Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 23, 1998 - Art Bell

02:38:31

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - A Remote Viewer - Joseph McMoneagle

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	If you have a fax for Art Bell in the Kingdom of Nigh, send it to him at every equation.
	702-727-8499. 702-727-8499. Please limit your faxes to one or two pages.
	702-727-8499.
	And if you don't love me now, you will never love me again.
	And still I hear you say, the world will never break again.
	It's a wild morning.
	I'm Art Bell, and we have Peter Davenport from UFO Reporting Center on in the first hour.
	And there are sightings of fireballs and objects going on right now and for the last two hours all over the continental U.S.
	It is remarkable.
	Switchboards are jamming all over the place.
	I wonder what's going on.
	Boy, do I wonder.
	Anyway, in a moment, you're in for a real treat.
	Joe McGonigal is going to be my guest, and let me tell you what he told himself, uh, myself, uh, he told me about him.
	Ha, ha, ha, ha.
	I am one of only two remote viewers from the project who was in both the Mead unit, as well as the research side of the house at SRI, uh, slash SAIC, the other man who is currently unknown to the public.
	Huh.
	Has about four years on the research side.
	He is also an exceptional remote viewer.
	Within our lab, there are at least six of what I would call world-class viewers.
	In fact, I was the first viewer, number 001, recruited for Stargate and spent a little over seven years at Meade.
	When I retired from the military, I spent the rest of my 21 years in the project.
	Working at the Cognitive Sciences Lab, while it was located at SRI and SAIC.
	I am still a full-time research associate with that same lab, which is now located with the Laboratories for Fundamental Research of Palo Alto.
	There is a website for that.
	We've got it up there now.
	By the way, we've also got Joe's personal website.
	Up and nobody's ever seen that before because it was it's just now born So if you want to read more about Joe, that's the place.
	We've got the link just go to my website www.artbell.com and Click on the appropriate link and we'll we'll test Joe's site and see how much traffic he can take in the past Says Joe.
	I've been challenged numerous times to do a live real-time remote viewing on camera I've successfully demonstrated this ability on double-blind targets for ABC's Put to the Test, Reader's Digest, Mysteries of the Mind, and the Paranormal World of Paul McKenna in London.
	I've also been filmed live at the J.B.
	Ryan Research Center in Durham, while under the strictest of controls.
	All but one was a first-place match.
	The exception being a target done at the J.B.
	Ryan Center, which was a second place match.
	We'll find out what that means.
	Contrary to common belief, I'm very well trained and well versed in what is now commonly referred to as controlled remote viewing, CRV, or what originally began as Mr. Ingo Swann's training methodology.
	Ingo Swann is considered the father of remote viewing.
	I'm also, he says, well trained in at least four other techniques developed and experimented with at S.R.I., S.A.I.C.
	I was trained as a dowser while at S.R.I., have participated in a number of psychokinesis or P.K.
	experiments.
	I'm intensely interested in those.
	While some choose to say that I am just a natural psychic, I have never considered myself In that way.
	While I probably possess some degree of natural talent, since the beginning of the project, I have learned remote viewing is just like everyone else has.
	I've learned about it the hard way, through trial and error, and held a lot of hard work over many years.
	From the latter part of 1982 until September 1st, 1984, I was the only remote viewer doing the remote viewing at Fort Meade because everybody else was in training.
	It is one of the reasons I received the Legion of Merit for remote viewing.
	I had direct contact with and did remote viewing for 16 major agencies, the alphabet agencies of the U.S.
	government, from 1978 through 1995.
	Much of that remote viewing was successful.
	Some of it was not.
	99.9% of it is still classified and has not been released.
	Wow!
	99.9% of what was done is still classified.
	He's got a new book.
	It's called The Ultimate Time Machine.
	And that should certainly serve to whet your appetite for what's about to come.
	Joe McGonigal should not need an introduction to anybody who knows anything about remote viewing.
	For those who don't, we'll do a brief 101, and then we'll get down to biz.
	Here we go, all the way back east to Joe McGonigal.
	Joe, welcome to the program.
	Hello, how are you doing?
	I'm just fine, and I'm sure glad to have you back on.
	We did, of course, sort of a multiple thing one time, but Having you back by yourself is a very, very good idea.
	Were you really Remote Viewer 001?
	That's correct.
	That was my number while I was at Fort Meade.
	It was later number 372 while I was with the kindergarten sciences lab.
	99.9% of what you did with the government is still, you say, classified.
	What about cutting it down to about 70% this morning?
	I don't want to spend any time in jail if I don't do that.
	Eventually, I suspect that most of it will probably be declassified.
	There are some things that will probably never be declassified.
	Is there any way that you can, even in general, refer to the kind of material it was?
	In other words, was it mostly, for example, Cold War related?
	The vast majority of it was Cold War related.
	There were a lot of things that essentially revolved around some very difficult targeting of missing items, downed aircraft, things like that.
	Alright, here's a question.
	While most of it is still classified, you can surely tell me this.
	What percentage of success Did you have in identifying specific locations of, for example, a downed aircraft, how successful was remote viewing for the government?
	In terms of locational ability or locating missing items, it probably doesn't do as well as it does for other things where you're describing something.
	In the search for missing items, the difficulty comes in in that You can have a near-perfect description of the location, but then you have to put it somewhere on the face of the planet.
	The information that's generally provided isn't as detailed as one would like it to be in terms of defining a location.
	Well, when they did the 30-minute nightline, and it was announced to the world that our government for 20 years had been doing this project and was giving up on it, they said they were giving up on it because it didn't work.
	Well, that's not really what they said.
	What they actually said at the time was it didn't have the kind of dependability that they needed or required to do the kind of intelligence work that they wanted to do.
	That's not exactly true.
	I didn't think it was.
	they didn't think it was uh... there there's a lot of uh...
	there's a lot of that that's grown out of the the amount of
	accuracy and whatnot around remote viewing I think what's incredibly important to say here is that the kinds of jobs that we did with remote viewing were very much like the alternative healer kind of thing, where someone is declared essentially terminal by modern medical science and they show up at the alternative healer's place of business and
	And the alternative healer can only claim 35 or 40 percent success rate, which is essentially 35 or 40 percent miracles.
	Yeah, exactly right.
	I mean, that still is an extremely high percentage because by then you are the last gasp.
	I mean, police departments do that in murder cases when they're finally frustrated totally.
	They go to a psychic.
	Exactly right.
	And they're usually able to develop new leads in some cases.
	In some cases, missing information is provided that leads them directly to the appropriate suspect or the solving of the crime.
	What do you say to people who say they believe remote viewing is a bunch of hooey?
	Well, everybody is entitled to their own opinion.
	What I base my judgment about remote viewing on is how solid the science is that supports it.
	There's been now 25 years of research that's been done in remote viewing.
	Most of that research has been replicated in many different labs, as well as different universities.
	Statistically, it's carried across from lab to lab, regardless of who's doing the research or how the research is being done.
	So scientifically, it is not really controversial?
	In other words, it is sufficiently established as real?
	Oh, I would think so.
	Are you a natural psychic?
	at that idea are the ones who immediately raise the question of, well, you can't tell
	us how the information gets from one place to the other.
	So obviously this isn't very good science, which is of course bunk.
	There's a lot of things in science that we don't know how it happens, but we do know
	it happens.
	Are you a natural psychic?
	Well, I'm about as natural as any human being walking the planet.
	In fact, we think, and this is pretty much established by the research, that every human
	being that walks on the planet is psychic to some degree.
	Well, they're capable to some degree, but there surely are an awful lot of psychic bricks walking around out there.
	Well, that's true, and the primary reason for that, Art, is they either have something in their belief structure that prevents them from From acknowledging it, or there's something to their ability that they just don't pay any attention to.
	So when we say you're a natural psychic, you are very open to this sort of thing, you've been involved in it for a very long time, you believe in it, and I guess in a way that makes you a natural psychic.
	But you were the first remote viewer in the government program.
	There must have been something about you at the moment you were chosen that caused you, above all others, to be chosen.
	Actually, the initial selection process involved probably evaluating something like 2,000 people.
	Some of the requirements that they were trying to fill were Had to do with whether or not the people they interviewed were open to this particular subject, as well as to whether or not they were skeptical.
	You know, had a healthy skepticism towards it.
	They didn't want somebody who was a total believer and they didn't want someone who was not critical in their thinking.
	Can you tell me this?
	How did it develop that the government even decided to have this program?
	Well, there's actually two reasons.
	The primary reason has to do with the fact that there was a paper that was printed by Dr. Kenneth Kress in the CIA.
	It was originally classified secret.
	You can now find it somewhere on the Internet, but back in the 70s, it was a paper written about remote viewing as being studied at SRI at the time.
	Using Ingo Swann and a psychic by the name of Pat Price.
	In this paper he proposed that it would probably of value from an intelligence collection standpoint.
	The Army saw that and had also done some studies of the survival rate of certain kinds of soldiers that were at great hazard during warfare and they decided that One of the commonalities between these kinds of soldiers and ones who don't survive is that they're probably very psychic people.
	So they put the two together and decided that this might be worth something.
	This might be worth doing.
	The suggestion there is that somebody is able to mentally, somehow, even subconsciously, discern where a particular danger is.
	Psychically, I guess you could say.
	And avoid that danger and that bullet doesn't hit them, is that right?
	Yeah, in effect they essentially zig instead of zag at the right time.
	It's probably because psychic functioning in general is probably taking place somewhere in the primitive brain and not in the The more modern areas of the brain.
	Oh, no kidding!
	Most people I've talked to have thought that the psychic ability occurred in the frontal lobe portion of the brain, not in the more basic parts of the brain.
	Well, actually, the processing may be taking place in the frontal lobe, but the actual delivery of the information is probably taking place in the primitive part of the brain.
	We talked for a second before we came on the air tonight, just to Divert from where we're going.
	And I told you that we have these incredible numbers of reports of things coming out of the sky tonight.
	Fireballs, objects being seen all over the country.
	I mean, the reports are just flying in from all over the country.
	Something's going on.
	And you said something kind of interesting.
	You said maybe there's a pending geologic event.
	Right.
	There's been a lot that I've seen in print and have read and There's a lot of conjecture about these sort of light phenomena occurring around or in areas just prior to a major geologic event.
	And I'm just kind of interested in seeing now, with all this going on, whether or not we have a major earthquake somewhere in the continental United States, or whether or not we have some geologic event that equates to this.
	news fascinating uh...
	uh... you have written a book called the ultimate time machine
	Time is something that really has been on my mind a lot lately.
	The nature of time.
	And most remote viewers that I've talked to have suggested that moving through time, in effect, is possible with remote viewing to the past or to the future.
	And obviously the present, which the Army would be mostly interested in, I'm sure.
	Is that true?
	Yeah, that's true, basically.
	There are some conditions, however.
	When one attempts to remote view the past, one of the conditions is that you're going to be rubbing a lot of fur the wrong way.
	If you go back and remote view an event, for instance, in the past and then report what What you see from a remote viewing standpoint.
	You're ruining their revisionist history?
	Well, yes.
	History, in my opinion, and I say this quite extensively in the book, history is pertinent to where you're standing in your sort of geopolitic and theologic view of the world within that time frame.
	We're constantly rewriting history to fit our needs of the time.
	Do you have difficulty when you begin viewing theological events?
	Well, yes, there are.
	One of the problems that I deal with is I of course have certain beliefs and constructs and even though I may be blind to them, How do you separate yourself from your belief system when you're looking at something close to it?
	You can't really.
	It's a theological belief.
	Certainly my likes and dislikes come into play, so I have to be very careful about how
	that might interfere with my conjecture.
	How do you separate yourself from your belief system when you are looking at something close
	to it?
	You can't really.
	That's one of the downsides to any psychic functioning.
	The person carries in their own prejudice, their own desires, likes, dislikes, that sort
	But the whole idea of the disciplines that were recorded over a long period of time was to cut through that.
	You're saying they don't entirely work.
	No.
	Well, no.
	That would be asking a human being to become a machine, and that's not quite possible.
	There are things you can do to reduce the effect.
	But in actuality, there will still be an effect.
	So there has to be an independent analysis of the information.
	Joe, have you ever looked at the life of Christ?
	Yes, I did, in fact.
	It was not a remote viewing.
	It was an explorer session with Mr. Robert Monroe at the Monroe Institute.
	Oh, I interviewed Robert, Bob, before he died.
	Just before he died.
	Um, good.
	It's a good place to hold it.
	We're at the bottom of the hour.
	What a question.
	Have you ever viewed the life of Christ?
	The answer is yes.
	The Monroe Institute of all places.
	My, my, my.
	When we come back, we'll ask about that.
	I'm Art Bell.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	Love never ever will be lost...
	Ride, ride my sea-soul Takes his place on this trip
	Just for me Ride, take a free ride
	Take my place on my sea-soul For free
	It's a wild ride tonight.
	Come on along.
	To talk with Art Bell in the Kingdom of Nye from outside the U.S., first, dial your access number to the USA.
	Then, 800-893-0903.
	If you're a first-time caller, call Art at 702-727-1222.
	From east of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	West of the Rockies, including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico, call Art at 1-800-618-8255.
	including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico, call it at 1-800-618-8255
	or call it on the wildcard line at area code 702-727-1295.
	This is Coast to Coast AM from the Kingdom of Nye.
	Wild ride.
	That's what we've got going on.
	Good morning.
	Joe McGonigal is here.
	He is our nation's first military remote viewer.
	Number 001.
	A natural psychic?
	I don't know.
	Depends on the definition, I guess.
	We'll get back to him and the viewing of Jesus.
	See how I start with the easy questions?
	This is the end of side one.
	Please leave the cassette exactly where it is, flip it over, and begin again.
	And now, back to the best of Art Bell.
	Alright, here we go.
	Joe, welcome back.
	You notice how I start with all the easy questions first.
	Right, I noticed that.
	But that is also an intense curiosity to me, and so you had a session with Robert Monroe on the life of Jesus.
	What did you find?
	Well, it was kind of an interesting session in that there was a lot of interesting details
	about why there is a great deal of similarity between the man Jesus and some of the other
	prophets that have existed over the course of history.
	Was Jesus a supernatural being?
	I suspect he was, and there were some things within the Explore session that would seem
	to indicate that.
	There's actually a full transcript of the entire session in my new book, The Ultimate
	Time Machine.
	You equated him to a prophet?
	Well, a prophet in the sense that that's how we regard a lot of people on the face of the
	planet, regard Jesus as a prophet.
	Was he viewed as indeed what Christians believe him to be, the Son of God?
	I'm going to get you in trouble, I'm sure.
	No, I think the answer is yes.
	In that we all are the creations of the Creator.
	He, as a representative of the Creator on Earth, was certainly a son or a construct of the Creator.
	Is this Joe McGonigal, the remote viewer saying this, or Joe McGonigal the true believer?
	Actually, it's me trying to report what I can remember about the events of the session.
	So this really came out of the session.
	In other words, I'm saying the session determined there was a creation force, there is a creator, and this was a supernatural man associated with that creator.
	Right.
	I would agree with those conjectures.
	The thing to remember is that this was what Bob used to call an explorer session.
	It was done in an altered state under the effects of what he used at the time.
	It's a thing called Hemisync, which is their technique that they used.
	Hemisync tapes.
	Right.
	It was not a remote viewing.
	But it was a very interesting session in that it was still what I would call a blind session.
	In other words, going in I had no idea what I was reporting on.
	Also, I was unable to remember most of what I had said over the two and a half hours that it lasted.
	That's remarkable.
	That really is chilling.
	You had no idea whatsoever.
	No, not going in.
	Eventually, I think I realized what it was, so you have to read the transcript with a little salt because I obviously have some personal feelings about it, which I can't help but mix in with the reporting, I'm sure.
	May I ask this?
	During the session, as you were saying whatever you were saying, Was there feedback being given to you that would have suggested to you the target?
	Eventually, yes.
	That did occur.
	What Bob would do is he would take whatever statements I would make and ask questions based on them.
	But in actuality, he knew what he was asking questions about, so the way he asked questions could very well have tainted the results.
	This is a great danger that occurs also in remote viewing.
	It's very, very difficult to guard against, which is one of the reasons why anybody in the room with a remote viewer or anybody interacting with a remote viewer should be as blind to the target as a remote viewer is.
	But you have done some very specific tests, haven't you?
	In other words, extremely well-controlled tests.
	Oh, yeah.
	Guaranteed double blinds where everything is done.
	How would a test like that go?
	that no one knew what the target was.
	Some of these were at Stanford?
	Oh, yeah.
	Stanford, actually, that's SRI International.
	It's not called Stanford Research Institute any longer, but SRI International and Science
	Applications International Corporation.
	How would a test like that go?
	Can you describe what a double-blind test of this sort would be like?
	Well, yeah, I can talk about what we term an intelligence simulation.
	We had an agency come to us and they essentially said, we have some targeting material for you.
	They gave us a black and white photograph of an individual that no one in the lab knew.
	They gave us three times on a specific date in the future and they said, describe where this person is at each of these times.
	That was the sum knowledge that anyone in the lab had.
	We did the targeting and we produced very detailed descriptions of the events and places that this person was located at.
	Was it located at or would be located at?
	Would be located at.
	How far into the future?
	It was a matter of perhaps a week.
	In one case, this particular individual was driving through an area at a specific time.
	In another case, he was standing in a top secret facility that builds atomic weapons.
	Another case, he was standing next to a linear accelerator that was in operation.
	Holy smokes!
	Things like that.
	And you guys came up with this?
	Right.
	We described all four locations and all four events with unbelievable detail and accuracy.
	That was later independently judged by that group of people that tasked us.
	Didn't you ever wonder, when you were given an assignment of this kind, whether you were setting somebody up to be assassinated or hit?
	Who the hell knows why?
	One of the unique things about remote viewing is that if you're on to that degree, you're going to know whether or not you're being set up.
	In fact, over 21 years I've had at least seven or eight occasions when people have given me targets or set up targets or where no target actually existed.
	I've not been fooled any of those times, Jeff.
	You mean where people intentionally gave you totally baloney information as a test?
	Right.
	I can give you an example.
	The most difficult target I ever worked was I was given a black and white photograph of a room and they essentially said, there's something in this room we're very interested in and describe it.
	I kept getting sort of a picture of a Y, three lines intersecting in the shape of a Y. I worked on that for probably two days and finally realized that it was on the inside and outside corner or perception of the
	corner of the inside and outside of an empty box
	and i said uh... well-planned there is no part of the box off the back was true
	and it was true that must
	cruel the hair of researchers something like that i mean it really would grow my hair
	it it's almost as good as doing an actual target where it's impossible to know what the target is and you
	produce detail on it and
	uh... it defies probability If remote viewing in any area had a 30 or 40 percent success rate, I personally, and I know we're going to go around on this, but I don't for one second think the government has actually stopped doing it.
	Now, most remote viewers that I've talked to, right across the board, have uniformly insisted the program is over.
	That's correct.
	You join that crowd, I take it?
	Yes, I do.
	How can that be?
	Well, it has a lot to do with politics, mostly.
	If, in order for it to exist within the government, or to be somehow franchised by the government, someone has to take responsibility for it.
	And no one that works 38 years of their life to get the position of authority that they may hold is going to risk that career.
	They'll want someone else to do that.
	They may want to task remote viewers, but they just quite frankly don't want to hold the ball of responsibility.
	It's devastating to a career politically.
	But with a documented success rate.
	Let me ask you this.
	Do you think the Russians are still doing this?
	I know they are.
	You know they are?
	Alright, so there you are.
	Regardless of what people say about the Cold War, things are as unstable as they have ever been.
	Probably the most unstable in Russia now.
	Scarier than most times during the Cold War.
	Right now.
	Anything could happen over there, and they're doing it, and we're not?
	I agree.
	Things are a lot scarier.
	A lot of the controls that existed in the Cold War don't exist any longer.
	As far as the Russians doing remote viewing research and continuing with it, they, like many other countries overseas, it's sort of psychic functioning as part of their culture.
	They not only believe that it's real, but everybody from Aunt Millie through Grandma, whatever, have visions and it's part of their natural culture.
	So in other words, the kind of political pressure there is here is non-existent over there with regard to this kind of program?
	Correct.
	It's essentially non-existent.
	The kind of political pressure they put out with over there is non-existent.
	To produce probably consistency in the results or to produce high enough level results that it can be used effectively or pragmatically in some way.
	Are there very good Russian remote viewers?
	I suspect there are.
	The Canada Sciences Lab has some connection with some of those researchers, some of the prime researchers in the remote viewing arena.
	Some of their remote viewers' material has been seen, and it appears to have at least the same quality as some of the viewing that was done by some of the American remote viewers.
	Well, if it's got that success level, and we're not doing it and they are, that really scares me.
	That really scares me.
	And it should scare everybody, because I've been hearing a lot of not good things about the Russians lately.
	Do you have any remote viewing information with regard to our future relationship with Russia?
	Yes and no.
	A lot of what I would say would probably have to be called conjecture based on remote viewing, but in my own sense of things, I would say that the Russian people have passed the point of no return in terms of their condition and where they're going and changes and whatnot.
	I think that what we're looking at in their disarray is we're seeing what naturally takes many, many years to change.
	They're going from a totalitarian, rather ignorant and oppressive government to one of election by free vote.
	More of a capitalistic kind of economy.
	So I suspect they're going to go through a lot of turmoil and we're going to go through it with them.
	And I think it's a good idea that we do, because we're the ones that can guarantee that they stay on that road.
	So we should do our best, but you have no specific information about any future clash with the Russians?
	I don't.
	If there's a clash, if there's a clash, it probably is going to be Russian against Russian, I suspect.
	Not so much involving us in any way.
	What about the use of nuclear devices?
	I'm sure this would be a hot topic with certainly the government and with the American people in general, it is.
	Will there be another use in anger of a nuclear device?
	Oh, I think that's inevitable.
	That's on the horizon.
	I think it'll happen probably in our lifetime.
	It'll probably be a tactical nuclear weapon, small yield, perhaps a quarter of a megaton.
	It'll probably be targeted against a specific city.
	I think, however, that when we're sort of sitting and thinking about, my God, would this be one of our cities, one of the things we have to To take into consideration is the very distinct possibility that it could be actually used by someone else on a third world nation.
	The situation has reached a point of criticality where within the third world there are probably three or four major factions that are vying for power.
	A nuclear, a tactical nuclear weapon detonated on the borders of, say, Afghanistan and Iran would be tantamount to starting the third world war within the third world.
	And I'm more afraid of that happening than I am having a tactical nuke show up in continental United States.
	Yeah, well, as I listen, I'm trying to delineate between What you are conjecturing based on current events and what you may know based on what you have remote viewed.
	Can we nail that down?
	In other words, you have seen through remote viewing the use of a nuclear device or am I stepping into ground here that you can't comment on?
	We're kind of drifting into an area I'd rather not comment on.
	Let me put it to you this way, Art.
	One of the things I do know about remote viewing is that while we have a lot of superior technology for locating nuclear weapons grade material, once a terrorist organization gets an 8 to 15 hour head start with it, it opens up the possibility of having to search huge areas with that technology.
	Remote viewing can almost guarantee an 80% reduction in that search area.
	If you were to view a specific incident about to occur, those hours were ticking off, what would you do with that information?
	Would you have a channel to get that information to the right people?
	Yes, I always have a channel I can get the information to.
	People that I think may be concerned or could use it, and I would do that if I felt that I was right.
	One of the problems is whether or not someone would take action based on it.
	I would never expect anyone to take any kind of action based purely on remote viewing.
	What I would expect is that they might take the remote viewing information and use it as a targeting mechanism for others.
	Other techniques or other methodologies to verify?
	Well, let's put it this way.
	If you were to make the call to a contact you have and say, look, such and such group has got a nuclear device.
	Their intent on using it, it's in transport right now.
	Would they take that from you seriously enough to apply other intelligence assets immediately to check it out?
	I would think so.
	I think there are people that at least know my know me by number.
	They see 001 on it, they'll probably do something with it.
	I can't.
	There's no way I could ever guarantee that.
	There's no way I'd get any feedback from that sort of thing.
	As I said, I am intently, intently interested in the nature of time.
	I would like to talk to you about that.
	You're a perfect guy to talk to because you wrote a book called The Ultimate Time Machine,
	which of course is remote viewing, correct?
	Well, actually The Ultimate Time Machine is the human being.
	The human being?
	Yeah, true, but using that discipline, right?
	Well, actually, what I mean by that is, in the context in which I understand time, I don't believe that there's a past except that which we create.
	I think we live in a very immediate past of our own creation.
	There's no such thing as the present.
	And the future is purely a result of our actions today.
	So, in effect, we as the ultimate time machine are creating this illusion of time and living within it.
	Uh-huh.
	All right, we'll pick up on the whole question of time when we come back, top of the hour, so soon!
	And yes, we will open phones for you to talk to Joe.
	Joe McGonigal, Remote Viewer 001, is my guest.
	He's a heavyweight.
	if you want to be curious about remote viewing don't touch that dial
	and don't forget to subscribe to our channel for more videos like this
	the from the kingdom of nine this is close to close to him with
	our bill From east of the Rockies, call Art at 1-800-825-5033.
	West of the Rockies, including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico, at 1-800-618-8255.
	First-time callers may reach Art at area code 702-727-1222.
	and New Mexico at 1-800-618-8255. First time callers may reach out at area code 702-727-1222.
	And you may fax out at area code 702-727-8499. Please limit your faxes to one or two pages.
	one or two pages.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	Now again, here's Art.
	Good morning.
	It's a wild night, folks.
	Our number one, Peter Davenport at the UFO Reporting Center in Seattle.
	And I'm getting absolutely blitzed with calls.
	We're getting sightings all over the continental United States.
	Uh, in some specific areas.
	Here's just one of many.
	Please stop faxing me.
	Stop faxing me.
	I know it's going on everywhere.
	Dear Art, tonight at about 9 o'clock p.m.
	in Eugene, Oregon, while walking home, we saw, this is Adam, Joe, Mike, and Abram together, a brilliant greenish, uh, shade of light streak through the sky, traveling as fast as a shooting star.
	It was immensely larger than any shooting star we've ever encountered.
	We appreciate your time.
	We'd like to give your West of the Rockies phone number out more often.
	Well, I'll try.
	We're going to get a very quick update from Peter Davenport in Seattle.
	It's a wild night out there, folks.
	And then back to Joe McGonigal.
	Peter, what's going on?
	Yeah, we've been getting as many calls as you've been getting, apparently, Art.
	Since I was last on the air just an hour ago, we've received probably two dozen calls Some of them are really interesting.
	I just got a call from a trucker.
	I think he called from Winslow, Arizona.
	They were traveling to the east on I-40, saw some very peculiar flashing lights off to their left.
	I presume that means off to the north where they were on the highway.
	But intriguingly, we took a call from a very serious-minded-sounding woman down in Kerrville, Texas.
	Apparently, she saw something that is reminiscent of what was Dallas this evening.
	Of what they saw in Dallas?
	Yeah.
	And we also took a report from a gentleman down in Oregon who's a green ball of light as well.
	You're getting calls right now.
	Yeah, I failed to block out the call.
	Do you have any sense yet from the calls you've taken of how massive this is?
	No, it's hard to say because we don't know how far away it was yet.
	That underscores the value of our getting written reports with maps.
	Well, you've got a lot of reports to do and a lot of correlating to do.
	We sure do.
	But one thing's for sure.
	Something's going on tonight.
	which they indicate one where they were standing at the time of their sighting
	number two a straight line pointing in the direction they estimate they were
	looking when we get those maps we can then estimate where the object was it
	could have been a mile away from them it could have been a hundred miles away
	from them well you've got a lot of reports to do a lot of correlating to do
	we sure do but one thing's for sure something's going on tonight
	yeah that certainly appears to be the case from our vantage point and it is
	It's not just tonight.
	From my perspective, Art, it appears to be a continuation of what's been going on for the last ten days or two weeks approximately.
	Daytime sightings, of course I played the tape from Vancouver today, two o'clock today, the sighting over Westboro, Massachusetts.
	We've been getting sightings reported to us all day long.
	Of course, we have yet to receive the written reports on these.
	The written report can change a lot of things, but it is clear that there are a lot of strange events that are being seen, allegedly, by people and reported to us.
	Alright, well, one more time with your reporting number, please.
	Our telephone number in Seattle is 206-722-3000.
	Although we're about to shut down for the night, I've been working all day and all night, and I'm going to take a break.
	The best way for people to send us a brief one-paragraph description of what they saw is on the Internet, and my email address is simply director at ufocenter.com.
	Or they can send a report over our standardized report on our website, and that's www.ufocenter.com.
	Thank you, Peter, and we'll talk to you tomorrow night and get an assessment of all this.
	Thanks a lot, Art.
	Take care.
	That's Peter Davenport at the UFO Reporting Center in Seattle, and as I say, it's a hot night.
	There's a lot going on out there.
	So, if you're so inclined, keep your eyes peeled.
	All right.
	Listen, we're about to go back to Joe McGonigal.
	Very quickly, though, An announcement.
	It is my understanding, and it is my great pleasure to announce, that KABC in Los Angeles, beginning tomorrow night, is going to carry the program in its entirety, beginning at 10 o'clock at night.
	I could be wrong about that, but I don't think that I am.
	Again, it's my understanding that KABC in Los Angeles has made the decision to begin carrying the program At its inception at 10 p.m.
	Pacific time, starting tomorrow night.
	I know that affects a lot of people in Los Angeles.
	Back now to Joe McGonigal.
	Joe is the nation's first military remote viewer.
	He still can't talk about most of what he did for the military.
	In fact, 99.9% he can't talk about.
	But we can talk generally about remote viewing.
	And he wrote a book called The Ultimate Time Machine.
	And, Joe, it is your view that time, as in going into the future, for example, you could remote view an event and then, with free will, change that event.
	In effect, changing the future.
	Correct?
	Well, actually, in that simple phrase that you just said, there's probably about five things that I could say.
	Go ahead and say them.
	One of the difficulties about remote viewing the future or one of the glitches in remote viewing the future can best be demonstrated by example.
	Let's suppose as an example that we were living in the year 1850 and we actually remote viewed a pump laser in operation in Silicon Valley in 1975.
	You could have a perfect 100% correct remote viewing of that event, but you wouldn't understand it.
	In other words, the conceptualization or the concepts that drive pump lasers don't exist yet.
	So going out into the future, just a few years in some cases, depending on the target, can present us with unsoluble problems in terms of determining what it is we're seeing.
	Having said that, when you remote view the future, if you see an event A, as an example, and you record that, The fact that A doesn't happen just simply means that you were wrong.
	In other words, you can have all the conjecture you'd like about whether or not our actions between that remote viewing and the event actually occurring somehow changed that event.
	But that's all hypothetical.
	In reality, we can only state what we experienced.
	That is, we did not experience A, so it in fact was a bad remote viewing or an incorrect remote viewing.
	I do see, it's my understanding from having talked to other remote viewers, that very large events are more easily viewed.
	For example, if your target was a certain individual, if they were about to die in a car crash, or be hit by an 18-wheeler, something very, very eventful and traumatic, if not fatal, That would stand out and be more easily remote-viewed than lesser events.
	Well, that's partially right.
	Based purely on sort of an objective observation, one would naturally say that.
	In all probability, from a scientific standpoint, what's probably occurring is even a little bit more complex.
	Remote-viewing targets that have a higher entropy than other targets They generally produce more information and more accurate
	information.
	What that means is that lower entropy targets, which are generally targets that don't have
	much happening within them, usually do not produce as much information or as much accurate
	information.
	So it really doesn't have anything to do with the significance of the event, but it has
	more to do with its content from an entropy standpoint.
	If you can change an outcome that has been viewed in the future, then you can change
	Then, an obvious question is with regard to the past.
	You can only view the past, or can you affect?
	Is there any way to actually affect the past?
	I personally think that every remote viewing of the past affects the past.
	Oh, really?
	The reason I say that is because As I said earlier, I think the past is purely a creation of the specific sort of geopolitical, theological scenario in which we happen to be living.
	In other words, what we believe today about the past is different from what we believed in 1890.
	So by remote viewing the past and making comments on it, we are adding information or belief structure to what is already known or believed to be known.
	And that has to modify the view in terms of how people think or feel about the past, depending on how much they believe in the remote viewing, of course.
	Okay.
	A straight-on hard question.
	Remote viewing is one thing.
	There are people who talk about remote influencing, which is quite another animal.
	Is remote influencing possible?
	Yes, it is if it's demonstrated within certain parameters.
	Generally speaking, where you see or observe remote influencing is where the target individuals or the individuals involved as the target generally have agreed by inference to being influenced.
	In other words, If you have someone that you bring into an experiment, you say you're going to remote influence them in some way, by virtue of the fact that they've agreed to participate in the experiment, they've given sort of an agreement or compliance to being influenced, I think you'll see influence occur then.
	But in cases where someone does not give that sort of tacit approval, I've never seen remote influencing actually taking place.
	I'm going to really take you out on a limb now and explain to you something I've done, and at least get your comments on it.
	I'm really thoughtful on what I have done.
	I decided to play a couple of years ago, and to experiment.
	Actually, in 1995, I began.
	And I said, look, if there are really these UFOs, and if they are from elsewhere, or whatever they are, let's try a mass concentration, how to merely have these craft show themselves over a large American city, and I had millions of people going into deep concentration to get that done.
	Two weeks later, the lights over Phoenix occurred.
	Then we tried it a second time, and there were massive sightings within a couple of days over Las Vegas.
	Then, more recently, in the last year, I have done Three separate experiments to attempt to control the weather.
	Each one of them successful.
	One time in Florida to bring rains to put out fires.
	Within hours clouds formed with no forecast for them and it rained like hell.
	Another time in Texas where they desperately needed rain and we tried it and by God they got rain.
	In the exact area we asked for, and the third time, in Alberta, in a province of Canada, where they were having fires, and again, we produced rain.
	At that point, I stopped, and I began to sort of scare myself, and I said to my audience, look, it would appear that something real is happening here, but I'm concerned about the consequences of experimenting in these areas.
	For example, people urged me to try to have mass concentrations to deter a hurricane from hitting the coast.
	Well, that scared me.
	I imagined all kinds of terrible possibilities like somehow managing to hold a hurricane over water and away from land long enough to build from a category 2 to 5, and then having it slam into land.
	In other words, It seemed like what I was doing, and I wasn't doing it, it was the millions of people, I was just sort of an orchestra director here, was working.
	And it sort of freaked me out.
	And so I have not yet done another experiment, but I've been very thoughtful about it.
	What do you think about millions of minds in intense concentration over events of that sort?
	First, I need to say that there's a very real possibility that something is going on there, that you are having that kind of influence.
	But then secondarily, I'd have to say that there's another response that's possible in that you're taking sort of the key role in orchestrating when millions of people, millions of minds will be concentrating on a specific thing.
	You may in fact be psychically picking.
	The precise time and moment in time and space to observe the result.
	There's a very good example of this in a remote influencing experiment that was done by the Russians that I could give as an example if you want to hear it.
	I do want to hear it.
	Are you aware that the Russians contacted Malaysia and made an offer to create a cyclone?
	And they would do it for free if the Malaysians gave their... Remember when the terrible fires were going on?
	Right, I remember that.
	They made, it was going on, being reported by the Associated Press, the Russians actually said, we have, they said, the technology to create a cyclone, would you like us to do it?
	And I'm still not over that.
	Well, there's some interesting technology that's been developed just very recently with regard to observing certain patterns and, as an example, the effects of the contrails of jets and how many days later and many thousands of miles away they actually create storms.
	That's correct.
	So it may be that there are scientists that are very far along that track and that might have something to do with it.
	It might also be that it would have been nice to have the opportunity to predict the cyclone from Malaysia and get paid a lot of money for being correct psychically.
	Well, actually, they offered to do it once for free, and then there would be charges for any future production.
	Sure.
	And I guess it didn't go anywhere, but the implication was that they could do this with satellite technology that was already in place.
	That's interesting.
	You know, I would have liked to see Malaysia take them up on it.
	That would have been fun to see.
	Yeah, me too.
	So you don't then toss out the idea that millions of minds in concentration over events of this sort can produce events of this sort as one possibility, the other being that I've sort of psychically simply read something that's going to occur.
	Right.
	I would give each equal weight simply because I don't know if either has ever been proven.
	Both, of course, hold the same possibility.
	One of the things that's very difficult about proving this sort of thing is that I'm absolutely convinced and have been for many years that our expectancy and outcome are what we intend to have happen.
	Very much has to do with what actually does occur.
	What we can't determine is whether or not it occurs that way because we've influenced the events in some way that cause it, or whether or not we've just in some predetermined way have selected the appropriate place to observe the event.
	Do you give any more weight to either possibility?
	No, I don't.
	Not at the moment.
	I just don't have enough data and I don't think anyone does to weigh one possibility over the other.
	You have even, I know, done experiments with telekinesis.
	Psychokinesis.
	Psychokinesis.
	And that is the ability to move or in some way affect an object or a beam of light or whatever it is you choose with your mind.
	Right.
	Is that real?
	In terms of affecting solid objects, I have been successful in a surgical steel bar that was sealed in a glass tube.
	What?
	You did this under control?
	Well, it wasn't controlled to the extent that I had access to the tube alone.
	But it was controlled to the extent that it was in a sealed glass tube.
	You bent a steel bar?
	Well, it was a surgical steel implement.
	They normally don't bend.
	They usually shatter under pressure.
	Joe, hold on.
	We'll obviously pick up on that when we get back.
	Off into a whole different world, huh, folks?
	What a night.
	I'm Art Bell.
	this, this is Coast to Coast, AM.
	This is Coast to Coast, AM.
	This is Coast to Coast, AM.
	When my eyes were set by the flash of a neon light.
	Sweep the night and touch the sound of silence.
	To talk with Art Bell in the Kingdom of Nye, from east of the Rockies, dial 1-800-825-5033.
	West of the Rockies, including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico, 1-800-618-8255.
	1-800-618-8255. First time callers may reach out at area code 702-727-1222. And you may
	call out on the wildcard line at area code 702-727-1292.
	To reach Art from outside the U.S., first dial your access number to the USA, then 800-893-0903.
	This is Coast to Coast AM, from the Kingdom of Nye, with Art Bell.
	The sounds of silence.
	The sounds of thought.
	Good morning, everybody.
	Phil McGonigal is my guest.
	You ought to know who he is.
	The first, our nation's first remote viewer, number 001 for the government, Project Stargate.
	A man who just said that in a controlled experiment, he bent a metal surgical instrument inside a glass jar.
	And now, back to the best of Art Bell.
	We are about to, in a moment, open the line.
	So if you have any questions for our nation's first remote viewer, Joe McGonigal, now is a good time to call.
	You know what the numbers are.
	And I'm going to turn him over to you in a moment.
	But, Joe, where did you do this?
	You bent a surgical instrument inside a glass jar.
	This was an experiment done where?
	Under what conditions?
	Well, actually, as I said earlier, and I probably wasn't clear enough about it, it unfortunately was not under control condition because I was allowed access to this glass tube without someone in the room with me, so that negates any kind of controls.
	You know, I could have switched glass tubes or something, but in reality it was like a test tube, a glass test tube that had been Melted shut on both ends and contained within it was around
	probably a 2 centimeter thick surgical piece of steel about 7 inches long.
	Over a period of about 8 months I was able to put about a 3.5 centimeter bend in the
	center of it.
	One of the difficulties when you start dealing with metals in PK is unless you are absolutely
	sure about the metal that is being targeted.
	It's difficult to say whether or not it would not have done that on its own in any event.
	On its own?
	On its own?
	In a sealed glass jar?
	Yes, that's very possible.
	There could be some metallurgical defect within the metal itself.
	When it's subjected to certain changes in temperature, as an example, it could have a reaction where It seeks to change shape or go back to an original shape, particularly with metals that have been stamped or die created in machines.
	That's why spoons are so controversial.
	Is that what you think happened?
	I think it's a little of both actually.
	It's a little difficult to say.
	I have a nickel alloy serving spoon that's rolled up into a Of course, that was very difficult to do, but when we attempted to unroll it, it, of course, shattered.
	So, rolling it into a tight knot in the first place sort of defied the laws of nickel alloy.
	And when you tried to undo what you had done?
	Right, it shattered.
	We tried to unwind it by force, I would add.
	Obviously, if it was going to shatter, it would have shattered if I had rolled it by force.
	But in this case, it just rolled up like a sheet of paper.
	It was very easy to do.
	How do people who observe this kind of thing happen keep full touch with reality after they've seen it happen?
	I mean, I'd be, hey, I'm out of here.
	Joe, you're a scary guy.
	The usual reaction is people go into sort of a stunned silence, and then they go away.
	By the next morning, they've convinced themselves that it was a freak accident.
	By that afternoon, they never observed it.
	It's either integrated into their reality or deny it altogether.
	Most people have a tendency to deny that they've seen those things occur.
	Here's just a couple of faxes, and we'll go to the phones up.
	Dear Art, in Joe's first book, entitled Mind Trek, he drew as well as described his impressions of the Cydonia region of Mars.
	Richard Hoagland sits straight up.
	Would you please ask him to describe the impressions of the Cydonia region of Mars as well as his impressions of its former inhabitants?
	Well, actually, within the book I drew a picture of what I think were the former inhabitants.
	They are very humanoid-like and they probably stood about 12 feet.
	I have a personal conviction that the people who actually built the ruins, which I believe exist in the Cydonia region, probably existed a million years ago and in some way might even be our ancestors.
	There's a very real possibility that we're aliens to the planet we live on.
	We are Martians.
	Right, essentially.
	Actually, I don't think they were originally from Mars.
	I think they came from another area, and the ruins that now exist there were actually constructed in a rather hurriedly fashion to protect them against the sort of ravaging storms and things that covered the face of Mars back then.
	Which literally ended up stripping its atmosphere and water and so forth.
	Right.
	And perhaps part of that group were safely transported to Earth at some point.
	The rest, of course, didn't make it.
	You seem like a really careful, well-grounded person, as I ask you various questions, offering other more mundane possibilities for what Otherwise seems to be a psychic event, and yet you seem pretty sure about this, about Cydonia, about the inhabitants.
	Well, and of course I'm saying that that's my personal conviction, which doesn't make it right.
	I also say in MindTrek where I give the actual descriptions and transcripts and whatnot taken from the session that is, for all intents and purposes, I'm creating science fiction.
	Until someone actually goes and lands at Cydonia and walks in those ruins, it's an impossibility to say whether it's right or wrong.
	All right, somebody writes, I'm on the East Coast, it's going on 3 o'clock in the morning here, and I've got to be to work by 8, it's killing me.
	Would you ask Joe, please, for any predictions or knowledge he has for the new millennium?
	I have talked to some remote viewers, Joe, who say there's almost a block at some point My book, The Ultimate Time Machine, I actually talk mostly about the next 75 years.
	There's approximately 160 very specific predictions with regard to date and what I believe is actually going to happen.
	Could you give us a few of those?
	Well, it's a little difficult to do without the manuscript in front of me.
	You know, we were talking earlier about these light phenomena perhaps being a preliminary for a geological occurrence.
	The things being seen all over the country tonight, yes.
	I'm almost convinced that within our lifetime we're going to see a major eruption occur somewhere on the North American continent.
	I'm sort of torn between two locations, one being the Mount Shasta area and the other being Mexico City.
	One of my predictions is that if it does occur in the Mexico City area, it will be quite devastating because of the intensity of the population in that area.
	I suspect that the one that you and I will see will probably be in the Mount Shasta area.
	In that sometime within the next hundred years, the one in Mexico City will occur.
	I'm a lot more specific about the dates in the book, but I just can't recall them from memory.
	Alright, and this.
	Art, please ask Joe if a specific item like a stock price can actually be viewed for future performance, and obviously if so, then why doesn't a group simply make a few choice picks?
	And fund any amount of research you would like to do in that particular fashion.
	Well, there's a lot of ways of answering that.
	You can do specific stocks.
	You can use a form of remote viewing called associative remote viewing for binary questions like yes and no, or constructive, destructive, that sort of thing.
	And, of course, target a stock as to whether or not you should invest, not invest, or just leave it alone.
	And I would say to the listener that I don't specifically ask them about their business, so I don't generally answer in response to whether or not I'm doing stock.
	Oh, gee, a lot to read between the lines there!
	Right, exactly.
	I guess I wouldn't assume that a viewer doesn't make money doing that sort of thing.
	I am particular, I personally don't have a great deal of interest in the stock market, because I believe it's a form of gambling, and that for everyone who makes $10 in the stock market, 10 people have to have lost a dollar, essentially.
	Well, it is gambling.
	It really is gambling.
	Presently, they're trying to squash Internet gambling.
	You can go on the internet now and you can play roulette and poker and 21 whatever you want offshore operations.
	And they're getting ready to ban that.
	And I was thinking the other day, if they're going to ban that, they probably ought to ban internet stock purchasing.
	There's a lot of people, Art, that are essentially giving up their homes and cars, playing the long shot on the uh... the
	self-invested uh... stock market over the internet in
	their they're but you're a good because they were gambling condition
	i think that that is uh...
	uh... that's unconscionable well let me know in our society uh...
	uh... were capitalists and that's i'd suppose uh... what it's all about
	they say but how they delineate that from real gambling I mean, if you're going to play arbitrage, for example, that's to me just gambling.
	Right, exactly.
	And what is the difference, and how come nobody ever talks about that fact?
	Just because that's what we are?
	Well, I think part of the problem right now, the major problem in Japan, goes back to their addiction to gambling.
	Well, that is more or less how we got in trouble with the Great Depression.
	enough to sell papers on commodities for the future they were selling paper on the paper and then papers on
	those papers so that
	they were essentially gambling three layers of the on commodities that fail
	that is more or less how we got in trouble with the great depression
	do you have any specific economic uh...
	information that would be of general interest to people in other words
	Do you see our economy remaining robust? Is there a deep valley problem ahead?
	Some sort of depression? Do you see any deep problems in our economy?
	I don't see any kind of a depression like occurred in 1929, but I do see a declining market.
	I see a market that's probably going to go through at least four major corrections over the next five years.
	And of course people make money during that period as well as they make it when it's rising.
	Sure.
	It's just that along with that comes sort of a negative confidence in the economy, and so I think we will go through a period where people are shaken by it and disturbed by it, but it's not going to be anything like the 2009 crash.
	All right.
	Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Joe McGonigal and Art Bell.
	Hi.
	Where are you?
	Hello.
	I'm in Nashville.
	Nashville.
	Okay.
	You're going to have to speak up good and loud, hon.
	Get close to the phone and yell at us.
	Okay.
	Is that better?
	Much better.
	Okay.
	I had a question.
	I heard the previous program with Ed Gaines.
	Yes.
	And there was a question raised about a connection between remote viewing and Scientology.
	Oh, yes.
	Oh, yes.
	Yeah.
	And I have it on pretty good authority that that's That's good information.
	Ingo Swann and Pat Price were indeed high-level Scientologists.
	Oh, listen, let's ask.
	Exactly right.
	There was a question in a previous program about remote viewing and a connection with Scientology.
	Are you aware of any?
	Personally, I can only attest to the fact that I believe That both Pat Price and Ingo Swann and perhaps one or two individuals within the SRI lab at the time were in fact Scientologists as well.
	I do know that some of them declined to remain members because they didn't like it or didn't find any value to it.
	I would also have to say that I've known Buddhists who are also remote viewers.
	So there is no more specific connection between Scientology and remote viewing.
	That's what people seem to believe, and I guess they've drawn that conclusion based on the fact that a couple were Scientologists.
	In fact, you could really stretch and say that there's some indication that perhaps some of the techniques in Scientology might have showed up.
	In some of the thinking of some of those individuals, but again, like I said, my thinking is heavily laden with my military background, so we are what we assume or what we do.
	I don't see anything wrong with that.
	In other words, I don't see any kind of conspiracy or anything behind the scenes or under the table.
	So much power to either perceive events or affect events.
	Is it proper then to conclude that many minds organized together to affect an event have a greater effect?
	I would say so, but again I would have to caution against assuming that it's the sort of mental energy that's come together or the focus that's come together to cause that.
	You have to also assume at the same time that a million people with thinking that something should be done are in fact going to be taking action and doing things within their life structure that will promulgate that.
	In other words, sort of bring energy to that.
	So I'm not so sure if it's the mental energy or the actual unconscious actions that we take as a result of our convictions.
	That might eventually bring that to fruition.
	It's probably a little bit of both.
	All right.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Joe McGonigal and Art Bell.
	Hi.
	Good morning, Art.
	This is Tim from KOGO Country.
	In San Diego.
	Hi, Tim.
	Absolutely.
	And I would like to ask Joe, would it be possible to get the masses of the minds together to create an experiment to prove levity is real?
	I would like to see that happen.
	and i have a t you know mind over matter
	policy uh... as in the experiment uh...
	uh... that he talked about earlier like you know i would like to see that happen
	uh...
	i'm not one of the difficulties in getting millions of minds
	together the focus on something
	is getting them to all agree essentially on an absolute in fact that's a you know
	that's common among all those minds.
	See, this is what we did with these weather experiments And frankly, Joe, it honestly scared me.
	And I began to contemplate consequences that I couldn't anticipate for doing something like that.
	And it stopped me, and I'm still stopped.
	Well, let me suggest another alternative to you, Art.
	I can understand where that fear would come into play, but isn't it a worst-case scenario to live your life in a world where coordinated action can make changes and where we choose to ignore that possibility and just sort of go along for the ride?
	Absolutely so, yes.
	You're absolutely correct.
	But I still think there should be a cautionary note here that it might have consequences that you wouldn't expect that would be negative.
	And I just would like to be more sure of what I'm doing before I proceed.
	And I'm not sure how I get to that point where I'm sure enough to proceed.
	Well, you can put it in a context that's more positive.
	For instance, If you're proposing to change weather to water crops, then the intent there is a positive and constructive one, and I can't imagine that weather would occur that would create damage or destructive results.
	In other words, it's all part of the same intent.
	Well, right.
	Hold on, Joe.
	We're at the top of the hour.
	Yeah, it's all part of the same intent, but Inevitably then, there are destructive weather things that have occurred in areas that we've concentrated on, and believe me, we get email and we get letters saying, look what you did.
	I'm Art Bell and this is Coast to Coast AM.
	Thank you for watching.
	To talk with Art Bell in the Kingdom of Nye from outside the U.S., first, dial your access number to the USA.
	Then, 800-893-0903.
	If you're a first-time caller, call Art at 702-727-1222.
	If you're a first-time caller, call us at 702-727-1222.
	From east of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	West of the Rockies, including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico.
	Call Art at 1-800-618-8255.
	Or call Art on the wildcard line at area code 702-727-1295.
	This is Coast to Coast AM from the Kingdom of Nye.
	It is, and Joe McGonigal is here.
	He's our nation's first remote viewer.
	001 in the military.
	He's definitely a heavyweight.
	If you have questions about remote viewing, or what Joe has remote viewed, then we are available for you.
	And the lines, of course, are totally jammed, so all I can say is... I almost stepped on that.
	I keep trying to get through.
	Anyway, more of this directly ahead.
	We'll be right back, and I've got several questions about shows we've done in the last couple days.
	You know, the ones that talked about the Russian weapons.
	I wonder if that's something you can comment on.
	We'll find out in a moment.
	Back to Joe McGonigal.
	You holding up okay, Joe?
	Oh, yeah.
	Alright, good.
	I had the highest-ranking Soviet defector to ever come out of the Soviet Union on my show a week or so ago.
	And then I had a Lieutenant Colonel on the other evening, and both of these gentlemen said that the Russians are, and for a long time have been, experimenting with, in fact, causing earthquakes.
	Is this an area that you cannot comment on?
	I don't know a lot about that area, quite frankly.
	I can understand where they might be saying that, but some of the reasons why they might be saying that, I'm not sure would imply a weapon system of any kind.
	By the way, folks, if you want to read more about Joe, and I'm just looking at one little part of his website right now, we've got it linked.
	Under remote viewing, you will find the definition of remote viewing.
	History with Stargate, examples of remote viewing, frequently asked questions, research and development, remote viewing applications, books, journals, publications, related websites, publicity and media, remote viewing services.
	Now that's just one little section of your website, so you just got this up, it's pretty comprehensive, eh?
	Yeah, there's still some areas that are under construction, but the area on examples, there are some simulated intelligence examples there that are very good.
	And of course there's information on my books and my personal bio and business bio and that sort of thing.
	Are there really things that you know that if you were to tell you'd end up in jail?
	Well, simply because I signed agreements and I gave my word that there were certain things I wouldn't disclose, I won't.
	There are a lot of things that are very sensitive and part of their sensitivity No, not necessarily.
	with our ability to know them.
	Just exposing them would...
	Expose the ability?
	...collect information there.
	Yeah, but see the implication there is, Joe, clearly the implication is that it's still
	going on.
	Well, no, not necessarily.
	That's what it sounded like to me.
	You know, if you're successful at doing something in defense of the nation, you certainly don't
	want anyone to know that you're having that degree of success.
	If your successes in the past were dependent upon additional methodologies that were used, you don't want to show that connection.
	One of the things I do want to say, I don't want to leave the listeners.
	With the opinion that I was the only remote viewer.
	Oh no!
	I want to say that within the time period of the project there were probably a little over two dozen viewers and there were many viewers equally as good as I ever was or am.
	Actually, I'm glad you brought this up.
	Of course there are.
	I've interviewed many of them.
	That project could not have existed based on just the efforts of a single individual in any case.
	It was always a team effort and everyone played an equal role in terms of their degree of involvement and importance and their support.
	Many people essentially laid their careers on the line and served as a result of that.
	I think the listeners just need to know that.
	Having said all that, I've got a very serious question for you.
	I really, really love the subject of remote viewing.
	And I have therefore interviewed many remote viewers.
	There is a terrible, terrible schism in what once was a very tight community.
	There have been some real problems that have developed between people who were in that program since the official ending of that program.
	There's a lot of animosity.
	How come?
	I think a lot of it is not really generated between the actual people involved.
	I think it's generated by a lot of misconceptions by the media.
	A lot of what the media has put into print or said essentially has sensationalized some of the statements and taken them out of context that people might have said.
	As a result, there are a lot of things that are believed to be true that aren't.
	As an example, there is a belief that at some point I made a statement that not everyone can be a remote viewer.
	Not everyone is psychic.
	That is exactly 180 degrees out of kilt from what I actually said.
	What I actually said was that there is evidence in the lab that every human being that has ever walked through our door How does that one get turned around?
	I don't know.
	I think a lot of people ask questions but they never listen.
	What they do listen to, they listen to in the context of how they would like to hear it sound.
	Why do I know that's true?
	That's happened with me quite frequently and I know that it's happened with others.
	When you don't have direct contact with some of the people and you're not able to answer those questions directly, a lot gets assumed.
	It's really unfortunate.
	There were, in the military, very specific protocols.
	Some remote viewers have strayed from or modified those protocols.
	In your view, Is that a reasonable thing to be doing, or does it dilute what accuracy was obtained with those very strict protocols?
	Well, the way I'd like to answer that is that absolutely, if the protocols which actually lend the scientific truth or validity to remote viewing, if those are straight from, that absolutely does dilute whether or not it's remote viewing.
	However, having said that, you have to understand that there are a whole lot of different methodologies that are being used that operate within that protocol.
	Are there any that you're aware of that have been developed or modified that are superior in results to what was done in the military?
	I don't know of any specific methodology that's superior over another.
	I do know that That some will probably be a little bit more consistent than others.
	They all pretty much produce the same accuracy level when you're using a well-experienced or well-selected remote viewer.
	But they're all pretty much the same.
	It's dependent upon the individual and simply what they like to do.
	Everybody brings their own natural talent to it.
	And since everyone's psychic, we have a tendency to go with what works for us.
	All right.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Joe McGonigal.
	Hi.
	Hi, Art.
	Calling from Seattle.
	I'm listening to you on Coma 1000.
	The big one up there, yes.
	Yes.
	Mr. McGonigal, I wanted to ask you, I read a book about the Montauk Project.
	Are you familiar with that?
	Yes, I am.
	Somewhat.
	Yes.
	And I read a section of it where they did experiments to affect weather changes.
	And also they did experiments on sound frequency to see how it affected people and animals.
	And also in the book it said they also did experiments in time travel.
	And the reason the Long Island location was closed down was due to an entity coming through during one of the time travel experiments that created havoc and they couldn't get rid of.
	Really?
	That's quite a story.
	Joe, do you know anything about all that?
	One of the things I like to do is when I read something I like to check it out.
	I read a number of things about the Montauk Project and what was implied is that many of the things that were used or developed in those projects still exist in terms of towers and buildings and tunnels and all that sort of thing.
	So I actually personally went to Montauk and looked for those things and none of them exist.
	So I have a little trouble.
	You know, buying some of the other things that were said as a result.
	I think it's quite possible that there have been experiments done with regard to sound and the effects of sound on people or animals.
	There's some literature that supports that.
	I believe also that there is probably a considerable amount of research and stuff that was done with regard to the earlier foundations of radar.
	Towards the end of the Second World War, mid-end of the Second World War, out of Montauk.
	But beyond that, I haven't found much evidence for anything else.
	Implication being that there was some, at least, nugget of truth to the Philadelphia Experiment?
	You know, the Philadelphia Experiments are a really interesting thing.
	In reality, what they actually did is they did build some very large degaussers in the dock areas there during the war.
	Because metal ships riding through the water build up electrostatic charges and make them very vulnerable to electromagnetic mines.
	So they would degauss these ships.
	We now know that certain kinds of electromagnetic wave fronts hitting the temporal lobes of the brain create a sense of having an entity standing next to you or some very bizarre effects.
	I can conclude from that that probably a lot of the things that have been said about the Philadelphia experiment might be true in the minds of people who are degaussed.
	It's also quite possible that in attempts to build something that would essentially wipe out a radar system, they could conceivably have built a very large unshielded microwave tube on the deck of one of those ships and cooked a few people.
	You know, nothing's beyond, you know, the possibility.
	So I think out of that sort of collage of things, you could hypothesize a number of things, and some of that being the, you know, what's been written about the Philadelphia Experiment.
	Exactly.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Joe McGonigal.
	Hello.
	Hi, this is Dan in Virginia.
	Hello.
	Yes, Joe, have you had any I personally have had a couple experiences where I had a sense that I was either visited by or in the presence of some form of entity.
	That is a good question, Art.
	I personally have had a couple of experiences where I had a sense that I was either visited
	by or in the presence of some form of entity.
	The difficulty is determining what exactly that is.
	I am not one to jump to a conclusion that it is alien simply because it doesn't look
	I try to hold an open mind in that regard, so I suggest that it might be alien, but it might also be time traveler.
	It could also be a construct of my own mind in some way.
	I'm not exactly sure what it was or where it came from, but I do know that there was a reason Based on the information that was exchanged, there's a reason to believe that there's some validity to that entity.
	If, Joe, somebody were to remote view you, would you be aware of that fact?
	Probably not.
	Again, I go back to the 25 years of research that's been done in the lab.
	There's quite a bit of evidence that In some cases, you can display the ability to determine that something has been remote viewed at a specific time or place.
	That would include individuals.
	But that happens very spontaneously.
	The last person that you ever want to ask for any decision with regard to remote viewing is the remote viewer.
	Even while they are in the act of remote viewing, they are generally incapable of making decisions Oh, they're going to be accurate.
	especially the us no kind of and decision yeah um... alright used to the rockies you're
	on the road to a mechanical high
	evening art uh... good evening at jones mother speak with you this is a rick about
	what was looking to you know i think it's a uh... i think that if that's what
	it is uh... joe uh... with regard to uh... miniature conversation
	that you have our had earlier regarding the effects of weather in the uh...
	weather experiment that uh... artist completed
	uh... it would be to me that uh... if you compare that to the surgical
	instrument i mean both would take a heck of a lot of physical or uh... or
	would would seem kind of fine compliant or applied to the electromagnetic field
	in order to make a little bit of energy or to accomplish either one of those
	But yet you said it was possible that, like the weather experiments, that people could subconsciously or physically affect the weather.
	How would that be done?
	Can you clarify that?
	Well, he even suggested that it was equally possible that I had, in effect, psychically viewed something that would occur, and therefore announced that particular experiment.
	I'd like to go back to that Russian experiment and sort of give that as an explanation for what I mean.
	The Russians did a very interesting experiment.
	They took 24 mice and tattooed them with numbers 1 through 24.
	Then they had a participant who was not going to be in their experiment select out which would be control mice and which 12 would be target mice.
	They alone knew that.
	They kept the information and of course they took the mice and put them all in a cage together and then they had a psychic 3,000 kilometers away target them to try to raise the aggression level in the targeted mice.
	At the end of six months they killed all the mice and analyzed the chemicals in the brain and were able to sort the 12 mice that were aggressive, that were pre-selected as aggressive, into one column that was accurate.
	So are you saying that that would be more of a telepathic or even psychokinetic influence?
	Well, their assumption was that it was psychokinetic.
	But in reality, it may have been that the person who made the selection of the two groups at the very beginning, knowing what the outcome needed to be, made the appropriate selection.
	You're a very, very careful man.
	Hold on, Joe.
	We're at the bottom of the hour.
	We'll do another segment.
	Joe McGonigal is my guest.
	He's our nation's first remote viewer.
	There were others.
	Alright, here we go again.
	Once again, back to Joe McGonigal.
	Joe, you've got several books out.
	Is there any that you would like to particularly plug right now?
	The new book, of course, which will probably be in bookstores the first week of December.
	The ultimate time machine is the new one.
	MindTrek, of course, is a good primer for remote viewing if people would really like to know something about how I integrated a lot of what I learned about remote viewing.
	You've had four major heart attacks.
	That's correct.
	Two open heart surgeries.
	And you had a near death experience as well.
	Was that during one of them?
	No, no.
	No, that was back in 1970 while I was overseas.
	In other words, did you actually clinically cease?
	What actually happened is I started feeling badly.
	I ordered a before dinner drink at a guest house in Austria.
	I took a few sips and started feeling very badly.
	Excuse myself from the restaurant so I wouldn't be in front of anyone.
	When I hit the door I collapsed on the sidewalk and went into convulsions.
	I swallowed my tongue and of course you can't breathe when that happens.
	So I ceased breathing after about five to six minutes.
	My heart stopped and I was delivered to the local hospital in Germany, DOA.
	DOA?
	What happened to you during that time?
	It was a very classic near death experience.
	I watched everything from outside of my body.
	I watched them load me into a car and take me across the border to this hospital.
	I watched them cut the clothing off my body in the emergency room and start sticking needles in me.
	I became sort of bored by that.
	By then I had figured out that I was dead or dying.
	And I started wondering what was going to happen next and found myself falling backwards through a tunnel.
	At some point I felt something warm on the back of my neck, or what I perceived to be on the back of my neck, and I turned around to see what it was.
	It was enveloped by a white light, which at the time I perceived to be God.
	I then actually did go over every event in my life up until that point.
	And I was told that I couldn't die.
	I had to come back.
	I, of course, argued about that and had very little control over it.
	Suddenly, I sat up in a bed that was in the hospital.
	I had been comatose for some hours or days.
	I began telling everybody in broken German and English about white lights and God and you can't die and that sort of thing.
	I wound up in a rest home as a result.
	What kind of a reaction did you get?
	It was a very negative one.
	They put me in a rest home in Munich and did brain studies to determine how much damage I had suffered as a result of the lack of oxygen to my brain.
	Really?
	I immediately started trying to act normal.
	They let me out after about ten days.
	You realized, I guess, if you didn't let up, they'd probably I have you in a jacket in a quiet place with rubber walls.
	Right.
	Back then, this was like unheard of.
	Nobody ever discussed this sort of thing.
	They immediately thought that I suffered irreparable brain damage.
	Is your fear of death gone?
	It went away during that event and I've not had it since.
	Well, you know, I'd love to experiment with that.
	There are people, Joe, I don't know if you're aware of it or not, who are doing experiments, in fact I'm waiting for the results now, with possibly a dangerous drug, which I'm not going to mention, we call it drug X, but two people with doctorates who are using a specific drug to induce NDEs.
	Does that concept give you the willies?
	Actually, no.
	Historically speaking, the Greeks were known to use some very exotic poisons to take people to the level of an NDE.
	It had a profound effect on some of the philosophies as a matter of fact.
	I love your show.
	Thank you.
	Where are you?
	I'm in Canada.
	I was actually trained by one of the people that came out of Joe's program about four years ago on remote viewing.
	Joe mentioned something a couple of years back.
	I'd like to ask him about, and that had to do with the Russians' experiments.
	I'd heard Joe had a bypass operation, at least one, possibly more.
	They were actually trying to do what I would call more remote influencing or remote assassinations, like to try and stop people's hurts.
	There were apparently people in the program that were having coronaries in mid-session.
	Oh, yes.
	Is that a true story?
	Are there people who actually died while having sessions?
	Actually, no.
	That's a myth.
	There was in fact one individual who was not working at the time who had come by the office and was in fact drinking a cup of coffee and was as a result of another job under a great deal of stress.
	He did have a massive coronary and subsequently died.
	But that was not in relationship in any way to any kind of a remote viewing.
	I think the proof is kind of in the pudding.
	I'm still here.
	My heart condition is pretty much genetic and I've survived so far.
	So if their targeting mechanisms are to induce heart attacks and death, they're not doing a very good job of it.
	There you are, caller.
	Okay, thank you.
	Thank you very much.
	So you don't consider there to be any inherent danger at all?
	Well, no.
	I don't want to be misconstrued.
	There is an inherent danger, and I think it comes from the person themselves.
	If, as an example, you become involved in the paranormal or become involved in remote And you cannot integrate what you're experiencing into your belief structure.
	In other words, it runs counter to your actual belief structure and how things work, or your theologic background as an example.
	What you will actually do is create an illness in order not to participate.
	I've actually seen that happen with people where they really did not want to alter their belief structure, and as a result they made themselves sick.
	Now if you pay attention, you quit and go away and you get healthy again.
	If you don't pay attention, the degree of sickness increases until you do.
	So you could kill yourself?
	You could essentially kill yourself, exactly.
	I suspect that's not just a predominant thing within the paranormal research area, but it's probably predominant throughout life.
	You're on the air with Joe McGonigal.
	that they are not comfortable in and they become so dis-eased with it that they actually
	Hi.
	die.
	They decide to die.
	There are many, many cases of course of people who once their mate is gone make a conscious,
	literally a conscious decision to die.
	Absolutely.
	Perfect example.
	Wild Card Line, you are on the air with Joe McGonigal.
	Hi.
	Howdy.
	Michael in California.
	Hi Michael.
	I am a Greek person, a pente, I believe is what you might have been referring to.
	That was just a comment.
	It seems perhaps that it is difficult to squeeze certain things into higher consciousness provoking
	situations like psychedelics or remote viewing where it can't be used negatively because
	That's a condition of that dimension on which it works.
	Well, let's ask about that.
	Joe, I like to be brutally honest with people, and I don't know that I believe that.
	In other words, remote viewing is a talent, a natural ability, a developed ability, a sharpened ability, and I think like most forces that If I had to guess, I'd say it could be used for good or what some might consider a negative target.
	All the evidence points to the fact that whether you consider something good or evil has no effect whatsoever on the ability to promote you.
	So conceivably someone who has a lot of good intention or who is very destructive by nature can be as effective a remote viewer as someone who is not,
	who is more inclined to the positive or constructive.
	I think what's important to understand is that remote viewing is a tool just like eyesight
	or smell or taste or anything else in that we all use our capabilities, our talents or
	our tools in an either destructive or constructive way and that's pretty much up to the individual.
	I had one question.
	In all paranormal research, parapsychology, psychic phenomena, UFO research, etc., are
	Over the years, I've known some pretty good scientists who have been interested in this work, and they all find tremendous opposition, not because of the work, but even if they make a suggestion or set up plans to do research, there is tremendous opposition from their fellow scientists and from other people just to prevent the work from even being discussed or done.
	Why is that?
	Well, there's a lot of reasons.
	Primarily, I think, if in fact the paranormal or psychic functioning is occurring because of a difference in our construct in how reality operates, then we of course are faced with having to change all of our opinions of reality or how reality operates.
	That can be very threatening to a lot of the baseline premises supporting other science.
	The other problem involves more of a personal area in that many scientists come in one of two ilks.
	One is they're very wedded to some theological idea or they're very non-wedded to a theological idea.
	In other words, they're either atheists or they're firm believers in a power that moves things.
	Discovering or underscoring an ability that tends to solidify the spiritual side of man or exists within a spiritual nature of man is a very threatening thing.
	And I think this is where a lot of that comes from.
	I have a problem with being paralyzed when I'm coming back.
	What do you mean by projecting?
	Are you talking about an OBE?
	Yes, like an out of body experience.
	My whole body and mind goes to where I'm looking.
	I'm like in a sleep and I become paralyzed.
	And the more I fight it, it's like the more I become paralyzed and I was wondering if he has the same problem.
	Actually, that's really easy to answer.
	In part of the prelude to actual sleep or to the processes of the body going to sleep, there is a disconnect that occurs where you mentally are wide awake and functioning.
	But you're disconnected in a sense physically from the rest of your body and it translates into a form of paralysis where you think you'd like to move your arm but it won't move and that sort of thing.
	That's a very normal occurrence and it occurs with everyone who can retain consciousness
	long enough as they are going to sleep or retain consciousness early enough when they
	are waking up to notice.
	Joe, we've done extensive talking on this program about out of body experiences, the
	Monroe Institute and on and on and on and on.
	A lot of guests on the subject.
	For a few years now, as we've discussed all of this, I've come to that state where I've been paralyzed, even heard the buzzing, and frankly, I'm such a control freak That it made me nauseated, and I yanked myself out of it every single time.
	I could no more let that go than the man on the moon.
	I can't lose that kind of control.
	So I've never been able to allow myself to go from that point and actually have an OBE.
	But I was recently in Paris, Joe, and I was lying in bed with my wife.
	Without any warning, without any paralysis, without any precursor of any sort, I shot up at an indescribable velocity out of my body and above the city of Paris in some kind of space.
	All I've been able to do is describe it as the greatest feeling of ecstasy that I have ever felt.
	So great there are not words to describe it.
	It shocked me so badly, I snapped right back, and I woke my wife up, and I started telling her about it.
	And it's never happened before.
	I can't say it won't ever happen again, but it's nothing I willed to occur, knew was occurring, or had any warning about.
	Boom.
	It just happened.
	Now I was completely out of my currents.
	I do a radio show every day.
	Very structured life.
	I was on vacation in Paris.
	Total change.
	That's when it happened.
	In fact, probably 90% of the OBs are spontaneous with people.
	Really?
	Yes.
	In your case, I would suggest that because you were in a different place and because you were probably somewhat tired, You were probably not in as much control as you are normally.
	I imagine doing the radio show you are very structured about your time.
	Not being within that scenario you had let go of that control with regard to time.
	All I can say is this.
	You know, I know what a dream is.
	I've had them all my life and I've loved many and hated many flying dreams, but always when I wake and I say, man, cool, cool dream, I'm absolutely aware.
	I'm saying all this so that the people understand that what I had was no dream.
	What I had was utterly, completely different than any dream I've had in my whole life.
	It was not a dream.
	Something real happened to me.
	That's precisely the way you can tell when someone has honestly had an OBE.
	versus a lucid dream or something that's very similar, there is no other context.
	It is most definitely an OBE and it's not like any dream that anyone could ever have.
	When somebody has an event like that, are they in the same realm that remote viewers
	to discern the information they discern?
	Generally speaking, I would say no.
	However, there are people who could be considered remote viewers who are in that realm simply because they're having their OBE within the confines of a remote viewing protocol.
	In other words, if whatever methodology you're using is happening within a remote viewing protocol, then you could consider it remote viewing.
	All right, all right.
	Listen, we're at the end of the hour, and I know that I should probably let you rest.
	I will, however, offer you one more hour if you like it.
	I've got it.
	Okay.
	We can do it.
	Really?
	Oh, excellent.
	The phone's going, of course, off the hook.
	So stay right where you are, and we'll be right back.
	Joe McGonigal is my guest.
	Remote viewer number 001 in the government's program.
	The one you may have seen exposed on Nightline.
	So we're dealing here with a heavyweight.
	And if you have questions for him, we'd just love to hear them.
	I'm Mark Bell and this of course is Coast to Coast Air.
	Thanks for watching.
	And now, back to the best of Art Bell.
	It was about a year and a half ago that Linda Moulton Howe, well actually that I began getting
	reports of frogs that were dying.
	Do you remember that?
	We've been talking about that for a year and a half.
	Linda Moldenhauer has done endless reports on it.
	And, you know, a lot of people consistently called me and said, what a bunch of BS.
	Frogs are not dying.
	There are very limited deformities.
	They come from some sort of snake something or another.
	There have been all kinds of things said about it, but let me tell you, here is a Reuters news story.
	None other than our own federal government, an environmental group, and a children's TV show have joined forces to figure out what the hell's going on with the frogs.
	Our Interior Secretary, Bruce Babbitt, said, numerous studies show that frogs are dying in alarming numbers.
	Others are turning up with gross deformities.
	The real questions are, why now?
	And why is this happening in so many places around the world?
	That's from Babbitt, folks.
	I said exactly the same thing a year and a half ago.
	The fact that it was occurring in Tokyo, in Africa, in Europe, here in North America, that we should be watching very carefully because something's going on.
	And a year and a half later, Finally, an acknowledgement from our own government, which leads me to the following with you, Joe.
	We've got some real environmental problems, some really serious problems.
	We've got chunks of the Antarctic breaking off.
	We've got apparent warming going on, controversial political, but it definitely seems to be occurring because known ice fields are In specific retreat that they can measure.
	We've got some ozone problems.
	We've got a lot of problems, Joe.
	And I wonder if you know anything about where that's leading.
	I agree.
	We do have a lot of problems.
	And I think we're guilty for causing quite a few of them.
	Certainly with regard to atomic weapon testing and whatnot over the last 50 years, we've spread enough contagion around the planet that It's having an effect.
	In other words, I think we've thoroughly crapped our nest and now we're paying for it.
	With regard to a lot of these things, however, they could also be major cyclic changes that the world or the planet goes through on a normal basis.
	And because we're in a period of time when we do have such intricate communication ability and we can exchange information so readily, We may be now noticing them for the first time.
	But is there anything in remote viewing itself, in looking at the future, that would suggest which is the case?
	Oh yeah, certainly.
	Regardless of whether you believe it's cyclic or not, in my book, The Ultimate Time Machine, I'm predicting a period of time in the next, certainly within the next 75 years, We're going to see significant sea level changes along the coast, which means during full moons there's going to be water in a lot of people's basements.
	I don't think that that'll be a disaster in terms of it all happening overnight.
	It'll certainly affect us economically.
	There'll probably be three to four trillion dollars in changes necessary to deal with it.
	Yeah, it's very hard to look, of course, at A long term, because we haven't even been monitoring the weather for that long.
	Exactly.
	But it would seem as though cyclical or permanent change, no matter which way you look at it, there is a definite change underway right now.
	Absolutely.
	I don't think there's a question of doubt about that.
	Particularly with significant weather pattern changes across certainly North America and Europe.
	The government itself warned that We are about to have the worst winter this coming winter.
	The worst winter we've had in 40 to 50 years.
	And I don't know on what basis they make that prediction, but it's out there.
	That'll be an interesting winter, then.
	I kind of think it's exciting, actually, to be living in a period of time when so many significant things could be happening.
	It certainly keeps life from being dull.
	That, it does.
	The old Chinese Chris.
	First time caller line, you're on the air with Joe McGonigal.
	Hi.
	Good evening, Art.
	Joe, pleasure to speak with you both.
	Interesting program.
	Thank you.
	I have a couple questions if Joe cares to address them.
	One, has he ever remote-viewed the green fireballs that have been a topic of discussion this evening?
	Too bad.
	Would he care to address the tactical nuke strike that he talked about earlier?
	All right, hold on.
	One at a time, then.
	The green fireballs, these incredible things, things generally traversing our atmosphere.
	UFOs, have you remote-viewed?
	Actually, in terms of the green fireballs, I of course haven't, since that's a recent phenomenon, and I don't generally select my own targets.
	Delivered to me blind.
	The subject of UFOs?
	As far as UFOs, yeah.
	I have at least accidentally viewed UFOs in conjunction with other targets on a few occasions.
	My sense of it is that UFOs are definitely vehicles and that they're not from here, whatever that means.
	I'm not thoroughly convinced personally yet that they're alien.
	They may in fact be time machines or could be intra-dimensional vehicles of some kind.
	I just haven't gotten enough information to make that decision yet in my own mind.
	They are very definitely hardened vehicles and have a profound physical effect on anyone
	that is near them.
	I suspect that they are probably most visible to us when they are either entering or leaving
	our reality and that once they are here, they are not perceivable.
	In other words, they have some form of shielding.
	Or they're only here temporarily.
	That sort of thing.
	You're such a careful guy as we go through the interview in so many areas, and then suddenly you just blow me away.
	And again, these are just my personal opinions.
	I can only say that that's been my experience.
	One political question that I said I was going to ask, and I'm going to ask our president, seems to be in big trouble right now.
	Do you ever do political targeting?
	Yes, I do.
	As a matter of fact, the way I'd like to answer that, my wife told me two years ago when he was elected the second time to office, she said that she came in and announced that it was probably going to not work.
	I said, what do you mean?
	And she said, well, every president that's ever been voted into office during a void-of-course moon has never fulfilled the obligation.
	So she predicted two years ago that he would not finish out his term.
	The exact same thing that a man named Sean David Morton said.
	Uh-huh.
	Exact same thing.
	He's a frequent guest on my program and eerily right about almost everything he said.
	And that's one of the things he said, void-of-course moon.
	Exactly, and I don't see politically how he could finish out his term under the kinds of pressures he's being put under.
	I would like to say personally, however, that I would like to have four hours with Starr sitting at a table and my interrogating him for him to properly put all this into perspective.
	I think that it's unconscionable the way they've been treating the office of the President And I'm not in any way, you know, acknowledging or saying that I agree with some of his actions.
	Condoning, obviously.
	I feel exactly the same way.
	And, you know, if you're able... I always get in trouble with this, and I really don't care, but if you separate his personal conduct from his job conduct, which I think a lot of Americans are able to do, I'm able to do it.
	Then, as a president, we've had worse.
	Oh, absolutely.
	And I'll go even one further than that.
	The very people that are condemning him for his personal conduct, part of their personal conduct is to support that office of the presidency as far as how it represents the American public and the American country.
	And they're doing a great disservice in the way that they're They're presenting that right now in a public sense.
	Well, I was prepared.
	I was scared to death of the guy before he became president.
	I mean, I really was not looking forward to the Clinton presidency.
	So I did a turnaround watching what he's been doing, not what he's been saying.
	Exactly.
	I did not vote for him.
	I did not like him as a candidate for presidency.
	However, I have to say that Based on what's occurred over the past number of years, that at least he's kept it on a course that's been a positive one.
	But you don't think he'll make it?
	No, I don't.
	At the present time, I don't think he will.
	I think that there's just too much stacked against him and there's too many people with the kind of power to see that through.
	It's unfortunate, but I think that the The prediction of the void-of-course moon is going to hold true.
	All right.
	Wildcard Line, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Joe McGonigal and Art Beller here.
	Where are you?
	Hello, Wildcard Line.
	Yes?
	Yes, hello.
	This is Joe from Philadelphia.
	Hello, Joe.
	Okay.
	Art and Joe, good morning to you all.
	Right now, I'm looking at a poster that my wife has given to me.
	And it sits above my desk at work and it says, have no fear of what the future holds, for God holds the future.
	Relating to your events that you conduct with yourself and seeing into the future, do you feel as though we are reaching into areas that are God-like in this?
	Can we be certain?
	That we are not encroaching on the higher beings event calendar?
	That's an interesting way to put it.
	I think one of the important things to remember here is that one of the things that make us
	unique as beings within this reality is the fact that we are born with free will.
	Part of what makes our theologic beliefs important in that respect is our ability to choose and
	think about God and the Creator in our own way and to bring whatever form of worship
	we want to that.
	I think in the case of free will that means that it's up to us to do What we believe is the positive or constructive thing that it's meant to be, and so we bring a lot of activity or a lot of action to that.
	Okay, with that thought in mind, the positive thing that we could do, on Earth we have what we would consider as very evil people.
	An example would be a Sodom Hussein, and if we have the ability to Know where he's going to be and what he's going to do.
	Wouldn't it be beneficial to mankind to more or less exterminate or eliminate somebody like him?
	Well, the problem you run into when you start considering these kinds of things is you have to take into consideration the stability that he might bring, as bad as the context might be that it's brought in.
	He does bring a relative degree of stability to that region, and may in fact be the buffer that is preventing an all-out war for power in the northern area of Iraq at the moment.
	Certainly, if he was to be eliminated, there may not be a strong enough person to take his place, which could result in an invasion of Iraq by some other country.
	And all out war in the Middle East from which tens of millions of people would suffer, you know, severely.
	So, you know, those decisions are really hard to make and I, for one, don't like making a decision about the life or death of another human being in that regard.
	I would much rather try to work with what's available and try to make things positive that way.
	But if he would have this ability or this knowledge, this capability That is available to you or to other people.
	Don't you think that he would use it in an adverse effect on mankind, as he has done with any weapons that he has available to him?
	I'm sure he would, because he's basically a nasty person.
	He's a very negative, very destructive kind of individual, and he certainly has only one motive in mind, and that's his own.
	However, there are a lot of people that live on the planet that are just like him, that have no power, simply because we don't give that power to them.
	And so, over time, I think we're diluting his power base, and he could have whatever access to whatever weapon system he'd like.
	He just will simply lose his power base altogether, and eventually go away.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Joe McGonigal.
	Good morning.
	Hello there.
	Hello.
	Yes, sir.
	Hi, this is Ron from the Philadelphia area.
	Yes, sir.
	1210 AM radio.
	Yes, sir.
	First of all, I wanted to ask Joe, where do they get the target coordinate numbers from?
	Well, this, again, there's a lot of myth about coordinates.
	Way back in the late 70s, early 80s, they used coordinates simply because it was a Cheap method of getting someone to a target versus using an outbounder.
	And those coordinates were actually map coordinates.
	An outbounder?
	I don't know what that is.
	An outbounder was originally, in the original use of remote viewing, they would actually send a human being to the target and then target that human being, thinking that another human being had to be present in order to pass the information, possibly.
	I guess they found out that was not so.
	That's correct.
	And the way they found that out was using coordinates.
	Using coordinates.
	We were attacked very severely for that.
	I was accused of having an eidetic memory and having memorized all the important coordinate systems in the world.
	All right.
	Very important.
	We're coming right back to it as we round the half hour mark.
	I'm Art Bell.
	this is close to close to him with joe mcgonigal the
	the the
	the the
	the the you
	When you're up one day, you don't want to leave the home.
	Oh, and forget I told you.
	I may have told you.
	But then you want things to think and do to keep the sanity.
	Oh, the sanity.
	To talk with Art Bell in the Kingdom of Nye from outside the U.S., first dial your access
	number to the USA.
	Then, 800-893-0903.
	If you're a first-time caller, call Art at 702-727-1222.
	From east of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	West of the Rockies, including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico, call Art at 1-800-618-8255.
	of the Rockies, including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico. Call Art at 1-800-618-8255
	or call Art on the wildcard line at area code 702-727-1295.
	This is Coast to Coast AM from the Kingdom of Nye.
	Well, I'll tell you something that should have been remote viewed.
	And there is a very strange story going on in my little town of Pahrump.
	Very strange indeed.
	Let me just read you what the Daily Telegraph have to say, alright?
	Los Angeles.
	Police are investigating the death of a former Las Vegas casino boss after three men were arrested in the desert digging up a vault containing Check this out, folks.
	26 million dollars worth of silver belonging to him.
	He's Ted Binion, who until very recently owned Binion's Horseshoe, the site of the annual World Series of Poker.
	He was found dead at his home in what they think might be an accidental drug overdose, but they don't know.
	Police are questioning his girlfriend.
	Binion's treasure, and this is going to blow your mind, was in a reinforced concrete vault 4.5 meters below ground right here in the middle of town next to a grocery store in Pahrump twenty six million dollars worth of silver it came right up out of the ground in the middle of Pahrump the other day what can I say folks I
	I live in a very, very strange place.
	This is the end of SAG-1.
	Please leave the cassette exactly where it is, flip it over, and begin again.
	From the Kingdom of Nigh, Coast to Coast AM continues with Art Bell.
	I'm curious.
	I'm very curious.
	Would it be possible, I mean, here they were, darnedest thing, my little desert town, and they were digging up a vault the other day with $26 million worth of silver in it.
	That's a true story.
	I mean, it was right next to the grocery store.
	Is there any application at all, Joe, in looking for They're trying to remote view treasure.
	There is.
	However, in this case, I probably would have used a magnometer.
	That's true.
	I would have certainly lit that machine up in a hurry.
	Boy, I sure would.
	You need a reasonable reason for looking somewhere, and then, of course, you can use remote viewing.
	One of the problems you run into is being very, very specific about the location.
	Obviously, if something's buried three to four meters in the ground, that entails a lot of digging, or at least gaining some entry to it.
	I think more to the point is that you would need some place of origin to start, some idea about a treasure being in a certain location in order to try to apply remote viewing.
	Here's the one thing about remote viewing that I never really quite understood.
	I understand that originally you would send somebody to the location to be viewed.
	Right.
	But I have never understood the process by which a control generates a random set of numbers that are a target that the remote viewer goes after.
	I have always imagined the only thing that can be occurring here is a transference from the control to the remote viewer By some mental means of what the target is.
	Otherwise, what process is occurring?
	What actually happened very early on in the project, when we went from the actual person going to the target to physical map locations and using map coordinates, for obvious reasons that wasn't going to work for skeptics.
	So we started putting those coordinates into sealed envelopes.
	The difficulty we ran into then is in dealing with subjects who are new to remote viewing.
	It's a much larger leap from being able to remote view something that's identified by a blank envelope than being identified by some numerical system that at least is a proxy for the target.
	Yes, but you mean a specific proxy for the target, like longitude and latitude?
	Right, only in this case you invent a set of numbers or letters.
	Well, that's where I fall off the cliff with this.
	In other words, the only thing that can be occurring once you've gone to random is a transference?
	Actually, none of that.
	What the actual targeting mechanism is, at least what we believe it is, is intent.
	It's what everyone has agreed to as the intent of the outcome.
	That gets you to the target.
	Now, having said that, I need to go back and say that you can't take what I just said and apply it within a training scenario because when you're dealing with someone you're trying to convince can target something with basically just intent.
	That's a piecemeal situation.
	You have to walk them to that belief.
	You start out by targeting them on targets that have at least a proxy targeting mechanism, which would be a set of coordinates, whether they're embedded or otherwise.
	Remarkable.
	All right, here we go.
	First-time caller line, you're on the air.
	Hi, my name's Tom, San Diego area.
	Hi, Tom.
	Hey, Joe, I wanted to ask you, you or any of your team ever done any remote viewing and discovery of any catastrophic solar flares hitting the Earth?
	For instance, in April of 99?
	Well, that's a good question because we've been having an unusual Strange amount of solar activity.
	Some pretty wild stuff.
	We have solar cycles.
	They're normal.
	Some of what's occurring seems abnormal.
	One of the things that is really nice about living on the Earth instead of some other planet is that we do have a nice atmosphere that protects us from that sort of thing.
	There certainly is some degree of effect From some of the bursts of electromagnetics, you know, that are involved in a solar flare.
	They're most readily noticeable within certain frequencies of radio communication or broadcast communication.
	I don't know of any other effect that I would project that I know of, at least in terms of the past or the present or the future.
	That would indicate any kind of a dire outcome from a solar flare.
	There are Israeli scientists now who believe the dinosaurs were not, in fact, killed by what's known as a KT event, but rather by radiation.
	Sudden, immense amounts of radiation.
	And they're looking very seriously into that.
	You know, that's a distinct possibility.
	But, you know, like, that would be, that would be sort of the, you know, I like to look at this as, well, that's sort of the negative side of the same coin.
	In looking at a positive side of that coin, you might say that one of the reasons why mankind evolved faster and better than some of the other species that we coexisted with It's because the intense radiation from one of those flares might have caused the genetic change in our brains.
	It causes us to grow additional cells.
	Or they may have died, so we might be here.
	Exactly.
	So, you know, there's always... I always try to look for the constructive first, and then deal with the negative later.
	Yes.
	All right.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Joe McGonigal.
	Hi, Joe.
	Um, I was wondering if you ever remote-viewed who built the pyramids, and then, like, there's other structures, uh, these, uh, Nazca lines in Peru, and, um, uh, these temples in Cambodia, they all involve, like, heavy stone structures and they align to, uh, constellations.
	It's a very good question.
	I would imagine it would be an irresistible target.
	Everybody wants to know how the heck the pyramids were built.
	That would be something that could be remote-viewed, could it not?
	Yes, in fact, it's in the Ultimate Time Machine as of past viewing.
	I actually did the remote viewing and it was a double blind scenario in 1983.
	What I had was essentially a vision of a large placid lake and they were using the surface of this man-made lake to create a perfectly flat engineering plane and they were using the water to Really?
	lubricate a certain kind of soft to level the stones in the first two or three layers of the
	pyramid really palm
	these large rafts to move the stones and and i saw a a formal dock area and
	that sort of thing what's what's fascinating is in nineteen eighty three when
	i did that i i actually took that material
	to the uh... egyptology lab at uh... s or r
	and was probably left out of the room Really?
	Yeah, and it was about a year ago, maybe a little longer now, on the front page of the LA Times, they came out with an article.
	Scientists, archaeologists have discovered an archaic lake that existed in the middle of the desert and now theorize that the Egyptians or whoever built the Great Pyramid probably moved stones using rafts And they were surprised to find out they had actually had a paved road and a dock area and saws and all that sort of thing.
	Wow.
	And I can't help but think if just one person had been open to remote viewing in 1983, they could have said, well, if this is correct, then you can look at a topographical map and see where that lake would have had to have been.
	You know, hypothesized where the edges of that lake would have had to have been.
	I have an article here which came from the Electronic Telegraph entitled, Remote Views, CIA Signed Up Psychics as Spooks.
	uh... that wasn't gone because no one had an open mind i have a article here
	uh...
	which came from the electronic telegraph and huddled remote views cia signed up
	psychics as books and they're talking about doctor put off
	and the beginnings of all this and apparently
	they told him there was increasing concern within the intelligence
	community the birth of all this about the soviet interest in parapsychology
	They asked if Dr. Puthoff could arrange for a demonstration of Ingo Swann's abilities.
	The results of those experiments, in which objects were hidden in boxes, impressed the CIA sufficiently to commission Dr. Puthoff to set up a more detailed study.
	If remote viewing were to be of any intelligence value to the CIA, questions Yes, I would say it is.
	Absolutely.
	Yeah, of course.
	could be whether a sender had to be present at the target site needed to be addressed now
	is that essentially inaccurate
	the description of how it all began i would say this
	you have lived it through some interesting times yourself haven't you
	yeah of course we've done some very interesting targeting over the years
	and some of its work very well and some of it hasn't worked at
	all uh... i think the thing to remember is that
	we really don't know a great deal about how the information is transferred
	We know something about what affects it, and we also have some degree of knowledge about how it might be improved to a certain extent.
	But in terms of its consistency, it still suffers.
	In terms of its accuracy, it's very, very difficult to determine accuracy prior to post-stock analysis of the results.
	So, you know, it's a lot to be desired, but I think what's important to state is that you can absolutely be assured, based on 25 years of research, that psychic functioning is real and that it's within the human capacity.
	Oh, I believe that without hesitation.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Where are you, please?
	I'm in Tennessee, Art.
	This is Roger.
	I wanted to ask Joe if he's remote-viewed the Y2K problem, and a question for you also.
	All right.
	Yeah, really good question, actually.
	Y2K is coming up quickly, and I've had a number of guests, Joe, very knowledgeable, and it's backed up by things the government has said, even the president.
	This incredible thing that's coming toward us, a fixed date.
	That is going to, that could account for a collapse of a good part of society, civilization as we know it, power grids, banks, commerce.
	Is it going to be a major event in 2000 or not?
	I think absolutely it's going to be a significant event.
	One of the things that I say in my ultimate time machine I say right up front and forward that I specifically don't address the Y2K problem, and the reason I don't is because we know about it, and it's real easy to hypothesize exactly where the problems might fall.
	In other words, it's so obvious it doesn't need remote viewing.
	Exactly, and I think there's two serious problems here.
	One is the total disregard for the fact that it's going to occur.
	I think a lot of people just Quite frankly, I think someone else is going to take care of the problem.
	I know.
	And so we don't address it.
	The area of concern, my concern, is more of a social one than a technological one.
	I think technologically we can solve the problem.
	It will take time.
	That's what I was wondering about.
	We have a serious, serious problem socially in that over the past 50 years we have essentially developed a whole new managerial level within government without Where people make decisions based on computer runs and whether or not the right columns are filled in.
	They no longer make those decisions based on intuitive gut feeling or instinct.
	As a result of that, when these people are forced to make some very major decisions because of a lack of automation, they may be making the wrong ones.
	That's going to have a great deal of impact across the board.
	I'm afraid I agree with that as well.
	Caller, you have something else?
	Well, WWTN Talk Radio, John Grayson?
	Yes.
	I was talking here the other night, said something about Africanized killer bees, I guess around... Yeah, I live in a very interesting place.
	There's an Associated Press story out right now saying that my little town of Pahrump is now the host of swarms of killer bees.
	I mean, it's like I ask, what next?
	Locusts.
	You never know.
	Y2K, solar flares.
	The bees.
	Killer bees.
	Swarms of killer bees.
	Really makes a person go out, comfortable to go out at night.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Joe McGonigal and not a lot of time left below.
	Is this me?
	Well, you know that for certain, but it sounds like you.
	It seems like I've been waiting a long time.
	Well, here you are.
	I'm calling from the state of Washington.
	My name is John.
	I have two areas.
	Number one, it was brought up that some areas of research are not gotten into by maybe even remote viewers because it disagrees with their theology.
	That's right.
	So, I believe, now this is my one area, That reincarnation could be validated by remote viewing.
	Now, don't comment.
	The other area is, one interviewee on the Art Bell Show made the statement that UFO abductions are done with the permission of the person who's abducted, and the only way that permission could be given would be Well, I would disagree with that premise right away.
	Let's comment on the first.
	Is there any indication in any remote viewing you have done that a person exists on the earth plane in three dimensions more than once?
	I address this actually within my book.
	I personally do not hold to the premise of reincarnation.
	Having said that, I have to say that I do hold to the premise that we exist in multiple incarnations, which means that I exist perhaps in 2,000 lives simultaneously.
	I am in fact a Roman soldier as I am talking on the phone now.
	Star Traveler in the year 3000.
	You're in fact, in effect, talking about a mass consciousness.
	Right.
	In, in... Collective.
	Your time space is not material.
	A collective consciousness.
	Right.
	And I think we incarnate in that, that way.
	Um... I don't know if that is very understandable in the limited amount of time I had to say it, but... It is.
	We could have used more time.
	We could always use more time.
	Obviously a show like this could go on Forever and ever, and we will have you back again, but this one's over.
	I'm afraid we're out of time.
	And you're probably thankful because it must be near six o'clock in the morning back there.
	It is six a.m.
	Joe, it's been a pleasure.
	It's been fun.
	Yeah, it has.
	And people can get your books at amazon.com and I presume in Barnes & Noble and places like that?
	That's correct.
	I'll look for it.
	Thank you, my friend.
	Good night.
	Thank you.
	That's Joe McGonigal, folks.
	And again, we've got links to his, as a matter of fact, to his personal website.
	So if you want to see and read more about what you just heard about, go on up there and take a look.
	Go to www.artbell.com.
	Scroll down until you see the name Joe McGonigal, and you'll see the two websites.
	That's what the mouse is for.
	Click, click.
	All right, folks.
	Tomorrow night, David Adair.
	Sorry, we're out of time.

▲