David John Oates introduces reverse speech, a controversial technique where backward audio reveals hidden messages—like Neil Armstrong’s "That's one small step for man" allegedly reversing to "man will spacewalk" or JFK assassination claims like "he's shot bad." Skeptics, including Art Bell, question ambiguous metaphors (e.g., "wolf serves the throne") tied to NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor and ancient Egyptian symbolism, while Oates insists strict protocols and clear reversals (like "We're all in trouble") validate the method. Despite doubts, reversals from figures like Ed Dames—warning of volcanic eruptions, diseases, and even a "Mad Max scenario"—suggest deeper, possibly spiritual or predictive patterns, though Bell cautions metaphors undermine credibility without concrete evidence. [Automatically generated summary]
Um, Dan Rather announced, and I guess it is true, if Dan says it, it must be true, right?
That the rotation of the Earth actually is slowing down due to the effects of El Niño.
Now, I don't know what any of this means.
The Earth's rotation is slowing down, excuse me, that's what they say.
It's slowing down.
And I honestly don't know what it means.
I've got a facts here from Richard Hoagland who says, oh, the rotation slowdown is not El Nino.
It is directly due to hyperdimensional physics.
Of course it is.
We'll explain during our segment later this morning.
Okay.
Well, it's occurring as El Nino is occurring, and then I also want to know if anybody can explain what it means that the Earth is slowing down.
That's really weird.
Really, really weird.
The other item is, and I'll leave it up there for about another half hour, I have received in today's mail the Stephen Gibbs time machine.
The coils, the giant electromagnets, the machine itself, I've done it all.
The only question is now, oh, what to do?
To try it?
And already I get feedback here, or don't do it.
You have an obligation not to use the time machine till after the cruise.
Especially since I just found out my mother and sister have signed on to go.
That's one side of it.
The other side is that was from Elaine.
And she's in Canada.
Yeah, please take Ontario, Montreal.
And then this art, please try the time machine.
Let's do it while you're on the air with a studio cam on so you can describe to us what you're doing and what you're feeling, and we can see you.
It'll make for great radio.
From David, the opera singer in Las Vegas.
So on the heels of all this news about NASA and JPL, suddenly, and I'm telling you, I'm telling you, you can believe it.
You are the ones who got that done.
Now, what it means, it's like they're slowing down.
Who knows?
All right.
Just a brief intro.
I have to do this.
And I know it's tiresome to those of you who know David Oates so well.
But David John Oates discovered reverse speech.
He is the father of reverse speech.
It is a process, a very simple process, in which you simply tape somebody speaking as I am now speaking, and then you reverse it, and you look for relevant, coherent words and or sentences in reverse.
And these are from the other side of your brain, and they definitely reflect the truth.
That is what David says.
If somebody is lying, it will be apparent they are lying in reverse.
If they are telling the truth, they will be whatever they say in reverse will also come out the same way, and the truth is revealed.
David has done all his life speech research.
He has a bit of a speech impediment, although lately it seems like it's been going away to me.
And that started him into the research of speech and led to this whole thing.
He has been suggested to be nominated for a Nobel Prize or reverse speech.
I know that people should understand how much work you have to do to prepare for a night like tonight when you're going to do Kathleen, Willie, Dr. Malin, Major Ed Dames.
I just didn't think it was good enough to I'll tell you what.
You know the fellow who wanted to challenge you, David?
Yes.
He has called the show, I don't know, two or three times since you were last on.
Right.
And I told him he had better send me some email with his phone number, and he hasn't done that.
But he did come on the air with some audio from the Area 51 caller, which indicated or would have led one to believe if you used that reversal, that the Area 51 caller was faking it.
Right.
Now, you heard about that, I take it, and you went and researched the same stuff.
What I'm going to do tonight, I'll play some of this classic ones first.
I'm going to be telling you initially what you're hearing, but as the night goes on, I want to run a few bioart and see if you can hear them without me telling you.
Now, let me throw you another one on speech, and then we'll move on to kids.
I'm often asked, okay, so this is here.
What good is it?
I mean, how can this benefit me?
And I'm actually quite amazed when I hear that question because the opportunity to look inside your own mind and to see what is really going on is really quite exciting.
And it helps me personally quite a lot in my own everyday life.
I use this every single day.
I use it with my clients.
I have a therapeutic practice in San Diego.
What it does for the therapeutic process is just amazing.
It allows us direct access in.
And this is a reversal that really illustrates how reverse speech can be used.
And this is one of my own clients in my own office.
And we're talking about the session we did last week.
And he's telling me, David, you went and found the reversal that fit my situation.
Reverse speech at its deepest level taps into what is commonly known as the collective unconscious, the storehouse of knowledge that we all have buried deep inside of us.
All right, David, here's the only thing that I worry about.
Yep.
That either consciously or unconsciously, I mean, for example, you just told us you did 100 hours of work to come up with the reversals we're going to hear tonight.
Now, could you take the Kathleen Willey material and come up either with a series of reversals that would show her to be absolutely telling the truth or find another series of reversals, she talked for a long time, that would show that she was a lying?
We've done this in class time and time and time again.
We've had different students go out and analyze the same tape from a variety of cross-sections of opinions and perspectives and come back with the same conclusions, the same analysis.
I do agree that it is possible, like with any skill or any technique, to let your own bias come into your analysis.
For the first, probably the first, at least the first eight to nine years that I did this, I never listened to the forward dialogue primarily because I was very much aware of the tendency to project into it.
I think when I was personally confident that I had overcome that was when I started to hear all my own issues in reverse.
When I first started doing my own reversals, I was not able to hear some of the more nasty, darker sides of my nature.
It's consciously, you don't want to hear that stuff.
And I swapped over about seven or eight years in.
I suddenly dropped down to a new layer and started to hear all these things on me that were really very devastating.
And I think one of the great things about reverse speech is if we have the courage to look at it, we can actually see our darker sides and come face to face with it and learn to work with it and have it be our friend rather than be our adversary.
This is the one right at the very end, which I thought was fascinating because someone said he called back a while he was in a veteran's hospital or something.
And, you know, I mean, see, what this highlights is this highlights the whole urgency that we need to have some serious, accredited research into this.
I think what I would love to do is get people like Ken and the thousands of other reverse speech people across the country.
Let's get them all together in a cassortium, a research body, to make this thing happen and to answer all these questions.
Would you be interested in starting up a local chapter of Dorsa in Las Vegas?
What Dorsa is, is the David Oates Reverse Speecher Alliance.
It's a series of chat clubs set up across the United States that's been in formation for about a month now, and it's a group of researchers just like yourself who are getting together to look at all this stuff and to answer all these questions.
And if you want to, there's a phone number I can give you to call for the local Dorset chapter.
Well, actually, the national coordinator is a chap called B.J. Ruchok, B-R-U-C-H-O-K.
And you can call him at area code 360-876-6296.
That's 360-876-6296.
And see, what I want to see happen is there's so many people like you who are really enthused and really excited about this.
And currently, all our efforts are fragmented.
You're doing your thing, I'm doing my thing, Joe Blow's doing his.
If we can all come together under one national organization, DORSA, and let's pool our research results and resolve these questions.
I mean, this is a very new field.
Obviously, there is something there.
After all my work, 15 years, there's very strong and definitive evidence that this exists, but it's such a new field.
Well, you know, it's the whole problem of the illusion of sounds, both forwards and backwards.
Now, if you can do the same thing with a section of forward speech, listen to it over and over again, just one or two seconds, and your ears will switch and hear different things.
We've validated that ourselves many times.
And as a point of fact, I'd like people at home to try that.
And it's one of the reasons why I'm so conservative in my documentation.
But on the other hand, with all the work he has done, he absolutely is a passionate believer in reverse speech.
But it brings up what I was talking about, David, and that's agendas.
In other words, if you decide somehow that this person is telling the truth, then even subconsciously, David, not consciously, I'm not accusing you of doing anything nefarious.
But subconsciously, you are then, at some point, beginning to listen to things that validate what you have begun to conclude.
Well, maybe I've been doing this for so long I'm so used to the metaphors and think of them as normal.
So here we have, let's move on to the next one.
unidentified
And when I got home that afternoon, there was a phone call from Nancy Harmwich asking me if I would come up and meet with her that the president had an interest in my working someplace else other than correspondence.
Now, here's a reversal that really quite threw me when I found it, primarily because it's almost exactly the same word that Hillary Clinton used in an early reversal.
So I want to play this one alongside of Hillary Clinton, and I will let people decide for themselves.
I want you to listen to the forward words because there's completely different forward words on this one and completely different forward words on Hillary Clinton.
You think of dreams, the surrealistic daydreams that we have sometimes.
The unconscious thinks and processes in a completely different fashion to the conscious mind.
And part of my theory is that it thinks and functions in pictures and images or metaphor and archetype.
Carl Jung, well-known European psychologist, spent his whole life studying the metaphors of the unconscious mind, claiming that on the unconscious world, which is 90% of all consciousness, we are thinking in a completely different fashion than conscious mind.
And what reverse speech, I believe, is doing, it is seeing these unconscious pictures and translating them to words.
I just think it's harder for the public to understand the relevance when it's metaphoric.
when you hear Neil Armstrong say man, hear man will spacewalk in reverse, that is so clear and so relevant to what is being said forward that there's no question about it.
But when we get off into these other areas...
unidentified
Well, what, continue with the metaphor discussion?
Okay, well, let's look at the one on Hillary Clinton.
And maybe we could talk about metaphors more as we go along.
It's really been the thrust of my career.
It's been the whole metaphoric development of reverse speech.
And here's this one on Hillary Clinton I wanted to look at.
unidentified
You know, initially, when this first started, and I would be accused of something, or my husband would be accused of something, I would be really upset.
That is the opinion I finally came to after receiving many emails I first presented on your program as hammering the accusations home.
But when you look at evil lips and sore lips, I mean, I'm not sure, unless he's referring to females who are hammering accusations home, like Linda Tripp, for example, when you're dealing with metaphors, it's tough to tell, which is why I keep away from them in my public appearances.
Now, when you're working with metaphors in the therapeutic context, you're in a whole different field all together, because this is literally how human behavior and how the unconscious works is through pictures and images.
And many, many, and a lot of the psychiatric trends nowadays is moving towards dealing with images and trance journeys.
And you've had Robert Ghostwolf on several times.
He would talk about the totem animals and our spirit beings.
And that is what I believe the metaphors are tapping into.
They're tapping into this extra dimension or the soul or the sacred nature of our consciousness that we really don't have much understanding of in this physical world.
I have a couple more that I think are fairly relevant.
This one here really concerned me when I found it.
She's talking about Bob Bennett talking to her about this.
unidentified
We were together at some point before a court hearing, and he mentioned that he had just left, he had just been at the White House, and the president asked for me and told him that he just thought the world loved me.
Now we're moving on to the subject of disease again.
A very simple reversal on this section, straight to the point.
unidentified
We'll not be able to develop vaccines, antidotes, antibiotics in the case of bacterial infections fast enough to be able to keep up with these diseases.
Okay, we are moving on to talking about projecting the future of a corporation.
unidentified
That is one thing that we can't use that for.
We cannot discern alphanumerics, but we can look and we can perceive the trajectory in time of an enterprise like a company or a corporation, what they're going to do.
And I have formed that opinion based on many, many shows that we have done with direct reversals.
In other words, congruent reversals that seem to either validate what the person says or will show it to be a lie.
But I think that although there may be something, I cannot deny it, there may be something, very much something to these metaphoric reversals, I think that metaphors, even in the, when they're said in, you know, completely forward speech, are interpretive.
And I think that David tends to get in trouble when he uses them in a public forum, whether it would be on my program, or it would be in front of a chat club, or it would be in front of any group that is hearing reverse speech for the first, second, third, or even fourth time.
The metaphors are a real problem and do the credibility of reverse speech harm.
That's my take on it.
And I'm just, you know, I'm an Neophyte.
As you, I have heard quite a bit of reverse speech.
And in the first many programs we did, when we stayed away from metaphors, and I have consistently advised David for the sake of credibility to stay away from metaphors, the interpretive, I think it went very well.
But I think when you get into a lot of these metaphoric statements that can mean this or can mean that, you get into trouble.
My only point is that to the uninitiated, the new listener, reverse speech is difficult enough at best as you begin to absorb what's going on.
And when you get into the metaphors, you make it doubly and triply difficult for the newbie to even begin to grasp what they're hearing.
unidentified
Well, I agree with you on that.
I just think, and what I don't think has been mentioned by David Oates or brought up is the fact that, like, we have a whole bunch of metaphors who are using forward speech, and they're also used in reverse, but there's this whole other set.
And then, like you said, there's certain groups have kind of their own inside metaphors.
And the fact that, like, even the ones that everybody uses, like this wolf, he mentions quite often.
The fact that the whole general public is that's showing up in everybody's reverse speech.
It doesn't matter who you put in there in reverse.
Some common ones keep showing up.
What could be said about the metaphors would just be the fact that everybody's using them proves that we are all communicating on this other level or we wouldn't all have the same other vocabulary.
I agree.
You see what I'm saying?
And I think that that might, every now and then when a metaphor comes in, that might help the understanding of a little bit.
And I do agree that though some of them are hard to determine now, on that Area 51 call, I had a bunch of reversals, more than David had, but, you know, I can understand maybe why he didn't put some of them on there, and maybe he didn't find some of the same ones.
But I had heal with thee instead of healed the feet or whatever.
But I had the word heal, you know, in there.
And I also had one that said, now weep with Harry.
And he was crying.
And now weep with Harry, something about the looseness of spiritual life.
And there was quite a few that, you know, that might have been something to interpret too.
So that might not be one that he wanted to put on the air.
Again, I'm just saying that in the early shows that we did with David, the reversals were not metaphoric at all, and they were clear, they were easy to understand, and they related directly to what was being said forward.
For example, the Sidonia reversal.
Yes, oh, I love that one.
You bet I did.
It was very clear to me, and it demonstrated, I guess, to any of it, that reverse speech, that there really is something to it.
But when you get down to these interpretive statements, I think people are more easily able to say, what a bunch of BS and just mentally reject it.
That's all I'm saying.
East of the Rockies, you're on air.
unidentified
Hi, Art.
How are you today?
Fine.
I hope that we can fit all this in because it's getting to the bottom of the hour.
The actual file for this press release is Sidonia.html.
So although they kind of try to obscure it in the first paragraph, they do say that they will attempt to take several images of features of public interest ranging from the Mars Pathfinder and Viking mission landing sites to the Sidonia region.
Now what's really interesting at the bottom of this release, down at the bottom of the first page, it says the Mars Pathfinder and Viking landers are very small targets to image, even at the closest distance possible, because they are the smallest objects that the camera can see.
The Sidonia features, on the other hand, are hundreds to thousands of times larger, and the camera should be able to capture some of the features in that area.
Remember how Dr. Malin, who we'll get to in a few moments here, has been saying for years how incredibly, impossibly, stupidly difficult it is for him to take a picture of the face?
Oh, he has gone over and over and over again how impossible and how the chances are very small and it's a postage stamp size thing and he's moving so fast and he can't really target and he can't really scan the camera.
Suddenly this release comes out and says that these things are thousands of times bigger than the Viking lander which he's going to try to take pictures of.
And undoubtedly they will get, should be able to capture some of the features in the area.
In other words, there has been at some level a political sea state change.
And I think you are absolutely right in crediting this audience, the 20 million people who are listening to us right now tonight, with being a major part of that C-State.
When David called me up a couple days ago, of course, you had scheduled this show with David as your sole guest tonight about a week ago.
We did not know until a few hours ago that NASA was going to release today on the JPL website across the world this announcement.
And it was because of the timing and because of David's interesting reversals on Mailin that he asked you if I could do the show with him in terms of interpretation.
If it weren't for the Mailin reversals, I would take this press release as evidence that maybe, just maybe, we were winning.
But when you hear what Dr. Malin is secretly thinking and planning and contemplating and hiding, I frankly think that we're being given another shaggy dog story.
And as the next few minutes progresses, people across America are going to hear for themselves what kind of a double agenda is behind this mission.
When the spacecraft is in its far or most of the orbit, it's pointed towards the sun.
What we do is we try to take a picture as the spacecraft goes from that orientation where the camera's looking backwards to the orientation where the spacecraft is looking at the sun.
Well, again, I think it's important, and I want to refer back to some comments on the Area 51 call from your colleague Ken, that in any one reversal, you can debate certain parameters, you can debate certain intonations.
What's important is, to me, the total context, the gestalt.
In other words, if you take a long interview and you get lots of reversals, what you can do is kind of get a consensus, a kind of an overview of the veracity of the backward information compared to the forward information.
And then you may even be able to get specific meanings that are references that you understand.
It's very important to listen carefully when David says that reverse speech is highly metaphorical.
You and I have had our interesting differences regarding symbolism.
The world we are living in when we're dealing with reverse speech is mostly symbolism.
What's astonishing, and this is where we're going to get to in the next couple of minutes, is that the symbolism, the gestalt of the symbolism involved in Malin's subconscious, as he was talking to Linda, is part and parcel of the incredible Egyptian symbolism I have found with the computer going back 30 years in the landings and liftoffs and configurations.
That occurs from about 8 to about 20 minutes after the closest approach to the planet.
Now, the latitude at which that heating pulse occurred, that pass through the atmosphere occurs, started out about 35 degrees north latitude and has been migrating northward very slowly.
So all he's doing is just casually describing the mission.
And now we hear this exceptionally clear reversal, and I'll play the reversal, then I'll give my brief interpretation of it, then Rich is going to come in and say something too.
This reversal very clearly says the wolf serves the throne.
Well, when David played this one for me, I had one of those aha experiences in reference to the two previous ones, Her Ships Will Get the Dust and Her Ships Carry Survivor.
In the Egyptian hieroglyphs, and this has been known since Chapollion deciphered them, there is a throne symbol.
The throne symbol stands for the goddess Isis.
And all Egyptologists to this day can understand why this powerful goddess, one of the central figures of the whole Egyptian pantheon, is replicated or depicted as a throne, as a seat, as a chair.
Now, I think this gets very close to David and his interpretation, because the throne of goddesshood is the throne of power, of might, of dispensation, of all favors, that kind of thing.
In forward speech, he's talking about he's going to try to get a picture of the face, but he cannot guarantee he will get a picture.
In reverse, his unconscious subconscious is saying, going to meet your new father in the light.
The face on Mars to Mike Malin represents the father, the Godhead, Osiris, etc.
There is a consistent theme here going back 30 years, which we've proven with the computer, this Osiris Sirius ISIS business that we find over and over and over again.
What we're finding in the reversals, which of course when I started looking at the computer constellation configurations, I had no idea we'd ever had this kind of data available.
We find that in their deepest, innermost emotions and feelings and needs, these priests, this priesthood, this inner elect select sect, is carrying out what they deem to be a religious ritual of pursuing the Godhead with our money and keeping us, the unwashed, the profane, the ones that are not in the in-crowd, from knowing what they're doing.
And then this whole thing of a mission, they're on this spiritual quest.
I was stunned when I found these reversals, and I didn't even want to play these.
This is right out of left field from what my whole research is heading into.
And when I was at Richard's conference in Pasadena, I reluctantly started playing these ones, and Richard's getting light bulbs going off everywhere, and it's connecting with all this other data.
What I want to know is why is there this spiritual reason for going back to Mars?
David, what's very impressive to me is before you and I ever met, before we had our first conversation, before Art ever sent you that first nasty interview, I was looking in the computer at the landing and liftoff times of various planetary missions.
And what we found, and I've had aerospace experts in celestial mechanics totally verify, is that the, quote, coincidences of key religious alignments of these constellations which were central to the ancient religious Egyptian calendar thousands of years ago in Egypt were showing up with incredible repetition and incredible coincidence over and over and over again.
This is Coast to Coast, A.M. And now I'm bringing these two gentlemen back, and I want to read one quick fact, which I agree with completely, and it is as follows.
And this really goes, Richard, to you and to David with respect to metaphoric analysis.
It's Daryl in Los Angeles who says, with all due respect, I would advise David Oates, whose work I generally and greatly admire, that when it comes to interpretations presented to the millions who are listening, stick with the concrete and avoid the results of analysis that focus on the abstract.
I would keep the latter in the classroom and the lab for now.
And that we are looking at a bunch of priests masquerading as scientists, spending our money to do something that they think is sacred and crucial and important that we're not supposed to be included in.
Our origins, and that it's intricately linked with this Egyptian cosmology, which has come down to us over the last hundred years in book after book after book after book, and all you have to do is read.
Okay, I had the father light queued up again, so let's just go to that one.
And when I finish talking with Richard, before we get to Ed Daves, I just want to briefly have a final word on this, on the whole metaphors, and how I think that we can help solve this.
And then in 93, we had Mars Orbiter, which blew up.
And then now we have Mars Surveyor.
Satellite 7 was Mars Observer, the spacecraft that disappeared.
Hear the lie with Satellite 7.
In other words, it didn't disappear.
And the possibility exists, and this is my greatest apprehension, that the photographs they're going to show us in the next couple of weeks of Sidonia are photographs they actually took five years ago with Mars Observer Satellite 7.
And they've had five years with supercomputer technology to make your grandmother disappear, let alone the whole solar system, let alone the face on Mars dissolve into a bunch of random rocks when they give us the super, super close-up.
Well, Art, it is interestingly coincidental that the seventh mission to Mars was Mars Observer, the one where I had four JPL engineers call me after our press conference and tell me it was not dead.
It was alive and well, and NASA had taken it stealth.
So now, in 1998, Malin says backwards, hear the lie with satellite seven, which segues into the next reversal, which is remarkable in what it tells us the real agenda is.
For example, there are a lot of people who are interested in whether or not there's life on planets around other solar systems, on other stars and so on.
In our work, 15 years of me and my colleagues attempting to get NASA to fess up and be honest and level with us as to what they found, we have developed an extraordinary model that links the monuments of Mars with the monuments of ancient Egypt.
The source of the Nile, the source of that incredible thing they're worshiping, the basis of the Egyptian cosmology, the Egyptian civilization they revere, was sent out from Mars from the lie of satellite 7, which was Mars Observatory.
Okay, look, look, I can't deny the possibility that it may be exactly as you suggest, Richard, but what I hear here is metaphoric statements that David has pulled in reverse are being fed to somebody who lives his life in metaphors.
I followed this yellow brick road many, many years ago, wherever it would lead.
And it had led me, because of the computer and the configurations, this ancient Egyptian cosmology, in all of the NASA liftoffs and landings and missions, you've got to say, wait a minute, this signal is trying to tell us something.
But when you hear in reverse the unconscious, the subconscious of these major players, Villard and Savage a year ago, Malin now, saying essentially the same things in the same context at very different levels of the agency.
Please do not interpret my enthusiasm for this as certainty.
What it is is apprehension that we're going to be given the shaft once again because if anything, what this is revealing is that the Dr. Malin who's talking to Linda in forward speech about numbers and orbits and missed distances is not the same Malin who secretly is worshiping a goddess and thinks he's going to go meet the Father in the light when he flies over the face of Sidonia.
I mean, it's like Ray Villard and Savage talking about, you know, we were involved with Sidonia backward, and you saying the other night that a thousand monkeys could type for a thousand years and never produce that.
Well, the difference is you're dealing with technicians, PR people, versus a priest, a high priest.
Malin isn't somebody they just brought in off the street.
Malin has been involved in this all his professional life, going back through Caltech with other people that he was undergraduate, student, under, et cetera, et cetera.
When you say you don't know, it must be taken in the context of all the other data, the celestial material, the other references to the goddess, her ships.
But this reversal, which is an insight into Malin's own thinking, remember, Malin is the guy who's been the designated hot seat.
Everyone you've had on the show, from McDaniel to Carlotto to myself to the NASA people in that secret meeting back in November, they're all saying that basically he's on his own, that he gets to decide what pictures get taken and whether they get made public.
The way I read that is Michael Nalan, if he's not careful, is being set up for an incredible fall.
And here's why.
If Nalan, high priest of this, whatever religion he's practicing, decides to keep the Father in the light secret, the photos of Sidonia, and the other guys in the system decide that politically it's time to come clean, he is a designated fall guy.
He is the bad guy.
They can say he stole the pictures, he kept them secret, we didn't tell us, we found out.
You know, in other words, they turn him in, the state's evidence, and become the good guys.
This reversal indicates to me that because of some things that are going on that he is seeing in the pictures that he's taken to Mars already, that he is beginning to wonder if maybe he'd not better go public after all.
Well, I must admit, we've got to wrap this up, but I've got to admit the statement from NASA is a remarkable shock of a surprise that they are going to actively go after and think they can get.
As you read to us, Richard, from this, they think they can get the face nail.
And again, okay, and I just saw that as not metaphoric.
So, finally, I almost, that was one of the ones that almost knocked out.
And I need to say, too, that he had, probably of all your guests I've done on your program, Ed Dames had the highest proportion of metaphor.
I would say probably 60-70% of his reversals were metaphoric in nature, referring to how I, what I believe is the metaphoric structures and the unconscious abilities he has tapped into to do his remote viewing.
And once again, I don't know Ed Dames.
One of my students trained under him, a chapter name of Jack Johnson, who I know has listened to this program tonight.
And I did ring Jack a couple of times while I was doing these to try to get some insight into what was going on.
Okay, now this one here, he's talking about if aliens, I think it was aliens, and I just don't have the full conferences, if they were to go to the United Nations, you know, they would wear a certain tie, at least learn how to use the devices.
It's some conspiratorial statement, I believe.
unidentified
And my nation was admitted to the United Nations, I would wear a suit and a tie, or at least learn how to use the devices that were present in the UN, the microphones and other things.
See, this comes down to the very clear need for total accuracy in this.
And I am so conservative in my documentation.
I mean, I really, really am.
I must throw out at least 60 to 70 percent of the reversals that I initially hear.
I want to make absolutely sure that what I hear, I can at least stake my reputation on.
Hear, here.
I mean, it's such a new field, and the scepticism out there is not as high as it was when I first went public, but it's still there, and it's got to be approached with great caution and respect.
And I admonish anyone out there practicing reverse speech, please exercise significant precaution in documentation.
Make sure you follow the protocol down to the letter.
Well, the kill shot that SciTech is describing, a very lethal event, we think the best that we can do, as remote viewers, is in 1999.
We're saying spring of 99.
A precursor that we were talking about, we were saying that something may happen as early as December, and that was a coronal, there was a coronal mass ejection in December.
Now, the next reversal is probably the most significant of all in the whole transcript.
unidentified
And I actually did this start.
I don't know, Art.
There are so many unknowns and so many things that we're perceiving and associated with that particular event in the future where we perceive ourselves there, but we don't know what's going on.
Now this one here, we uh get down to uh the more um uh probably the side of uh remoting that he probably en en enjoys and enjoys greatly, like with Reverse Beats.
I enjoy working with my clients and actually helping people.
And here he's talking about finding missing children, which is also a compassionate way to use the technology.
unidentified
Another one that's even more difficult to do is missing children.
Almost always missing children are out there.
street urchins or they're with a family member, but it's the ones where a child has been killed or sometimes tortured that are very difficult to...
Now we're moving on to the subject of disease again.
A very simple reversal on this section, straight to the point.
unidentified
We'll not be able to develop vaccines, antidotes, antibiotics in the case of bacterial infections fast enough to be able to keep up with these diseases.
Okay, we are moving on to talking about projecting the future of a corporation.
unidentified
That is one thing that we can't use that for.
We cannot discern alphanumerics, but we can look and we can perceive the trajectory in time of an enterprise like a company or a corporation, what they're going to do.
And I have formed that opinion based on many, many shows that we have done with direct reversals.
In other words, congruent reversals that seem to either validate what the person says or will show it to be a lie.
But I think that although there may be something, I cannot deny it, there may be something, very much something to these metaphoric reversals, I think that metaphors, even in the, when they're said in completely forward speech, are interpretive.
And I think that David tends to get in trouble when he uses them in a public forum, whether it would be on my program, or it would be in front of a chat club, or it would be in front of any group that is hearing reverse speech for the first, second, third, or even fourth time.
The metaphors are a real problem and do the credibility of reverse speech harm.
That's my take on it.
And I'm just, you know, I'm a Neophyte.
I'm, as you, I have heard quite a bit of reverse speech.
And in the first many programs we did, when we stayed away from metaphors, and I have consistently advised David for the sake of credibility to stay away from metaphors, the interpretive, I think it went very well.
But I think when you get into a lot of these metaphoric statements that can mean this or can mean that, you get into trouble.
My only point is that to the uninitiated, the new listener, reverse speech is difficult enough at best as you begin to absorb what's going on.
And when you get into the metaphors, you make it doubly and triply difficult for the newbie to even begin to grasp what they're hearing.
unidentified
Well, I agree with you on that.
I just think, and what I don't think has been mentioned by David Oates or brought up is the fact that, like, we have a whole bunch of metaphors we use in forward speech, and they're also used in reverse, but there's this whole other set.
And then, like you said, there's certain groups have kind of their own inside metaphors.
And the fact that, like, even the ones that everybody uses, like this wolf, he mentions quite often.
The fact that the whole general public is that's showing up in everybody's reverse speech.
It doesn't matter who you put in there in reverse.
Some common ones keep showing up.
What could be said about the metaphors would just be the fact that everybody's using them proves that we are all communicating on this other level or we wouldn't all have the same other vocabulary.
And I think that that might, every now and then when a metaphor comes in, that might help the understanding of it a little bit.
And I do agree that, though some of them are hard to determine now, on that Area 51 call, I had a bunch of reversals, more than David had, but, you know, I can understand maybe why he didn't put some of them on the air, and maybe he didn't find some of the same ones.
But I had heal with thee instead of healed the feet or whatever, but I had the word heal, you know, in there.
And I also had one that said, now weep with Harry.
And he was crying.
And now weep with Harry, something about the looseness of spiritual life.
And there was quite a few that, you know, that might have been something to interpret too, so that might not be one that he wanted to put on the air.
Again, I'm just saying that in the early shows that we did with David, the reversals were not metaphoric at all, and they were clear, they were easy to understand, and they related directly to what was being said forward.
For example, the Sidonia reversal.
Yes, oh, I love that one.
You bet I did.
It was very clear to me, and it demonstrated, I guess, to a neophyte, that reverse speech, that there really is something to it.
But when you get down to these interpretive statements, I think people are more easily able to say, what a bunch of BS and just mentally reject it.
Well, I tell you what, I have an open mind, but listening to some of your guests, if we don't get blown away, if we don't have an asteroid that lands on Earth, I don't know.
I think, and I'm kind of glad to see it, that Ed Dames is congruent.
Now, whether everything will occur as he said, and whether you think remote viewing is a valid discipline or not is an argument that you can have.
But that Ed Dames believes with a passion what he says, I was convinced of before I heard the reversals.
West of the Rockies, you're on there.
unidentified
Yes, I didn't hear all of the Area 51's speech when he was on, so I only got the bits and pieces tonight.
But I felt it was kind of ironic from what I heard that when they played the forward speech, and then Richard would give the explanation of the reverse speech, it would be explaining what he was so upset about.
I don't know if I'm saying that so you can understand what I mean.
I think I do.
If someone were able to take Richard's comments and the entire part of the Area 51, I think it would be quite interesting to see how it correlates.
And then when you had John David Morton on, you mentioned that Neptune was in the house of Aquarius, and that would be strongly affecting the electric magnetic field.
The fundamental problem I see with them is that you can say that these reversals are true, that they're saying these words, but the spin you have to put on them, I think the interpretation is the area that leaves something to be desired.
And that's why I have tried to tell David, David, play the unambiguous, clear reversals.
I'm sure that his research with regard to these metaphors is very interesting, but it's a lot deeper than this audience, and I include myself, is able to grasp and understand.
And he does not sell reverse speech well to the general public when he uses metaphors.
unidentified
Well, I'm skeptical, but at the same time, on the surface, intellectually, mechanically, I can say, okay, it's possible that in moments that you're thinking deeply and you may look for words that have similar sounds when they're reversed, you can't arbitrarily assign a meaning.
Nobody can do that.
I think David's job should just be to point out the reversals.
He maybe should not even say what he thinks is being said.
Now, if David does not tell us what we are about to hear, most of us will not hear it.
The critics of reverse speech will say, well, then that means there's nothing to it.
No, it doesn't.
No, it does not.
The ear takes quite a while to calibrate itself to be able to hear reverse speech.
I know that's true.
I was a dispatcher for a 911 system, and before they would ever let me sit there and do my job by myself, I spent six weeks with headphones on just listening to the rapid traffic, radio traffic, before I was able to hear it.
And that was all in forward speech, by the way.
And there was a requirement that everybody who was going to do that job would do it because your ear simply wasn't calibrated.
You could not hear what was being said.
After about, well, I don't know, six weeks, maybe into the third or fourth week, all of a sudden the light bulb went on and you began to hear it.
So I don't have a problem with David telling us what we are going to hear.
Otherwise, it would not work at all.
Or very rarely, I do have a problem, as the young lady from Boston said, with being told what the interpretation is of a metaphoric statement, which, in my opinion, to the general public shouldn't be played anyway.
Webster the Rockies, you're on the air.
unidentified
Yeah, is anybody going to follow up about that religious leader who, the phony guy, recently with the Taiwanese?
Well, if somebody said, come to Texas with me and we will watch God on Channel 18, and you fork over your life savings or a lot of your money, and you go to Texas to see God on Channel 18, do you deserve what you get?
unidentified
Well, it was a small group or something like that from California originally, wasn't it?
I doubt that he will, and I'm sure they went voluntarily.
And I guess my point, driven with a bit of dry humor, was, if you pick up sticks and use your money to go to Texas Seed Dodd on Channel 18, I wouldn't necessarily expect to get your money back.
But seriously, if you do go, make sure someone is there watching you and documenting it with video or something, so at least maybe they'll be able to help get you back.
Boy, you know, I am not Madman Markham.
Now, I was willing to go document Madman Markham's march through the arch.
And the thing that I wanted people to keep in mind when you're talking about this reverse speech, I believe that there is something to it, but I also believe that it can be misused by demons.