Dr. Larry Dossey, a former Dallas physician and Vietnam surgeon, presents evidence from 19 experiments—including Duke’s prayer studies and Palo Alto’s retro-temporal findings—that consciousness may transcend the brain and time, defying mainstream science’s "blind spot." Callers share anecdotes like Arnold’s LSD-aligned dream, Tanya’s pre-birth death, and Terry’s 1981 spinal recovery post-prayer, while Dossey cautions against dismissing such phenomena as coincidence. With 60% of U.S. medical schools now teaching alternative approaches, the episode suggests science must reckon with consciousness’s unexplained but potentially life-altering dimensions—or risk ethical and medical oversights. [Automatically generated summary]
Dr. Dorsey is a physician of internal medicine, very standard, right?
Formally with the Dallas Diagnostic Association and former chief of staff of Medical City Dallas Hospital.
So very mainstream.
After graduating with high honors from the University of Texas at Austin, he received his MD degree from Southwestern Medical School in Dallas in 1967.
Following internship, he served as a battalion surgeon in Vietnam, later completing his residency in internal medicine at the Veterans Administration Hospital and Parkland Hospital in Dallas.
Remember Parkland?
Adosi is a past president of the Isthmus Institute of Dallas, an organization dedicated to exploring the possible convergences of science and religious thought.
He lectures widely in the U.S. and abroad.
In 1988, he delivered the annual Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Lecture in New Delhi, India.
The only physician ever invited to do that.
He's published again and again, as you must do in that position, I guess, author of seven books, actually, very prolific, including Time, Space-Time and Medicine, Beyond Illness, Recovering the Soul,
Scientific and Spiritual Search, Meaning and Medicine, Healing Words, Prayer is Good Medicine, Be Careful What You Pray For, You Just Might Get It, and his most recent Reinventing Medicine.
Now Reinventing Medicine is an interesting book.
In this book, he offers scientific evidence for the infinite non-local nature of the mind.
What does that mean?
In other words, our mind, it is conventionally thought, is totally local.
In other words, everything that is around us, what we see, what we hear, I suppose our genetic makeup and our environment, all of that, but only that.
In this book, he outlines the non-local nature of the mind, suggesting the mind can reach out in space and time beyond the brain and body.
Pretty unusual view.
In this view, the mind can insert information into the world, such as in distant healing and prayer.
And the mind can acquire information from the world, as in remote viewing, premonitions, and dreams.
That's a lot of conventional background for such a rebel-like view.
Well, I think I had a confrontation with something that heard me coming and hunkered down.
You know, they can do that.
I mean, coyotes, when you see them a lot of times, they're kind of sneaking around.
And he was just waiting for me to go away.
And when it didn't go away, well, all I can say is I would have had my heart attack then, so I must have a strong heart.
Anyway, good to have you on the show.
Now, you've got an awfully conventional background in medicine to be coming on the air and talking about the things you're going to talk about tonight.
Well, I must say that I didn't develop these ideas overnight.
And as a matter of fact, I sort of came into these considerations kicking and screaming.
I didn't really want to have anything to do with these things.
But sometimes your experiences can be so dramatic that you just can't back down from them.
And if you also keep your mind open and you begin to look around at some of the interesting data in medicine on the nature of consciousness these days, you know, what choice do you have?
You can try to weenie out of these sorts of things and backpedal, or you can confront these issues.
And so I must say it took me a long time to gather the courage to confront them, but eventually I began to take a hard look at these things.
Matthew Alper wrote a book called The God Part of the Brain.
In it, he suggests, and he makes a very powerful argument, that the greatest fear that man has is what?
Fear of death.
Greatest fear we have, collectively, I guess, is of death.
And that the brain, our brains, cannot cope with that fear.
And as a result, through the process of evolution, our brain has developed a portion of it which demands virtually, wires us to believe in something.
And it's a very interesting argument, and that that is the only way that we overcome the fear of death, by inventing a creator, inventing an afterlife, inventing life beyond the mere physical that we now experience.
And as a matter of fact, there are a few people out there now who are beginning to explore areas of the brain that may mediate what we call spiritual or transcendental experiences.
But I must say, I take a much more outrageous and robust view.
I do not believe that we can explain away all of our transcendental urges and metaphysical type experiences and spiritual inclinations by simply pointing to what some researchers have called the God spot in the brain.
yes i think that it may well mediate those kinds of experiences but there's much more to this than uh...
just simply what those receptor sites and chemicals in the brain happen to be doing are you familiar you say you say you are with the research they're doing now on that part of the brain which would seem i've heard rumors that with the proper stimulation of that part of the brain, people have what they describe as an out-of-body experience, epiphany, a near-death experience, whatever.
One of the key players of art in this field is Dr. Michael Persinger, who is at Laurentian University in Canada.
And he has developed gadgets that you can put on the head, and they deliver a little microburst of electromagnetic stimulation to an area in the temporal lobe of the brain.
Looking at your brain from the outside, that would be just sort of above one of your ears.
So they can stimulate this area of the brain, and people can have wonderful experiences.
They can feel as if they're out of the body, that they sometimes have ecstatic experiences of union with the Almighty, and so on.
And so these researchers take this information and they say, aha, that proves, therefore, that all of this is just inside your head.
They make a huge leap, and it goes something like this.
Their idea is that it's so implausible that there might be something out there that they simply rule out that possibility.
I think that's highly irrational.
It would be like saying, well, you know, David Letterman is inside the television set.
This is silly.
You know, this would, but this is the same strength of the logic that they employ by saying, well, since we can tweak the brain and reproduce these things, that's all there is.
Well, you know, David Letterman isn't inside the television set.
That completely overlooks the external source.
And so these folks, with their experiments along these lines, overlook the external source in my judgment.
And I think that there's a lot of evidence out there that you can't explain the operations of consciousness just by saying it's confined locally to the brain.
This could be an artifact of a living human brain.
It does not necessarily prove there's any life after this one, but it proved to me that that can happen.
Now, maybe they can make this happen in the lab, but I don't see how they can possibly escape the conclusion that they simply might be producing a real phenomenon, a scientifically repeatable, real phenomena that is non-local.
It's an assumption, Art, and it's one of those gratuitous assumptions that simply never gets examined.
Let me tell you how this operates in the mindset of 99% of researchers in neurophysiology and medicine today.
The dogma that's received from your professors in medical schools makes it unthinkable that there could be any activity of consciousness outside the cranium.
I mean, this is just heresy and blasphemy to propose otherwise.
And so the assumption is that since there cannot be, because you've learned it this way, that we just simply don't look at the evidence suggesting otherwise.
I know it may sound disrespectful to people who think scientists are really smart to talk this way, but there are blind spots that are colossal in science.
And I can't think of a better example than our attempts to understand the origins and destiny of consciousness.
There's simply too much data that doesn't fit.
And what we're in the process of is trying to piece together these days a picture or a model of consciousness that accounts not for just a piece of the data, which these gentlemen have when they stimulate the brain and it does all of those sorts of things we've been talking about, but things where the consciousness can come back with information and can insert information into the world as you were talking about just a moment ago.
And so what we need is a comprehensive model that doesn't force us to deny our own experience, such as your experience you just described, and also the data from actual experiments, which I hope we can talk about.
I suppose the commonest experience that people have of this non-linear, non-local aspect Of space and time is during dreams.
For example, during dreams, there's the sense that things take place.
I mean, we have dream events, but there's no sense that time is going anywhere.
This is completely unlike the sense of flowing time that dominates waking experience.
And this is viewed, of course, as a kind of a bogus experience of time as not real and so on.
But there are other areas of the world where people dwell very comfortably with this non-local, non-linear, non-flowing sense of time.
If you get past the Suez Canal, it's not difficult to, you know, traveling eastward to find culture after culture where they believe that that view of time is the real one and that the one we experience in our waking life is the illusion.
And I know that this has been belittled by skeptics and cynics in the rational Western world as being just new age and flaky and all of that.
But I must say that you could make a very long list of venerable scientists and philosophers in the West who have believed that we have not yet finished with our understanding of time.
I think this is vastly misunderstood.
Most people think that science has figured out time and that we know without any doubt that it's linear, that it flows, and that it goes in one direction.
That's a fallacy.
One of my favorite quotations about this came from the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman, who once, when he was asked, what is time, he says, don't ask me.
You know, there are these titanic arguments and struggles about what time is.
And one of my favorite commentaries on this subject is the physicist Paul Davies, who writes books for laypeople about the new physics.
And Davies is quick to say in one of his books called Space and Time in the Modern Universe that there has never been an experiment in the entire history of modern science that shows that time flows.
That's the fact of the matter.
But yet we bring into these discussions of time all of these assumptions about time being linear and that just being the way it is.
Yet in Fort Collins, Colorado, we have an atomic clock that keeps a very, very accurate, I don't know, record, I guess, of how time, in fact, is passing in a very linear fashion, right down to the billionths of a second.
They've got that.
So, I mean, there really is a linear time, and it's hard to imagine.
Hold on, Doctor.
We're at the bottom of the air.
Welcome right back to this.
some are felon this is close to close a_m_ doctor larry dawson the the the
unidentified
Don't you give up, don't you cry, don't you give up.
Please be up in the sky.
I was lonely, baby.
Where are those healthy days?
They seem to have I tried to reach for you, but you have lost your mind.
Whatever happened through our love.
I wish I understood.
It's just a face of nice, it's just a face of good So when you hear me darling, can't you hear me?
It's so weird Call Art Bell in the Kingdom of Nye From West to the Rockies at 1-800-618-8255 East of the Rockies, 1-800-8255-033.
First time callers may return at 1775-727-1222.
And the wildcard line is open at 1775-727-1295.
To return on the full-free international line, call your AT ⁇ T operator and have them dial 800-893-0903.
This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell from the Kingdom of Not.
But, you know, we don't have a good vocabulary for what it is we're talking about because all of the terms have been so loaded down with erroneous baggage through the decades that they really are misleading when they pop out of our mouth.
But I still prefer consciousness to just about any other term.
That would fit the requirement for some people in that area.
There are others, however, who would simply say that consciousness is the equivalent to just simple computation.
When something gets good enough at calculating, then it looks like it's consciousness.
It's conscious, so you might as well declare it so.
So self-awareness doesn't come into that sort of perspective.
I think the point is that, like with time, there's no agreement about what consciousness is and what requirements there are that would justify you to declare something conscious.
The evidence which I really like are, you know, those wonderful double-blind, randomized, prospective-controlled experiments that medical scientists do to, for example, test the effect of a new medication.
As it's turned out, you can use that same study design art to test the effects of your intentions at a distance, your wishes, your thoughts, and what is commonly called prayer.
And this has actually been done in study after study in the past few years with positive results.
I think there's no way that one can look at this evidence in an even-handed way and easily dismiss it.
Let me give you an example of what this looks like, if I may.
There's one of the most high-profile studies going on in the country now looking at these non-local activities of consciousness to make a difference in terms of health outcomes for sick folks is taking place at Duke Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina.
Duke is one of the great medical centers, not just in our country, but the world.
So if you went through Duke for a heart catheterization or an angioplasty procedure, some invasive heart procedure or operation, let's say, and you went to their VA hospital, which is one of their major teaching hospitals, you might bump into Dr. Mitchell Krutoff, who's the head of cardiovascular medicine there, who's running the study.
And so if you volunteered for this prayer study, here's what would happen.
If you were randomized, in other words, assigned unknown to you by chance to this so-called intervention group which would receive these prayers, overnight you would be on the receiving end of more prayer than you probably ever received in your life.
Dr. Khrukhoff and his team would solicit prayer for you from prayer groups from around the world, as far away as Nepal.
There are many different religions that are represented as far as the prayer.
The bottom line of this randomized double-blind study, in which no one knows who's receiving the prayer and who isn't, the bottom line is that the people receiving these healing intentions or prayer have a 50 to 100% fewer side effects than people who are just treated ordinarily, conventionally.
There are about 50 to 60 patients who have gone through the program yet, enough to show that what they call a p-value is statistically highly significant.
In other words, you can't explain this away by saying this just happened according to chance.
All right, at the expense of boring my audience, I've got to relate something to you.
If you're a casual listener to the program, you may know.
If not, well, that's fine.
I conducted with my audience in the millions, millions of people out there, about eight experiments, Doctor.
We began because I had a guest who said, you know, it's possible to concentrate and actually affect a cloud.
It's called cloud busting.
You know, you go out and see a wispy little cloud and you begin concentrating on it, and you can punch a hole in it or dissipate it or make it bigger or do whatever you want.
I thought silly.
But that brought on the concept of, well, then why not involve millions of people and just give something a try?
And so they were having fires and it was terrible down in Florida, northern Florida, and they were having a drought.
There was no rain in the forecast.
I had millions of people concentrate on rain for Florida.
No forecast of rain.
Within 24 hours, even sooner, it rained.
We did the same in Texas.
We did the same thing up in British Columbia, where they were having fires.
We then began to concentrate on some people who were ill, the people involved, so that they could feel waves of energy coming at them.
And one person who should have died didn't die.
And the other is still, you know, the question mark is still out on him, but we definitely helped him.
I've seen it happen, Doctor.
I got scared of it.
I thought, you know, who the hell am I to be directing this kind of power?
But I've seen it work.
It's worked, Doctor.
And so I guess the answer must be millions of minds, or many minds, concentrating on an outcome can have an effect.
I think what you were doing, Art, is an uncontrolled experiment which has been taken into these clinical situations and managed with excellent methodology.
Here, here.
And so I think we're just going to have to take a deep breath in my profession in particular and sort of liven up and just say, look, we've misunderstood what consciousness is capable of doing.
Here's the evidence.
We're not justified any longer in ignoring this, particularly since this can make the difference in life and death in sick people.
I mean, if this were just a trivial outcome, I suppose that you could make a case that, well, this is just too difficult.
I don't want to go there.
It's too challenging.
But where people's lives and health are concerned, I think we are obligated ethically and morally to take this on.
You know, I was getting email and faxes from people who would say things like, oh, there's a horrid hurricane headed for Florida or North Carolina.
Concentrate on having people change the course of this thing.
And that's when I stopped because I thought, I don't know what the hell I'm doing.
And if I have people concentrate on stopping this hurricane or altering its course, what if I should stop it and the damn thing builds up to be a category five and then comes onshore?
In other words, I don't know what I'm doing.
So I was impressed with the experiments, more than you'll ever know, but scared away from continuing them.
As a matter of fact, I share it so much, I wrote a book about this called Be Careful What You Pray For.
And the thrust of that book was to say, listen, there are some great unknowns here.
We are not smart enough to try to micromanage the universe by our own agendas.
And my contention in that book was that even though we're ignorant and we should really be careful, that doesn't mean we have to give up our power.
And I rationalize this in this way.
I think that there's a way to use our intentions and our wishes and our thoughts and our prayers by putting our wishes and thoughts and so on in the hands of a superior wisdom.
In other words, I think it's probably better to say, well, when it comes to the weather, I have the power to influence it, but I'm not going to try to dictate how the universe ought to behave.
I'm just going to say, may the best thing happen in this situation.
May the best outcome prevail.
Or when it comes to prayer, I might pray, may thy will be done.
So I instigate an outcome, but I don't tell the world what to do.
In other words, is this message or prayer, if you want to call it that, being received by a Creator who is answering in some affirmative manner?
Or is it simply millions of minds and, as you have put it out, a power of consciousness that we have that doesn't have anything to do with God other than the fact that it might be God-given, that we can utilize?
Or is it intervention, divine intervention, the answering of prayers?
Well, if you had a large body of Christian people praying for an outcome and you had a positive outcome, and then you had a large body of Buddhist people praying for a certain outcome, and you got that outcome, what would that say?
In other words, the same double-blind testing that's being used now to achieve the results you just talked about could, in fact, be confined to one specific religion and then another and then another and then another.
And my bet would be that you would get results in every case.
And I don't know what that would say to the groups, do you?
Well, let me just sort of suggest how complicated this really is.
Back in 1988, the first published prayer study, which utilized the double-blind controlled methodology, was published out of San Francisco General Hospital and the University of California San Francisco School of Medicine by a researcher named Dr. Randolph Berg.
Dr. Berg was a born-again Christian, and he selected and solicited prayer only from born-again Christians in this famous study.
Well, the thing worked.
And so this suggested to people that, boy, you know, born-again Christians, they really packed the gear.
You know, if I'm sick, I want them to pray for me, that sort of thing.
Well, the field developed so that now, Buddhists have been recruited.
Buddhism is not even a theistic religion.
Buddhists don't pray to a personal God.
They don't have that concept.
But Buddhist prayer works just fine.
So what do you do with this event?
Here you have groups that are at the opposite end of the theological spectrum.
Both of their prayers work.
And so this has caused a lot of Christians a tremendous amount of worry.
Well, had you been sitting in Jodi Foster's seat and asked if you believe in the God of the Bible, if you could carry that word forth for humanity and put it in her position, how would you have answered in any different way than she did?
doctor larry dossier here special researcher into the unconventional An interesting and very, very difficult topic from a lot of points of view, and I suppose I'm not making it easy with the questions I'm asking.
All right, once again, Dr. Larry Dossi, M.D., and he has written so many books, the latest one, Reinventing medicine, but he's gone down a kind of a non-traditional path in looking at consciousness and really a whole lot more than just consciousness, but that's where we've been going so far.
I've got a facts I would like to read you.
Doctor, it says, I put an offer in for a vacant condo in San Diego tonight, and later the agent called and said that by California law, they had to divulge to me that within the past year, someone living there had died there.
That California law says that such information has to be given if a death occurred in a prospective condo or home within a three-year period.
Now, they say it was not a violent death.
Would you move into a condo that had a death in it within the past year?
Would your guest move into a condo where somebody had died in the past year?
Or would the consciousness of the late person remain there as some sort of entity?
And so that takes us into an interesting area.
And that is, of course, whether, I mean, on the one hand, we've been discussing things that seem to be products of living brains, you know, the effect on the weather or prayer for a person and the double-blind studies you've been talking about.
You know, I think that if we were to try to look at the implications of the study showing that the brain or the consciousness can't act beyond the brain, as in these healing studies, what we see here, I think, is clear evidence that there is some quality or factor of the mind that can extend beyond the brain, which is to say that it's more than the brain.
I think the logic is straight as an arrow here.
What we're talking about is a quality of the consciousness that cannot be restricted to the physical.
This has all sorts of what I think are fairly wonderful implications for survival of bodily death.
I must say that it doesn't really concern me personally or professionally what form that takes.
And in that sense, I don't line up with a lot of people who really want to know if their personality carries forward.
That doesn't interest me in the least.
What I want to know is, flatly, whether there's anything carried over, period.
Or is this the end?
And I happen to believe that the implications of these studies show that there is some sort of a non-local, immortal aspect of who we are that has no intentions of signing off with the death of the body.
But isn't there a distinction between non-local, in other words, an artifact of an active living brain, and then what we talk about broadly when we talk about the other side?
I mean, there may be kind of a leap there that you've got to make.
Well, for me, I don't struggle with what the other side looks like.
For example, I'm not concerned about whether the personality is carried over.
That for me is irrelevant.
I think that if there is a universal wisdom that can provide for continuation of consciousness in some form following death, I will leave it up to that wisdom to take care of the petty details.
And so that's basically where my deliberation comes to a screeching halt.
I want to know if there's a yes or no to the question, does anything persist?
Is anything carried over?
And again, just to say, that's where the logic points.
If there is some quality of our consciousness that can extend beyond the brain and the body, as we see in these double-blind studies, that has wonderful implications for immortality.
Well, there are all kinds of, as you pursue trying to answer that question about survival of some sort, there are all kinds of really interesting things you run into, like a million.
I do a show every now and then about ghosts.
And I must tell you, the stories are never-ending.
And they're serious, and they're real.
They're as real as anything you can imagine.
And that would seem to indicate that that's one area of investigation that you can make that would seem to indicate that there is some sort of survival after physical death.
And you know as well as I that the majority of spouses who are left have some sort of contact, a sense of contact with the deceased.
This may come in the form of simply a sense of presence.
It may be visual.
It may be audible.
It may have to do with a sense of smell.
But there is no evidence whatsoever that these people have any sort of mental imbalance whatsoever.
And as a matter of fact, a recent survey at the National Opinions Research Center at the University of Chicago found that the experience of having contact with someone who has passed was one of the best criteria for good mental health.
In other words, this is a predictor of mental soundness in people.
So a lot of the cynics and skeptics turn this around and say that people who have these experiences are just sort of mild schizophrenics who are hallucinating.
I wouldn't make it that harsh, but I might say, gee, isn't it possible that like our discussion about the God part of the brain earlier, a good, healthy prison in a situation of deep, severe mourning like the loss of their mate,
that their brain would, as a healthy thing, protect them by having this God part of the brain activate an experience suggesting that prison's essence and soul and consciousness is okay.
I believe that these intimations and premonitions that people can have, these so-called non-local mental experiences, I believe that they serve the function of protection.
May I give you an example of that in action?
There was a lovely survey that was published in a journal called Pediatric Pulmonology about three or four years ago by researchers in the disease called SIDS, S-I-D-S, sudden infant death syndrome, where the baby is just found dead in the crib the next morning for no apparent reason.
So these SIDS researchers asked parents of babies who died from SIDS, did you ever have a premonition or a dream or a dream or a very strong hunch that your baby was going to die?
And 21% of these parents said, yes, we knew it.
We saw it coming and this was so real to us that we made a big deal out of this with our pediatrician.
So then the researchers said, well, you know, do parents just get worried like this all the time?
And is this just normal for parents?
So they asked parents Of normal babies who had no problem whatsoever, did you ever have this sort of premonition?
And only 2% of them said yes.
So you have this huge disparity here.
And so what happened was when these 21% of parents expressed these fears, these premonitions of impending doom to their baby, to their doctor, in every case, and there was no exception to this, in every case the doctor responded to the premonition with outrage and ridicule.
And in no instance were they willing to take any special precautions to monitor these babies to save their life.
And if they had, if they had had some sort of worldview or an attitude toward consciousness which said, yeah, consciousness can manifest non-locally outside of the body, outside of the present, then some of those babies ought to be alive.
Well, I think that there's a real ethical dimension here that we haven't come to terms with.
What do you give up when you ignore this?
If you're a physician, how do you put your patients at risk and their children, as in this instance, by ignoring this sort of thing?
So we see here this ability of consciousness to reach out non-locally and bring back information that does have protective value for us and for those we love.
So I think you're right to use this term protection.
If there could be intervention, in other words, if somebody had a premonition and they, who knows, put some kind of medical guard, began to monitor the baby's vitals and had alarms set up and all the rest of it because of this premonition and you could save that baby's life, then what have you...
Does that mean that events in the time stream are malleable and we can change them?
What it means, in my judgment, is that time for this factor of the consciousness is not absolute.
It's entirely relative.
It is not linear and unidirectional.
Time may be absolute and linear for that atomic clock you were describing earlier in the program, but for this aspect of the mind, timelessness, not time, is the premier factor.
Let me give you an example of how this was made real to me in my practice, this way of knowing in which people can acquire information outside the senses and bring it back in ways that help them make smart decisions about their health.
I had a patient who came into my office one morning and she said, I need your help.
I'm scared to death.
She said, last night I had a dream in which I saw three little white spots on my left ovary.
And she said, I'm afraid that that means cancer.
This woman's examination was normal, so we decided to do a sonogram of her pelvis.
So I took her back and introduced her to the radiologist.
And she made the mistake of telling him her dream, and he wasn't exactly into dreams, and he ridiculed her.
But this woman had her revenge because the radiologist was back in my office about 15 minutes later, white as a ghost.
And I said, what's wrong with you?
What did you find?
He said, three little white spots on her left ovary exactly as she dreamt.
So here you have a woman who was able to acquire outside of the reach of the senses information that could have saved her life.
As it turned out, these were benign cysts, not cancerous cysts.
The story shows how this quality of the mind can serve us, Art.
And I think this makes really good sense from an evolutionary point of view because, you know, evolutionary biologists say that if we develop a quality that has survival value, it tends to be internalized genetically and perpetuated down through the species.
So it may be that this has become part of our genetic packet, this ability to acquire information like this that can serve us well in terms of survival.
Do you think that the ability that you just talked about, that that woman has, is evolutionary, that it's something from our deep past, that we've always had this ability and we rarely listen to it?
Or do you think that it is something now evolving and becoming stronger within Homo sapiens?
My speculation is that this is widespread by now in the human species.
I think that this exists practically in everyone.
I think that there are different degrees and sensitivities of this, just like there are prodigies in every field.
I think there are prodigies in non-local knowing.
But I think this is extremely widespread.
I believe that we have driven it off the stage of consciousness.
We have denied that we have this gift.
We're threatened by it.
And so threatened, for example, we've already mentioned that back centuries ago they would have done away with people for being witches and warlocks and so on who exercise these visions and these ways of knowing.
What percentage of people today do you think, of your patients, I would say, who had a dream like that lady's, would pursue it to the degree that you would come to an internist like yourself and then a radiologist and demand that that be done?
How many people would pursue it that far from a dream?
Because I think that we have stigmatized this art and we said that, you know, this is a silly, irrational way to run your life.
And look at the downsides of the patient.
In those fifth parents, in every case, they were ridiculed by their physician.
So, you know, the survey showed that 75% of patients who merely Use alternative therapies, refuse to tell their patients they're doing so because they don't want to be hassled.
So there are a lot of reasons why people don't own up to this, but my experience since writing this book has been an outpouring of letters, not just from patients about these sorts of experiences.
Doctors have even begun to open up to me and share experiences like this, which they've had.
I'm not surprised, because as I said, when I do a show about ghosts, I do very serious shows.
And I don't laugh nor do I berate people in any way.
I just let them tell their stories.
And they inevitably, once it gets going, it just gets better and better and better.
And people are all of a sudden freed to be able to tell their stories, and so they do.
But most people, otherwise, not in a million years would they talk to a friend or an acquaintance and relate something like that for fear of being assigned to a rubber room somewhere.
You know, because we've had it drilled into us that, you know, that's one of the criteria for schizophrenia.
You know, we put people on medicine for talking like that.
But I found that as this information about, particularly the intercessory prayer studies where this stuff happens at a distance and you've got to invoke some other model of consciousness to explain this, when doctors see that data, and I have the chance to present this at medical schools around the country, doctors come forward about this.
And what they need to see is that they can dabble in this and not lose their scientific standing.
That is so important to doctors.
And so when they see the data, they think, well, maybe I can venture forth in this and still feel good about being an empirical scientist.
And so what we have now are out of the 125 medical schools in the country, 60 of them have developed courses looking at the kind of data you and I are discussing.
A lot of other physicians, when they encounter, I know I've talked to physicians, for example, who have encountered people, a lot of near-death experiences.
And they either seem to embrace them and consider the concept or just on a regular basis simply reject them.
That's one reason why I think that we need more than anything in this field a good theoretical framework which says, look, this is how this could happen.
And, you know, a lot of the problems for doctors who deny these sorts of things is that they're just simply horribly informed.
Most of them don't know what the word non-local even means.
Most of them don't know that there's a major difference between classical Newtonian physics and quantum relativistic physics.
And so doctors, you know, really need to do some homework before making these confident declarations about what's possible and what isn't possible.
In America, we like to have czars, you know, drug czars and stuff.
So if you were the medical czar and you could dictate how much alternative medicine, traditional medicine, would have to begin to embrace to properly treat patients, how much would it be?
There are people, individuals, who claim to have greater power than others, I hesitate to use the word power, or ability to heal, that One person has the ability to heal another.
I think that there are real moral issues in withholding it.
As a matter of fact, this is the point I got to in my own professional and personal life, Art, when I stumbled into the double-blind studies on prayer back in the 80s, which I didn't know existed.
It became clear to me in a flash that if this was valid science and I wasn't using it, then I had a real problem because this would be like withholding, for example, an appendectomy from somebody who had appendicitis.
I mean, it might save their life.
So I went on a search, which I thought was going to be a quick one, but which lasted many years, trying to identify all of the studies in this area I could get my hands on.
And many years later, and 131 studies later, I came away thinking there really was something here that had to be applied in medicine.
So withholding it, I think, involves us in some real questionable ethics.
And I think the medical schools are beginning to agree.
Back when I first wrote a book about this in 93, a book called Healing Words, there were only three medical schools out of 125 in the country that would have anything to do with this.
But as we speak, there are 60 of the 125 schools that have developed formal coursework looking at the kind of data we've been talking about.
So we really are making tremendous progress, Art, and bringing this forward in academic medicine at the highest level.
And you and I mentioned a moment ago that one of these high-profile studies is going on at Duke Medical School.
And I can assure you that if this sort of stuff has been embraced by a modern medical center as outstanding as Duke, then this speaks volumes about how legitimate this research is.
Well, since I've been small, I've heard stories that a lot of times when somebody's partner dies, they die very shortly thereafter.
That would seem to imply, if you gathered enough statistical evidence to prove that, that people can kill themselves virtually, psychologically, or with their own consciousness.
They can will themselves to die, causing some failure of the body, or, conversely, heal themselves.
There is a huge body of data looking at the death rates in the first year after the passage of a spouse.
And in every study that's ever been done in the Western world, except one study I know of, these studies show that the death rate in the surviving spouse during the first year of bereavement goes up 2 to 12 times what it is for the married age-matched population.
He died on July 4th, which was the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which he drafted.
And Jefferson's final words, and we know this because his physician was sitting at the bedside taking all this down, his final words were, is it the fools yet?
And so this is another one of your examples of people keeping themselves alive until they get there and then they sign off.
You know, the skeptics look at that Jefferson event, and the typical skeptical response is, well, Jefferson had a 1 in 365 chances of dying on July 4th.
What's so special about that?
As it turns out, Art, he wasn't the only president who died on that particular day.
Up the road, John Adams, the second president of the United States, also died on July 4th, the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
But that does not impress the skeptics who just aren't prepared to go there.
Yeah, there really are some interesting studies going on right now, which I think will just put some more nails in the coffin of this idea that the mind just stays home in the brain.
We're adding more data points to this art, you know, gradually.
And what we're doing is, I think, getting close to the day where it becomes so obvious that we've just got to reconceptualize consciousness that the paradigm will just flip, and then we'll look back on it and say something like, you know, well, what was the problem?
That's where we are.
We're doing more and more good studies.
There's no turning back in this, I think.
There's already too much data.
It's not going to go away.
It's becoming more and more abundant.
And it's a terribly exciting time because I think for the very first time in human history, we do have empirical evidence that consciousness extends beyond the brain and the body, and the implication being that it outlives the death of the body.
How much evidence is there that it eclipses, and we were talking about time earlier, that it eclipses not just the physical manifestations we've talked about, but time itself?
Well, let me give you an example of a paper that was published just this January in a journal of which I serve as executive editor, a journal called Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine.
This was published by a professor and research director at the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology in Palo Alto, Dr. William Broad.
And he looked at all of the experiments that have been done on living things, from human beings to bacteria and test tubes, in which there was something that he calls a backward, time-displaced, retro-temporal influence.
Now, that's a bunch of verbiage, which means that consciousness can operate into the past and affect events which we presume have already happened.
This gets to be pretty heavy duty to try to lay this out very simply in a short period of time, but the gist of this is that these studies, of which there are 19, which he was able to identify, show that consciousness can reach back into the past, and if any event has happened and has been measured but is the key point has not yet been observed by human then consciousness in the present can reach back and affect
that event even though we presume that it has already taken place so this is hard evidence that Let me give you an example of how this works.
And then at a certain point, you measure with something called a photometer the amount of light that can shine through these test tubes, which is an index of how much they've multiplied.
Now, somebody in the present moment says, I'm going to go back and try to slow down the replication rate of half of those test tubes.
And so they exert their intentions, or they pray, or whatever they call it, to make a difference in slowing down the rate of growth of half of those bacteria.
And then, here's what happens.
Then the researchers go back and look at that magnetic tape, which recorded all of those growth rates and all of those test tubes, which should have been the same generally on average.
It should have been close to the same for all those test tubes.
And by golly, the half of those test tubes which that person in the present moment tried to effect were in fact slowed down.
But if there had been a human consciously monitoring the growth all along in all of these test tubes 24 hours a day, that effect could not have occurred.
Well, I think in the next few years, we're going to see the relevance of this phenomenon that I just mentioned here, tapering with the outcome of the experiment in this particular way.
And we're going to have to go back and assess many of those studies.
How were they done?
At what point did the individual observe the recording of the outcome of the study and that sort of thing?
So this is terribly exciting.
In all of those experiments that Dr. Broad reported, those 19, there were less than three chances in one billion that those outcomes could be explained by chance.
I just wonder, though, if some hard scientific processes, like the one you described, might be paralleled by the attitude of the researchers who were trying to duplicate the cold fusion process.
I mean, it's a big leap, I realize that, but it might be applicable here.
I think the leap is justified, and in certain studies in human beings, we have seen the outcome of the study correlate time after time with the pre-existing prediction of the primary researcher.
Once again, back to Dr. Larry Dorsey, and the phone's coming right up.
Doctor, this is kind of out on the edge, too, but I thought I would ask it.
Really interesting facts from Salt Lake City.
Dear Arnold, I had an experience that relates to your discussion of nonlinear time.
I've had many strange experiences in my life, but there is only one experience that I absolutely have no doubt occurred.
About ten years ago, I had an extremely vivid dream of where I was experiencing strange perceptions, situations, and interactions.
I woke up from the dream and literally said out loud, what the hell was that?
I remembered all of the events that occurred within the dream.
Three months after that dream experience, I took some LSD with a group of my friends.
During the peak of the LSD experience, which lasted maybe 30 minutes, really, that's short.
Every nuance of my perception went back in time and landed in the dream that I had three months earlier.
It was like traveling through a wormhole.
Every person, situation, perceptual distortion went back in time.
Since all of these experiences were already registered in my memory from the dream, when they arose in real life, I could do nothing but drop my jaw in astonishment.
I think that there's a huge spectrum of how nonlinear time manifests, Art, and I think this is a classic example of that.
What we have are overlapping events to the extent that past and present and future just really lose their meaning.
I think that the best proof or evidence that this sort of thing can't happen is to have exactly the sort of experience that this person described.
This is not rational, and I think that there's no way that you will ever be able to convince somebody who believes in linear time that there's anything to this sort of experience.
But for The individual who experiences it, that erases the indecision about it.
I would like to talk to the doctor and yourself about dynamic noetic transfer.
I'm a spectrum guy, and I think this deals with dimensional transfer.
How does one, let's say, DNA facility talk to another?
Is it by the spectrum that we know conventionally, or does it surpass that into dimensional transfer?
I'm not sure I understand all that, Dr. Yeah, I'd be really venturing on Then I to even venture a response.
I'm really I don't share the vocabulary, so I think it would be probably irresponsible for me, Jim, to even attempt to respond to your question.
Well, let me rather, let's try to rephrase that.
Let's talk about mental telepathy.
How is one mind talking to the other, like in radio waves, as one radio person talks to another person?
Well, I can give you my opinion about where I think this is headed.
I don't think that there's any signal that's going between distant individual minds.
I think that's an image that's drawn from classical physics.
We're habituated to think that if things make contact at a distance, they've got to have some sort of signal that bridges the gap.
Non-locality is not like that.
And non-local events in subatomic physics, for example, when two distant electrons change, they do so immediately.
There isn't even any time for any signal to bridge the gap.
Right?
So I think that where we're headed is setting aside a lot of these prejudices about how this can happen and how it must happen.
I think one of the things we're going to have to give up is this signal mentality where we think something's got to bridge the gap.
You know, currently one of the favorite Darling terms is what's called subtle energy.
There isn't any evidence, any empirical evidence that I know of, that any sort of energy, subtle or otherwise, bridges any sort of distance between people.
Plus, even if you said that there was some sort of subtle signal that was so subtle we just haven't been able to detect it yet, that still wouldn't help us understand how you're going to have time displacement.
So and plus there are other policies of signals also.
For example, there's no diminution in the strength of telepathy with distance.
It doesn't matter if you're at one inch or on the other side of the earth from somebody.
So all sorts of energetic signals fall off according to the inverse square law in physics.
They get weaker the farther you get from the source.
Telepathy doesn't behave like that.
There's no evidence that it does.
So we're beyond energy for another reason.
We're beyond energy and energetic signals for yet another reason.
You can't shield this stuff.
You can put the recipient or the sender in a Faraday cage, a lead-line box that blocks for all intents and purposes electromagnetic signals of all sorts.
But the signal or the telepathy gets through just as if the box wasn't there.
So for many lines of reasoning, I think that we're going to have to go beyond this idea that there's any specific sort of energetic signal connecting distant individuals when they have telepathic or clairvoyant communications.
Wildcard line, you're on the air with Dr. Larry Dosse.
unidentified
Hi.
Hi, yes.
Good evening to both of you and to the good Dr. Larry Dossey.
And by the way, artists, hormones, not hormones.
I keep hearing you advertise hormones, H-A-R.
Anyhow, I'm calling.
I'm going to make a quick comment about Matthew Alper, who you talk about a lot.
I don't give him two figs for what he says about having to protect ourselves and we have to invent a God and so on.
You would not have small children, pets going around ghost figures, and you would just not have people who would be responding in the way that Larry Dawsie's experiments that he talks about.
People who are semi-conscious, don't even know they're being prayed for, having these healings.
Well, dear lady, that's why I'm having the good doctor on after that.
unidentified
That's right.
Well, I'm calling because there is a question when you were last in Richmond, Virginia, that I asked you, Dr. Dossi, and you could not really quite answer it.
Of course, we were all surrounded by people who were essentially worshiping at the feet of Carl Jung and all of Carl Jung psychologists.
And I think they were fairly agnostic in their own approach to God or a Creator.
And what I asked you then, you couldn't quite answer, but maybe you can now, these years later.
And that is that since these prayer experiments really show scientifically that they work, and since when we have taken prayer out of the schools, how the schools have fallen down so incredibly badly, doesn't it make sense that we re-establish prayer back in school?
But her point is well taken, and that is that even if it's silent contemplation and prayer without specific religions involved, could that affect society in general?
Could such a massive action as removing prayer from school affect society in general?
Could that be one answer to the mindless, violent crimes and deterioration in our school system that we've seen?
Yes, I think that there's a very strong possibility that that's a factor in social deterioration.
Art, I presume that you know about these experiments in mass meditation, for which there is some published evidence that when a certain number of people, a certain percentage of the population come together and meditate in a certain way, the quality of life in that surrounding area changes for the better.
One of the times I was really very offended, almost very close to shutting a radio station off, was when she suggested that the upbringing of parents and sort of the environment and everything they subject the child to sort of disposes, you know, predisposes them to certain diseases and stuff.
And I was sort of very offended, I mean, at the mere suggestion that my parents' upbringing and their habits and sort of the feeding and everything, you know, would sort of dispose her to such diseases and stuff.
And I was wondering what Dr. Dossi's thoughts were on, like, just overall, like, well, the way, you know, upbringing and environment and stuff sort of affects these certain diseases and stuff.
All right, I'm not sure you're going to like the answer, but it may not be the case in your specific case, but overall, Doctor, how would you answer that?
Well, I think that we get into real trouble where we try to simplify and trivialize the origins of the illness.
I think that without question, there are psychological causes.
There are certainly physical causes.
There are environmental causes.
There are certainly genetic causes.
Now, in any given illness, I defy anyone to be able to define those explicitly.
I think that in most diseases, the origin of the disease is pretty much a mystery, and we're stuck trying to do the best we can as far as understanding where it came from.
I think a lot of metaphysical mischief is done by making people feel guilty for getting sick.
I think that this begins as a tremendous insight, namely that the mind does make a difference in health, but it's often carried to ridiculous extremes.
And so you heap a lot of sense of guilt on families and so on for perpetrating illness.
I think we need to take a deep breath and back off and look at this again.
I have made a study of the diseases that have killed the great saints and mystics throughout history.
Let me tell you, that's not a pretty sight.
Some of those people die from horrible diseases, including cancer and brain tumors.
These people are highly spiritual.
They're God-realized.
They pray enough.
They pray right.
And if these people die of brain tumors and worse, then that of us says something about the rest of us.
You can be highly spiritual and have it all going for you psychologically and still die of some pretty awful diseases.
So that's it in a nutshell, Carla.
And I think you're right to really question that kind of simplification of the origin of any illness.
Is there any way that as these studies move forward, that we will eventually be able to assign a percentage of probability to the metaphysical alternative approach along with the traditional approach to these serious diseases, you know, like radiation and chemo and all the rest of it.
Yeah, I wish I knew the answer to that, and I think that that's something we're just going to have to stay open to as we go along.
I think our science now, art, is too primitive to make a prediction along those lines.
You know, I would be happy now if we could just get on the table the possibility that spiritual issues might really play a role in the consciousness can work at a distance and do all the things that we've been talking about.
I think the other more complex questions will settle themselves in time.
Doctor, I have a short story and then a question for you.
And the story, I used to be a teacher naturalist at this outdoor ed camp.
And this guy I worked with always told me a story about this uh college he went to down in Southern California where on the first day of this uh Tai Chi kind of class, it was called Qi Gong or something like that, the teacher would sit half the class down in a row and have the other half stand behind them and would do some sort of brief meditation form thing and then push and make a sound and all the people standing up would like get pushed back,
like knocked over, like by a force.
And the people sitting down didn't get pounded.
And my question was actually about biofeedback and if you were thinking this might be a more standard practice in the future.
Because if people like yogis and even from what I've heard average everyday people can actually control their physicality, is it going to become standard practice for us to start practicing that in a forked setting?
One imagine for might imagine, for example, yogis we know can control their heart rate.
Now if somebody was having a heart problem, would you be able to take that ability and control your heart rate and stop what otherwise might turn into a big problem suddenly for you?
If we were to take biofeedback training and these self-mastery possibilities quite seriously, biofeedback, I have to say personally, is very dear to my heart.
Since grade school, Art, I had a terrible physical illness, classical migraine headache that was associated with incapacitating pain and nausea, vomiting, and the worst thing was blindness.
This got worse when I was in medical school, and it began to be such a problem that I was convinced that sooner or later I was going to either harm or kill a patient during surgery or something like that with an attack of blindness.
I tried to drop out of medical school because this was an ethical issue for me, and my advisor wouldn't let me.
This persisted and got worse even when I went into medical practice.
And in the early 70s, biofeedback was discovered accidentally at the Menninger Foundation in Topeka to be helpful to people who suffered from migraine.
I chased all over the country learning how to do biofeedback as a patient.
And for the very first time in my life, I found tremendous, almost miraculous relief.
This opened up a huge area of interest for me in terms of the effects of consciousness on the body.
I was really an obsessive type A individual in those days, and I didn't even know I had a mind-body connection.
But it taught me how to relax.
It taught me how to use imagery and visualization.
It led to my participation in meditation.
And my interest in the farther reaches of consciousness actually had their roots with my experience in biofeedback.
I actually used certain gadgets, sophisticated solid-state gadgets that measured, for example, the temperature of my hands, my fingers.
And I would learn to raise the temperature, which is an indication of turning off sympathetic nervous system activity in the body, dilating your blood vessels, allowing more blood to flow to the periphery Of the body, which is a great index toward relaxation.
I really got good at that.
I also monitored my muscle tension at key areas around the head and neck, and I learned to lower that.
And so hand warming techniques and muscle tension lowering techniques were the two modalities which I really had fun with.
I did research that shows evidence that there is such a thing as out of body memory and that real-looking dream characters are memory puppets recorded all the way through and that the brain is simply a mechanism in the center of all this.
This research is based on how real-looking dream characters can bend the way I can bend and they are unable to bend the same way I'm unable to bend.
All right, in other words, that our brain is a separate entity from what it is connected with, sort of backing up, I guess, what you're saying in a way, Doctor.
I guess I was trying to get this organized in my head of what's going on.
It seemed kind of to me, after listening to what Dr. Dawson just said about his biofeedback with his migraine, it made a little more sense that unlike one of the other callers who just called, can you not realize that when we incorporate all of our systems together, that this is already in place?
I think one of the reasons people won't come forth with is because our government wants to put, as you put, quote, money on everything and they'll figure out a way to tax it.
You know, as the doctor says, you get a, oh gosh, I'm losing my train of thought.
If you have to go through, like you go to college or go to school and set up a curriculum for certain things, there's some things that you cannot have a curriculum for in life.
Well, let me pose a question based on what you just said.
That is, Doctor, how long do you suppose it might be, and I know it's just a wild guess, before alternative methods, the kind of thing we're talking about tonight, would be included in any school curriculum?
Currently, three-fourths of the medical schools in the country have courses in alternative therapies.
Now, that's not saying that they're jumping up and down cheering this on.
A lot of them have developed these courses because the students have gone to the dean's office and banged on the door and said, you know, we want this.
But that really is a major start.
I mean, ten years ago, this was dead in the water.
So I think this is a generational theme, though, Art.
I mean, we're not going to see modern medicine coming on board overnight, but I am extremely hopeful that as these young doctors really become comfortable with these modalities, we're going to see this trickle down to the doctor's office near you.
So I think that there's no turning back in this.
The data is too strong.
There's too much of it.
And we really have made some great gains in the past four or five years.
The book looks at the reasons why we are in the process of redefining what it means to be conscious, how our mind works, how our mind can function beyond the confines of the brain and body, and what all this has to do with their health.
There are tips in there about how to actually use this.
There's information about how to apply it to your own situation.
And so this is a look at where medicine is going to wind up.
And this is based on solid science.
This isn't ruthless speculation.
This is, I think, a realistic look at what we're all going to be living in terms of how medicine is practiced in the next decade.
If I had to pick a second choice, it would be Healing Words, The Power of Prayer and the Practice of Medicine.
Healing Words was published in 93.
It wound up on the New York Times list because it really, for the very first time, came forward with a whole bunch of evidence showing that prayer actually works when put to the test in medicine.
And that was a new idea, and it created quite a sensation.
Well, I don't know where he's coming from religiously, But I must say that the response I have had from religious, professional religionists and theologians in this country towards what I've been talking about has been just tremendous.
Most people I've bumped into in the theological community are willing to bend on this and bring other religions under the umbrella and allow that their prayers could work also.
It's only a very small, minor, vocal group who don't want to compromise on this at all and want to claim that only their prayers are effective.
But I must emphasize that that's a very small minority in my experience.
Actually, the most popular way is to use images and visualizations that have to do with relaxed experiences and very pleasant experiences that you've had.
For instance, if you want to warm your hands, you might imagine that you're sitting in front of a fire with people you love and it's Christmas or something like that and it's silly outside.
Build up a wonderfully colorful image for yourself and enter that as totally as you can.
And so the first time or two you try this, you feel pretty silly.
But then something amazing happens.
Your body begins to come along and respond in the way that you image.
And then you get so good at this so quickly, most people do, within five or six sessions, that it's like taking the training wheels off the bicycle.
You don't need those gadgets anymore.
You develop an inner sensitivity toward being relaxed or tense so that you just do it automatically.
Dr. Dossi, I had a question regarding something you were talking about earlier about timeless consciousness and how you said that this research and hypothesis in certain scientists' cases when they were prayed about, they had a positive effect or an outcome in which they expected.
What I was wondering is, in that case, does that mean if you can apply to it like a be-all and end-all rule and say that, well, anything in the future that's thought of or anything, any idea, if enough people think about it as being true or enough people know it to be true, whether it be a fallacy or not, that it actually would be true?
Well, Dr. Roger Nelson at Princeton is doing this, for example.
He has something called random event generators, which seem to respond by becoming less random and more organized in terms of spitting out ones or zeros.
Usually they spit out equal numbers of ones or zeros.
And when people entrain their minds and become aligned emotionally, the darn things begin to respond less chaotically and less randomly.
And so what he's done is to run these things when vast numbers of people come together in some sort of emotional alignment.
For example, he's run them during the World Cup of soccer.
He ran them when the millennium changed.
He runs them during the Academy Awards, you know, which a high percentage of the world's population watches.
And during these moments when people come together, he hypothesizes, in a sort of emotional alignment, these things began to become less random and less chaotic.
This is indirect evidence that when large numbers of people do entrain themselves in a certain framework, the mental framework, then the physical world changes.
unidentified
That explains why the U.S. wins so many wars, I suppose.
I think this is part and parcel of a social movement, a vast cultural movement, which I think is absolutely profound and which reaches to the foundations of our society.
I think particularly you see this in alternative medicine, where in any given year, the majority of the American adult population uses some sort of alternative therapy.
This is one of the most massive social shifts at the end of the 20th century.
And I think you're seeing this reflected not just in medicine, alternative medicine, but as you imply, in the arts and entertainment as well.
My family, even though they tried to, I went to a Catholic school and the nuns the whole bit, and I rejected the whole concept of Jesus.
And I was Matthew Albert.
And pretty much when I was exposed to this, I was confronted in such a manner that I could not deny it.
My father, I mean, he thought I lost my mind.
I mean, my father went to the seminary, and he couldn't even accept this.
And being an attorney, he's pretty hardlined.
But they read about it here and there, and they start coming around a little bit.
But more importantly, I wanted to mention briefly the contrails here are like daily, very heavy every day for God knows how long.
And I treat people all the time for upper respiratory things and all types of fibromyalgia symptoms, and they don't know where it's coming from, and they're usually healthy people.
And I can't go telling them, oh, yeah, by the way, it's the contrails.
All right, then I've got something I'll say back that's also off topic, and that is I got a fact earlier tonight from a very good source that suggested, in fact, with regard to the contrails, that whatever it is, it appears to be highly corrosive.
And what corrosive problems have we had in the air lately?
And I'll leave it at that.
All right?
Thank you very much for the call.
Doctor, let me ask you, we're at the top of the hour.
I have one more hour of show.
And I always ask guests, depending on their day coming up later, whether they want to stay for the last hour and can stay or whether they've got an early get-up.
Oh, I've got a very, very interesting New York Times story here that I thought you might enjoy.
Several years ago, I wrote a book called The Quickening, which basically suggested that everything around us is speeding up.
Society, economics, politics, everything.
Every aspect of life around us is speeding up.
And that was a basic contention in the book, and it still holds true today.
Now, I'd like you to consider the following from the New York Times.
It's by James Glantz, Galen Z. The discovery two years ago that the expansion of the universe is speeding up has presented physicists and cosmologists with a major problem.
The gravity of all the known matter and energy in our own universe should slow that expansion, not speed up.
Think about it, right?
There was, most people think, a big bang and everything was blown outward.
Well, if anything, the laws of everything we know suggest that as time, billions of years, would go on, those objects would be expanding at a slower rate, not a faster rate, but it's not true.
The cosmologists who have made this proposal concede it is a radical proposal, but they are now suggesting that the acceleration effect may be because of another universe.
In other words, something is pushing us out.
Something with extra dimensions that may exist beyond our own three-dimensional world pushing us.
Now, what other explanation would you have, and this is going to be, of course, a pretty good question, I guess, for Dr. Ross tomorrow night.
What other explanation would you come up with when trying to explain why things are moving faster rather than slower following the old Big Bang?
And some of what he said has to be startling to an awful lot of people.
It just has to be startling.
unidentified
It has to be.
And I would suggest to the rest of your audience that are listening right now that there are a lot of dark angels out there that cause a lot of problems, a lot of disease, and a lot of the things that are going on in this universe right now.
Listen, a while back, I read an article in Newsweek where there were some scientists at some Mideastern university, Mideastern United States, where they had hooked up some electrodes to some experimentees, and they were running the brain waves that they had recorded from some Swamis, from some adepts from India.
And they had to stop the experiments because these students who were like electronic engineer majors and psychology majors who were becoming lab brats for money were changing careers, becoming joining the Peace Corps.
That is really, really, really interesting, what he just said.
I can imagine that you could modulate an electromagnetic wave with the brain waves of, as he put it, a Swami or somebody capable of controlling their own processes, bodily processes.
I'm one of those old-timers who, although I understand the efficiency and the spectrum saving capability of single sideband, it still sounds like crap.
And so you can't go on AM these days without being criticized on the handbands for being a spectrum hog.
FM, narrowband FM, offers audio quality that is reminiscent of the old AM days, and that's why you'll find me up there.
One theory he had was they were spraying to cover holes in the ozone layer and like a patch idea.
And I had seen a picture of the ozone hole in the Antarctic, and I was shocked to see one that was huge over the northwest here.
And I live just down the island from him.
He lives up a ways from me.
And I don't know exactly what's going on, but I'm absolutely shocked and amazed to see these huge contrails.
And I'm wondering if they're spraying to make a patch, then that means that there are some undesirable effects.
And one thing I wondered is if the ozone layer is not covered, maybe there's an immune suppressant effect because of the radiation it would be coming in.
But then if the Buddhists are praying or meditating to attain a specific end and it's working, that's a problem.
Isn't it?
unidentified
Well, no.
See, what the Bible says is what he said is man has the ability, not through the power of God, but man has the ability to achieve anything he sets his mind to.
I mean, the scientific results, and I don't mean to really be, I don't want to argue with your faith at all, but it would suggest that you don't have to believe in Christ or God as we believe in him here in the Western world to have the same effect, to heal, to do whatever it is.
unidentified
Well, no, no, and I agree with you.
These things can be achieved through the power of man.
It's like with your experiments that you've done with the weather.
Sure.
Okay, even in the New Testament, it states, if a man has the belief of a mustard seed, he can move a mountain.
I mean, a man has the ability to do these things.
It's just that there's a higher power that's much more powerful.
I've been trying to get a hold of you for such a long time because it's such a complicated matter.
Or maybe you should rephrase that and just say, man is the problem with religion in the first place.
unidentified
Well, yeah.
But the failure to follow what the book says, I mean, just the fact that they go by the name Jesus, which is not the accurate name, either is Yeshua, which I've heard a few of your guests refer to.
But if by whatever name you pray to him and you're sincere and you love him, not using the name, then would he really reject your pleas or your prayers based on the fact that you weren't saying his name right?
unidentified
Well, no, no.
I mean, you could be in the wrong, you could be using the wrong name and still have your prayers answered.
But that doesn't mean that when you come into an understanding of truth, that you should accept this truth and follow it.
See, the thing about Buddha, you know, Muslim, all these other religions, the fact that the Bible has prophecies in it that have been fulfilled and very accurately.
Previous guests talked about the power of prayer, which prayer I suppose has 100 definitions as far as whether or not you're asking for something or which direction it's going in.
Well, what if instead of Petri dishes we were talking humans, and instead of bacteria, we were talking virus?
And what if instead of we were hoping for something good, we were hoping for something bad?
And what if the people that have AIDS and had AIDS and died so rapidly did so because of our negative thoughts?
Well, it may come to that someday, but we're still pretty far away from that because despite all the discussion, for example, on this show and other open-minded forums, we're still a long ways away.
unidentified
Oh, I don't think so.
I think it's getting pretty clear, pretty quick, with the diseases we're getting.
But I'm afraid that the establishment, the current establishment in science and medicine is, even though they may have a program at a college, even though Duke may be doing studies, and even though in 75% of the higher institutions of learning in medicine, there may be some sort of attention paid to this, it's still, believe me, on the back burner compared to where it needs to be, based on what we think it can do.
But with a steady current or with uh just a a momentary uh little that's not normal at all.
And you should immediately apply to an electric company as somebody who can produce electricity.
That is not normal.
There could be a quick static discharge that would certainly show had you acquired that much static, but if you're putting off real juice, then there are a lot of people who would like to talk to you.
All we need is a whole bunch of people like you, and we don't need Con Ed anymore in New York.
In other words, prayer is a word you could concentrate on something to have an effect on something, like healing somebody, without it being specifically prayer as your local preacher might understand prayer.
unidentified
Well, okay, do I have time to relate to your listeners what my experience has been?
Well, that's exactly, sir, what the good doctor was here talking about.
Not just with incidental evidence, but with specific evidence from double-blind tests.
Now, people may wish for whatever their reason to reject this concept, but I think there is now sufficient scientific proof to believe that what the doctor said is absolutely true.
Whether that's going to be accepted by conventional wisdom types or not for a while, I don't know.
I think the doctor may be a little optimistic about that, but I think he was dead on the money.
And I try to imagine how the guy who would dance around the campfire and chant, that all the women in the clan would want to make him the lead breeder.
So his children.
And whereas the young bucks that are out bring you home the bacon, there's stuff in them for the guy who dances around and chants.
That's right.
And you go on with this concept here, how the guys who had a better concept about death weren't as depressed as much.
So they were better providers and better breeders.