inadequacies of

[1:18:14] materialism has many different starting

[1:18:16] points. Empiricists like myself, who who

[1:18:19] assemble eight cases in over eight

[1:18:22] chapters,

[1:18:24] um it's one way.

[1:18:25] Interestingly, you you pointed out that

[1:18:28] um

[1:18:28] Hoffman says we need good theories. I

[1:18:30] agree with that. I didn't start with

[1:18:32] theory in my book that I knew of, but it

[1:18:35] took me finishing the book, which was an

[1:18:36] empirical empirically based book. Let's

[1:18:39] look at this phenomenon. Now, let's look

[1:18:41] at this phenomenon that is similar, but

[1:18:43] different. Over here is another

[1:18:44] phenomenon, near-death, and so forth. I

[1:18:46] did all that, and I finally realized,

[1:18:48] "Well, wait a minute. I do have a

[1:18:49] theory, that we are capable of an

[1:18:51] interconnectedness,

[1:18:53] and that there is a fundamental matrix

[1:18:56] underlying the essence of things that is

[1:19:01] a connectedness that gives rise to all

[1:19:04] of these phenomena and makes them

[1:19:07] intelligible as related family

[1:19:09] resemblances, as you could say. So, what

[1:19:12] is the nature of that connectedness?

[1:19:13] It's

[1:19:14] it's that we we maybe we need to better

[1:19:16] understand how we had this crazy four

[1:19:19] dec four centuries of believing that

[1:19:21] consciousness is irrelevant. It's

[1:19:24] There will be, you know,

[1:19:26] in our lifetime or the next one that

[1:19:27] there will be books written about

[1:19:29] materialism as a strange set of precepts

[1:19:32] that didn't pan out. Don't And people

[1:19:34] say, "Well, materialism has gotten us to

[1:19:36] the moon." Materialism hasn't. Science

[1:19:39] has. Many of the scientists believe on a

[1:19:42] material frame of reference, but it's

[1:19:44] not necessary to believe in materialism

[1:19:46] to accomplish things in the physical

[1:19:48] world. The physical world isn't matter,

[1:19:51] is mind at mind in mind in matter.

[1:19:55] Matter as mind in some disguised form.

[1:19:59] That's the kind of language I like.

[1:20:01] Disguised to our disguised to our

[1:20:03] blinders, by the way. It's not disguised

[1:20:05] to itself. Nature, although nature does

[1:20:08] like to play hide and seek with itself.

[1:20:10] The very effort to uncover these things

[1:20:12] is nature. Nature's discovering as much

[1:20:14] about itself as we are. We are the eyes

[1:20:17] and ears in of

[1:20:19] Bernardo with his emphasis on the Daimon

[1:20:21] in recent years has gone further than

[1:20:23] he'd had to go. He I think there's a

[1:20:25] bravery in Bernardo Kastrup by bringing

[1:20:28] up the Greek image of the Daimon, which

[1:20:30] I actually think, and I know you do,

[1:20:31] too, is a very fertile frame to bring

[1:20:34] back Bring back the middle platness, the

[1:20:37] pre-socratics, and all of it. Let's go

[1:20:40] back to Plato.

[1:20:42] >> Yes.

[1:20:43] Yeah, and and I'm glad you brought this

[1:20:45] up. And before we we we go away from

[1:20:47] this

[1:20:49] materialism conversation, I do want to

[1:20:51] highlight that that's like one of those

[1:20:52] non-sequitur

[1:20:54] one of those things that sounds very

[1:20:55] logical when they say it. But when you

[1:20:58] invest it it's a complete non-sequitur

[1:21:00] really when you say something like, oh,

[1:21:02] materialism got us to the moon,

[1:21:04] materialism cured your disease, or you

[1:21:07] know, made the medicine that you take

[1:21:08] when you It's like

[1:21:10] that

[1:21:12] the fact that those things work on an

[1:21:14] engineering level does not mean that

[1:21:16] matter is the primary metaphysical

[1:21:18] substance of the of reality, right? Like

[1:21:21] Like that's one of those things that is

[1:21:23] is not proven by

[1:21:25] um

[1:21:27] by demonstrating that things have cause

[1:21:29] and effect on a material

[1:21:32] level. But but anyway, yeah, this this

[1:21:34] to to completely switch gears, this

[1:21:36] concept of the Daimon is one of those

[1:21:39] things that I think is irreplaceably

[1:21:42] precious. And I think it's been

[1:21:46] and maybe this is my own bias because

[1:21:48] it's something that I'm massively

[1:21:49] interested in and I became uh hugely

[1:21:51] interested in I don't know probably

[1:21:54] close to a decade ago at this point, but

[1:21:56] um

[1:21:57] but it does seem like it's one of these

[1:21:59] topics that's stirring in the zeitgeist

[1:22:01] that's getting more and more popular.

[1:22:03] But how did you become interested in the

[1:22:05] idea of the the personal daimon? I'm

[1:22:08] assuming you're talking about the idea

[1:22:09] of the personal daimon, not not the the

[1:22:11] larger um kind of daimonic view of

[1:22:14] reality. Though I think that that would

[1:22:16] fit into this conversation as well. I'm

[1:22:17] guessing Do you Do you know of Patrick

[1:22:19] Harpur's book

[1:22:20] >> Oh I do.

[1:22:21] Daimonic reality.

[1:22:22] >> Yeah yeah.

[1:22:23] >> Another approach which is very different

[1:22:25] which again attests to the the

[1:22:26] robustness of the daimonic image that it

[1:22:30] can be approached from so many different

[1:22:32] angles was James Hillman's book The

[1:22:34] Soul's Code.

[1:22:36] >> He put it in a

[1:22:36] >> my shelf right back there.

[1:22:38] >> Yep, he put it in a psycho- therapeutic

[1:22:40] framework by saying psychology may have

[1:22:42] missed something by assuming that all

[1:22:44] we're doing is resolving a physical

[1:22:46] traumas from our mom and dad

[1:22:49] from the past. That that actually all

[1:22:51] the traumas are necessary from a

[1:22:53] daimonic perspective. I'm going to make

[1:22:55] the case that there is something that

[1:22:57] joins us that that we choose and chooses

[1:22:59] us at the very beginning of an

[1:23:01] incarnation and it presents to us uh

[1:23:04] opportunities of learning to put it

[1:23:06] simply. Um and there are and and allows

[1:23:10] fate to come into the conversation, the

[1:23:12] sense of having a destiny, the sense of

[1:23:15] knowing amidst all the top turmoil and

[1:23:18] tumult of a life, this is where I must

[1:23:21] go.

[1:23:22] This is what I must do. I Ella

[1:23:25] Fitzgerald, uh the great singer, when

[1:23:27] she was a child, her first appearance on

[1:23:29] a stage was at a church, a talent show.

[1:23:33] And she was going to dance cuz she loved

[1:23:35] dancing. So the announcer said our next

[1:23:38] our next talent participant, a young

[1:23:41] lady aged 12 or whatever she was, Ella

[1:23:44] Fitzgerald, she's going to do a dance

[1:23:46] for a Oh, what?

[1:23:48] Oh, wait a minute. She's going to sing

[1:23:50] for us.

[1:23:52] So, here's the point. She came prepared

[1:23:54] to dance.

[1:23:56] >> Yeah.

[1:23:56] >> But, she was also a singer.

[1:23:58] Her daimon said, "You're going to do

[1:24:00] song."

[1:24:01] If you will, if you will. Her Did she

[1:24:02] even She never said she had talked to

[1:24:04] her daimon. But, she made a correction.

[1:24:06] She made a choice. She made One of those

[1:24:08] fateful when the two roads diverge,

[1:24:11] maybe take one you didn't expect. She

[1:24:12] sang. She brought the house down. She

[1:24:15] sang all night. She became Ella

[1:24:18] Fitzgerald.

[1:24:20] >> Yeah.

[1:24:20] >> You become who you really are. So, the

[1:24:22] daimon is a very

[1:24:24] rich frame for to

[1:24:26] >> Absolutely.

[1:24:27] >> to tackle philosophically

[1:24:29] as well as practically and

[1:24:30] pragmatically.

[1:24:32] And existentially.

[1:24:34] The sense of, you know, there's

[1:24:35] something that's guiding me. There's a

[1:24:37] There's meaning in this that I don't

[1:24:38] know.

[1:24:39] Just that very assumption is a beautiful

[1:24:42] place saver

[1:24:44] for a life when one is stuck.

[1:24:47] >> Mhm. Mhm.

[1:24:48] Yeah, for people that don't are not

[1:24:50] familiar with this idea of the personal

[1:24:51] daimon, one, you must have never watched

[1:24:53] this channel before, but just to to give

[1:24:55] it like a a one-minute um sort of

[1:24:58] overview, it's

[1:25:00] I don't think it's known exactly where

[1:25:02] this idea originates. I mean, you see it

[1:25:04] across many different cultures and by

[1:25:06] many different names, you know, from

[1:25:08] like Zoroastrianism to, you know, the

[1:25:11] ancient Greek realm. Um you know,

[1:25:13] ancient Egypt has its own crazy

[1:25:17] um

[1:25:18] metaphysical view of the self and, you

[1:25:21] know, the subtle bodies and guides and

[1:25:23] stuff like that. So, it's present there

[1:25:24] as well. But, um from a Western

[1:25:26] perspective, probably the most

[1:25:28] well-known story or myth is the myth of

[1:25:31] Er from Plato's Republic. And that

[1:25:33] that's the one that Hillman pulls from

[1:25:35] in Soul's Code, which essentially is the

[1:25:37] story of the soldier named Er, E R,

[1:25:40] who is about to be burnt at, you know,

[1:25:42] burnt in a funeral pyre.

[1:25:45] But, then he comes back to life. And he

[1:25:46] has full memory of the other realm. And

[1:25:50] there's this whole essentially this

[1:25:51] process you go through upon dying and

[1:25:54] it's a it's a

[1:25:56] cyclical reincarnation sort of thing.

[1:25:59] But where it diverges

[1:26:02] from the Eastern view, at least from my

[1:26:03] understanding, is there's a part where

[1:26:06] you you go before the Fates, at least in

[1:26:09] this mythological retelling.

[1:26:11] And the Fates essentially present you

[1:26:12] with these lots to choose from. Like you

[1:26:14] can choose like here here's what's

[1:26:17] available to you based on your soul,

[1:26:19] your experiences, your choices. So

[1:26:22] there's almost kind of like a karmic

[1:26:24] element, but there's always this weird

[1:26:26] tension between here's what's you what

[1:26:28] you get and then you exercise your own

[1:26:30] will to choose some limited uh array,

[1:26:34] right?

[1:26:36] of choices.

[1:26:37] So you choose the lot and the lot has a

[1:26:40] particular fate associated with it.

[1:26:43] But you still get a certain amount of

[1:26:45] free will within that

[1:26:47] kind of choice.

[1:26:49] And upon making this choice and and I've

[1:26:52] seen it said both ways that either a

[1:26:54] Daimon is assigned to you or you choose

[1:26:56] a Daimon. So

[1:26:58] um I believe it's you choose a Daimon is

[1:27:00] is what it actually says

[1:27:02] according to to most of the translations

[1:27:04] I've read. And a Daimon is just like a

[1:27:06] spirit that is aware of this choice you

[1:27:10] made. It's aware of

[1:27:12] um this lot, this fate that you chose.

[1:27:15] But then as you incarnate, you

[1:27:16] completely forget. You completely forget

[1:27:18] you made this choice. You have no idea.

[1:27:21] And but this Daimon knows. This spirit

[1:27:23] that's with you knows. So Hillman's

[1:27:26] argument is that the Daimon reveals

[1:27:28] itself sort of in these inclinations,

[1:27:31] these um

[1:27:33] >> desires,

[1:27:35] desires

[1:27:36] >> Yeah yeah, desires, you know, feeling

[1:27:38] like a square peg in a round hole, just

[1:27:40] kind of intuitively knowing this path is

[1:27:42] not meant for me, this one is. Um

[1:27:45] and it's through

[1:27:47] those choices or not where you do or you

[1:27:50] don't follow the whisper of the Daimon,

[1:27:52] that you have an opportunity to become

[1:27:54] something greater or become become the

[1:27:57] self that you really could

[1:27:59] grow into. He uses the metaphor of the

[1:28:00] acorn and having the potential to become

[1:28:02] the oak tree, right? It's not

[1:28:03] necessarily true that the acorn will

[1:28:05] become the oak tree, but it could. And

[1:28:07] that's

[1:28:08] essentially the situation that that that

[1:28:11] we're in metaphysically according to to

[1:28:13] Hillman, to play and to and Jung, too. I

[1:28:15] think Jung

[1:28:17] um was also very very clearly interested

[1:28:20] in this in this way of thinking.

[1:28:22] Um

[1:28:22] But how how did you come to the idea of

[1:28:25] the Daimon? And have you any have you

[1:28:27] had any daimonic

[1:28:28] um

[1:28:30] experiences in your life?

[1:28:32] >> I Well,

[1:28:33] you know, in Patrick Harper sense, yes,

[1:28:35] I suppose. Um and the the the the range

[1:28:38] of possibilities with the daimonic is so

[1:28:41] uh so vast. Um

[1:28:44] I'm I'm just right now I'm just

[1:28:45] remembering this morning I was listening

[1:28:47] uh as I was getting ready for this and

[1:28:49] so forth, listening to Radiohead singing

[1:28:51] their their hit song Creep.

[1:28:53] And and the the singer is saying, I I

[1:28:55] want to be special

[1:28:57] like you are. So very special. But I'm a

[1:29:00] creep.

[1:29:02] I'm a weirdo.

[1:29:03] And it's an an incredibly melancholic

[1:29:05] song that sense of being a creep or a

[1:29:08] weirdo and wanting to be special.

[1:29:11] Um

[1:29:12] So uh I think my daimonic experience was

[1:29:16] my near-death experience, uh if you

[1:29:18] will. Um

[1:29:19] And

[1:29:21] uh

[1:29:22] But so but discovering Hillman's book

[1:29:23] gave me a frame for and it has allowed

[1:29:25] me to open to that sense of being guided

[1:29:28] without the capital G from North

[1:29:31] California and the you know, self-help

[1:29:33] new age movement. You know, so many

[1:29:35] people are guided and so many people

[1:29:38] have certainty about metaphysical things

[1:29:40] that I don't tend to bring. I mean, you

[1:29:42] know, not that be overly certain,

[1:29:44] overbelief, certain amount of overbelief

[1:29:46] is is characteristic of these things,

[1:29:48] but open to the possibility of the

[1:29:50] daimonic frame. Why is it any less

[1:29:53] plausible than the idea that I have to

[1:29:55] spend the rest of my life working on my

[1:29:56] mommy issues? My mommy issues may be

[1:29:59] what were given to me so that I could do

[1:30:01] the do do my best work. My sense of

[1:30:04] being betrayed by mommy or daddy.

[1:30:07] Maybe that that's that's the Freud had

[1:30:09] no clue of that and wouldn't invite us

[1:30:11] to consider that larger frame of having

[1:30:13] a destiny

[1:30:15] and having a fate. But again, destiny

[1:30:17] and fate are terms you can easily get

[1:30:19] lost There's a lot of inflation and

[1:30:21] grandiosity. So I guess I'm a little

[1:30:23] mindful of the ten potential for

[1:30:25] grandiosity with the daimonic

[1:30:27] because it is larger than human. In

[1:30:28] fact, Kastrup I believe has said

[1:30:31] if you have a daimon as I do, be careful

[1:30:34] what you listen to.

[1:30:35] Be careful it might ask you to do

[1:30:37] certain things for its individuation. I

[1:30:39] believe he makes the case actually that

[1:30:41] it is the daimon

[1:30:43] that is individuating.

[1:30:45] In Jung's sense. And so it goes through

[1:30:48] So the daimon is growing as much as we

[1:30:50] are. And

[1:30:52] so and and he also points out that

[1:30:53] mostly the daimon as we know from

[1:30:55] Socrates. Socrates' daimon told him what

[1:30:58] not to do.

[1:30:59] >> Yeah.

[1:30:59] >> Didn't tell him what to do.

[1:31:02] So it tells So I listen like when I have

[1:31:04] a feeling, don't go there.

[1:31:06] That's not That's not Don't go to that

[1:31:08] place.

[1:31:09] It isn't It's a premonition if you will,

[1:31:12] but it's a gut It's an increasing

[1:31:14] ability to consult my gut.

[1:31:16] Is this the right path? And is it If

[1:31:19] it's not the right path, is it because I

[1:31:20] don't just don't want to do it?

[1:31:23] It's going to get me out of my comfort

[1:31:24] zone or is it not my right path because

[1:31:27] this is

[1:31:28] really misguided.

[1:31:30] This choice.

[1:31:31] Maybe you shouldn't marry this person

[1:31:33] that you've just met.

[1:31:34] >> [laughter]

[1:31:35] >> I haven't had one of those.

[1:31:38] >> Um yeah. Yeah, I think it's it's such a

[1:31:41] beautiful idea because it gives us all

[1:31:44] all of these things we just discussed.

[1:31:45] You know, it gives us directionality but

[1:31:47] still a certain amount of free will. It

[1:31:49] gives us a fate. Um yet a certain amount

[1:31:52] of

[1:31:53] choosing what that fate is. May Maybe

[1:31:55] that's too strong of a word. Maybe it's

[1:31:57] not quite choosing. I I guess this is

[1:31:58] one of these things like that the

[1:32:00] fatalists and not and uh

[1:32:03] I don't know, free free will assists

[1:32:05] have been have been debating for for

[1:32:07] millennia for a reason. But um

[1:32:10] you know, completely switching

[1:32:13] uh topics here because we're getting

[1:32:15] deeper into the conversation now and and

[1:32:17] I do want to get your take on it.

[1:32:20] How much do you follow the the totally

[1:32:22] opposite end of this conversation in

[1:32:24] terms of like

[1:32:26] disclosure at large? Do you follow the

[1:32:29] mainstream disclosure developments and

[1:32:32] the people who are out there talking

[1:32:33] about bodies in hangers and um the

[1:32:36] legacy program and reverse engineering

[1:32:38] stuff? Do you follow that aspect of it

[1:32:40] as well? And and if so, what is your

[1:32:42] take on it?

[1:32:42] >> I I follow it, but I always tell people

[1:32:44] when I go on the

[1:32:45] on shows having written two books about

[1:32:48] UFOs. I've been joking lately that my

[1:32:50] new my new book my

[1:32:52] anomalous phenomenon is going to get me

[1:32:54] out of the UFO ghetto.

[1:32:56] >> [snorts]

[1:32:56] >> Because I've written two books on UFOs

[1:32:58] and I don't believe it's a ghetto.

[1:33:00] Uh I I love the books. I love the time

[1:33:02] I've spent being mentored by the UFO

[1:33:05] phenomena. I actually personify. I often

[1:33:08] say my friend the UFO.

[1:33:10] I'll say that to people, you know, my my

[1:33:12] because you develop a personal

[1:33:14] relationship to the stories and so

[1:33:15] forth. So,

[1:33:17] I I was struck with Spielberg's new

[1:33:19] movie uh this year, Disclosure Day.

[1:33:23] Going to write about it in the book.

[1:33:25] That I that he was probably going to

[1:33:27] hold and I think he did. He really held

[1:33:29] held attention in the story um much more

[1:33:32] so than in Close Encounters.

[1:33:34] But he held attention between sort of

[1:33:36] two registers of disclosure. One is

[1:33:39] definitely and I think it was the

[1:33:40] predominant register of the movie.

[1:33:43] The sense of disclosure of the

[1:33:45] government secrets, the government

[1:33:47] cover-up, what the forces that don't

[1:33:49] want the truth to come out, the car

[1:33:52] chases, the the near collision with the

[1:33:54] train. A lot of chase scenes in this new

[1:33:57] movie. So, it's clear he went down that

[1:33:59] road to a large extent. But, I I was

[1:34:02] almost certain and I think I've been

[1:34:04] born born out right on this

[1:34:07] that he also has a metaphysic You you

[1:34:08] you you can't look at his body of work

[1:34:11] and not see including ET, you know, the

[1:34:13] children's movie so to speak. He has a

[1:34:15] metaphysical sense about him and so I

[1:34:17] think there's a and and also because he

[1:34:20] worked very closely with Jacques Vallee

[1:34:22] um back in the '70s on Close Encounters.

[1:34:25] I think

[1:34:26] I I was pretty certain Disclosure Day

[1:34:28] would at least not take tip its cap to

[1:34:32] the larger meta larger disclosure about

[1:34:35] the nature of reality.

[1:34:37] That this phenomenon requires a

[1:34:39] resettling of our accounts with reality

[1:34:42] itself. There's too much about the UFO

[1:34:46] phenomenon that cannot be explained only

[1:34:49] in terms of an extraterrestrial

[1:34:51] technology whose craft are slightly more

[1:34:53] evolved than ours. It can't be just

[1:34:55] that. So, I where I stand with the

[1:34:57] Disclosure Movement, the the the alleged

[1:35:00] bodies, the

[1:35:02] biologics they're called, and the

[1:35:04] recovered craft, and the fact that

[1:35:06] they're almost always certainly I think

[1:35:09] entirely always found on government

[1:35:12] property. They don't land in public

[1:35:14] places where other people can except

[1:35:16] Roswell. Roswell I don't think was

[1:35:18] necessarily public property, but there

[1:35:20] were people who whatever crashed at

[1:35:22] Roswell, people came away with pieces of

[1:35:24] it.

[1:35:25] Uh in any case, I I followed because if

[1:35:27] it's right, it's right.

[1:35:29] I'm I'm I I sense it doesn't seem to go

[1:35:32] anywhere.

[1:35:33] Uh the is there not one Here's a

[1:35:36] question. It's maybe it's a naive

[1:35:37] question.

[1:35:39] Is there not one whistleblower

[1:35:42] who would be open to being funded by

[1:35:45] Imagine there's a billionaire somewhere

[1:35:47] in the United States who's very

[1:35:48] interested in UFOs. Shall we imagine We

[1:35:51] shall we imagine that possibility? I'll

[1:35:54] name him. Robert Bigelow. Okay?

[1:35:56] >> Yeah.

[1:35:57] >> Would Robert Bigelow not be willing to

[1:35:59] write a check to a whistleblower to say,

[1:36:02] "If you lose your pension,

[1:36:04] and if they do to you what they did to

[1:36:06] Daniel Ellsberg, I will pay your entire

[1:36:08] legal costs, will make them come after

[1:36:11] you,

[1:36:12] and we'll make them pay for making you

[1:36:14] pay."

[1:36:15] So,

[1:36:16] not one whistleblower has been offered

[1:36:19] that, uh, is not willing to ask for it.

[1:36:22] So, I mean, I get So, I believe there

[1:36:24] are people who are working on things

[1:36:26] that they believe are off-planet.

[1:36:29] They also talk about how they don't know

[1:36:31] what the person in the next cubicle is

[1:36:32] doing. So, highly compartmentalized. So,

[1:36:35] from a platonic standpoint, the

[1:36:37] disclosure movement is just a massive It

[1:36:39] is a not just,

[1:36:41] but is a

[1:36:42] hall of mirrors.

[1:36:44] Makes it very hard to

[1:36:46] to to take a stand, to plant your flag

[1:36:49] somewhere. So, when you say, "Do I

[1:36:50] follow it?" Yes. Would I write a book

[1:36:52] about it? No, cuz I think it's what

[1:36:54] leads to one rabbit hole after another

[1:36:57] until it doesn't anymore.

[1:36:58] I don't think Trump has been briefed in.

[1:37:01] I'm sorry. I don't look at Donald Trump

[1:37:03] as somebody who holds that kind of

[1:37:05] complexity without being

[1:37:07] I don't think any president would be

[1:37:08] able to handle it. I don't think I don't

[1:37:10] think I don't think Obama was read in.

[1:37:12] He has played mischievously with the

[1:37:14] idea that he does know.

[1:37:17] I notice these presidents tend to play

[1:37:19] be very cagey about it, including Trump.

[1:37:22] He says, "I don't know what what's going

[1:37:23] on. I I don't People I've talked to

[1:37:24] pilots." He says, "I talk to pilots. I

[1:37:26] bring them in."

[1:37:27] >> Yeah.

[1:37:27] >> They describe things that I can't So, I

[1:37:30] I don't know.

[1:37:31] That doesn't sound like somebody who's

[1:37:32] seen the further reaches. Vallée says

[1:37:35] the president has no need to know.

[1:37:38] By his account, there's some permanent

[1:37:40] frame in the government, the permanent

[1:37:41] government, doesn't allow presidents to

[1:37:44] get rid in read in on this. So,

[1:37:46] the the overlap between the disclosure

[1:37:48] movement and and just what we would call

[1:37:50] paranoia is too great for me to want to

[1:37:53] land there. That why some people do, but

[1:37:55] those who do, you know, Corbell Corbell

[1:37:58] and Knapp and others, uh,

[1:38:01] Greer, who I've actually met I met him

[1:38:04] once at a conference that Lawrence

[1:38:06] Rockefeller had back in the '90s. But, I

[1:38:08] I don't know them well, and I find it uh

[1:38:11] disturbing area of like any I believe

[1:38:15] conspiracies exist. After all, we have

[1:38:18] laws, criminal laws against conspiring.

[1:38:20] Just the act of conspiring to commit a

[1:38:23] crime is a crime. So, I believe a

[1:38:26] conspiracy could exist. I don't quite

[1:38:29] fully understand how this conspiracy

[1:38:31] could be as airtight as it is. But,

[1:38:34] yeah. It It could be. It could be that

[1:38:36] this is the

[1:38:38] lodestone.

[1:38:40] >> Mhm. Mhm.

[1:38:41] Yeah, well well summarized. And I I

[1:38:43] share many of the same thoughts. And I

[1:38:46] would add on to that that even if there

[1:38:49] is a limited level of knowledge, like

[1:38:52] like let's just say let's just take the

[1:38:54] most cliché mainstream version of this

[1:38:57] story to its logical conclusion, right?

[1:38:59] Like we wake up tomorrow, there's

[1:39:03] uh

[1:39:04] Okay, let's let's go a little further

[1:39:05] than tomorrow cuz there'll be a lot of

[1:39:06] ontological shock tomorrow. But, let's

[1:39:08] get on the other side of the ontological

[1:39:10] shock, right? There's There's four alien

[1:39:12] species.

[1:39:14] Um

[1:39:14] We've We've been working with them on a

[1:39:16] limited basis. Uh we've got some of

[1:39:19] their down craft. A couple of them have

[1:39:22] died under crazy circumstances.

[1:39:25] The existential situation of humanity

[1:39:28] and like what we're broadly doing here

[1:39:30] probably doesn't change a whole lot

[1:39:33] unless there's other additional

[1:39:36] metaphysical or at least major physics

[1:39:40] breakthroughs that come along with that.

[1:39:42] So, the point I'm kind of getting at is

[1:39:44] I think

[1:39:45] though it may add some complexity, we're

[1:39:47] sort of still right where we are right

[1:39:49] now, right? Even on the other side of

[1:39:51] that. Like maybe yes, maybe there would

[1:39:53] be a new era of plenty, but but at the

[1:39:56] end of the day, we're still in the same

[1:39:59] existential, spiritual, metaphysical

[1:40:02] situation that we are in sitting here in

[1:40:04] this room right now. So, I think that

[1:40:07] for me is why I end up going in the

[1:40:09] directions that I go in is because to me

[1:40:11] that that's what's most important

[1:40:13] anyway. Like, yes, of course, I would

[1:40:15] want to know if there's other species. I

[1:40:17] would want to know if we have

[1:40:18] anti-gravity. I would want to know if

[1:40:19] somebody cracked, uh you know, fusion,

[1:40:22] whatever. Like, yeah, I would want to

[1:40:24] know that stuff. But, also I think at

[1:40:25] the end of the day, how much

[1:40:28] does that really advance us as like

[1:40:31] souls doing whatever we're doing here?

[1:40:33] The answer is I I don't think it really

[1:40:35] probably does unless it's something

[1:40:36] beyond technology and just beyond the

[1:40:39] idea of an extraterrestrial, like you

[1:40:42] said, slightly more advanced or even

[1:40:44] more advanced um civilization. So,

[1:40:48] but but yeah, all of that said, man, it

[1:40:51] really does beg the question, if that is

[1:40:53] the case,

[1:40:54] it it's the same questions people have

[1:40:56] been having for decades. Why don't they

[1:40:57] reveal themselves then? If they're so

[1:40:59] much more powerful, they must not be

[1:41:00] very hostile cuz they're not actively uh

[1:41:03] persecuting us in a way that at least we

[1:41:06] um

[1:41:07] can see or or or sense very obviously.

[1:41:11] So, yeah, it just

[1:41:12] yeah, there there's something

[1:41:14] well well I do think there is something

[1:41:16] real happening in terms of mainstream

[1:41:18] disclosure. I I also look at that with a

[1:41:21] sideways glance and I'm just like, I'm

[1:41:22] not sure what the hell is going on here.

[1:41:25] I'm not sure what's disinformation,

[1:41:27] what's misinformation, what's real. I

[1:41:29] certainly find a lot of the mainstream

[1:41:31] whistleblowers compelling. Um you know,

[1:41:35] like as much as people love to bash on

[1:41:37] many of them, like Elizondo and

[1:41:38] everybody else,

[1:41:40] I don't know. They they seem, you know,

[1:41:42] they seem believable and they seem like

[1:41:45] they're they they really care about the

[1:41:47] messages that they're pushing.

[1:41:49] But, then we don't really make any, you

[1:41:51] know, are we really in any different of

[1:41:52] a place than we were in 2017? Not

[1:41:54] really. Other than we've just I think

[1:41:56] we've

[1:41:57] we've certainly permeated the zeitgeist

[1:41:59] with these ideas more. But but beyond

[1:42:01] that, what else have we really done? You

[1:42:03] know, I'm I don't I don't really see

[1:42:04] anything.

[1:42:05] >> I've noticed as you have that Phil

[1:42:07] McGraw, Dr. the legendary Dr. Phil

[1:42:09] [laughter] of daytime TV, has become

[1:42:12] interested in this and he's planted

[1:42:13] himself out there as a

[1:42:15] uh guy who says things as many people

[1:42:17] say, he has it on very good authority

[1:42:20] that the president has been Whoa, whoa,

[1:42:22] whoa, whoa. What authority?

[1:42:24] So, I I I don't think

[1:42:26] I don't have a problem with Dr. Phil. I

[1:42:28] wish he'd get me I wish they'd get me on

[1:42:30] that kind of When when people do say, I

[1:42:33] have heard from those who have talked to

[1:42:34] those who have talked to those who have

[1:42:36] talked to the uh Yeah. I said, "No,

[1:42:37] that's that's right there. You're

[1:42:38] telling me I'm going to I'm going to

[1:42:40] stay over here. Call me when it's a

[1:42:41] little closer." So, Dr. Phil sat down

[1:42:45] with um

[1:42:47] uh David Grusch not long ago.

[1:42:49] >> Mhm.

[1:42:49] >> And says, "Can you take me

[1:42:51] to the location?"

[1:42:53] And Grusch said, "Yes." To one of the

[1:42:56] hangars where McDonnell Douglas or

[1:42:58] Lockheed Martin has them. Now, again, I

[1:43:00] understand the the

[1:43:02] it may turn out that Grusch may say,

[1:43:04] "Well, I'll take you there, but they're

[1:43:06] not they're no longer here." Or by the

[1:43:07] way, you can't just show up at Lockheed

[1:43:10] Martin. Who can Who can? It's a private

[1:43:13] business even though it is an aero-

[1:43:14] aerospace contractor. It's a

[1:43:16] quasi-government

[1:43:18] quasi-government

[1:43:19] connections. But anyway, I don't know

[1:43:22] what what has happened with that idea

[1:43:24] that Dr.

[1:43:25] Dr. Phil and David Grusch are going on a

[1:43:28] field trip sometime soon. I will say one

[1:43:31] thing that interests me about the you

[1:43:32] know, Ross Coulthart as you very very

[1:43:35] right on the center and in NewsNation

[1:43:37] show, Reality Check, he's really been

[1:43:40] right on the cusp of all this this the

[1:43:43] UFO thing. And he's sort of stayed away

[1:43:45] from the larger connections of other

[1:43:47] kinds of anomalies. Well, lo and behold,

[1:43:50] I see he just had Jeff Kripal on his

[1:43:53] show. And he said, "Jeff, I'm now paying

[1:43:56] attention to your work as much as I'm

[1:43:58] paying to mainstream ufology because I

[1:44:01] think there's something about death that

[1:44:04] we need to understand." And he said And

[1:44:06] you know, Jeff just laughed. Jeff has

[1:44:08] such a warmth

[1:44:09] playful warm playful qualities it you

[1:44:12] and Leslie Cain. She did a book a great

[1:44:15] book about UFOs and you did a great book

[1:44:18] on UFOs and the next book she did was

[1:44:20] called surviving death. So

[1:44:23] and with me I've done two UFO books and

[1:44:25] now I've done a kind of

[1:44:27] let's look at multiple and I'm actually

[1:44:29] trying to push it more in that direction

[1:44:31] with multiple multiple kinds of

[1:44:34] phenomena

[1:44:35] using Gregory Bateson's question. What's

[1:44:38] the pattern that connects all of any

[1:44:40] anything in a field? I'm actually doing

[1:44:43] what's the pattern that connects all of

[1:44:45] these anomalous phenomena. So anyway

[1:44:47] Ross Coulthart is uh open. He he went to

[1:44:51] Esalen Institute and did a CE5 outdoor

[1:44:54] >> Right.

[1:44:54] >> uh sky scan. So good for you Ross

[1:44:57] Coulthart. That tells me you are um

[1:45:00] you have a curious mind a mind of

[1:45:03] curiosity as well as a curious way of

[1:45:05] thinking. So

[1:45:06] >> Yeah.

[1:45:06] >> you're going to get a new kinds of

[1:45:07] trouble here Mr. Coulthart. Good for

[1:45:09] you. Be prepared to look up all new

[1:45:12] kinds of trouble in your life but I

[1:45:14] admire your courage in doing it.

[1:45:16] >> Me too. And and you know what's what's

[1:45:19] fascinating

[1:45:21] speaking of Lockheed Martin I I don't

[1:45:22] know how far you got in that again in

[1:45:24] that in that video I just made that you

[1:45:26] said you started watching but one of the

[1:45:29] really perplexing things that I wound up

[1:45:32] finding and I actually also heard this

[1:45:34] from uh Dr. Eric Davis directly

[1:45:37] um

[1:45:39] everyone has figured this out by now but

[1:45:41] when when Eric Davis was doing my show

[1:45:43] he kept bringing up a certain Lockheed

[1:45:46] executive over and over again whose name

[1:45:48] he said not to say but he was giving all

[1:45:50] of these context clues to reveal who it

[1:45:52] was and this person's name had been said

[1:45:55] over and over again already on other

[1:45:57] podcasts bigger than mine. So I'm not

[1:45:59] breaking any news here though I think

[1:46:01] maybe Eric may have broke

[1:46:03] some specific pieces of news in terms of

[1:46:05] like

[1:46:06] little anecdotes and nuggets here and

[1:46:08] there that maybe no one has said before.

[1:46:10] I don't even know because I haven't I

[1:46:12] haven't seen every interview by that

[1:46:13] Erica has done by any stretch, but

[1:46:17] come to find out there are multiple very

[1:46:19] high-ranking people at Lockheed who are

[1:46:21] interested in exactly the stuff you and

[1:46:22] I are interested in. And like the the

[1:46:24] primary example that everybody points to

[1:46:26] because he has several public talks out

[1:46:28] there was the late Jim Rider.

[1:46:30] So I I don't know if you've ever

[1:46:31] stumbled across any of his talks, but he

[1:46:34] became very interested in theosophy and

[1:46:36] particularly um

[1:46:38] Alice Bailey's work and he was like oh

[1:46:40] he he was giving talks with this

[1:46:41] organization called the Lucis Trust.

[1:46:44] Have you stumbled across them at all?

[1:46:45] >> No. No.

[1:46:46] >> Yeah, they're essentially like the

[1:46:48] organization that carried on the work of

[1:46:50] Alice Bailey who admittedly I'm kind of

[1:46:53] a neophyte in her work, but she comes

[1:46:54] out of the Theosophical movement and she

[1:46:57] was kind of this new age, you know,

[1:46:59] luminary type woman.

[1:47:02] And yeah, all these talks that Rider so

[1:47:04] VP of Lockheed Space Systems like very

[1:47:06] very high up guy. And um

[1:47:09] yeah, he's talking about all of this

[1:47:11] exact same metaphysical stuff. He's

[1:47:13] talking about

[1:47:15] um

[1:47:15] you know, there there being this

[1:47:18] like etheric realm other

[1:47:20] you know,

[1:47:21] multi-disciplinary in a very Jacques

[1:47:23] Vallee-esque kind of way where he's

[1:47:25] bringing in all of these different

[1:47:27] disciplines. And I just always find it

[1:47:30] incredibly interesting when these guys

[1:47:32] who have

[1:47:33] PhDs in like hard material science

[1:47:37] end up going this other direction. And

[1:47:39] it's even it's for the same reason it's

[1:47:41] really interesting with the Karl Nell

[1:47:43] example, right? Because it's like man,

[1:47:45] here's another guy who's on this other

[1:47:47] side of this opaque thing I can't see

[1:47:50] beyond

[1:47:51] which is hardcore material science at

[1:47:53] the highest levels, but then he comes

[1:47:55] out from under beside

[1:47:57] the other side of that door

[1:47:59] talking about all this stuff.

[1:48:00] So again, like what is I don't know what

[1:48:02] the connective tissue is there, but very

[1:48:05] interesting. And then there's also the

[1:48:06] skeptical part of me that's like is this

[1:48:08] could this potentially be

[1:48:10] esoteric red herrings to try to distract

[1:48:13] from other things, but that is not the

[1:48:14] sense I get

[1:48:16] um from him or

[1:48:17] or any of these people to be completely

[1:48:19] honest.

[1:48:19] >> This circles around by analogy to what

[1:48:21] we're talking about with Bruce Grayson.

[1:48:23] Again, a psychiatrist with a hardcore

[1:48:25] materialist viewpoint did not set out

[1:48:29] someday, I think I'm going to look at

[1:48:30] I read the book on near-death

[1:48:32] experiences uh life after life. Um

[1:48:35] that's interesting. No, he didn't do

[1:48:36] that. He He had patients who kept coming

[1:48:39] back and saying things like, "I know

[1:48:40] what my prognosis is. I heard you

[1:48:42] talking to Dr. Smith in the other wing

[1:48:44] of the hospital two aisles away."

[1:48:47] Uh that's the kind of stuff He's a

[1:48:49] hardcore materialist uh rational guy

[1:48:52] whose thinking was shaken. So, um that

[1:48:56] theme replays itself over and over. And

[1:48:59] by the way, as you were talking about

[1:49:00] this, you know, what's not allowed to be

[1:49:02] said, I've often been struck by Elizondo

[1:49:04] and others. They They They uh field the

[1:49:07] questions about what they're allowed to

[1:49:08] say

[1:49:09] and they, you know, they'll say, "Well,

[1:49:10] I can say that um

[1:49:12] I can say this

[1:49:14] but my oath does not allow me to talk

[1:49:16] about that."

[1:49:18] And I go, "Hmm, I don't know what the

[1:49:19] difference is, but nevertheless, there's

[1:49:21] a protocol in place." Isn't it

[1:49:23] interesting that even in the esoteric

[1:49:25] world there is there are similar

[1:49:28] protocols. For example, you In certain

[1:49:30] traditions, you don't state the name of

[1:49:32] God. And if you write about the

[1:49:35] divinity, it would be G blank

[1:49:38] D.

[1:49:39] You especially Orthodox Judaism, I

[1:49:42] believe. You must not utter the name of

[1:49:44] God. It's a blasphemy. Maybe in Islamic

[1:49:46] faith, it's similar. The a holy one must

[1:49:49] not be named. So, that which cannot be

[1:49:52] named has a correlate in esoterica and

[1:49:56] in the secular disclosure government

[1:49:59] intelligence world. What are the

[1:50:00] boundaries of what can't be said? And I

[1:50:03] get loyalty oaths uh NDAs mean

[1:50:06] something.

[1:50:07] But uh they are certainly invoked often

[1:50:10] enough. Uh

[1:50:11] I can say this and I can write this

[1:50:13] book. This book was cleared, but But to

[1:50:16] change the names and

[1:50:18] it's uh there's a lot of it I don't

[1:50:20] expect to unders- to get figured out.

[1:50:22] I'm leaving it to the disclosure experts

[1:50:24] to figure figure all that out.

[1:50:26] >> One of the senses that I'm

[1:50:29] broadly getting that I've begun to

[1:50:31] suspect that maybe I would even put my

[1:50:33] money on this possibility

[1:50:36] is that I think a lot of what is coming

[1:50:38] out

[1:50:40] under under the the guise of disclosure

[1:50:45] is is truths given in a in a false

[1:50:48] narrative wrapping that are necessary

[1:50:54] constituent elements

[1:50:56] of disclosure. So, I haven't I haven't

[1:50:59] even read like Stratton's new book or

[1:51:01] So, I I'm not even sure what's in there,

[1:51:03] but you know, I've heard I've heard

[1:51:04] rumblings and you hear these anecdotes

[1:51:06] of like things they've experienced,

[1:51:07] things other people have experienced.

[1:51:10] And and I think this may be the case I I

[1:51:12] think

[1:51:13] maybe the best mainstream case of this

[1:51:16] might be Spielberg's movie, even though

[1:51:17] that is just the opposite. It's it is

[1:51:20] supposed to be fiction, but I think it

[1:51:21] was probably, you know,

[1:51:24] concealing or or containing rather many

[1:51:27] true

[1:51:28] anecdotes within it perhaps. But but I

[1:51:31] think that might be what mainstream

[1:51:34] disclosure is is is

[1:51:36] a bunch of things that are true in a

[1:51:38] sense, but not literal examples of

[1:51:42] truths. You know what I'm saying? Like

[1:51:44] like they're telling you

[1:51:46] about phenomena that are real and about

[1:51:49] things that actually did happen in a

[1:51:50] sort of historical fiction kind of

[1:51:53] wrapper. And I think there's all kinds

[1:51:55] of different reasons that it would make

[1:51:56] sense to do that. One, um I think

[1:51:59] if there is a legacy program or there

[1:52:01] are these groups that are aware of these

[1:52:03] things, they've probably done illegal

[1:52:05] things that they will never want to

[1:52:07] admit to, but to have disclosure, we

[1:52:09] have to all collectively understand that

[1:52:11] oh, these things are real and they've

[1:52:13] happened, but we we can you know,

[1:52:16] obscure all the names and the actual

[1:52:18] dates and all the data around these

[1:52:20] things, while also communicating that

[1:52:22] they're true. And I'm wondering if

[1:52:24] that's what we're getting from this

[1:52:26] collective of people is a bunch of true

[1:52:28] things that are actually not true in the

[1:52:33] um

[1:52:33] the literal

[1:52:35] senses that they're being told to us.

[1:52:37] You know what I'm saying?

[1:52:37] >> Good point. And um oh boy, that's just

[1:52:40] so rich right there. Um

[1:52:45] Yeah. Good good It's it's good question.

[1:52:47] Um the the ability to know Oh, I I know

[1:52:50] what I was I was going to say that I

[1:52:51] won't be surprised um given the the you

[1:52:54] know, Hollywood is lots of different

[1:52:57] kinds of people with lots of different

[1:52:58] interests. I wouldn't I won't be

[1:52:59] surprised that that there might be some

[1:53:01] projects in the works. I'm not being coy

[1:53:03] about it. I don't know of any. But I

[1:53:05] would imagine that a good screenplay

[1:53:07] would be similar to Disclosure Day. Uh

[1:53:09] somebody who gets hold of something that

[1:53:12] is real evidence of

[1:53:14] uh you know, like the the recovered

[1:53:15] craft or the biologics, the beings. But

[1:53:19] when they're brought out, let's say,

[1:53:22] who confirms that they are what

[1:53:24] what they're said to be?

[1:53:26] Like when you

[1:53:27] >> Yeah.

[1:53:28] >> you bring out pieces of craft or that

[1:53:30] have been reassembled, um

[1:53:32] retrofitted, etc. etc. Who Who's going

[1:53:35] to confirm it? Well, I mean, will

[1:53:37] the idea that Trump has a has a speech

[1:53:40] on Trump's desk

[1:53:42] that he's considering giving? I know

[1:53:44] enough about politics. I worked on a US

[1:53:46] Senate staff. I didn't have a dis- you

[1:53:48] know, a top secret clearance or anything

[1:53:51] of that sort. But I I know that there's

[1:53:53] all kinds of things on a president's

[1:53:54] desk, all kinds of things on a the

[1:53:56] senator's desk. And if people want the

[1:53:58] senator to give a talk on something, to

[1:54:00] give a statement on something. No, no,

[1:54:02] no, no. No, I'm not doing that.

[1:54:04] So, I would imagine Trump, even if he's

[1:54:07] been read in on something, he's got to

[1:54:09] be enough enough of a pragmatist to

[1:54:11] know, am I going to burn how much of my

[1:54:12] capital am I going to burn

[1:54:14] by saying, I'm dis- disclosing tonight

[1:54:17] that there are there are and have been

[1:54:20] in our airspace for decades objects that

[1:54:22] we can't explain.

[1:54:24] Wow. It would that even be responsible

[1:54:27] in terms of mass response, mass

[1:54:30] consciousness.

[1:54:32] Wow. These are These are questions I I

[1:54:34] would love to talk with people who are a

[1:54:36] little more on the inside. I I tend not

[1:54:38] to to get to know I don't tend to know

[1:54:39] many people who are disclosure experts,

[1:54:42] but I'm not sure who I'm not sure who

[1:54:43] really are the experts.

[1:54:46] I find I do tend to take seriously when

[1:54:47] I hear from somebody who does seem to

[1:54:49] have been on the inside. And when they

[1:54:51] say things like uh well what what people

[1:54:54] don't realize is how much of this points

[1:54:57] to the nature of consciousness.

[1:54:59] >> Right.

[1:54:59] >> When I hear that, I go, "Okay, now you

[1:55:01] probably are you've been around the

[1:55:03] block a few times." I don't know why

[1:55:05] that registers. I I know why it

[1:55:07] registers because I am writing about the

[1:55:09] that that's close to my bailiwick. So,

[1:55:12] when I hear somebody with some standing

[1:55:15] say, "We're going to have to understand

[1:55:17] the psychic dimensions of this

[1:55:19] phenomenon. Remote viewing." I'm not at

[1:55:21] all surprised remote viewing has been

[1:55:23] undertaken by our government. And and

[1:55:25] come up with some pretty interesting

[1:55:26] findings.

[1:55:28] >> Yeah, right. Absolutely. Yeah, and and I

[1:55:30] think

[1:55:32] you Oh, I forgot to ask you. Did you Did

[1:55:34] you hear the most recent episode um of

[1:55:37] of Joe Rogan that Grusch was on?

[1:55:40] >> I didn't I didn't not see the whole

[1:55:41] thing, but I think I saw parts of it.

[1:55:43] >> Okay. Well, well,

[1:55:44] there are some new There are some new

[1:55:46] admissions in there that really kind of

[1:55:48] um

[1:55:49] or new new claims, let's say.

[1:55:52] Um

[1:55:53] that really kind of split the community

[1:55:54] because one of the things he

[1:55:56] acknowledged for the first time

[1:55:58] was the existence of certain um races of

[1:56:03] of ET, including uh

[1:56:06] I I guess there's no There There's no

[1:56:08] highbrow way to say lizard or reptilian,

[1:56:11] I guess. But um including reptilians,

[1:56:13] including grays, including hostile

[1:56:16] conflicts between different groups of

[1:56:18] NHI, including an episode where

[1:56:21] apparently United States military killed

[1:56:24] a reptilian, stuff like this. So it was

[1:56:26] so like So it's getting to a very

[1:56:29] literal kind of

[1:56:31] cartoonish level of disclosure that I

[1:56:33] think

[1:56:34] some people were really waiting for and

[1:56:37] some people were like

[1:56:39] this is this is sounding a little too

[1:56:41] much

[1:56:42] like non non-fiction being inspired by

[1:56:46] fiction for my taste to to not to not um

[1:56:51] you know, give this a sideways glance.

[1:56:54] Um

[1:56:56] but amongst all of that there's all this

[1:56:58] other interesting stuff. You know, he

[1:56:59] starts bringing up the um

[1:57:02] are you familiar with um not to just

[1:57:04] keep bringing up pieces of lore here,

[1:57:06] but are you are you familiar with um

[1:57:09] General McCasland telling Peter Levenda

[1:57:12] about, you know, looking into Greek myth

[1:57:14] and um Prometheus and all of that kind

[1:57:17] of stuff. Uh well so so Grusch took it

[1:57:21] to a very literal level

[1:57:22] and said that he saw evidence of a crash

[1:57:25] that had very beautiful human-like

[1:57:27] beings

[1:57:29] that he compared to like Greek god

[1:57:33] sort of appearances. So So that's out

[1:57:35] there now and um

[1:57:38] yeah, you should check it out if you

[1:57:39] haven't seen it because it's pretty

[1:57:41] it's something. It's something.

[1:57:42] >> I I too haven't read Stratton's book. I

[1:57:44] didn't read Grusch's book. I mean, I did

[1:57:46] not read Elizondo's book either. I've

[1:57:48] read analyses and

[1:57:51] followed um podcasts he did. Uh I'm

[1:57:54] aware though that the that there's a

[1:57:56] growing effort to juxtapose

[1:57:58] uh Stratton with Elizondo. What does

[1:58:01] Stratton do? And and the and the little

[1:58:03] rivalries that seem to exist. Stratton

[1:58:05] is making some people upset for various

[1:58:07] reasons and the politics of all of that

[1:58:10] are uh one reason I sort of stay clear

[1:58:12] of it.

[1:58:13] >> Yeah, it it yeah, it becomes very

[1:58:15] gossipy and weird and clicky and the the

[1:58:17] internet discourse around it is like

[1:58:20] it Speaking of Speaking of the UFO

[1:58:22] ghetto, like that That is the UFO ghetto

[1:58:25] is is is a UFO Twitter. Not Not

[1:58:27] everybody on UFO Twitter, but but a lot

[1:58:30] of it, man. I I just I stay far away

[1:58:32] from, but um,

[1:58:34] circling back into everything that you

[1:58:35] are more interested in,

[1:58:37] you said, you know, like you you've kind

[1:58:39] of

[1:58:40] the the general direction

[1:58:43] that you've gone and the big question

[1:58:44] that you've been trying to investigate

[1:58:46] is like, what is the pattern essentially

[1:58:48] that connects

[1:58:49] all of the patterns? Maybe that's not

[1:58:50] the exact verbiage you use, but

[1:58:52] something to that effect.

[1:58:54] And

[1:58:55] do you think you've come to language

[1:58:59] that can serviceably describe whatever

[1:59:02] that thing is? Like what what

[1:59:04] terminology do you think comes close to

[1:59:06] capturing that?

[1:59:08] >> Good question. I I did I think something

[1:59:10] about I don't think the term Whitehead's

[1:59:12] term prehension, that there is a level

[1:59:14] of connectedness at a level of feeling

[1:59:17] that everything that exists has a

[1:59:18] feeling for everything else, which makes

[1:59:21] it possible for psychic phenomena, for

[1:59:23] uh, at large consciousness, non-local

[1:59:26] consciousness. But something about that

[1:59:29] the our capability of a

[1:59:31] of consciousness um, to each other and

[1:59:34] with all aspects of everything that is

[1:59:37] would be something to develop. We need

[1:59:40] new language for it. Some sense, um,

[1:59:43] friend of mine was saying the other day

[1:59:45] that

[1:59:46] we are are we running out of topics and

[1:59:49] books that can be written or do we just

[1:59:51] need to keep coming back to them and re-

[1:59:54] re- stating things that materialism has

[1:59:57] left out. Somebody said they were they'd

[2:00:00] love to read a good book about Ian

[2:00:02] Stevenson's research on reincarnation.

[2:00:05] And I said, well, there've been some

[2:00:06] books, but it can be treated again. Some

[2:00:08] of the early literature of of of um,

[2:00:12] Christianity has reincarnation. Early

[2:00:15] Christianity was open to forms of of

[2:00:18] trans migration. So, that's the kind of

[2:00:20] broad answer. I think something about I

[2:00:22] have

[2:00:23] since [clears throat] writing my book

[2:00:24] and having eight frameworks, like hol-

[2:00:27] holographic theory and non-locality and

[2:00:30] entangled particles, These may be help

[2:00:32] us understand

[2:00:34] kind of backed off from that a little

[2:00:35] bit and said these are all ways to

[2:00:38] they're looking for ways to fix to get

[2:00:41] beyond the gap. Maybe there is no gap.

[2:00:44] >> Yeah.

[2:00:44] >> Maybe it's consciousness all the way

[2:00:46] down and then what is consciousness?

[2:00:48] What is the big thing we've left out of

[2:00:50] our maps?

[2:00:52] Um we have serious philosopher Daniel

[2:00:54] Dennett saying consciousness is an

[2:00:56] illusion.

[2:00:58] Which says something about how much we

[2:00:59] should pay attention to Daniel Dennett

[2:01:01] anything he says.

[2:01:02] Because if consciousness is an illusion

[2:01:04] does that not include his own

[2:01:05] consciousness?

[2:01:07] His own trustworthiness as a narrator?

[2:01:10] What he's now dead and I you know wish

[2:01:12] him wish him well. I always

[2:01:14] had respect for his thinking even though

[2:01:15] I disagreed with it but anyway, I don't

[2:01:18] know

[2:01:19] where things will go but it's a it's a

[2:01:21] good time to be asking these kind of

[2:01:23] questions.

[2:01:24] >> It really is and and I think to your

[2:01:26] point I think it is coming back to them.

[2:01:28] But I think

[2:01:30] there is this push and pull between

[2:01:34] the conversation both evolving and re-

[2:01:38] returning in a way that I think is kind

[2:01:40] of appropriate for the for the point

[2:01:41] that you're you're getting at here is

[2:01:43] that there's like and and this is

[2:01:44] something that I have trouble wrapping

[2:01:46] my mind around with Whitehead too

[2:01:48] because he is like

[2:01:50] Oh my god. I I don't know if I can

[2:01:51] remember the metaphysical terminology he

[2:01:54] uses exactly but

[2:01:57] so Whitehead's not an idealist. He's

[2:02:00] like this

[2:02:01] co-participating panpsychist who is

[2:02:04] trying to

[2:02:06] draw attention to this idea

[2:02:09] that materiality and mind are on this

[2:02:13] like same big spectrum of the same

[2:02:15] thing.

[2:02:16] And and that means that

[2:02:18] things are like co-arising and and

[2:02:20] co-habitating in ways that we don't

[2:02:23] understand, we can't experience and and

[2:02:26] even from my very poor understanding of

[2:02:29] this prehension idea that there's a

[2:02:31] reason that it's

[2:02:32] prehension, right? It's like it's

[2:02:34] something that's occurring

[2:02:36] before there's like an instantiation

[2:02:39] even, right? So, there's like it's like

[2:02:41] some kind of

[2:02:43] um

[2:02:44] pre-

[2:02:46] knowing or or

[2:02:48] co-arising of knowing and becoming at

[2:02:50] the same kind of time.

[2:02:52] >> Yes.

[2:02:53] >> And and um

[2:02:54] I I think when we return to these kinds

[2:02:56] of topics,

[2:02:58] there there is something new that we can

[2:03:00] add to them with breakthroughs we've had

[2:03:03] in material science and in concept,

[2:03:06] right? Like like for instance, it's very

[2:03:08] easy to look back at ancient wisdom and

[2:03:10] something like simulation theory and

[2:03:12] say, "Wow, these two things work really

[2:03:13] well together." And then I think some

[2:03:15] people take it too far and they say,

[2:03:17] "Yeah, it is a simulation. Therefore,

[2:03:20] like

[2:03:21] because this fits so well together,

[2:03:23] that's what it is." And I don't think

[2:03:26] that's true. I I I think in a sense it's

[2:03:28] true, but I think it's true in the same

[2:03:30] way that, you know, Paly Was it William

[2:03:32] Paley who used uh the analogy of the

[2:03:35] universe being like a clock

[2:03:37] or a uh a watch or what or or whatever?

[2:03:41] Um that's also kind of true, right? It

[2:03:43] doesn't it it like like it is it is

[2:03:46] planets do orbit in this very

[2:03:48] mechanistic way that's reminiscent of

[2:03:50] the the the the gears of a watch or a

[2:03:53] clock.

[2:03:54] But I think in the same way we're going

[2:03:55] to grow beyond this simulation notion to

[2:03:58] the next thing that that fits it better

[2:04:01] and better. But but I Yeah, I think it's

[2:04:03] equally important to return to the

[2:04:04] topics because I don't think, you know,

[2:04:06] you you look at these dusty books

[2:04:10] that we have from the geniuses of

[2:04:11] antiquity and it's like just scraps.

[2:04:15] Like it's just scraps of what we've had

[2:04:17] and it's extraordinarily sad that

[2:04:20] we don't have more, but even the scraps

[2:04:22] that we do have. Like I have many of

[2:04:24] them sitting on my own bookshelf that I

[2:04:25] haven't even read, you know, and it's

[2:04:27] just like

[2:04:29] I I think we I think we think because

[2:04:31] we're alive now, we have all of this

[2:04:35] new wisdom to bring. And and I think a

[2:04:37] lot of it's already been brought. You

[2:04:39] know, and I think we're doing a

[2:04:40] disservice to our ancestors in a lot of

[2:04:42] cases by not

[2:04:44] really doing our due diligence first

[2:04:46] on the body of ancient wisdom that

[2:04:48] exists and then trying to contribute to

[2:04:51] that um great work. But I think most of

[2:04:54] us just don't I don't have the intellect

[2:04:55] to do it is my problem. I'm I'm I'll

[2:04:57] just sit here around the fringes and and

[2:04:59] comment on it and and riff about it, but

[2:05:01] um

[2:05:03] yeah.

[2:05:03] >> I think

[2:05:04] >> So, I think that yeah.

[2:05:04] >> Yeah, they're all wonderful questions

[2:05:06] and I I know for myself when I finished

[2:05:08] my new book anomalous phenomena, I was

[2:05:11] struck by how much two things were

[2:05:12] there.

[2:05:13] One is um talking about how difficult it

[2:05:16] is to talk about these experiences. Um

[2:05:19] people who have an anomalous experience

[2:05:20] I I I know from my own going back to

[2:05:23] walking out of being brought out of the

[2:05:25] ocean, surviving, trying to mutter to

[2:05:28] people about what I had experienced um

[2:05:30] and and they just backed off from me

[2:05:32] like I was contagious. These are close

[2:05:34] friends. By the way, in the aftermath of

[2:05:37] that, when I went back to the mainland

[2:05:40] and began to investigate um was there

[2:05:44] any precursors for that? Then I

[2:05:45] discovered Raymond Moody had written his

[2:05:47] book, Life After Life exists. There was

[2:05:50] a whole stage model of it and my friends

[2:05:53] who were with me in Hawaii called me and

[2:05:55] they had this Keith, did you know

[2:05:56] there's a book called Life After Life

[2:05:58] that describes about the stuff that we

[2:05:59] were all saying didn't happen to you

[2:06:01] that day. You had just had a fantasy.

[2:06:04] Or you had a life and you were near the

[2:06:06] end of your life so your your mind

[2:06:08] delivered up a narrative that was

[2:06:10] comforting. Do you know there's a near

[2:06:12] death phenomenon? I said, yeah, I found

[2:06:14] out about it, too. That becomes a kind

[2:06:16] of paradigm. Those moments of discovery

[2:06:20] when we realize there is something going

[2:06:22] on. The other thing I think we're going

[2:06:23] to have to

[2:06:24] continue to pay attention to is just the

[2:06:27] there's got to be some cleanup work

[2:06:29] about the refusal of our mainstream

[2:06:31] institutions to deal with these things

[2:06:34] straightforwardly. Just as in the UFO

[2:06:36] field, the authorities that we trust as

[2:06:40] gatekeepers to use that phrase, they've

[2:06:42] let us down. Likewise, when you hear a

[2:06:46] a media report about the placebo effect,

[2:06:49] I devote a chapter, part of a chapter to

[2:06:51] the placebo effect.

[2:06:52] >> Mhm.

[2:06:53] >> The degree to which people believe that

[2:06:54] they were told you may be part of the

[2:06:56] group that has the medication, you may

[2:06:58] not.

[2:06:59] And that those who do not have the

[2:07:01] medication but think they might have the

[2:07:03] same more than statistically significant

[2:07:06] uh experiences of the same benefits. So,

[2:07:10] what is the general closing of most

[2:07:14] media stories about the placebo effect?

[2:07:17] They generally consult somebody in

[2:07:19] medicine.

[2:07:20] I don't know who who would you name?

[2:07:22] Who's a doctor now that is well known in

[2:07:24] the I would say Dr. Phil, but he doesn't

[2:07:26] chime in on ontological thing. But the

[2:07:29] the the doctor that they will quote,

[2:07:31] somebody from the Mayo Institute will

[2:07:32] say, "Oh, that's the placebo effect.

[2:07:35] That's just the placebo effect." And

[2:07:37] they speak of it if as if it's a

[2:07:39] confounding factor. They wouldn't We've

[2:07:42] got to get rid of of that. No, we need

[2:07:45] to understand what it is about belief

[2:07:48] that is so Likewise, with the stigmata

[2:07:51] phenomenon which I describe in the book,

[2:07:53] 100 Catholic saints over a long period

[2:07:56] of time so deeply identify with Christ's

[2:07:59] suffering, his wounds that they open

[2:08:01] those wounds in their own bodies. No,

[2:08:03] they don't cut themselves. That's not

[2:08:05] what's going on. They don't want the

[2:08:07] attention. They don't want the painful

[2:08:09] bleeding wounds, trust me. But they so

[2:08:11] identify with Christ that it they make

[2:08:15] marks on the that body marks appear on

[2:08:17] their own body. That says something

[2:08:19] right there about the inability of to

[2:08:21] separate mind from matter. That's more

[2:08:24] than a confound.

[2:08:26] So, when they say, "Oh, that's just the

[2:08:27] placebo effect." Maybe there's a title

[2:08:29] of a book there. Just the placebo

[2:08:31] effect. The dismissiveness with which

[2:08:35] mainstream medicine and mainstream

[2:08:38] science

[2:08:40] uh push these things away. My point is

[2:08:42] we're probably still going to have to do

[2:08:44] cleanup work. There's a fair amount of

[2:08:45] work I do in my new book to say, but of

[2:08:48] course, the debunkers as usual say

[2:08:50] nothing is going on here. True

[2:08:52] skepticism doesn't do that. I'm all for

[2:08:55] skeptics, too. I'm I'm so skeptical that

[2:08:58] I don't admit anything out of bounds. I

[2:09:00] don't dismiss in advance what's

[2:09:03] possible. I ask what's possible based on

[2:09:05] what the evidence seems to point to.

[2:09:07] That's a

[2:09:08] great place to stand.

[2:09:10] >> Yeah.

[2:09:11] Well said, my friend. Yeah, I'm I'm on

[2:09:13] board with so much of what you're

[2:09:15] saying, of what you're writing about, of

[2:09:17] the directions you're going in. I love

[2:09:19] that you have this multi-disciplinary

[2:09:21] approach to not just the phenomenon, but

[2:09:24] whatever it is that's

[2:09:27] collectively going on here. Um,

[2:09:29] and yeah, man, I just I I get so much

[2:09:32] um,

[2:09:33] I don't know, spiritual nutrition out of

[2:09:36] these conversations, man. So, thank you.

[2:09:39] >> you talk to. I had an experience while

[2:09:41] during my near-death experience. I don't

[2:09:43] know how much time on the clock passed

[2:09:45] during this whole thing,

[2:09:47] but I remembered was I going through the

[2:09:48] tunnel that I did not know existed, by

[2:09:50] the way. I didn't know know there was an

[2:09:52] NDE till I'm so glad I didn't know about

[2:09:54] the NDE experience because in terms of

[2:09:56] my own representation to myself

[2:09:59] of my own experience understanding it.

[2:10:01] If I had known about the NDE experience,

[2:10:04] I might say, "Well, you want that

[2:10:05] experience to be a near-death experience

[2:10:07] because it's like it." But I knew

[2:10:09] nothing about it. So, when I was going

[2:10:11] through the tunnel with loud roaring

[2:10:14] sounds, or for that matter, on

[2:10:16] psychedelic experiences I've had that

[2:10:19] have been that involved a great deal of

[2:10:22] a sense of crisis, you know, existential

[2:10:25] crisis or ontological, I said, "This may

[2:10:28] uh, kill me.

[2:10:30] This may destroy me,

[2:10:32] but it can't hurt me."

[2:10:34] >> Mhm.

[2:10:34] >> This may destroy me. And and and I said

[2:10:37] that during the near-death, I said,

[2:10:38] "This may destroy me,

[2:10:40] but it can't hurt me.

[2:10:41] Destroy me." And And I mean, I think I'm

[2:10:43] now this may destroy everything I think

[2:10:45] is true.

[2:10:46] Then I came out of it and I said, "Yeah,

[2:10:48] it destroyed my way of thinking,

[2:10:50] but it didn't hurt me. It made me better

[2:10:53] because I now don't I now have no fear

[2:10:55] of death. It wasn't a transactional

[2:10:57] thing, but as a result of this going Oh,

[2:10:59] by the way, one last thing, which is I

[2:11:00] think from my end.

[2:11:02] One of the things that's really

[2:11:04] remarkable is how often the non-ordinary

[2:11:06] anomalous experiences happen in moments

[2:11:09] of great existential peril.

[2:11:11] Lindbergh flying across the ocean from

[2:11:13] New York to Paris at his wit's end,

[2:11:16] nearly ready to pass out, cold, hungry.

[2:11:19] I don't know if he was peeing in a

[2:11:21] bottle, but he it was then that the

[2:11:24] cockpit filled

[2:11:26] with phantom

[2:11:28] creatures that supported him and soothed

[2:11:30] him. And he was said later to say,

[2:11:33] "Well, wasn't that

[2:11:34] a hallucination?" He said, "I have

[2:11:36] hallucinated with the best of them. I

[2:11:38] never had the greater clarity." And

[2:11:40] likewise, I have the chapter not only

[2:11:42] about Lindbergh, but about Joshua

[2:11:45] Slocum, the great sailor who

[2:11:46] circumnavigated the globe. He too was in

[2:11:49] incapacitated.

[2:11:51] Woke up to a phantom figure running the

[2:11:56] rudder of his ship.

[2:11:58] So, right at the end of a near-death

[2:12:00] experience, what are they? But you

[2:12:02] nearly die. So, the experiences of

[2:12:04] extreme

[2:12:07] to the degree that they open to the

[2:12:09] anomalous, maybe because we're right at

[2:12:11] the edge where our cognition our world

[2:12:16] view

[2:12:17] begins to slip.

[2:12:19] It's a crisis.

[2:12:21] We have a spiritual emergency because

[2:12:24] And and that's why the larger

[2:12:25] supernormal, supernature kicks in. I

[2:12:28] believe we're embedded in supernature

[2:12:30] all the time.

[2:12:31] But Donald Hoffman, I believe most of

[2:12:33] the time we get along pretty well with

[2:12:35] the idea that space and time are real.

[2:12:37] They get us to the next They keep us

[2:12:39] surviving. Keep the body. They're good

[2:12:42] for the It's good for the body to

[2:12:43] believe in in space and time. But when

[2:12:45] they give out,

[2:12:47] we don't give out.

[2:12:48] We surpass. So, I'm interested in how we

[2:12:52] surpass. What is the We're we're making

[2:12:54] a transition. We're like an amphibian.

[2:12:56] Amphibians that swim out of the ocean

[2:12:58] and their their gills turn to lungs,

[2:13:01] effectively speaking. Well, we we are an

[2:13:04] animal that has one set of organs and

[2:13:07] we're developing new limbs and organs

[2:13:09] that the Hindus call the the Vedantists

[2:13:11] calls siddhis, greater capacities of

[2:13:15] mind and body and spirit.

[2:13:18] >> Yes. I'm glad we returned to this and

[2:13:20] that was all very well articulated. Uh

[2:13:22] tell people one more time the name of

[2:13:24] your book, my friend, and then and then

[2:13:25] we'll

[2:13:25] >> called Anomalous Phenomena, the mystery

[2:13:28] of objects that materialize and

[2:13:31] translocate. That's one theme of the

[2:13:33] book

[2:13:34] and it deals with uh a whole lot else

[2:13:36] that I've given some hints of.

[2:13:39] >> Perfect. Thank you, my friend. I'm glad

[2:13:41] we got over these these technical

[2:13:42] hurdles to do this. Um and then hang on

[2:13:46] for me when I hit stop here.

[2:13:47] >> I sure will. Thank you, too.

TE
Artist
Third Eye Drops

Watch more from Third Eye Drops on YouTube.

Site web
Explorer les thèmes
Near-death-experienceUfo-phenomenaAnomalous-phenomenaMaterializationOut-of-body-experience

Des questions ?

Questions fréquemment posées

Thompson, then 24, was caught in a rip tide at Sunset Beach on Oahu after running a marathon the day before. He described being pulled under for a long time, then finding himself out of his body with a 360-degree awareness, where he saw a swimmer in trouble and realized it was him. He later said he met deceased relatives during the experience.
Thompson uses the term peak-in-Darien to describe a near-death experience with veridical elements, meaning perceptions that can be checked against facts the experiencer could not have known. In his case, he saw his great-uncle Sam, whom he believed was alive, and learned later that Sam had died in his sleep before the drowning.
Thompson cites Jacques Vallée and John Mack, who viewed UFO encounters as shamanic initiations. The framing treats the experiencer as undergoing a transformation rather than simply misreporting a hallucination.
The Scole Experiment is a series of séance-based sittings in which physical materializations were reported. Thompson brings it up as part of his argument that the boundary between mind and matter may be more porous than mechanistic science allows, though he does not present it as settled proof.
Anomalous Phenomena: The Mystery of Objects That Materialize and Translocate chronicles cases of objects that appear, move, or arrive in impossible places. Thompson describes cataloging examples including minted coins and newspapers, such as an entire newspaper dated April 1, 1944.
Thompson uses Bateson's phrase as a research method. He argues that near-death experiences, UFO encounters, and materializations differ in details but share broad patterns, and that those recurring patterns point to something about the nature of reality.
Thompson does not claim his experience proves UFOs are real. He presents it as one case that changed the question he was asking, shifting from whether individual events are real to what kind of reality would make such experiences recur with regularity.

Continuer la lecture

More from Third Eye Drops

Voir tout
Alchemy Manuals as Out-of-Body Guides: The Precognition Thesis
Inspire

Alchemy Manuals as Out-of-Body Guides: The Precognition Thesis

Anthropologist Eric Wargo argues that 17th-century alchemical texts may be lucid dreaming manuals, and that out-of-body states can carry us …

9 min read
Gaea's Ebb: Harp and Bansuri Riding "Cabbage" Changes
Inspire

Gaea's Ebb: Harp and Bansuri Riding "Cabbage" Changes

Harp, bansuri, voice and guitar reshape Elden Kelly's "Gaea's Ebb" over the changes of Gregg Hill's "Cabbage." A live KGNU duo preview of a …

7 min read
Cacao Prayer: The Chant That Travels From Circle to Circle
Inspire

Cacao Prayer: The Chant That Travels From Circle to Circle

A close listen to Cacao Prayer, the chant that has moved from circle to circle with Bruna Bortolato and Mose. Here is how its few lines repe…

5 min read
Beautiful Light and the Song for the Day You Can't Get Up
Inspire

Beautiful Light and the Song for the Day You Can't Get Up

Rick Jude's "Beautiful Light," performed acoustically with Janet Robin, is a song about staying with someone in the dark. Its lyrics move fr…

5 min read

Continue d’explorer

Poursuis ton chemin

Plus de sagesse et de rassemblements dans tout l’annuaire BrightStar.

Plus d’articles

Parcours toute la bibliothèque d’enseignements, d’entretiens et de guides.

Retour à tous les articles →

Enseignants et artistes

Découvre les lignées, les musiciens et les guides du monde conscient.

Explorer les artistes →

Trouver un événement

Kirtan, retraites, bains sonores, breathwork, festivals — bientôt près de chez toi.

Parcourir les événements →