Ed Dames, a 20-year U.S. government remote viewer nicknamed "Dr. Doom," predicted Egypt Air Flight 990’s crash via cockpit altercation before black box confirmation, though authorities suppressed the news. He dismissed Y2K fears, warning solar activity and ecological collapse—like cattle starvation and crop failures—will dominate, while declining to discuss North Korea’s nuclear threats beyond their inevitability. Dames confirmed the Ark of the Covenant’s existence and intactness, hinting at its public reveal via SciTech’s website, and exposed a JFK assassination conspiracy involving a dashboard flashette striking his Adam’s apple alongside the known shot. Remote viewing’s potential to prevent terror attacks remains limited due to law enforcement skepticism, yet Dames insists humanity’s trajectory will first spiral into chaos before evolving upward. [Automatically generated summary]
Coming up here in a moment is SciTech's Major Ed Dames.
Major Ed Dames worked in the U.S. government project, secret black project to remote view.
It was a 20-year government project, and Major Dames was in it for a substantial amount of time, actually.
And they called him during his tenure there, they called him Dr. Doom eventually, because of some of the things that he began to report to his superiors.
Now, Doctor, Ed Dames, Major Ed Dames, comes to us tonight on the heels of two really, really big hits.
Two big hits.
One, Egypt Air Flight 990.
He said there was an altercation in the cockpit.
There was a man involved.
That Flight 990 was killed.
Remember that?
Next week, there it was in the headlines.
Then, of course, the Egyptian government got involved.
And you just don't hear a lot about it anymore, do you?
Have you noticed that?
Have you noticed the news blackout on Flight 990 news?
Well, it's political, folks.
The Egyptian government doesn't like it.
So he hit that one dead on.
I mean dead on.
And then you may recall that he predicted on the last program the loss of the second Mars probe, the Mars Polar Lander said, he said, would be lost.
And I'll be damned if it's not gone.
As we know, yesterday's program with Richard Hoagland and, of course, the news from NASA, they have given up.
It's lost in space, maybe, according to NASA.
So, that same major ad-AMS is coming up in a few moments.
Where we're going to go tonight, I have no idea.
But with this kind of record, close in record, you know, predicting these closer, I shouldn't say predicting because it's not prediction.
Remote viewing is not prediction.
It is viewing an event, past, present, or future.
But with the short-term, I mean, you got to give it to the guy, the short-term predictions, damn it, there I go again, the short-term visions, that'll work, that have come to pass so quickly where you have your neck so far out that it could be chopped off if you're wrong very quickly with that kind of prediction.
With that kind of viewing under his immediate belt, you're going to want to be listening tonight to see what he has to say.
Now, I want to give you my normal warning, and that is they don't call him Dr. Doom for nothing.
We're entering a tumultuous time toward the millennium.
I thought you were, you know, I said to myself, man, he's really done it this time because they're going to bring up these black boxes in the next couple of days and he's going to get blown right out of the water.
It's been politicized, but that could have been predicted.
It doesn't take a remote view or 10 miles to predict what would have happened for Egypt Air and the Egyptian government to even suggest or intimate that one of their crew members had a psychological problem would be very unacceptable to their State Department.
It reminds me, the situation reminds me very much of the O.J. Simpson trial.
My company, when we were based in Beverly Hills, was very, very much involved in locating the Nicole Simpson murder weapon, the weapon itself.
We spent a lot of time and effort to pinpoint the location of the weapon and attempt to retrieve it.
But it reached a point where it would not have made any difference anyway, because the trial was so political in nature.
It's not something that I would normally have any interest in whatsoever, but it is eminently doable.
In past elections, we've done things like this.
It's tantamount to remote viewing the outcome of a sporting event, the Super Bowl or something like that.
Now, you can't resolve the problem, however, unless it has already been adjudicated and the likelihood is 100% in terms of the matrix or the collective unconscious.
And that may be as late as two weeks prior to the election, or it could be much earlier, up to six months or seven months.
Until the likelihood on the horizon becomes, I use that term Lucy becomes 100%, we're not going to be able to determine the winner.
But let's say that the outcome is already determined in the matrix, in the collective unconscious, where the area that we remote view.
Mind is unitary.
There's a single mind in the universe.
We're all parts of that.
So that everything exists as a pattern of information, a thing or an event.
If this is already a fait la compli, then we can very easily remote view the outcome and describe the winner of the next presidential election.
We can describe the person physically, the person's family, and it's easy to deduce based upon very rudimentary data and very cursory sketches who is the winner, if that has been resolved.
I remember an interesting case years ago where we gave this target to my vice president, the winner of the next presidential election, we gave this target to my vice president and some students that I had at the time.
And all of the participants in this project who worked this blind, they did not know what the target is the same way that we train, they sketch people sitting in front of a television.
And that is the way that the collective unconscious, or the matrix, by the way, we used that term long before the movie did, told us that the outcome had not yet been determined as far as we're concerned.
And that's how the matrix, that's the symbol that the matrix chose for us to sketch to allow us, to let us know that the problem had not yet worked itself out in terms of all the decisions by many numbers of people.
That's why it's so much easier to remote view geological events or material failures or something like that in an engineering sense than it is to remote view the outcome of an election where so many individual decisions are necessary for a threshold event to be reached.
In fact, what I might do tonight during your breaks is, if I can here, I might remote view that for you.
The danger there is that when a person remote views, if I engage in this, it takes a few minutes for my conscious awareness to pop back all the way to a left brain modality.
So I'm bilocating.
Half of my conscious awareness would be on the target, that is, the event Agaira, and the other half would be attempting to communicate with you.
We were meandering about, and you were talking about some Boloids, possible other things.
You know, when we remote view, we don't make any preconceived, we have no preconceived notions or assumptions about what a target, a person, a place, a thing, or an event may be.
Even though the reports will state unequivocally that this was such-and-such or so-and-so, we as remote viewers, as professionals, to never go into a target or a problem set with any preconceived notions about what something may be.
If the game has been resolved, then what one can do in terms of our technology, technical remote viewing, is the problem set ends up describing the remote viewer ends up sketching and describing many times the uniforms, the color of the uniforms of the winning team or the symbols on the helmet.
But unconscious, the power of the unconscious mind to sort through all that is far more powerful than any computer in terms of processing information.
Remote viewing is direct knowledge, so we turn our attention immediately without any red tape, without any intervening analysis to the solution of the problem.
However, about this process, if, for instance, any of the information about the winning team could be used to alter the outcome, then we run into the paradox problem.
If that's the case, then the outcome of the game is not resolvable.
Suppose, for example, that the, God forbid, the quarterback of Jacksonville, which looks very likely, were to be injured between now and Super Bowl time or even playoff time.
That could certainly change the outcome.
If somebody knew Jacksonville was going to win and they intentionally sent some 350-pounder straight at the quarterback and did something awful to him, that could change the outcome, right?
But if that intent and if that action was also highly likely, then the remote viewer would not be able to determine the winner of the game.
So that's where we run into the paradox problem.
In a very simple explanation, if I wanted to remote view where you would eat dinner tonight, let's say you were going to a restaurant or eating at home, I were to remote view where you would eat dinner at the next dinner, the next night, that would be a fairly easy thing to do in most cases, at least eight to ten hours before you did that.
It would already be resolved.
But if there were any intent, and unconscious knows this, by the way, the universal mind knows that the intent is real.
If there were any intent for me to tell you that I know where you're going to eat and then allow you to change your mind, then I would not be able to remote view the outcome in the first place.
Well, the answer to your first question is we remote viewed, a team of remote viewers remote viewed the Mars Polar Lander mission before it even left the ground here on Earth.
Or it may have been just shortly after its launch.
I can't remember right now.
So the outcome of that mission was decided in the collective unconscious, actually in the universal mind, way before it ever got to Mars.
To mind at large in the universe, whatever mind is everywhere, it's a field effect.
Everything, every event, we're just plugged into this grander mind.
So that's how we can know anything that this universal mind knows.
Having said that, however, some things are beyond our ken because we can't understand them.
So for instance, let's say there's an alien civilization or our own civilization that is, oh, let's say, 100,000 years ahead of us technologically.
We might not be able to discern anything about the deep space propulsion systems or teleportation devices, even though we can remote view them as professionals.
There may not be anything we can say about them because we understand nothing, absolutely nothing.
So that's what I mean about something being beyond our ken.
There has to be some commonality, some common denominator, a baseline of understanding in terms of ideas and our own memories and experiences so that we can communicate the information both to ourselves and to other people.
So the answer to your first question was we looked at the fate of the Mars Polar Lander before it took off and discerned that it would not be successful.
The answer to your second question is that the Mars polar lander burned up in the atmosphere of Mars before releasing its two probes.
And the reason that happened was I followed this vehicle into the Martian atmosphere, remote viewing this, and it began to bounce off the atmosphere.
The atmosphere appears to be a whole lot different than planetary geophysicists have calculated.
There wasn't a problem so much with the trajectory or the mission itself.
The problem was not understanding the Martian atmosphere.
This is not my guess.
Not understanding the Martian atmosphere enough to be able to predict what would happen.
This probe began to actually bounce off the atmosphere, jerk around, hitting like wave fronts, a very thick atmosphere.
And it began to bounce up and down and bounce around, became disoriented.
And every time it bounced, the trajectory changed.
And as a remote viewer, you can actually see the sparks, the ablation, the surfaces begin to peel away on the spacecraft to the point where it became very high.
It looked like a locomotive that was trying to conduct an emergency stop where the sparks fly off the rails.
And that's what this thing looked like every time it bounced around in the atmosphere of Mars before it finally burned up completely.
So I remote viewed that particular event as well, and I conduct a double check on my own information, the current location of the Mars Polar Lander spacecraft.
The trajectory appeared to be correct, but the calculations for the atmosphere, NASA needs to study the Martian atmosphere more before they do this again.
Only one probe that I talked about before was, and I'll go over that again momentarily.
I did a BBC television show with Ray Bradbury about two years ago where I called Mars a forbidden planet and predicted that we would have some very bad luck when we attempted to fly some no-fly zones on Mars.
There is an area on Mars that, for all intents and purposes, could be called a no-fly zone.
And there is something there that will react to inbound objects.
And the reason we knew that is because I used my military remote viewing team in the late 80s to take a look at this.
And then when SciTech was first formed, when I founded it in 1989, the Russians approached us because they were desperately seeking an answer to why they lost the Phoebus II spacecraft.
This was a Martian probe.
The last thing that published thing, because the Russians held back some information from the public, the last thing that they showed the public was what appeared to be an elongated bright object that registered on the camera and the Phoebus II spacecraft.
That's what it appears, but appearances can be deceiving.
Appearances can always be deceiving, and for us with very fallible minds, appearances mostly are deceiving.
This was not an object.
It was a burst of energy that impacted on the camera and the spacecraft and appeared to be an object.
In fact, there was an object, and it fired a particle beam, not a weapon, but a particle beam, what could be an interrogation beam, at the Phoebus II spacecraft.
There was something in orbit around Mars that projected this particle beam into the Phoebus II spacecraft and it burned up some of the semiconductors in the spacecraft.
But what was more interesting to us was this disc shaped, it looked like a big sand dollar, this thing that was settled down in the Martian sand that very rapidly rose from the Martian surface and came into physical contact with the Phoebus II spacecraft where we sketched this and returned this to the Russians.
And some of the, what they did was they used that as a control to see if we were on target or not.
If we could provide them with any more information than they had by using this, attempting to see if we could describe what they had on other films in terms of this Event.
So there's an area on Mars that has sort of an air defense interrogation zone.
If something overflies this area, it's going to be approached by machines.
It turns out that this idea of destiny is real, but most people, very few people ever attain it.
And it's something very profound.
It's the idea that humans are a whole lot more, not just human potential in terms of skills and things that we can do, but much, much more.
And that's perceivable using remote viewing.
The best way to look at it is to look at your own death using remote viewing and then turn around and look back at what you could have been, what you really are, but don't know.
It's like we're swimming around, we're a bunch of larvae or maggots swimming around in the darkness.
And we're all happy with the Super Bowl and with our jobs to some degree or less degree.
But we really don't know that there's a whole world out there that's very different, a whole world of light.
We stay in this muck.
And there's something that's very special about us.
I stumbled across this in my work about a week ago.
I did not want to look at, I was not involved in counterterrorist and predictive intelligence.
This was how remote viewing started in the military.
It was a predictive intelligence tool.
Intelligence is useless unless it's really a predictive tool.
Who wants to know what happened after the fact?
So we use this to take a look at what is going down out there in terms of potential enemies or threats.
In SciTech, for a number of years, we looked at counterterrorism things.
And I stumbled across this one about a week ago.
It involves an Islamic militant terrorist group that is planning, with a very high likelihood, I might add, to employ rocket-propelled grenades and automatic weapons against a certain area of a North American city.
The kill zone is one that is very well known.
It's the center mass of this area.
This kill zone where this ambush cave will take place is a very well-known place.
And since this is the Christmas season, I just don't want to put this out on the air.
But it is important enough to have to notify certain authorities.
One of them in particular that I will talk about tonight that's a wonderful targeted SciTech New Millennium Project, the grand prize of remote viewing, if you will, and that's something that I turn my attention to.
But this one, sometimes when you're out there in the matrix on what we would call an open search, it's as if the collective unconscious is just trying to shut this in your face saying you need to see this.
Now, when we produce the information connected with that, now one has a responsibility.
do I or do I not tell anyone?
So, that's, you know, I don't know what purpose is served by telling anyone, but I think in this case In this case, there is at least the chance that additional law enforcement will be in the area at the time it goes down.
Whitley Streber and myself have a co-authored book that is about to, well, it's breaking all over the place.
It's called The Coming Global Superstorm.
And it has as its central theme, although it's a researched work of fiction that's going to scare the hell out of you.
The scenario is a change, a rapid, very rapid change in the North Atlantic current, which would produce storms at a level that you can't even imagine.
And it's all told in this book in a dramatic form.
And that's going to be hitting the newsstands, the bookstores and, you know, Amazon.
In fact, some people are actually beginning to see it now.
The reason I mention this is because I have it in front of me, and I mentioned it yesterday.
I'm going to mention it again right now.
It's from the New York Times.
It's called Freezing Future.
And it's from the New York Times News, Science and Technology, a section.
And it reads, There is now alarming evidence that Europe is facing an ice age.
The ocean currents that give Europe its mild climate are changing.
Scientists have found evidence that global warming may cause a big freeze by switching off a current called the North Atlantic Drift.
Several teams have found signs that the current that brings warm water to the northwest of Europe from the Gulf Stream is being disrupted by a growing amount of fresh water entering the Arctic Ocean.
This increase is a result of changes attributed to global warming, melting ice, increased rainfall, and changing wind patterns.
The North Atlantic Drift is part of a global conveyor belt that in effect brings warm surface water from the Gulf of Mexico to northwest Europe, and then sends cold, deep water back.
Now, without getting too technical on you, it's because of all the new fresh water.
A scientist recently announced that measurements made of the Arctic ice cap reveal that over the last two decades, we now have 20%, I repeat, 20%, no, correction, 40% less ice than we had two decades ago.
Now, what does that mean?
That means all of that fresh water is now part of the Arctic Ocean and coming down and coming down and coming down.
We know in the Antarctic, the ice sheets are melting.
A couple have already broken off.
There's danger to the remaining ones.
There's some extremely serious environmental...
What's the right word?
Potentially catastrophic events underway right under our very noses.
And so I want to ask Ed about this, and I know that it kind of goes to his Millennium Project.
And it looks at what's going to happen environmentally to us.
And Ed, these are pretty serious things that are going on.
To imagine 40% of the Arctic ice is gone.
Gone, gone.
To imagine the ozone is thinning now at an extremely alarming rate over Europe presently.
Things on Earth are changing rapidly, and obviously remote viewing would have a place in trying to tell us what's going to happen.
I think that anybody that masters technical remote viewing skills is at a great advantage.
It's a great leg up on others that...
Or that masters this and looks at health, survival, one's spirituality, spends the time doing that rather than Las Vegas, has a great advantage in terms of quality of life.
I have said over and over again that Y2K events will be eclipsed by the sun, by the behavior of the sun.
maximum and Y2K events will pale beside what is going to happen geophysically and I've been saying that for a couple of years now that that has not changed so in terms of upcoming geophysical changes and their effects upon humans these are far More significant than Y2K, or even wars, and there will be some, and the rumors of war far more significant.
The key millennial change events in the next couple of decades will be loss of the ozone layer and our extremely active sun.
Remember, there's a very, I don't think that atmospheric scientists and geophysicists realize the extreme linkage, extremely strong linkage between the sun and Earth's weather.
The sun pumps Earth's ionosphere.
So if the sun is very active and burps out protons and electrons like never before, there's no way that Earth's atmosphere cannot be affected.
And it will be.
And what this will result in is what we have been saying at SciTech for the last couple of years.
Desiccation and extremely dry regions, drought, very heavy weather effects, but particularly drought.
To your credit, Ed, you have been saying this now, my God, as you said for two or three years, you've been saying that Y2K would be eclipsed by other events.
Now, Y2K is only 23 days away.
The solar maximum is also just about upon us.
And what I said about 40% less ice at the Arctic, it's a non-trivial event.
Sheets of ice breaking off in the Antarctic and melting.
Hunks the size of Rhode Island just breaking off.
I mean, these are real events that are taking place right now.
So I want to cover just these two things for really the last time.
I've been saying this for years now.
And I just want to review the bidding here so that people are fully apprised of what to expect in the next couple of decades, particularly the next decade.
And that's increased volcanism, a lot of new volcanoes, a lot of new volcanic activity.
But more than that, that these, that the activity of the sun will result in a tremendous amount of crop loss and loss of fresh water.
Fresh water will be an extremely important thing, consideration in the future.
I'm in the Hawaiian Islands.
There's a lot of fresh water here.
Think about that.
If you really do want to move, fresh water is important.
It's also important to live in a community where if the lights go out, you don't have to arm yourself.
You know what I mean?
But to get back to the geophysics here, crop loss.
We're going to face a tremendous amount of crop loss.
That means starvation.
The first thing that will starve will be cattle.
Cattle will starve.
And I'm going to tell you what that will mean.
It will mean that there'll be a lot less milk.
And mothers will really have to start thinking ahead about alternatives to feed their babies, human babies.
That's going to be very important very soon.
Because as crops fail, there won't, you know, cattle eat green things.
And there's going to be super droughts now very, very quickly.
And crops will fail very quickly.
And as they do, the stresses on crops in terms of phytopathology and plant pathology, a lot of opportunistic microbial plant diseases will pop up and decimate crops.
The things that are not, crops that are not killed by drought will be decimated by microbial diseases, crop diseases.
Well, everybody knows about the experiment where they put a bunch of rats together and they end up cannibalizing each other and fighting and being very destructive.
And we're not all that different.
They pack us into cities.
The world has a lot of space, but we're not utilizing it.
We're generally packing people into very small spaces, very close together.
And it seems like we're getting close to the point that the earth will not support what we're doing.
And I've never thought of it as sort of a vengeful God raining some terror, retribution down upon us, but rather a simple balance that the earth will seek.
In other words, if something is out of balance, and we have assisted greatly in getting it out of balance, then it will strike back as a natural returning balance kind of thing.
So then, Ed, there could be a planetary system somewhere, planets revolving about a sun, without evolved life upon them, that would have a consciousness.
Those worlds themselves would have a huge consciousness.
As someone who managed scientists, some of the best scientists in the United States for many years on very big defense projects.
That's not something I would want to say that sounds very scientific.
But from my experience in consciousness, as the vanguard of remote viewing in this last decade, I have to say that based upon our research and discoveries and use of remote viewing, that is in fact the case.
Systems out there have consciousnesses all their own.
Well, the American native says and knows this, so I'm not surprised to hear you say it, Ed.
Hold on.
We'll be right back.
Those make a great holiday gift.
And yes, we have Ed Dames in the newsletter as well.
And the Somewhere in Time photographs, the brand new newsletter just got to me.
Really cool.
Ed, welcome back.
And I've got several questions that I know you're not going to be able to answer, but I want to finish up on the geophysical changes that we face in the very, very near term.
A lot of people, Ed, are going to freak out about this kind of thing.
This is one of the few times in the more than three years that I have done your show where, again, I cannot comment on what some of those contrails are.
And I'll reiterate what I've said in two of your past programs when on the air.
That is because some of the contrails are part of a defense program to protect this country.
If I were to tell your listeners and yourself what this program was, it would breach that.
Number one, I would go to jail very quickly, without pass go, would not collect 200.
And number Two, your listeners would be very angry at me because I would have given away.
No, it is not a reassuring matter because if I told you why our government was doing this, you would be even more, you would be very unreassured because the reason they're doing it is a tactic of desperation.
It's the first time on your show, I think, because I have said I cannot talk about this.
In every other instance, on Aurora, advanced deep space propulsion projects, electro gravitational vehicles, those kinds of things, I was able to say I got this through remote viewing.
But in this case, it is something that I was part and parcel of in terms of intelligence collection while I worked at the levels of Office of Secretary of Defense as a scientific and technical intelligence collection officer.
It's a tough call because I am not sure if I would be able to prevent any death, even one, for instance, by giving away the attack site, Center Mass, the attack site.
So the best thing I can do is provide the authorities the information.
Because if a terrorist wants to attack, they're going to do it.
I mean, there's only so much that one can do to try to surveil an area.
And number two is that technical remote viewing is still ahead of its time.
It's catching up.
It has a large following in science and technology, in the medical arena where we've done some very impressive work, but it's still catching up.
Law enforcement has not come around yet to using TRV, although we've trained many police officers as individuals.
It is not accepted except by small circles within, let's say, the FBI and certain drug enforcement agencies where they've really seen how valuable it is.
It isn't of widespread acceptance yet.
It will be maybe five years from now.
So we're just not going to make a big impact by telling law enforcement that, hey, you expect an attack right here.
The most that we can gain is the most that I hope to gain, and that's some increased surveillance because of our track record.
I remember when I ran the Sci-Spy team, I thought, why mess around with all these closed secret institutes in China and the Soviet Union and potential threat countries?
Let's go for the juggler.
Let's go after the sanctum sanctorum of Soviet decision makers, the Soviet Defense Council.
Let's remote view their meetings and see what not only the intent of the Russians were in terms of military operations, but what their secrets were.
So I did that to great stead.
And now I think in terms of a symbol of a renewed connection between man and God, that pinpointing the Ark of the Covenant would be a good project.
The wonderful thing about technical remote viewing is that you have to leave your ego and your intellectualization and your raciosination outside of a remote viewing session.
You have to drop all that behind.
It's direct knowledge.
So in a case like this to make that kind of decision, you have to kind of go by your feelings, by your heart, so to speak.
And it feels right to me.
It feels like it's right for this thing to see the light of day.
And I have really three quick questions, and then I'll hang up so you guys can hear the talking, which is what I would most like to hear.
But first of all, Major James, is there a personality trait in all of your training different people or a set of characteristics that make a better viewer, make a better trainee, that perhaps can intensify their adventures?
And three, on a more frivolous note, supposing you had a three-year-long yearning or knowing that you were going to meet this certain person, he doesn't know you exist.
Is there any way to see what kind of odds there are in these two people?
The general answer is no, except the people that do the best in training are the ones that work the hardest and have a lot of patience with themselves.
So we found people like high school and college professors, people like that who, for instance, who grade tapers, stay up all night, then plug away at the same thing, they seem to do quite well in remote viewing because you have to hang in there for 45 minutes in a remote viewing session.
They do well.
People that work with a lot of details, like auto mechanics or contractors who have to read blueprints and work on this detail work all day long, they do exceedingly well because they have a lot of patience.
They know that they can't take any shortcuts.
They've got to do the detail work bit by bit by bit.
They do exceedingly well.
There are no shortcuts in this work.
So those personalities work well.
As far as question two, no, I have never looked for, nor do I intend upon looking for the golden plate, I think she mentioned.
Is there some way she can what we do in my business is we can look at a person's, what we call a personal trajectory.
I've mentioned this before.
You can remote view those key events that are to the right on the timeline by convention.
The right is the future, left is the past, from a point that we call now.
And so if I were to look at your personal trajectory, Art, I would pop up with things like, let's say, if you move, if you take a new job, anything that's emotionally powerful in your life, I can describe.
However, it appears to be another type of trajectory, and that's one that is one's personal destiny or an optimum trajectory is what we call it.
What a person could be doing to maximize their potential in terms of fulfillment and happiness.
So if we were to look at this caller from Grouse Creek, Utah's personal trajectory, there may be a man in her future who she's going to meet and let's say marry.
But you have to be, and when you do this, you have to spend a lot of time on that person and sketch them, sketch the workplace, the environment, the personality of the person, so that you don't walk right by them.
Because remember, on a personal trajectory, the path that you're going down, it's a given.
You are going to meet up with these people on your personal trajectory because it's a done deal.
On an optimum trajectory, that's a path that you are not on in most cases.
There, you have to really be watchful because if you're describing this person that is your optimal soulmate or the person that is optimally you should be with next in terms of fulfillment, you may walk right by that person and never know.
Earlier in the program, you mentioned about you remote viewed your death and you looked back and you saw what could have been.
Now, that hit me like a swift kick in the gut.
I want to know if I'm tracking you correctly because what came to mind immediately to me was something out of scripture, and I'll paraphrase, that said, when Christ said, the kingdom of heaven is spread upon the earth, but you can't see it.
And is that, I have another question also, but is that sort of the thing we just, for some reason, can't see it?
And another thing, too, about the Russian-Chinese, I know that you touched upon it, but I was wondering that, to me, since December 98, China and Russia have formed the first time in history, at least as I know, a strategic alliance, and they're fully mobilized now under the pretext of Chechnya and Taiwan.
Anyway, these machines are, let's say, assigned to protect this area.
Not necessarily protect, but they're escort vehicles.
When a certain type of machine comes in the Martian atmosphere, these vehicles rise up and escort it down.
So let me get technical just for a moment.
There's a certain type of vehicle that occasionally enters the Martian atmosphere.
It projects a neutrino beam down into the surface, down into the planet.
If you think of a radar corner reflector, there's sort of a reflector that reflects back in response to this neutrino beam a glide path, like a LORAN for a commercial airliner that we have these days and times.
It reflects back a glide path.
This machine rides this glide path down to the interior of the planet, but there's at least one type of vehicle, this sand dollar-shaped, very large thing that rises up, and it's actually an emergency type of a vehicle.
If anything goes wrong with this inbound vehicle, this emergency vehicle is there to assist.
Now, what happened to the Russian Phoebus II probe was this sand dollar type of vehicle that is sitting in the sand in Mars in that zone, when Phoebus II passed overhead in its orbit, this sand dollar sentient machine rose up to greet it and physically came in contact with it and mangled it like an untrained bird dog would to a duck or something like that.
Very much like that.
So very Ray Bradbury-ish, but unfortunately that's what the entire military team came up with when we targeted that area.
In my peregrinations in and out of Washington, D.C. with various agencies, FAA, FBI, and other agencies in terms of mostly security, I have never come across an agency as arrogant as NASA.
As unbelievable arrogance at the top levels of NASA.
Now, I don't know if that's still the case, but when I went in and out of those hallowed halls, it was unbelievable arrogance.
It's like we're going to take the taxpayers' money and do whatever we want, however we want to do it.
And I had a lot of grievance with the SETI program at the time and said they were doing it the wrong way.
As you know, I'm a big proponent of OSETI, optical SETI, where lasers should be used rather than radio waves.
Yes, and by the way, I, of course, have interviewed SETI people, in fact the head of SETI, and they don't necessarily disagree with you, but what they suggest is SETI, of course, is no longer privy to government money.
It's all private, and they only have so much money, and they could only concentrate in so many areas, and they don't disagree that laser would be a pretty good approach, Ed.
This will go with one of your earlier statements regarding contact.
Remember that?
Oh, well, I told you at the beginning of the program that something has crashed into an Australian reservoir and that in the town of Gaira, G-Y-R-A, they now have police posted.
They're not allowing people to drink the water.
They're going to be sending divers down in the morning to try and locate whatever it is that crashed into the reservoir.
And Ed said he might take a look at it sometime during the show.
Yeah, I'd like to say thank you very much for your talk program.
It's fascinating.
It opens areas of thought and introspection I don't often think about.
And my question to Major Ed Dames is this, is that whether or not his remote viewing could see if there are possibilities of change in what seems to be some of the givens.
I'm wondering if part of our problem as a race globally is that we've taken almost everything and made it into a business, whether or not it's the health care system, our own sense of survival, our lives, even what we've done with the health of the earth.
It's like business, the profits of it.
It supersedes our sense of humanity, our common sense.
And I'm wondering whether or not if we, as a species, can change where we're coming from.
Please ask Ed, when the ice at the Arctic and or Antarctic melts, will we find evidence, do you suppose, of a lost civilization there, Atlantis, whatever else might have been before?
Yeah, there are many that say what will happen is the magnetic field will collapse, and for a period of time, short or long, nobody really knows, there will be essentially no magnetic field.
It'll be neutral, and then it will switch.
Do you have any sense of whether there'll be a period of time in between or whether it'll be a very quick process?
Well, the only thing you can go by is you notice when I push the button you're here at that noise, a little noise, that means it's you.
unidentified
Okay, I'll keep that in mind.
I had two questions.
One, I hate to dig up what we've already covered, but the question, I don't know, I forget his name, but the question earlier was asked about the disc, the chauffeur disc on Mars.
Would you go to the American people and say, well, the Russians said this, or they had this photography, and, you know, there's nothing that you would do.
That's not politically correct to suggest that, again, we hark back to the same old bugbear about the, and that's the UFO enigma.
No government in the world is going to say that they don't know because governments are supposed to have all the answers.
People, when they run to the government, they run with the expectation that the government will know and be able to help them.
The last answer in the world that a citizen of a country like the United States wants to hear from their leaders, scientific or political, is, we don't know.
Y2K may be the closest they've come to it, but even at that, there have been all sorts of assurances.
Caller, does that answer your question?
unidentified
Yeah, that does.
I had another quick one, if I could.
Just pertaining the idea, I hate to sound conspiratorial, but to me, Or paranoid, but to me, paranoia is just nothing but including all possibilities in your thought processes.
And my mind immediately goes to, well, because Ed was talking earlier about there's a certain threshold at which a certain the collective comes to a consensus, so to speak.
And there's a certain threshold at which it's not known or you can't view that.
So couldn't it be that Ed could come on, or anybody could come on your show or whose ever show and say and suggest something and then that might kind of subliminally suggestion injected into the subconscious.
Yeah, and then everybody starts thinking along those lines, oh yeah, that's going to happen, whether they know it or not.
If somebody wanted to inject into the collection of unconscious a concept that, oh hell, I don't know, the sun is going to explode and wipe out Earth or whatever, some major, something like that, would that...
And that happens to be the subject, the search subject of a professional remote viewer.
They come up with an explosion at a nuclear plant.
The professional remote viewer is going to know that the difference between the movie and the real event.
So if there really is no explosion in a nuclear plant in the near future, and then it's the subject of search, and the viewer comes up with the idea of this movie, they're going to know that, Hey, this is not real.
The reason why was because it was an enigmatic seismic event there once, and seismologists from around the world could not figure out what kind of thing this was.
That's what it was.
It was the impact of one of these devices that was being tested.
Sorry for the interruption, but I'd like to have a response to this.
A couple of years ago, after several days of brainstorming over some of the alleged Martian artifacts, I finally threw in the towel and went to bed still obsessing.
When that twilight state finally started to steal over me, I seemed to see a large dark space, comparatively speaking.
It was to the space shuttle hangar, as that edifice is to an outhouse, hanging suspended under a truncated funnel-shaped roof is a huge black, a blue-black ball shape, not connected to anything that I can see.
In the entrance to the chamber is a pedestal, triangular in shape, made of glass or some clear crystal, with a beveled face tilted at 30 odd degrees.
This turned toward the entrance.
There's much more, but due to time constraints, I decline to go any further.
Could you ask Ed if he has seen anything like this?
Well, you'd say there's no way to tell how old they are.
It could be a million years, it could be a half a million years or more, but they are structures that were built by an advanced technology, and they're there.
And some of it's so over my head, and some of it's, but I feel connected.
I wanted to ask Major Dames if he is giving any lectures anytime soon in the Los Angeles area.
And I also wanted to ask, I called before Art.
I got you on the slide.
I'm sorry I'm calling on the first time caller line, but I'd asked, I was trying to ask a question about visions and psychic stuff.
And I wondered, I tried a long time ago to get through to Major James, but I wondered if natural, you know, like visions and psychic ability or whatever, you know, predisposed someone to be able to do technical remote viewing.
And in other words, is this something I'd want to pursue, not on a financial basis, just for my own curiosity, because I've had eerie predictive type visions.
If they follow the protocols that I have established for these tapes, the same ones that I use to teach the military team, if the natural does that, they can become, instead of just a professional, an all-star.
But I have found, my experience as a teacher, I've been teaching this since 1983, is that naturals, they have to unlearn what they think they know to be good.
And that's difficult for many of them to do.
They've had these experiences, they've grown to trust them, but many times they've been wrong, as often as not.
So naturals can have a hard time with the very rigorous structure that remote freeders use.
I was as psychic as a rock.
I had no psychic ability whatsoever.
Now I'm damn good because I've been doing this a long time.
But naturals who maintain the same type of rigor can far exceed what I could do.
He is essentially the Wright brothers of remote viewing.
He is the father of remote viewing.
And we owe, I owe my career to Ingo Swan.
Of course, we took his discovery, I took it personally into the deep confines of the military and turned it into a militarily useful tool and then evolved it.
But without Ingo, there would be no technical remote dealing.
See, our unconscious, it's like an iceberg where our conscious awareness, the one that you're using right now, that part of your brain to listen to me and focus on what I'm saying, is only the tip of the iceberg.
Our unconscious mind is all that surface area, both the surface and the bulk below the liminal gate.
And that is extremely knowledgeable about many, many things.
Very, very powerful.
So we think we know a lot, but the unconscious portion of our mind is really the powerful one.
And to be able to utilize that is what we teach people how to do.
There could have been a dialogue at the unconscious level between a number of people, myself included, that we are not consciously aware of.
All that exists right there.
It's that, you know, you have to reach down into that murky area, but it's all there.
There's parts of us that we never know, usually as individuals.
I like my work so much.
unidentified
Just kind of leave that alone because I've got a question, but maybe perhaps if we mention the Mars polar lander, because remember it would go into six-day mode, safety mode, which would be today, Thursday, Thursday again.
But it goes into safety mode, at the hard landing or something, today would actually be the last day when the safety mode would come off, the six-day mode.
So perhaps if we ask again, maybe it'll come on if it didn't burn up, but who knows?
East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Major Ed Dames.
Where are you, please?
unidentified
I'm in Charleston, South Carolina.
All right.
Hey, yeah, I always like to like when you come on.
I have one question.
I hate to keep making you go back there, but I feel like maybe you're coming across wrong, and I wish you'd put me straight on this.
And that concerns, you know, this experience where you're looking back on your life.
I know in previous shows you, you know, said that you were a Christian and all.
And what it sounds like is you found the secret to life.
And I can imagine Jesus telling his followers and disciples the same thing and say, well, but I'm not going to tell you because you've got to buy my tapes and do your own work.
Essentially, it's something that I think that individuals sporadically have known throughout history.
And if one were to think about what it would be like to dump their ego completely, all the conceptions of what you think you are.
And if you could look and perceive your own soul, just focus on that, your own soul.
Get rid of all of your ego and all your preconceived notions about who you think you are.
The soul is an embryo, like a baby.
We think that we're this flesh and blood thing, this thinking mind.
But the only thing that's lasting is that soul.
And If you expose that soul to its creator, if you can actively do this using your heart and your mind, so to speak, expose it to the creator's love, we are pure light.
We're like a star.
We're almost as bright as a star.
And I'll leave it at that for right now.
But the potential is amazing.
It has nothing to do with remote viewing.
It has to do with an indomitable will to dump your ego and expose your soul to the Creator, God, if you will.
There was a device in the dashboard of the car that fired on remote control, in addition to the high-velocity heavy caliber round that hit JFK from outside of the car.
There was a flushette that penetrated his Adam's apple and went through the back of his neck.
And that was fired from inside the car by something that appears to have been in the dashboard.
So it was a conspiracy.
I did not like that answer at all when I remote viewed it.
And when Nel Riley remote viewed it, Nel Riley was this country's first size spy.
We did that together.
I was not happy with the answer.
And then I became very angry at the arrogance of somebody in the government who set up the President of the United States for assassination.
Ed, every time you come on the show, it seems like a blind person calls or some blind person calls, and you have said, like on your last show, that a blind person could learn to remote view.
And what I'm curious to know is if I were to buy the tapes, would I be able to do learn, I'm also totally blind, would I be able to learn how to remote view or do I need somebody that already knows the rope, so to speak?