Art Bell

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 4, 2001 - Art Bell

02:48:20

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Fuzzy Science - Bart Kosko

Participants

Main voices

59:42

bart kosko

01:02:50

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Welcome to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
unidentified		Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		From the high desert and the great American Southwest.
		I bid you all good evening and or good morning wherever you may be across this great land of ours, from the island of Guam in the west, sort of west, I mean, it's across state mine, maybe it's east, I don't know, eastward to the Caribbean and the U.S. Virgin Islands, south into South America, north all the way to the Pole.
		This is Coast to Coast AM, and I'm Arbell.
unidentified		Cheerio.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Lots to talk about tonight.
		Lots of lots to talk about tonight, but first, I guess I better do what I'm supposed to do first, right?
		Welcome, K-X-Y-L in Brownwood, Texas.
		They're 1240 on the dial.
		Glad to be on the air in Brownwood as we continue to screech now toward 500 affiliates nationwide on the network.
unidentified		Glad to have you on board.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're going to break some news for you in this first hour.
		It has sort of begun to leak out in some other news media earlier in the day, but not one of them have got the complete story.
		Tonight here, in the first hour, you will get the complete story.
		It has to do with chemtrails.
		And boy, have we got some big news for you in that category.
		So stay tuned for that coming up here in a few moments.
		Last night I mentioned Echo Challenge.
		I don't know if any of you have seen that.
		As you know, I'm a fan of Survivor on TV.
		And Echo Challenge is survivor times 10,000.
		Easily times 10,000.
		I mean, this is really rough stuff.
		It also took place, the one I'm referring to in Borneo.
		And holy man, I mean, these people were picking leeches out of places where you didn't even think leeches would want to go.
		They were going over terrain that no human being should ever have to go over.
		They were suffering injury that no human being short of supermen and women, which these were, could sustain and keep going.
		If you want to see Echo Challenge, it's going to be on the USA Radio Network Radio Network, the USA Network on TV.
		These are Eastern Times.
		Check your own TV guide to see when it's on locally.
		Sunday, you can catch the whole thing.
		It'll be on at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 o'clock in the afternoon Eastern Times.
		That would be the preferred time to catch it.
		Then next Tuesday, I think they're going to do a recap, two-hour recap.
		But if you want to catch the whole thing and it's worth catching, why any human being would ever go through this escapes me totally.
		I'm in the middle of, I haven't watched the whole thing yet.
		I'll see the last couple of episodes, I think, tonight when I finish my air shift.
		So mark that down.
		USA Television, Eastern Times on Sunday, April 8th, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 o'clock in the afternoon.
		It's a real mind-blower.
		It's something past reality TV.
		And one of the, by the way, one of the teams that went in the Echo Challenge, and I know you're not going to believe this, was a team of three Playboy Centerfold bunnies.
		And so you say, oh, yeah, right.
		Well, right.
		This is really extreme sports.
unidentified		I mean, really, really extreme.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And I had a listener who happened to know one of these bunnies, and so I got in contact with one of the bunnies, and now I think I'm in contact with three of the bunnies, and we might have them on.
		They did remarkably well in the A and the Echo Challenge.
		You cannot imagine how difficult this thing is until you see it.
		That's why I'm urging you to see it.
		We'll probably book these gals on the show to talk about what they did.
		My God, it was incredible.
		In my opinion, anybody who would do that has to be completely, has to have lost their mind.
		In fact, you've got to pay to get into it.
		It's put on by Barnett, the same guy who does Survivor.
		But this one, they ought to call it Borneo Death on a Stick.
		Incredible.
		So we'll see.
		Maybe we'll get somebody booked on the show or several of somebody's.
		So there is that.
		Let me see.
		Is there anything else that I must get on before we get deep sky?
		Remember during the Nixon years, remember Deep Throat?
		Well, we've got Deep Sky.
		That's right.
		Deep Sky as it relates to chemtrails.
		And as I said, little wisps of this have made it out on other media.
		But only here will you hear, and for the first time, the complete story from Deep Sky that's coming up here shortly.
		The airplane still on the island in China.
		Actually, Drudge was running a story earlier saying China's hinting it might put the crew of an American spy plane on trial as tension over the grounding and seizure of the aircraft grew.
		They put them on trial, and then we do have a problem.
		So I would imagine they would avoid doing that.
		The Clinton administration offering a chorus of regrets, but no apology for what happened.
		And it's all still at a stalemate.
		All right, there you have at least the open.
		I've got so much more I've got to get to you, but what I'm about to give you from a reporter in New Hampshire and from Will Thomas takes precedence over the rest of what I'm going to do right now.
		It's breaking news.
		It has to do with chemtrails.
		And trust me, you don't want to miss it coming up immediately next.
unidentified		Sounds of wind
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we're going to call this report Operation Deep Sky I guess first of all you know him very well Will Thomas are you there I'm here okay a reporter a journalist he's been on to this chemtrail thing for how long now anyway two years and three months and I could probably give you the hours and minutes that's all right two years and that's a long time and you've done a number of shows here there's a young lady back east in New Hampshire named
art bell ▲ ● ▼		tiffany brent is that correct d_t_ not a b_r_ and d_t_ yes okay tiffany welcome to the program thank you art you are a reporter news person radio person uh...
unidentified		you work for what station back there i work for w_l_k_v_ oldies one oh five as a disc jockey and i also do news weather and sports and that fun yes actually it's all right arm so you've been in the media for how long that tiffany eight years they also do freelance reporting and my com items air on another radio station w_m_w_v_ that a conway new hampshire how long have you been a broadcaster
art bell ▲ ● ▼		eight years eight years all right um...
		how did tiffany meet will on the phone on the phone and over email and over email i take it tiffany that you have been following the story of chemtrails these things that look like contrails only contrails only they're uh...
		they're uh...
		much more of perhaps sinister or different than a normal contrail usually darker oily gooky stuff that spreads through the sky and remains when it ought not and i think that's a quick description but uh...
		uh...
unidentified		how did you get on to this i had learned about it a couple of years ago and i think that uh...
unidentified		but i think that a lot of times didn't even know what i was looking at but i really got my teeth into it march 12th of this year because we saw an incredibly huge operation in the skies over Maine and new hampshire and i just could not believe what i was seeing in my life march march 12th so uh...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		not even uh...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		a month ago exactly uh...
unidentified		had you heard about chemtrails on this program or did you just sort of fall fall into wondering what it was all on your own no i had heard about it on your program from my partner louis bichon and from someone else that I know named Phil Marie Jr.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you knew what you were looking at?
unidentified		When I saw it on March 12th, I sure did.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, all right.
		So what did you do?
		Here are these no doubt horrid little chemtrails crossing X's, crossing your sky, whatever.
		What did you do?
unidentified		Well, I had just literally gotten off the air just a few hours before that, and I wasn't even sure what I was looking at.
		I had made a comment in fun saying contrail or chemtrail.
		And Lou happened to look out the window, and he said, I'm not sure.
		And we both went outside, and we couldn't believe it.
		We were seeing, at that point, we had seen 30 jets, not just lines, but 30 jets in 45 minutes.
		We counted them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		30 jets?
unidentified		In 45 minutes, from 12.10 p.m. to 12.55 p.m.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		30 jets.
		Jets.
		You're not really, I wouldn't think in New Hampshire you'd be over any major air traffic lanes.
		If you were in New Jersey, New York, somewhere there, I could imagine it.
		But where you are, I wouldn't think that many jets ought to be flying.
unidentified		No, and it's not something that we had ever witnessed before.
		Not even Lou, who is ex-military.
		And I used to live in Mamaranek, New York, which is just north of New York City.
		And of course, you know the jet traffic that you would normally see down there.
		This still wasn't like that.
		This was very different.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Even greater than that.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So I guess with a reporter's curiosity, you decided to do what?
unidentified		I made several phone calls to various airports that might have air traffic in our area and finally got a hold of one human being that would actually tell me something of what was going on, but I did have to pull it out of them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		As a matter of fact, we have two tapes that you're going to play tonight.
unidentified		Yes, we do.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, I want to talk about the tapes before we play them so that people understand what they're hearing.
		This is going to be, first of all, the tape is going to be altered.
		The sound is altered.
		In what manner did you alter the sound?
unidentified		Well, my voice sounds a little bit different, but the reality of it was that we took his voice out, fiddled around with it, played with pitch control, and then put it back.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So he's going to sound a little unnatural.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This is basically to keep this guy from getting fired, right?
unidentified		Absolutely.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Can you tell us what position this person holds?
		I don't want to know where he works.
		How close can you, how much can you tell me about him without telling me too much?
unidentified		Well, what I don't tell you, I can't.
		I'll tell you everything that I can tell you that he has given me permission to say.
		He is an air traffic control manager.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Air traffic control manager.
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		And he works at a major metropolitan airport in the Northeast.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is he the first person you connected with?
unidentified		On that day, no.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No.
		So you had to go fishing around a little bit.
		What kind of answers did you get from the first people you called?
unidentified		Well, they wanted to put me through to their superiors, but I was on hold a couple of times, a little bit longer than I like to be on hold, so I just kept dialing.
unidentified		Mostly people wouldn't tell me anything or they didn't know anything.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This person that we're going to play the telephone tapes of has given you permission to record his voice.
unidentified		Yes, actually both tapes were done in person.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, in other words, he came to your, what, studios or radio station or what?
unidentified		Well, he actually made a trip up here.
		He has a house by a lake.
		I also have a place by a lake, and this is in Maine right now, by the way.
		Although I do work in New Hampshire, I have a house on a lake in Maine.
		And he invited me to interview him there because he felt more comfortable than at that time either going to a radio station or possibly me interviewing him anywhere near any of the airports.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is this fellow worried about his job if it gets out who he is?
unidentified		He's worried about his job, and I have had the impression since my first meeting with him that he's worried about more than that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		More than that?
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		As in the health of himself and or his family, that kind of thing?
unidentified		Yes, that was one of the first things that came out right after the interview.
		I had asked him, at that time it was off the record, but since I've had permission to say this, if he had experienced or his family had experienced any unusual health concerns or symptoms that they had not had in the past.
		And he said, well, by unusual, do you mean something that the doctors wouldn't know anything about?
		And I said, no, just something that, say, happens suddenly that you never had happened to you in the past.
		And he told me that his wife had what he termed as sudden adult onset asthma when she had not even had as much as an allergy in the past.
		And all three of his children suffered from either asthmatic or allergic reactions and very sudden and gushing nosebleeds to the point where his infant, his son who's under two years old, who I happened to see that day, had to go to the emergency room.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you think there is a relationship between these health problems and what he knows?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, that would imply they're already not only on to him, but actively disciplining him.
unidentified		I don't know if that's happened yet because my most recent interview with him was yesterday.
		So we don't know.
		I will try and reach him tomorrow and hopefully I'll be able to hear from him.
		But I gave him a bone so I could take a bone away.
		I told him something that had happened to me at a time that I didn't even realize I was taking photographs of chemtrails when I thought I was taking photographs of foliage and the beautiful blue sky that we had.
		And this was a couple of years ago.
		Very shortly after that, I had a gushing nosebleed, and I don't get nosebleeds.
		And I went to the emergency room at a hospital in New Hampshire.
		So when I told him that, he also told me that, yes, that's something that has happened to him and his family.
		He personally has not had a serious nosebleed, although he's had nosebleeds, but nothing like his son.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Which one of the two of you decided to call this fellow Deep Sky?
unidentified		I believe that was Will, yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That was you, Will.
unidentified		I couldn't resist after Woodford emerged.
		I guess the journalist in me has always wanted a coup as big as Watergate and Art.
		We have that thanks to ST tonight.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, did Tiffany call you once she had the first tape?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, how did this happen?
unidentified		Tiffany, go ahead.
		Okay.
		Basically, I think we had been in touch by email first.
		That's right.
		We do listen to you, Art, both Lou and I. And actually, Lou's been listening for longer than I have because I didn't even know who you were for a while.
		But since we'd been listening, we listened to your show on March 14th because we had heard it was going to be about chemtrails and that Will was going to be on.
		And obviously, that was just a couple of days after we had seen the largest operation we'd ever seen.
		So we did listen, and we contacted Will via Chemtrail and via Chemtrail, via email about the chemtrails.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		And then Will had contacted us after that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, Will made a frantic call to me.
		I don't know.
		That was a few days ago, Will, and I made reference to it on the air.
		Will said, I not only have the smoking gun, I've got the smoking bomb.
		And you had a tape that you were having very great difficulty in playing.
		You don't have a lot of luck with tape, Will.
unidentified		Not having a lot of luck with secondhand tape.
unidentified		No.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And so you tried to play it for me and never could.
		I take it that was the first of the two tapes that we're going to hear tonight.
		Is that correct?
unidentified		Yes, it is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And then there was a second tape that was made, a really critical, important tape that nobody has heard anywhere until tonight, correct?
unidentified		No one has, except for Will.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Except for Will.
unidentified		Right.
		We got together and put together a list of questions, the two of us, to present to this person that would allow him to answer key and critical questions again without exposing himself.
		Well, all right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do either one of you think that what we're about to do tonight is going to be dangerous for either you or the gentleman who came to you, Tiffany?
unidentified		I don't know that I would say dangerous, except that if they do figure out it's him, which we've taken great pains to make sure that they cannot figure out that it's him, I think he could lose his job.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And if somebody comes to you with some sort of court order trying to get information on who he is based on what you revealed tonight, what would you do?
unidentified		I just have terrible short-term memory problems, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, and you could blame it on chemtrails, too.
unidentified		I could do that, yes.
unidentified		I joke, but I'm serious.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I know, I know, I understand, believe me.
		We have speculated, as you know, on the air for a long time about what chemtrails might be.
		The ugliest theory is that they are virtually testing some sort of germ warfare on us.
		Then it gets a little less ugly.
		Maybe they're trying to immunize all of us against something horrible that's out there.
		And from there, it goes to even lesser things.
		Nevertheless, big stories.
		For example, control of our weather or an attempt to control our weather.
		And this tape, once the audience has heard it, is going to answer which of those it is, correct?
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you believe this man?
unidentified		I believe that he believes that this is what it is because I believe that he was told this.
		And he does say that this is what he was told.
		And actually, he was not told it on the 12th.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Did he seem credible to you?
unidentified		Yes, very.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Credible.
unidentified		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And Air Traffic Control Manager is about to tell us what these chemtrails are all about.
		You're going to hear a lot of I'd rather not comment on that kind of deal.
		And I can't blame him, but that's what's coming up.
		So both of you hold on, all right?
unidentified		All right, Will.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		That's the setup for all of this, folks.
		You're about to get some answers.
		I'm Art Bell, and this is Coast to Coast AM from the high desert.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time, the night featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
		I stopped an old man along the way, hoping to find some old forgotten words or ancient melodies.
		He turned to me as if to say, hurry boy, it's waiting after you.
		Gotta take the light to take me away from you.
		It's just another one.
		The sight of a touch or the scent of a sound or the strength of an oak room is deep in the ground.
		The wonder of flowers to be covered and then to burst up through tarmac to the sun again.
		Or to fly to the sun without burning a wing.
		To lie in a meadow and hear the grass sing.
		And all these things in our memory's horn.
		And the unison to come.
		To come.
		Yeah.
		Right.
		Right where you go.
		Take your pain.
		On this trip.
		Just go ahead.
		Right.
		Take a free ride.
		Take a free ride.
		Up I see.
		It's my free.
		But I'm going to spend two years.
		It's so hard to do with my fears.
		And to end my life before I rest.
		But by now, by now, I'm never in front.
		You're listening to Art Bell Somewhere in Time.
		The night featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
		In a moment, you're going to hear Tiffany Brent along with Will Thomas.
		But you're going to hear a recording that Tiffany Brent made.
		A witness who actually came to her, an air traffic control manager whose voice is going to be modified for obvious reasons.
		Who's about to tell you what he thinks he knows or has been told these chemtrails are on.
		are all about stay right there well you never hear that not with the chemtrails good morning everybody i'm art bell and here we go tiffany brent is a reporter from new hampshire who has interviewed an air traffic control manager at one of the major northeast airports in the u.s will thomas an investigator who's been on this chemtrail thing forever uh from a
		reporting point of view and trying to get good, hard information.
		And I think Will believes that Tiffany has good, hard info, don't you, Will?
unidentified		I do.
unidentified		We've got it tonight, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let's not hold them, Tiffany.
		Let's do it.
		The first tape is just sort of, I guess, a kind of a setup piece for the second tape, right?
unidentified		Yes, more or less.
unidentified		But there is some information on there that confirmed what we suspected, specifically the military operation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let's rock.
unidentified		Okay.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Here we go, folks.
unidentified		Oh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Tape preparation sounds.
unidentified		For the record, you work at a metropolitan area airport in air traffic control.
		In fact, you are a federal employee.
		Is that correct?
		Yes.
		And I am the journalist and radio personality that spoke with you via phone on Monday, March 12, 2001?
		Yes.
		Well, I would like to reconstruct our conversation of March 12, 2001 as near to the original as possible, with the exception of anything that might identify you and the addition of a few questions that have since arrived in my mind.
		Is this agreeable to you?
		Yes.
		approximately 1255 p.m. on monday march 12 2001 i called your airport's air traffic control tower and i spoke directly with you correct yes i gave you my exact location which you recognized and informed you of what seemed to me to be an unusual amount of air traffic visible in our area in fact i told you that we were witnessing over 30 jets in less than an hour mostly flying northeast to southwest over 30,000
		feet did I not yes and what do you remember as your answer I have relatives in that area so I knew where you were calling from and what should be visible to you do you remember telling me in that time span that you had nine jets in or out of your airspace yes did I ask if you could see all the traffic on your screens that we were witnessing yes and I told you that we own everything to 10,000
		feet that we filter everything else out we could see it if we chose to but we don't unless we have something of our own coming in at that altitude and what altitude is that over 30,000 feet and what do you remember telling me of international air traffic that would be visible to us if any I said that there is an increase of international flights on Monday and especially in the afternoon and that you might be seeing international flights coming into Boston or New York Did you ask me if I'm usually in this area during the week or just a visitor yes I thought that you might not be used to the normal amount of air traffic
		that we have here during the week and I told you that I am here every day during the week and sometimes on weekends?
		Yes.
		So I am used to normal air traffic.
		Did I insist that this was not normal, that what we were seeing was considerably more air traffic than I can remember seeing here even in the summer?
		Yes.
		Didn't I ask how it was that we could see so many jets and whose air traffic was it if not yours?
		That is if you filter out most everything over 10,000 feet?
		Yes, and I told you that Boston Center is in Nashua, New Hampshire, also Kennybunk VOR.
		Boston Center being another air traffic control center in the Northeast?
		Yes, one that handles a good deal of traffic, including international flights.
		And what is Canniebunk VOR?
		It's a major navigational aid to international air traffic in the Northeast.
		At this point, did I mention that my partner was outside the building still counting several more jets in the air at the same time as we spoke?
		Yes.
		And what was your answer to that?
		I said that that amount of air traffic in such a short span of time was unusual, even though you would see more international air traffic in the afternoon.
		Did you mention to me that you had to reroute some air traffic?
		Yes.
		And why was that?
		We had to bring in a couple in lower.
		That is, we had two from the northeast that had to come in under their usual altitude.
		They had to come in at 10,000 feet or under.
		We had Boston Center take one.
		So if I'm hearing this correctly, on March 12, 2001, you had a reason not to filter out everything over 30,000 feet?
		Yes.
		So you did see some, and I quote, step-up activity yourself?
		Yes.
		Didn't you question that?
		No.
		Well, why not?
		Because I had an explanation for that.
		Did someone ask you to reroute your traffic?
		Yes.
		Who?
		I can tell you that I received a call telling me what I had to do.
		You mean reroute air traffic?
		Yes.
		You can't tell me who?
		No.
		Will you tell me why?
		You are sure you'll keep my name and whether I work out of it?
		Well, you work at a major metropolitan airport in the Northeast in air traffic control.
		You did agree to allow me to say that.
		Yes.
		And I gave you my word that that is all I will say.
		Okay.
		So will you tell me why you were told to reroute your air traffic?
		I was told that there was a military exercise in the area.
		And did you tell me the military exercise combined with your traffic and international traffic is probably why I was seeing stepped up activity?
		Yes.
		And you used the phrase stepped up?
		Yes, I probably did.
	Did you say, of course, they wouldn't give you any of the particulars and that you don't ask, you just do your job?
	Yes, something like that.
	Well, since Monday, the 12th, have we spoken?
	Yes, a couple of times.
	To set up this interview?
	Yes.
	Did I ask if you happened to notice an increase in air traffic on the 12th?
	Yes.
	And you said?
	I did notice a little more than usual, yes.
	In the last couple of years, can you recall any other times when you were asked to reroute air traffic?
	Just a couple of times, maybe as much as four times.
	Were you asked to reroute air traffic yesterday or today?
	Yes.
	Both days?
	Well, I'd rather not say both days, but yes, I was.
	For the same reason as Monday?
	I have to be careful of my job.
	I have a family to support.
	Well, I understand.
	You have helped me tremendously, and I won't do anything or add anything to the information that you have given me here in this interview today.
	I will not do anything to compromise the promise of anonymity that I gave you.
	But will you answer that one last question?
	About, were you asked to reroute air traffic Tuesday and today for the same reason as Monday, the 12th of March?
	Yes.
	Thank you again for granting me this interview.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		All right.
		That's interview number one.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And the big information comes in interview number two, but it all goes to the listeners deciding for themselves the credibility of what they're hearing.
unidentified		Exactly.
		And the main reason why that tape was important is that he became curious about the amount of air traffic that I would see.
		And you'll hear in the second tape how he made a trip up here himself on a Monday to see exactly what we would normally see.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		By the way, Tiffany, you'd be real good in depositions.
unidentified		So I've been told.
unidentified		Thank you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let's, without delay, I'll tell you, you can hold the phone a little closer or turn up the volume a little bit.
		Okay, go to the second critical tape.
		Same man.
		Second interview, folks.
		Here we go.
		Go ahead, Tiffany.
		Go ahead and put it on.
		Once again.
unidentified		It's April 3rd, and this is a follow-up to the interview of March 21st, 2001 with my Deep SkySource.
		We've spoken with each other via phone, and we've met before, correct?
		Yes.
		When I called you to set up this follow-up interview, did you tell me about a trip you made on March 26, 2001 to my area?
		Yes.
		Would you tell me about that trip, why you made it, and what you observed?
		I wanted to see for myself what air traffic would be visible to you on any given Monday from noon to 1 p.m.
		And what did you observe?
		I saw one jet flying at approximately 31,000 feet traveling east to southwest.
		I also saw two smaller aircraft at much lower altitudes.
		Did you mention something about traffic that might be visible to me from our local jet port?
		Yes.
		And how much traffic would be visible to me of the nine jets in or out of that jet port on March 12th?
		Possibly one or two of those jets.
		Would any international traffic be visible to me?
		Yes, but a small amount.
		Not the number of jets that I had witnessed on March 12, 2001?
		No.
		Which you told me were probably a combination of the military exercise and international traffic.
		Yes.
		And that was 30 plus jets in 45 minutes from 1210 p.m. to 1255 p.m.?
		That is what you reported to me, yes.
		But you've since proven to yourself that I wouldn't see much international traffic.
		Yes.
		You also saw a lot of activity on your screen on the 12th.
		You told me you witnessed stepped up activity on the 12th, the 20th, and the 21st of March.
		Yes.
		And this was due to military exercises?
		Yes.
		Was there considerably more traffic on the 12th than there was on the 20th or the 21st?
		Yes.
		And would I be able to witness this activity from my location?
		Yes.
		Is it customary to reroute air traffic for military exercises from your tower?
		That is, does this occur on a regular basis?
		No, not really, not from my airspace, no.
		But it might be from other areas?
		That is possible, yes.
		Well, is there a reason why you're still worried about your identity?
		Worried enough to have me alter your voice on the tape?
		Yes.
		And why is that?
		I don't know how much I can tell you that you can record.
		You mean this might compromise your identity?
		It could.
		Oh, I'll let that one go.
		Did you witness any radar anomalies due to the exercise?
		That is, was it degraded or maybe enhanced during the operation on March 12th?
		Somewhat degraded, yes.
		Was radar painting or any kind of clutter or cloud in a clear sky?
		Yes, there was what you might call a haze.
		Would this affect flight safety?
		That would depend on the density.
		Was safety affected on March 12th, 20th, or 21st, 2001?
		Not from my perspective, no.
		Did your orders to reroute air traffic come from military personnel?
		No.
		Did they come from a higher civil authority?
		Yes, but I can't tell you who, so please don't ask.
		Are you aware of this happening in any other air traffic regions?
		Yes.
		On the same dates?
		Yes, and other dates as well.
		Many regions?
	I wouldn't say many, no.
	Some regions?
	Yes.
	What regions?
	Well, one was south of my location.
	Will you tell me where?
	I'd rather not.
	Were you told the type of aircraft that was involved in the military exercise?
	Yes.
	Were they tanker-type aircraft?
	Yes.
	Where did they originate?
	I really can't disclose that information.
	It might identify me.
	Okay.
	To your knowledge, did any aircraft cross into Canadian airspace?
	That was what was indicated on my equipment, yes.
	On March 12th?
	Yes.
	Do you know or were you told the nature of the operation?
	Only after the fact.
	When?
	On the 22nd.
	Of March?
	Yes.
	Was this a radar experiment?
	Not that I was told.
	Was this a weather modification experiment?
	That approximates what I was subsequently told, yes.
	Will you elaborate on that?
	I'd rather not, no.
	Okay, well, thank you again for agreeing to this interview.
	And as I promised, I will not disclose your identity for any reason.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, so there it is.
		Weather modification.
		He said it aloud.
unidentified		Yes, he did.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Again, all right, Tiffany, two things.
		One, you know, I joked, I said you'd be good in a deposition, you would.
		Those questions sounded as though they were absolutely prepared.
		I mean, you were just boom, boom, boom, boom, right there.
		Did you have those written up for him before the interview?
unidentified		I had them written up for me before the interview.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right, that's right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, in preparation for him.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you knew exactly what you were going to ask?
unidentified		Yes, I did.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Did he know ahead of time what you were going to ask?
unidentified		i told him i wouldn't blindside him that we would discuss uh...
unidentified		in the first interview that we would discuss what we had already discussed on the phone when i contacted him at work in the second interview i said we're probably That's critical.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You contacted him at work?
unidentified		The first time, not in the first interview.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I understand, but you, without question, Tiffany, you spoke to him.
		You know what you called.
		You called whatever air traffic control center it is that you called that we're not exposing here.
unidentified		Exactly.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you know doggone well.
		He's not a put-on.
		He's a real employee is what I'm saying.
unidentified		He's a real employee, absolutely.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		That was very important.
		Will, comments, what do you make of all this?
unidentified		I helped prepare those questions, and these are key questions.
		And let's take a second, look a little bit closer.
		One of the key questions was the radar return.
		There's been speculation that this was a radar experiment using barium to enhance radar.
		And we have been able to disprove that with his answer, that it actually degraded performance with a hazy type clutter on the radar in weather that was a clear blue cloudless sky.
		That indicates to me very, very fine particulates of aluminum.
		Talcum powder type clouds of aluminum would give you that hazy return.
		So I think we're really on the right track with our aluminum hypothesis here.
		And also the fact they've crossed into Canadian airspace makes me particularly angry.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Briefly explain to the audience why aluminum, just in case they didn't hear you the other night.
		Aluminum so powdery is virtual powder and it actually polishes the engines of aircraft.
		That's what we were talking about last time.
		But why the aluminum?
		What do they think that will do to our weather?
		What is the theory?
unidentified		It is the theory put forward by Dr. Edward Teller and the Lawrence Livermore Lab, which actually ran computer models, and the International Panel on Climate Change, which verified these models, says that if you put up 10 million tons, 10 million tons of aluminum particulates, very fine particulates, it will reflect up to 1% of incoming sunlight and chill out global warming that is now almost in a runaway condition.
		Now the military, of course, has been using aluminum shafts, big pinfoil-sized pieces of aluminum, to jam radars for many years.
		That's why fine particulates will give a hazy return without interfering to the point where it would degrade.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So I now see where your preparation of these questions came into play for Tiffany's interview.
		You wanted to see if there was any degradation of the radar that you believe would be produced and probably would by a powder-type substance aluminum.
		And so that's exactly so he gave the exact answer that would support that theory.
unidentified		Yes, he really confirmed that theory.
		He nailed that down.
		And here's something that's very important for our listeners tonight.
		When an agency wants to modify weather, according to NASA, they introduce very, very fine particulates into the atmosphere.
		These particulates act as nuclei.
		Water vapor condenses around them.
		It forms clouds.
		It forms precipitation.
		I'd like to go back to Tiffany in just a second and talk about what happened to their weather on and after the 12th.
		And we're talking fatalities here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, we're very short on time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Tiffany, what did happen to the weather?
unidentified		Well, I can say that after they sprayed on the 12th, we had a very large snowstorm in mid-March.
		That's a little unusual for Maine.
		But worse yet, since it has become spring, we had two snowstorms that equaled almost four feet.
		So since the 20th, we have had two snowstorms that were quite large.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Tiffany, I want to, we've got to begin summing up here.
		This gentleman, then, we know through you firsthand to be who he says he is.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know that for certain, and at least as far as that goes, you're staking your journalistic reputation on the fact that he is who he says he is, at least that much, right?
unidentified		Yes, I've called him at work a few times, yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you think it likely that he will give you any more?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, he flatly said weather modification.
unidentified		Yes, he did.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you think he will give you or knows any further details that he'd be willing to talk about?
unidentified		We're going to try and find out where they originated.
unidentified		I believe he knows that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In that interview, Tiffany, did you stop at the point where he said weather modification or did you probe without success further?
unidentified		I stopped at that point because I knew that he was getting into an area where he was very nervous.
unidentified		He more than chain-smoked both interviews, and his hands were shaking.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Will Thomas, other media are going to be interested in this.
		I think best we give out one set of contact information, Will, and why don't you go ahead and give that out so other media can contact you?
unidentified		Okay.
		My website with full documentation and an updated press release, lifeboatnews.com.
		Media can reach me by email, WillThomas.
		One word, WillThomas at tellus, T-E-L-U-S.net.
		I've sent out over 100 press releases to major newspapers, radio, magazines throughout the U.S. and Canada.
		I have gotten one response.
		I am urging all listeners tonight, go to your local media, local and national media, and insist that they cover this story.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, now you've got a little something to cover at least.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Will Thomas, that's W-I-L-L-T-H-O-M-A-S, right?
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		At tellus, T-E-L-U-S.net.
		Correct.
		Tiffany, are you going to pursue this with this deep sky, we'll call him?
unidentified		I will be speaking with him tomorrow morning for a few.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, really?
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you going to pursue the weather control angle with him and try and find out how much more he knows?
unidentified		Yes, and I'm also going to try and find out if he does know, which I believe he does, where these jets originated.
		Uh-huh.
		Art, we're talking the mother of all class action lawsuits, and I'm not kidding.
		We are in touch with two attorneys as we speak tonight.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, then you're probably also in the middle of the mother of all dangerous situations from my point of view.
unidentified		No, we've gone public, and that's the safety.
		I talked with ST earlier today.
		We were going to sit on this, and I said it's too hot.
		We're going to go public, and that really is our safety here.
		I feel under no physical threat whatsoever.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, then I want to thank both of you, Will and Tiffany, and we'll look forward to any further follow-up on this, but it's the first person that's ever said anything like that.
unidentified		Yeah, I thought I've gathered because I could not get any information from anyone else.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good night, all.
unidentified		Good night.
		Thank you, Ark.
		Thank you, SC.
		Thank you.
		You're listening to Arkbell somewhere in time on Premier Radio Networks.
		Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
		And a kid without a net.
		It'll break and maybe grow up to be friends.
		Only in America level opportunity and would likely girl like you all for a poor boy like me.
		I don't want your lonely mansion with a tear in every room.
		All I want to love you promised, then leave the hail of room.
		But you think I should be happy with your money and your name And hide myself in sorrow while you play your cheating game Silver threads and golden needles in a endless heart of mine And I dare not drown my sorrow in the warm water wide
		But you think I should be happy with your money and your name And hide myself in sorrow while you play your cheating game
		Silver threads and golden needles in a endless heart of mine And I dare not drown my sorrow in the warm water wide Premier Radio Networks presents Heartbell somewhere in time.
		Tonight's program originally aired April 4th, 2001.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In the first hour of this program, you just heard something for the first time.
		You heard an air traffic control manager at a northeastern facility in the U.S., courtesy of Tiffany Brent and William Thomas, admit for the first time publicly that what they're doing up there with those chemtrails, it's weather control.
		That's what he said, folks.
		In a few moments, we're really going to have an interview.
		We're really going to...
		Heaven in a Chip.
		Now, what do you suppose that means?
		It says, fuzzy visions of society and science in the digital age.
		Imagine a world where you could achieve digital immortality in a computer chip.
		Tell the government how you want it to spend your tax dollars.
		We'll have to talk about that one.
		Have a digital intelligent agent as your best friend and your protector from The prying eyes of government and corporations.
		Design a child, perhaps, that is 40% yours, 40% your spouse's, and 20% someone else's.
		Yes, sir.
		Millions are lining up, I'm sure, to do that right now.
		Create new music from Mozart and new art from Michelangelo.
		View a fetus as only 36% alive while viewing an aging person as only 90% dead.
		Back up your thoughts, your entire brain, on a chip the size of a sugar cube.
		That's what we're going to be talking about with Professor Costco in just one moment, if you'll be patient and stay right where you are.
unidentified		The End Heaven in a chip.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Bart Costco is a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Southern California, where he teaches courses on information, science, neural networks, fuzzy logic, digital processing, and where he serves as an elected faculty senator and former director of USC Signal and Image Processing Institute.
		Dr. Costco holds degrees in philosophy, economics, mathematics, electrical engineering, and is an award-winning composer.
		He is an elected governor of the International Neural Network Society and has chaired and co-chaired several international conferences on neural and fuzzy systems conferences and is on the editorial board of several scientific and mathematical journals.
		Dr. Costco has published over 100 scientific papers, has published several popular essays in venues from Scientific American to the New York Times.
		Dr. Costco is author of the new book Heaven in a Chip, Random House, the international best-selling fuzzy thinking, and a novel called Nanotime, a fact-based cyber thriller about what World War III would look like in 2030.
		Oh yes, we'll ask about that.
		Dr. Costco has authored the scientific textbooks, Fuzzy Engineering, Neural Networks, and Fuzzy Systems, and Neural Networks for Signal Processing, all from Prentice Hall, and the brand new text, Intelligent Signal Processing.
		The latter text reflects the new field of advanced technology that Dr. Costco has helped found, ISP or Intelligent Signal Processing.
		Dr. Costco is also one of the fewer than 1,000 people in the world who wears a cryonics bracelet, get this folks, and who holds a cryo-suspension contract to take effect upon his death or deanimation, if you will.
		Hence, he is in the experimental group while about 6 billion other people are in the burn or bury control group, oh my God, of this multi-decade social experiment.
		Oh my, there's a lot of material here.
		Dr. Costco is on the scientific advisory board of the Alcor Cryonics Foundation, along with MIT Artificial Intelligence Pioneers Professor Marvin Minsky and nanotechnology founders Drs.
		Eric Drexler and Ralph Merkel.
		I could talk to you from probably 10 shows, Professor.
		Welcome.
unidentified		Welcome.
unidentified		Good to be here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We have a little bit of a hum on this phone line, it sounds like.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you have a light on, perhaps, or something nearby your phone that would be causing it to hum a little?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I can't locate it, aren't it?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Well, we can live with it.
		It's very low level.
		I don't even know where to start with you.
		There is so much here.
		I guess heaven in a chip, there are a lot of things I want to talk to you about, but heaven in a chip, no, let's start here.
		Would you explain to the audience so that they can understand it?
		Is it possible?
		What is fuzzy logic?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Fuzzy logic is reasoning with shades of gray.
		So, for example, you were talking earlier about the airspace.
		Just where does the sky end and space begin?
		That's not at all clear.
		Where does life begin and end?
		And a non-fuzzy example, something that's artificially black and white, is when you suddenly become an adult at the first second of your 18th birthday.
		And what you find is the minute you get outside of mathematics or politics, where people, in effect, artificially draw lines, everything's fuzzy.
		All air is cool and not cool to some degree.
		Everything is gray to that extent.
		And what we've tried to do is to endow computers with that same property.
		A lot of what makes us intelligent is our ability to work with constant uncertainty and imperfect situations and understandings.
		And we've been packing that bit by bit into computer chips and putting those chips initially into gadgets.
		And most people listening are using Fuzzy Logic in their car.
		A typical car has over 100 computer chips.
		It's very easy to program some of those chips to an automatic transmission to help with the process, especially shifting while going downhill, changing gears, or the control of the carburetor.
		Or if you have a camcorder, there's a fuzzy, smart little device in there that's taken a lot of experts from experts, expertise from experts in Japan and packed that into the chip so that it adjusts the autofocus for you or your microwave oven or hundreds of other gadgets from washing machines.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doctor, in a digital sense, everything's a zero or a one.
		Correct.
		In what way does fuzzy logic, in what way does it function in any different way than that?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, you raised the fundamental tension.
		It does capture the idea of something analog between zero and one, and yet the mass of fuzzy logic is black and white.
		And because of that, that was sort of the breakthrough.
		Once we figured out the mass using black and white tools, then we could upload it into chips and build all kinds of systems.
		And let me just continue for a minute.
		This ranges not just to every electronics gadget, almost that comes out of Japan or Korea, and a few of them from here.
		The GM Saturn has it in the transmission.
		The new VW bug has it in the transmission.
		They don't advertise in this country the word fuzzy.
		it's still seen as a pejorative term.
		But in Germany, for example, this is used in very large-scale signal and systems processing.
		It's used to control cranes and physical plants.
		It's used to control sewage.
		It's even used in the control, God forbid, of nuclear power plants to some degree.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, so in other words, instead of a zero or a one, two absolutely defined states, you're talking about sometimes a 0.5, a 0.4, a 0.7, even gradients in between those.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		For example, if we had an air conditioner that had a rule in it of the form, if the air is cool, then set the motor speed to slow.
		Well, anytime you take an air measurement, it's cool to some degree.
		That's always changing.
		Every measurement is an exception to some degree of the rule.
		And so this is smoothly mapping those partially cool measurements into smoothly changing control outputs.
		Instead of something being all or none, black or white, exactly cool within the range, say, of 65 degrees Fahrenheit to 70 degrees Fahrenheit, it smooths out the rough edges.
		And by then, combining lots of knowledge like that, it's very easy to represent mathematically and in a computer.
		And by the way, these computers are digital computers.
		That's what's neat about this.
		We use binary logic to capture gray reasoning.
		We can boost the machine IQ of gadgets.
		And now, you know, ultimately, we talked about World War II, you mentioned World War III, all the way up to smart weapons and so forth.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, I read an article from the BBC the other day that stated, it may be a bit premature, but it said the first biological computer was born the other day, and they claimed to be using leeches, you know, the leeches, lousy little leeches, to compute.
		And they showed this jar full of leeches.
		It's a disgusting thing to think about, but are they on to something with that direction of development, with biological?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		They certainly are.
		That's touching on the sister technology of fuzzy systems, and those are neural networks, or computers that are based on the brain that recognize patterns.
		And it's often fun to compare them or test them on the simplest neural organisms like worms and leeches and things like that, or to take the giant squid that's been especially popular as a laboratory experimental device to see how signals propagate down fibers.
		And these systems don't have, these creatures don't have a lot of neurons unlike you and me.
		In your brain, you have over 100 billion neurons.
		And by the way, it's easy to remember that number because that's roughly the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy, which in turn is roughly the number of known galaxies in the universe.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Interesting coincidence.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, and I think it's just that.
		But nevertheless, it's a big number.
		And by the way, each of those neurons, and I think we want to talk about this later, each of those neurons in your brain emits ones and zeros, in effect, but is connected on average to 10,000 others.
		And just imagine what's going on in your head right now.
		You've got 100 billion neurons emitting almost the random ones and zeros and sending that to 10,000 other neurons.
		You're talking quadrillions of signals propagating around there without any central clock, without any kind of government in effect running everything.
		Somehow this wonderful device has figured out how to self-organize.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor, what's my clock speed?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That's a good question.
		And actually, no, I had mine measured recently.
		I had a problem with my hand, and there's experiments.
		And what they do is they shock the heck out of you, poking various nerve fibers, and then measure it, looking at the waveform that pops out.
		And most people propagate signals at about 40 or 50 meters per second.
		And that's the classic explanation why if you're at ground zero at a nuclear burst, you'll never know it because wires will melt before it gets to your brain.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that's pretty slow, huh?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Pretty slow.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Actually, it's good enough for biological work.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But it's nowhere near a pentium.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Nowhere near it.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		The pentium would be sleeping constantly, waiting for new signals to come in at that rate.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So how is it going to be profitable for scientists to be using organic material to compute if the neurons communicate so slowly?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, one thing is to boost that neural communication.
		The other thing is to assist it when it fails.
		Last year, for the first time, we implanted, I didn't, but scientists collectively, scientists implanted a neural type chip into a blind person, back into the visual cortex.
		And a bunch of neurons, each one could be on or off, and there's two to the end, a very big number of possible states.
		And so this unsighted person suddenly has, kind of see a grid of ones and zeros lighting up in front of them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I saw that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I saw that they actually showed what the blind person saw.
unidentified		Right, correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely amazing.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Now that's the tough job, though, Art, of grafting chips to flesh, and vice versa.
		And of course, the flesh is fixed, and we're figuring it out every day.
		But the chips, every 18 months, thanks to Moore's Law, are doubling in capacity and basically falling in price.
		So a lot of these schemes, mathematically and otherwise, that we've worked out in the last 20 years that were not feasible before, thanks to Moore's Law, either are feasible now or soon will be.
		And in effect, computer processing is becoming free.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Excuse me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If there's eventually the machines and the humans are going to co-join, you're going to want to begin working with the neurons very quickly.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		I think the way to see that is to refer to the humans as a biomachine and a bioprocessor.
		And that's what we are.
		Extremely sophisticated, but we're starting to figure it out.
		And with that comes a change to many concepts from legal ones right down to religious ones.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we'll get to those inevitably.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But what a jump from what we're discussing right now to a day, how far away when you might actually be able to, in effect, and when you talk about digital immortality, I'm assuming that you're contemplating the possibility of downloading the contents of a human brain either into a machine or another human being.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
unidentified		First off, I would use, to get the preposition, I'd use uploading.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		But we would upload from a brain, which is a computer made of three pounds of meat, to a different kind of brain, made of a more durable material.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Think of it as your brain playing musical tunes right now on a very classical and floppy instrument and shooting that over to a synthesizer, something that can play far more, play the same music, play It in different ways, and it doesn't need sleep or blood sugar.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		So that's the basic idea.
		But long before that, art is what you're starting to see now.
		And that is the gradual parts replacement, initially with people who need it the most, people who are blind.
		We have cochlear implants now, and ultimately to help Alzheimer's patients and others.
		But several of the claims of religion and others to give sight to those who are blinded and to raise the poor, we're achieving now through science.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doctor, sticking with it for a second, because it fascinates me so, how much storage would you imagine that it would take to contain the contents of a human brain?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Good question.
		There have been a lot of estimates of that.
		I give over this in detail in the back of having that chip.
		By the way, there's like 100 pages of tiny footnotes in the back with mathematics and references to the primary scientific literature.
		But the usual answer is about a billion, billion bits or something to that effect.
		And the way to think about that is it would take a computer chip today the size of a good large building to replicate the sheer processing power of your brain.
		We simply can't do it.
		But every 18 months, you cut that in two so that by the year now, maybe 2015, 2020, somewhere thereabouts, a computer the size of a sugar cube equals your brain and forever thereafter greatly outstrips it.
		Now that doesn't mean you can just plug it in, of course.
		That's the tough job of working out the porting technology.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		But it does mean, in effect, a wink of a technological eye, it'll be unlimited computation.
		That's at hand.
		That's about going to quantum chips and other things like that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But, doctor, the entire contents of a human brain, if that were, and I understand that we're doubling speeds and the amount of storage exponentially increasing and getting cheaper and it's incredible what's going on out there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So one could imagine that one day it would be possible, if you transferred the contents of a human brain to a machine and it was stored, would it continue to contain the emotions, the feelings, the memories, everything of the person that had been uploaded?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		The answer is yes, and there's several reasons why, but there's a mathematical, of course I'm not going to prove theorems on the air, but it's a theorem, it's a fact in mathematics, that both neural systems and fuzzy systems are what we call universal approximators.
		That is, any curve you could draw that wiggles in any imaginable way, in ways that human beings cannot imagine.
		These systems can, in theory, always approximate if they have enough neurons or rules.
		So in principle, your brain is like a surface with trillions of bumps in it.
		It's a real complicated mathematical surface.
		And we can do a real good job of approximating it.
		Maybe not getting all the bumps in there at first, but eventually we can.
		So we know in theory we can do that, and we're creeping up on it.
		First we do simple surfaces with just a few bumps, but we're getting more bumps all the time as the computer power gets cheaper and cheaper.
		That's the first question.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well now if you did the, all right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Here's the real answer.
		The real answer to your question is your knowledge of self, as the classical philosophers and other thinkers have known for years, is an illusion.
		And we can sustain that illusion of all those signals flowing into you from your skin and from outside of you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doctor, we're at the bottom of the hour.
		Hold on.
		We'll be right back.
		Professor Costco is my guest.
		I'm Art Bell.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time.
		Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
		Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
		Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
		Don't be alright.
		Little driving on the flood at night.
		Come on, man.
		We'll be right back.
		News is blue.
		There's no way to get to you.
		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time on Premier Radio Networks.
		Tonight, an on-course presentation of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're talking with Professor Bart Costco about his book, Heaven in a Chip.
		Some of you might say, sounds like hell in a chip.
		We'll talk about some of that in a moment.
		I kind of wonder if I were to be uploaded and wake up and find myself in a machine.
		Otherwise, I'm the same.
		I'm Art Bell.
		I'm every bit the Art Bell I am right now, except I'm in a machine.
		I am a machine.
		No, I'm in a machine.
		If I did this while I was still alive, what would the other Art Bell be doing?
		And would we be the same individuals from that moment on out, learning, experiencing, feeling, being tortured, loved, how you love a machine?
		Well, I do know how you love a machine, but it's not really the same.
		You get some of the questions that I'm about to ask.
		there may not be answers for them but will try Obviously, I'm going to be pushing Professor Cusco into some science fiction-like areas, although maybe not.
		Professor, as I just asked on the air, and you said all of this might be possible by the year 20 what?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, the question is, how long will it take to have computer chips or have the sheer processing power of your brain?
		That's somewhere between 2020 and 2030.
		We used to think it was 2030 or 2050.
		We're moving that up because of Moore's Law, the doubling of chip density every 18 months.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So then a lot of people now living will live to experience this.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		No question about that.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		But that doesn't mean, though, that you can just open the brain and shove it in like the Frankenstein monster.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I know we're going to need a big connector.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		it but one would presume that the technologies would proceed along and probably we would be Would I be conscious inside that machine in the same sense that I'm conscious right now, theoretically?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think the answer is yes.
		As I said before the break, the real reason is your notion of self is really a kind of delicately sustained illusion, and we can continue that illusion.
		But you're touching on something else, though, a little trickier.
		What if I am living now in a brain and I want to get to the chip?
		Does the me and the brain die and then wake up in a chip?
		And how do I know it's the same person in the chip?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That is the question.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we can download the information from a disk drive, and all we have is a copy, right?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Right, and the copies pose a whole new problem here, the notion of identity.
		But here's the fuzzy solution.
		I call it chipping away at your brain.
		Let's suppose you're wide awake and the neurosurgeons pop off your skull and cut out a small chunk of your brain.
		Roll it around in some sensors to find out exactly how the chunk works, its input and output, and replace it with an equivalent little golden chiplet.
		They put it in, you're wide awake, this doesn't hurt, and when they insert it, you're going It might, but let's assume it doesn't.
		And they insert the little chipping, and it feels like you just drank a cup of coffee, but nothing's changed.
		You're still you.
		There's still the continuity of self.
		Even though, of course, you lose that every time you fall asleep.
		Now we take out another chunk of your brain, another part, and we repeat this process, and we do it step by fuzzy step.
		And by degrees, you are uploading ultimately to a chip because in the end, you're in that chip.
		What's left of your brain is a bunch of chunks floating in solution.
		And you've made a smooth transition without ever a break in consciousness.
		This is a classic fuzzy solution to a binary problem, by the way.
		So that itself is not a problem.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, suppose we did it, though, in the manner that I discussed.
		I would then, at that instant, be in two places.
		In every sense of me, I would be in two places at one time.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		The bifurcation of consciousness.
		It's a real issue that we'll have to face someday.
		And we haven't had to to date.
		But even before that time, one of the first things we want to do that will raise the problem in a different way is to back up.
		I mean, one of the terrible tricks that nature and evolution has played upon us is that our most precious information has no backup.
		You get old, the brain withers and dies.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		The cheapest computer has a backup.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		And so as you back up, wouldn't you like just to back up your last year or two of brain thought?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't know.
		I probably wouldn't go for the last year or two.
		But there would be segments.
		Yes, I'd pick out segments, and I'd say, let's have a look at it.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Wouldn't it be fun just to relive the best moments and the worst moments of your life and vary that it will relive it not just like watching on a screen, which is sort of a poor man's version of virtual reality, but really relive it with the same vivid sensations that you believe you're experiencing now.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You are there.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You are there.
		And let me tell you what we're really getting at here.
		We're trying to exorcise a little demon, a little thing called the homunculus, the little man who sits behind the screen in the brain pulling the levers, just like in the movie, by the way, Men in Black, which parodied that idea very well.
		And here's the way to think about that.
		If you eat an apple, I ask you, why did you eat that apple?
		And you say, I wanted to.
		Fine.
		Why did you want to?
		Because my will wanted to.
		Okay, and here's where it gets difficult.
		Okay, why did your will want to?
		There's really no good answer at that point.
		And this reveals the fiction bearer.
		There's no little art sitting inside the brain pulling the levers.
		It's much more complicated.
		What there is is something like the United Nations or something like a whole bunch of warring, competing neural circuits that are fighting for control.
		For example, if you look at an image, and in the image is an apple, I say, all right, look at the apple.
		You can focus your attention somehow that you can't explain on that apple.
		Now, we can explain that now mathematically.
		We have tools that show how that selective attention works.
		There's some neurons in the thalamus that seem to line up and create a false sense of searchlight for the illusion.
		We can replicate those kinds of things.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, my.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Let me make this very clear.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, please.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		We cannot have it both ways.
		We cannot enjoy the wonderful advances in science and biology and mathematics, and at the same time, keep these old concepts that came around, as far as we know, before there was civilization, notions of self and the way we speak and the language.
		These are going to have to give way to different concepts.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How do you really know that that will end up being true?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How do you really know that if you download bit by bit or collectively my entire brain that you really have the emotional me, the real me, all of me?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, again, I can work out the math of why glass breaks when I shatter it, but technically I have to break the glass each time to test that hypothesis.
		We don't know until you actually do it, of course, but you can make some very good reasoned guesses, but I want to stress the neural systems we work with, the fuzzy systems we work with, both obey the wonderful property of universal approximation.
		They, in theory, could do anything.
		That's presumably why nature has stumbled upon these devices and is developed in ways we're still trying to figure out.
		We work with the simplest.
		Just four or five neurons can often recognize very complex arrays of patterns.
		And again, you have over 100 billion working in your brain.
		They've been tuned for millions of years through your ancestors.
		So we have a much better sense that with that kind of computational power, that distributed parallel neural power that everybody has in their brain, not just in the brain, just what you have in your big toe is pretty impressive.
		And your spine is very impressive, that you're able to approximate a lot of things.
		By the way, a lot of things that we can't right now imagine, the true capabilities of the human mind, if you look at it mathematically, are beyond comprehension.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It brings up Another really interesting possibility.
		If I can be uploaded to a machine or even another human brain, then why would it not be possible to virtually record or upload the experiences of another person?
		You're not saying somebody who does the idiotic, crazy, insane echo challenge.
		I don't know if you've seen any of that stuff.
		These people torture themselves to death.
		And have me experience every minute of that echo challenge.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You touched on something a lot of us expect that someday, we won't live to see it, unfortunately.
		Those of us in the tank might come out and witness it.
		But someday this will be a form of entertainment.
		It's exactly that.
		But it's more than that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, it's much more than that.
		It's so much more than that, that why shouldn't we be afraid, scared to death of that, because that kind of available reality, I mean, they talk about reality TV.
		This would be actually being there, doing it, feeling every cut, every bruise, every bit of pain, everything that person experienced.
		That would be so overwhelming and so encompassing that it would be tempting to forego life for one extreme experience after another.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, again, if you jump there first, in the same way, can you imagine art 100 years ago telling someone we're going to have 200 people flying through the sky in metal boats?
		Are you kidding?
		I'd be terrified to do that.
		And we couldn't imagine society now without it.
		But if you get their degrees, I think you'll find it'll be a popular form of entertainment, but there's something else going on here, too.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But we've got a problem now, Doctor, with people watching five hours of television a day.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If you offered them this, you would be offering them something that would be better than life.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think in the end, Art, that life is going to turn out to be grist for our imaginative meal.
		We take the sensations of us and others in the past and random number generators to create more.
		But if we look at the real set of mathematical possibilities that even our humble brains could experience, we haven't sampled a fraction of a fraction of a fraction percent of it.
		There's a lot of sensations and patterns out there to think about and do that we haven't imagined.
		But no doubt, entire sense modalities.
		In fact, if you just took the human genome and looked at the mathematical possibilities of what we know of the genome now, about 30,000 genes, and the way it's pulled up out of amino acids, you could construct creatures consistent with that that you would think are bug-eyed monsters from out of space, but still compatible with the human genome.
		There's so much potential combinatorially when you're playing with this many elements.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If you create something of that sort, why would it not imagine us as simply a bunch of pests, intellectual dullards that would be better, I don't know, serving them in their needs, whether it be electricity or whatever it might be?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		This is a classic concern if we have the big mega supercomputer chewing away and we're nothing like a dog with some speeded up thoughts that doesn't have anything really intelligent to say to them.
		I guess that's possible.
		Well, according to the fact that you will see that power, you will have that expansion of thought.
		And we'll get there a step at a time, a chip at a time.
		But you did touch on something else, though, the idea that we are watching more TV.
		What is that really?
		That's just signal processing.
		We love to bombard our sense receptors, our skin and our eyes and other things, with as much and as rich a stimuli as we can get.
		I think that trend is going to continue in ways that we really can't anticipate.
		This is truly the tip of the iceberg.
		I think it'll be a lot of fun.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, one can imagine living all kinds of scenarios, underground tapes going around or chips or whatever they would be.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, I'm sure you can imagine all the permutations that would be possible, right?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		A small subset of them, but yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
		So how does that not, in effect, destroy society as we have always known it and loved it and hated it?
		Or would you say it will do that and it'll be a better place?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		The word destroy is pretty strong, right?
		I think if you were to take a snapshot of 100 years from now, I think we would all say, my God, people want to live in that.
		And that's probably been true for the last hundred years, the last 500 years, or any given 100-year snapshot.
		But it's going to be much more intense in the next, given these rapid rates of change.
		But getting there by degrees, I think we'll not only get there, I think people will be standing in line to get there.
		I think it will be such a rich experience.
		Just the idea of conquering death and disease itself should be enough.
		It may make us all into couch potatoes of the worst kind.
		I mean, one of the classic problems in philosophy is called the brain-in-a-vat problem.
		How can you prove that you right now aren't a brain sitting in a vat of fluid somewhere?
		Very much like brought out in the movie Matrix.
		And technically, you can't.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Technically, I can't.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You get real close and you have some reasonable guesses.
		And then you realize, again, looking at this as an illusion of self, a sense of ability to focus your concentration and struggling to recapture those items of memory.
		And again, of course, this gets worse with age.
		We can do that, and we can do so much better.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, in the legal world, though, you use the benchmark is what a reasonable person would conclude.
		And as a reasonable person, I conclude I'm not in a vat at the moment, floating about thinking my thoughts.
		However, I can imagine myself in a vat, and I can imagine your technology eventually getting me there, or perhaps my son or his son.
		I don't know.
		Your chips.
		But I mean, what kind of chips?
		but what kind of world is that going to be is that really going to be a world that you for example You would probably want to live in that world because reading down a little further, you wear a bracelet.
		What is this bracelet for?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		This is to freeze me when I die.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Freeze you.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Deanimate.
		And there's a reason for that.
		We don't have backup.
		And unfortunately, most of us alive today simply were born a little too early.
		We're not going to live to the good times when it's relatively cheap and expensive to upload, at least for those in developed countries at first.
		There is only one way, with any chance of scientific plausibility whatsoever, however slight that may be, of backing yourself up.
		It's not a good way.
		It's not a cheap way, but it is the only way.
		And that is upon your death or deanimation, recognizing that you are your synapses.
		You are your brain.
		That's the hardware, but it's been conditioned like software through your experiences to freeze that.
		Now, it's not going to spontaneously come back when you thaw it out.
		In fact, it looked like if you've ever seen a frozen strawberry when you thaw that out.
		But with the proposed nanotechnology of the future, with molecular engineering, with a bit of patience, you in theory, without violating any laws of physics, without any great cost, can reconstruct it at sell at a time and boost it.
		And that's a good way, I'd say the only way at the present to back up.
		So the real question is, would you bet your life on this?
		No.
		But I am more than happy to bet my death on it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor, are you going to have your entire body frozen or just you?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I happen to be one of those, Art.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I'm an all-body kind of guy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I know there's a choice.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Either there's a choice.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		There's a neural suspension.
		The head is much better, and I recommend it to the interested listener for a relatively small sum, Art, each month.
		You can set that money aside that you would otherwise spend on the movies, and it goes to an insurance policy that upon your death pays Alcor, the Climax outfit, to suspend you.
		It's not a big deal.
		The liquid nitrogen is cheap, and you do time in a bottle at minus 320 degrees Fahrenheit where there's no change.
		If you have to wait 50 years or 500, it really makes no difference.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are they in California?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		They moved from California.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All good.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		See, all those rolling black outset.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		Rolling black and earthquakes are a big issue.
		That's why if you're all body, they put you upside down so the head would thaw last.
		They've moved to Scottsdale, Arizona.
unidentified		Uh-huh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, good move.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		so you will your entire body is going to be preserved cryogenically first you're pumped through an antifreeze of glycerin Antifreeze, basically.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Glycerin.
		It takes about 10 days to cool you down to that level, and then you're frozen.
		The other alternative is barrier burn, which have zero chance in terms of the information lost of reconstruction.
		I mean, the real tragedy, Art, is that we all, in effect, have one car from the lot, and it's starting to fall apart.
		This idea here, we'd like to keep upgrading it, or in theory, repairing the same car over and over.
		But nature didn't deal with that hand.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or even get a brand new car, ultimately.
unidentified		Absolutely.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hi, yi, yi, doctor.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I guess I ought to ask, you don't have to answer, about your religious beliefs, because a lot of people of religion, of course, would never consider freezing themselves.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		But why is that?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		They go to sleep.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, because in their opinion, when they die, they have something called a soul, which goes then through a natural transition to possibly another dimension, to somewhere else where consciousness continues, to which you say what.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		When they go to sleep, where does that soul go?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I've always wondered about that myself.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Another thing, and many surgeries now are such that the body is emptied of blood and liquid, watery, icy water is pumped through the veins.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I saw the 60-minute surgery.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Exactly, that's a good example.
		According to the old definitions, you're dead, but of course we can bring that back to life.
		Where'd the soul go in that case?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where'd the soul go?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		The era of the soul arguments go back to our ancient natural language.
		And a good way to, I think, put this notion in perspective is someone's looking at your watch, looking at a time handle, suddenly it stops and says, oh, where did the motion go?
		No, no, no.
		It's just a matter of energy and gears.
		And in fact, there are very religious people in chronic suspension now and are signed up for it.
		I mean, it's in theory compatible with it.
		But you're right, on its face, it does seem to fly in the face of these earlier supernatural notions.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Out of curiosity, Professor, when these people agreed to be frozen as very religious people, Christians, whatever, where did they think their soul would be while they were cryogenically frozen?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And when they are retrieved, if that ever becomes possible, where did they think their soul will be then?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It's a good question.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I've never heard a good answer from them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, then.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		These are faith issues.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Those people of great faith who are frozen right now, aren't they sort of hypocritical in a way?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I'm not convinced of that.
		I mean, if you think about those sci-fi movies we used to like from the 60s and 70s, be it Planet of the Apes when Charles Henson wakes up from chronic suspension, a form of chronic suspension, or those unlucky scientists frozen and killed by Hell of the Computer in 2001, there didn't seem any major problems about their soul.
		It was a form of sleep, and so is this.
		We simply stopped the motion.
		Here's another way to think about it.
		We have different scales of time, of course.
		And right now, you and I are thinking in very slow neural time.
		You mentioned this before the break.
		If you're on a chip time, 30 seconds of our slow neural time can be many, many hundreds or even thousands of years.
		So time's an issue.
		But if you're on quantum time, we're talking issues at 10 to minus 43.
		In a quantum episode, where's your soul go?
		You and I are suspended robots during that period of time.
		I don't think the old supernatural notion of soul has been sufficiently well worked out to handle that, nor can it address the problem of how can something that has no senses enjoy the claimed senses of heaven, like eating grapes.
		We can deal with all those problems in the digital domain.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You could even convince a machine that here have a grape, enjoy it.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Again, I'd stress, Art, that if aliens came now and looked at us, they would say, what are these two machines talking about to each other?
		They are machines.
		Ultimately, they're energy and gear.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's very interesting.
		We've got a break here at the top of the hour, Doctor.
		Hold on.
		Remember, I think it was Dr. Kaku I asked, wouldn't they...
		It was Seth Shostak of SETI.
		And I said, Dr. Shostak, isn't it likely that the first beings we will encounter, the first extraterrestrials, are going to be machines?
		Asked him for the first time ever that question last time he was on, and he said, absolutely.
		The odds are very high indeed.
		They will be machines.
unidentified		Let me shake it any way you want it.
		Call me to love me.
		It's all right.
		In the year 2525, if man is still alive, if woman can survive, they may fall.
		In the year 3535, ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies.
		Everything you think, do and say, is in the field you took today.
		In the year 4545, ain't gonna need your teeth, won't need your eyes.
		You won't find a thing to chew.
		Nobody's gonna look at you.
		In the year 5555, your arms hanging lips at your toes.
		Your legs got nothing to do.
		Some machines doing that for you.
		In the year 6565, ain't gonna need no help, and won't need no wife.
		You pick your son, pick your daughter too.
		from the bottom of the long glass.
		From the bottom of the long glass.
		Whoa, whoa, whoa.
		in the year 6565, in the year 6565, it's got to come.
		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time, tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A prophetic song, I imagine so.
		We'll ask in a moment.
		My guest is Professor Bart Costco.
		All kinds of education, all kinds of experience in the areas that we're talking about, fuzzy logic, what's coming.
		very well credentialed and he'll be right back Once again, Professor Bart Cosco, Professor, does that song sound perhaps a little prophetic to you?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yes, it does, Art, and bless you for playing it.
		I have to tell you this.
		When I was a young boy on a farm in Kansas, I and my friends would sit around listening to that smoking pot talking about the future, and that had a lot to do with my choice of career in science.
		That very song by Zager and Evans in the year 25, 25 is extremely thoughtful.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, wait a minute, Professor.
		Smoking pot, how come you don't have too many brain cells fried and cooked to be transferred anywhere or even to function well enough to get journal doctorate and all the rest of that?
		I don't know.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It worked wonders for me.
		I don't smoke anymore and haven't for quite a while, but it helped open doors.
		I read the books by Aldous Huxley and others and experimented with those kinds of things in the early 70s.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So I take it you're not in favor of the government's war on plants.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		No, and more than that, Art.
		I think, just on his point, that people who have, in the educational at least, have an undue power over other folks by way of the government, and in particular, the medical establishment.
		If you, as an adult, wish to walk into a store and buy penicillin at your own risk, willing to forego suing someone if you assume the risk, and by all means you'll be able to do that.
		So not only should the nonsense of the war on so-called drugs be eliminated, there's no basis in the Constitution for it.
		At least in the old days of prohibiting alcohol, they had to amend the Constitution.
		This media didn't go that way.
		But I think it's inevitable that this will go all the way to self-medication.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This obviously would have application for, let's say, when all of this first becomes available and we first start doing all of this.
		People of wealth, people with money, and it's going to take, no matter what the technology is, it always costs a lot at the beginning, right?
		Absolutely.
		So the people who are going to be able to afford this sort of thing are going to be the very well-off.
		How would you imagine them doing it?
		In other words, somehow we picture an old guy on his deathbed, the last throws, and you're going to upload his brain.
		Well, what you're going to get is what there is, and that's kind of a degraded brain at that point, isn't it?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It raises a real question about when is it an optimal time to die or upload.
		But the nature on this score of cryonics is what we call in computer science a push-down stack.
		Remember those trays, you put one on top and it pushes down the whole stack?
		Well, the property there is that really in dire straits, it raises the question when you should be frozen.
		And one of my colleagues, Dr. Thomas Donaldson, had this very trauma because he has brain cancer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I know the case.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You know the case.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I know the case very well.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It made national headlines.
unidentified		Right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		And even inspired an episode of L.A. Law that turned out far more favorably than it worked out in real L.A. Law.
		But his case, he's a mathematician, was he said, look, I don't want to wait till I'm dead and possibly autopsy, which would destroy the whole thing.
		I want to be frozen now.
		And the government wouldn't allow that.
		And fortunately for him, his tumor was, and I understand, still is in remission, but could come back at any point.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know him personally?
		Professionally, through organically, all right.
		If you were faced with his situation, would you make the fight to be frozen early?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You bet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You would.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Like a shot.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You are your synapse of technology.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you honestly have that much faith in the cryogenic technology?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It's cryotic technology, by the way.
		Not so much that I have it in that.
		That's just a suspension mechanism.
		I have faith in science.
		Now, again, whether it's 50 years or 500, even 5,000, it makes no difference.
		At minus 320 degrees Fahrenheit, there is no change.
		Quantum changes barely occur.
		Time is frozen.
		This is forward-only time travel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But there is a problem, though.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, if you keel over with a heart attack in a parking lot somewhere and it takes them quite a while to get to you and then transport you to the appointed freezing location, your brain is beginning to turn mush already.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		We call that molecular death.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Even worse if you're at a fire or something.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, a fire would be very bad.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		We all run that risk.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But if you choose the moment yourself when you are still of sound mind, legal term, I guess, then presumably you would be revived or uploaded in that precise state or close to it when you're thawed.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		With one problem with the government, and which I want to point out has been supported and aided and abetted here by the undertaker and funeral industry, a dark little industry that seldom gets explored.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		But the problem is, right now, if you do that, if you basically killed yourself to be frozen, you almost guarantee an autopsy to destroy your brain.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Courtesy of the government.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		There's another problem with this.
		If you want to leave some money, for example, to compound, just put it in a bond.
		Like Benjamin Franklin put a dollar in the bank knowing that 150 years or so it would amount to a huge quantity because of the exponential returns.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		We don't have that kind of in-perpetuity status in this country.
		The money goes by default to the government after 20 or so years.
		I believe Liechtenstein and two other countries have that.
		That's the other issue, because part of this is ultimately funded by a pot of money and what are called resurrection bounties to give people incentive to pull you out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I was going to say you could do all this under the table, I suppose, but you really couldn't do these legal things under the table.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You'd want some sort of a title.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		We're going to have to readdress all that.
		Just as now with cloning and other things, we have to rethink the nature of conception and offspring.
		This will happen on the other end of death and resurrection.
		For example, what if you're a mass murderer and you want to be chronically suspended?
		Will they allow that?
unidentified		I don't know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, I wouldn't.
		But who am I?
		What about, you mentioned cloning.
		Now, the Raelians, I've interviewed the Raelians.
		You know who they are, right?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You're going to have to refresh me on that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, you don't.
		All right.
		The Raelians probably are going to be the first.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yes, I'm sorry.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I do know.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They're going to be the first to clone a little 10-year-old girl.
unidentified		Correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They actually believe that it's going to be possible and soon to clone and then use the process you're talking about to replace the brain of the clone with the present brain of the needy person, we'll put it that way.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think they've got some pretty good odds on the first act and very bad odds on the second.
		And I would point out, though, what they're really talking about is just another form of reproduction.
		People have all kinds of silly ideas about sex as it is.
		This is really no different than that.
		And I think the argument for having children to replace, to give children to infertile couples, is a compelling one.
		And you'll see that being the inner-edge of the wedge here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Definitely not going to be as much fun.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, that is saying something, but I suppose you would separate sex and reproduction totally.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Or if I say one other thing about cloning, because the media, I think, gets us wrong all the time.
		If you like navel oranges, you're eating clones.
		Almost every fruit tree in America and most around the world is a cloned tree that we graft things on.
unidentified		True.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		And we've been doing this for a long time.
		All of our food is genetically modified.
		The chromosomes of an ear of corn are really a Frankenstein nightmare, if you think about it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		but this is the law for a very long time it's quite natural to extend it from the animal kingdom Have you been hearing about that?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I've heard that in other issues, because it raises a very real question.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		One issue has to do, each time the cell divides, there's a little tape in there called the telomerase tape.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		And you snip it off, and when it snips off about 50 times or so, that's it.
		You run out and you die.
		And the question is, like with Dolly, as I understand it, does Dolly get a brand new telomerase tape when she's born, when it was born, or is it the tape of the mother that was fairly old?
		And as I understand, the telomerase tape was still in good condition.
		Of course, it doesn't mean you could overcome these other problems.
		And there are real issues about creating a creature so quickly in a dish when you might otherwise have nine months in gestation.
		Evolution's had a long time to work out the bugs in that approach.
		I would think at first you'd have some problems.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How do you feel ethically and morally about pursuing this whole you obviously, I mean, you're very confident the way you speak.
		You're very confident.
		You're very sure.
		You've taken personal steps.
		I suppose it's a silly question.
		But do you have any moral or ethical reservations about this technology proceeding?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Which technology?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, everything we've been discussing from cloning to eventually down or uploading a human brain and or those things that will obviously be in between, many of which arguably will advance and help mankind in many ways.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But I mean, as you look down the road in this technology, there are going to be some pretty big moral ethical questions.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		There will, and there will be unforeseen dangers.
		I don't foresee any major ones at the time, but you never do in advance.
		But the answer is no.
		And I think, again, 100 years ago, when life expectancy, you and I almost all likelihood would be dead by now, people would be scared.
		Are we fiddling with the natural way of things, living to age 70 and 80 on average?
		Yes.
		I don't think so at all.
		I don't mind using a toothbrush or driving in a car or an airplane.
		I think it's all within the realm of scientific possibility.
		The real issue in something like this art is to what extent will the law evolve?
		And the law is somewhat like your brain.
		It's an adaptive system.
		And it's done a pretty good job of adapting.
		A case in point has to do with spam email.
		Spam email has been a problem, of course, for most people.
		And the courts have been pretty good.
		They took the old medieval doctrine of trespass to chattels, chattel being movable property, and said when someone sends you spam, that in effect is a form of virtual trespass.
		So rather than creating new laws, they've updated it.
		It's a case called from 1997 called CompuServe versus Cyber Promotions.
		You can look it up online.
		And it's set a precedent into the process of stereotypes that will evolve.
		I think that will happen here, too, a step at a time.
		The crucial thing is that those who take the risk, though, are going to have to indemnify and bear the potential cost.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If, here's a good one then for you.
		If there was a process available by which you could upload your brain to some sort of machine until something else was figured out and you had a brain tumor, we'll make it easy for you here.
		Would you be prepared to do that today if you had to?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You used the word reasonable before, and if there were a reasonable expectation that it would work, and if the alternative was a good old Be burned or buried, then sure.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Again, these technologies have one great thing in their favor: that the alternatives are hopeless.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, let's get science fiction-y, I guess, for a moment.
		Maybe you can project this.
		Once the brain was in the machine, would it continue to expand, learn, feel, have emotions?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Let's take that one at a time.
		What is learning?
		Learning is change of your synapses.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		These are the wires.
		If you took a brain and cut it open, you see a lot of gray matter.
		That's basically wires.
		The neurons are largely on the outside, that convoluted surface of the neocortex.
		And every time a photon hits your eye, it makes a little change.
		Brains are remarkably plastic.
		That's, by the way, a reason to be careful what you watch on TV or who you hang out with.
		It leaves its mark, maybe subconsciously, but it's modifying those synapses.
		Now, if we model synapses, as we do mathematically, and you can download free neural software to demonstrate this, in fact, I introduced something called the BAM or the bidirectional associated memory that's available in the public domain.
		You can test this.
		You'll see that we can create with very simple now electrical devices or in software little learnable synapses.
		Now, if we've uploaded you into a device that has those, it has not just your current number of quadrillions, but perhaps many more, or those that modify and change with far more sophisticated learning algorithms, and I assure you ART, there are hundreds.
		There are hundreds.
		And there are three journals that could describe this.
		The Journal of Neural Networks, which I'm one of the editors, associate editors, a journal of neural computation, and the IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks.
		They come out monthly, and each month they're chock full of algorithms that if you could capture in the way you're talking about, would give you what we view as superhuman capabilities.
		So yes, you'll continue to learn.
		All these patterns and experiences, that whole illusion of self that we call self.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How would I find my satisfaction, my emotion?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would I turn from the physical ultimately as I was in the machine to the pure intellectual finding my happiness, my joy, my satisfaction in the completion of some problem that was put to me?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		In other words, how would I envision a world of sterile Mr. Spocks walking around?
		My answer to that is think about you and I are living in computers right now.
		Again, they're just sloppy computers made of three pounds of meat.
		They have this bizarre property of needing sleep.
		A bump on the head screws them up.
		A lot of what you take to be your emotions and changes are simply fluctuations in blood sugar.
		And other things, of course, strokes can happen, all sorts of strange deteriorations.
		So I don't think that's fundamentally different.
		I like to think of it again as the patterns of the mind like music.
		And if you want to replay the patterns or the kinds of patterns you have now, you should be able to do that with no problem.
		You can do vastly more original and more powerful things, beginning with the ability to edit memories at will.
		First off, having a complete vivid memory.
		Let me tell you another bad property about neurons that we have, all mammals have.
		Neurons work on a 40-millisecond window.
		They add up the little pulses flowing in, and that's basically it.
		And then if nothing come in, they'll change a synapse.
		But do you really want a 40-millisecond window?
		That's why we forget everything so quickly.
		You read a book at night and you've forgotten 95% the next day.
		This is what we call the recency effect.
		And it's really easy to see mathematically why it happens.
		It has to do with what's called a decay term.
		And we know how to deal with that.
		But you would like, I think, be able to vary at will.
		For example, what we were talking about 20 minutes ago has kind of faded from memory.
		It's on your tape.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So in other words, I might find joy in, even heavenly joy, in being able to remember everything in.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Or not to remember it.
		I mean, if you really shake, as a lot of folks do, that your childhood traumas are interfering with your life, then you'll be able to control and filter those out and do many other things.
		And maybe, in effect, have memories from experiences that you didn't directly have.
		But this all should be things under your control.
		They're not now.
		You're under control of it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor, do you ever see young Frankenstein?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You remember the abnormal brain?
		Absolutely.
		When you said we might make mistakes along the way, if you were to take an abnormal brain and upload it to a machine, would you still have an abnormal brain or would you then have something that you could sectionalize and use perfectly well?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, the first point is I think that we have two points.
		The first point is I think that the very abnormal nature, maybe disease or a big brain tumor there or something, we like to think cause some of the aberrant behavior.
		So we should be able to avoid that, but the first order would be the same behavior.
		But the second point, I'm glad you brought up Frankenstein because I always ask myself as a kid, whatever happens if they put the good brain in?
		You never see that in a movie.
unidentified		No.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, you never see that.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		And that's really what we're talking about.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We all know that the jars get mixed up.
		We've seen it.
		Kidding you.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I dropped the brain in a slot, I believe.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		So, yes, I mean, you're right.
		So, a good brain.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think, by the way, most criminists view Dr. Frankenstein as a hero.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm just trying to understand how I would feel in a machine.
		Would I find my satisfactions in all of this memory, in this ability to compute endlessly, to grow and learn endlessly?
		Would these be my mental orgasms?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Could be, but the easy answer is we're in a machine now.
		We seem to have fun with that.
		But I explored this in the novel Nanotime that you mentioned, that once you go through a kind of Buddhist, like the Buddha did, at first he was into sensory experiences and all the wine, women, and songs he could handle.
		And after that, you really might want to have fun in an interesting spiritual way, contemplating things that we can't now, listening to music that doesn't have two or three independent voices, but two or three hundred or a thousand, really having something interesting to think about in terms of origins of the universe and more complex ideas that just wouldn't fit in our little brains right now.
		So I think there would be all sorts of things on the conceptual frontier.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I think I mentioned to you that Seth Shostak from SETI said the most likely encounter we human beings will have, if we have one, if we are contacted, the most likely scenario is we will be contacted by machines.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Correct.
		And there's a real simple reason why information is the cheapest thing to transmit.
		Matter is very expensive.
		And so we'll likely find some information beam or something that encapsulates that and can create that, the robot probe.
		We're already doing that ourselves on other planets.
		But if someone has a millionaire start on us, you would think that they'd be doing that to a great extent.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would it be the eventual societal evolution of any planet that manages to survive to essentially become machines from biological to move to the machine?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You know, I think that's right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		If you go back and read the book 2001, not the movie, but the book, they try to.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, wasn't that a great book?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It's a wonderful book.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hold on.
		We'll pick up on that when we get back.
		We're at break time here.
		I'm Art Bell.
		This is Coast to Coast AM.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in Time.
		Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
		But she lets me down every time.
		Can't make her mind.
		She's no one lovers at night with me.
		She'll be so infinite.
		I wanna hold my bed.
		Transcription by CastingWords
		Remember Radio Networks presents Art Bell somewhere in time.
		Tonight's program originally aired April 4th, 2001.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, there may be some rides that you may not want to take, or you may want to think about for a while.
		Not Professor Husco.
		He's already decided.
		He's going to be taking that trip.
		I'm Art Bell.
unidentified		be right back.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor, I believe you said something about 2001.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Correct.
		You ask what's next in the biggest picture.
		If you think about the end of the book, 2001, not the movie, Stanley Cooper tried to capture this with that wonderful display, a psychedelic display of colors at the end.
		If you read the book, you see, Arthur Clarke was talking about becoming information, becoming your own thought, really capturing the idea of that great German philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer, who said, the world is my idea of it, and ultimately mingling with space and time itself, and to weave yourself into the very fabric of the universe.
		And there's a lot of reasons for that.
		There's a relationship, as we know, between matter and energy.
		We're also discovering relationships between energy and information.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I rather fancied at the end of the book that he in essence became a god.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I guess that would be another way to put it.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		In terms of how we would define a God, I think that's absolutely right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		But I think Arthur tried to take that a little further.
		And the idea that more advanced species will have shed these mortal coils and the constraints of what Arthur has called the tyranny of matter, sir, the tyranny of matter.
		And again, if there's a relationship between mass and energy equals mc squared, and a relationship between energy and information, it follows that there's a relationship between information and matter.
		And here it is.
		It's something given to us by what's called the Hawking-Bekenstein equation.
		You can measure the information content of anything, of you, of a book, by throwing it into a black hole and seeing how big the black hole's belly swells.
		And so the question arises, can we view the entire world as made of information?
		And some thoughtful physicists answered that by saying if we threw the whole universe into a black hole, we would get an amount of information that's 10 to the number 120, which roughly is the number of all possible chess games, by the way.
		And that's what we are worth in this universe, where the bit count is bigger than a Google, which is 10 to the 100.
		It's 10 to the 120.
		There is a deep connection between information and matter.
		So one concept that a lot of folks have looked at is what about the idea of the universe as a kind of chip?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		and now we're turning that around here saying that ship to me a kind of universe and that's ultimately behind it Mike in Las Vegas wants to know, if a large number of people are ported into computers, who's going to pay to keep the electricity on for them?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Will they be imprisoned in computers as slaves, working for juice, forever imprisoned?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That was the theme of the movie Matrix, which did broach the question, though, to be sure you're...
		It's a good question.
		And it brings up the real problem with uploading to a chip.
		That is, somebody with a flip of a switch can injure eternity just that quickly.
		But the energy costs, as chips get smaller and more efficient, are smaller and smaller themselves.
		If we play this out, how could we be in a chip and have indefinite time spans?
		Well, first point, time in a chip is thousands, millions of times, maybe billions of times faster than what we call neural time, the slow time.
		Your sense of time is very subjective.
		Again, one minute of our time right now can easily be 100 years plus on chip time, even with nanoprocessors that are under design.
		So you can get a lot of that.
		Ultimately, you could always get energy sucked out of a star or black hole somewhere.
		But it does raise the more serious questions with our system of government evolved out of tribal warfare and such, that one of the real problems with anything like this, of not just a full upload, but even a partial implant, is the control of the government.
		Do you want the Supreme Court finding a, quote, compelling governmental interest and having access to your chip?
		What about evil thoughts?
		They'll give new meaning to the notion of a hate crime if they can simply get a subpoena and downplay your replay your thoughts.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, but information ultimately is power, and you know our government will be first in line doing all this because the super mind can sure create the super weapon, can't it?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It can do that, and but this really raises a deeper question, Art.
		If we start all going to our own little heaven in a chip, each man or woman or saying a king unto his own castle or bubble, we don't really need governments anymore.
		This is something a government.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, see, now that will really bother them, I guarantee you.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, but in the end, economics wins out.
		And governments, if you think about it, are powers, are monopolies on power in a region.
		They're atom-based kinds of things.
		You know, the logic of the sword, you know, we see that now with the battle over China, who owns the kind of fuzzy airspace or other spaces.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The fuzzy airspace.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, we know the property rights are not well defined.
		Just like if I blow smoke in your face, I don't have good control, 100% control of that smoke.
		Wherever you have fuzzy property rights, you typically have a legal problem.
		But as time passes, it's just not clear what the function of a government would be.
		Now, you may want to govern yourself and a chip.
		And in fact, if you think about a lot of the classical religions, especially the Middle Eastern religions, kind of view heaven and God as like big government in the sky.
		And God is a kind of dictator or something.
		And they may well choose to do that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, even our government, which is the best of the worst.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Look at what it's doing with the drug war.
		Why is it waging the drug war?
		Mainly, I believe, because it hurts productivity.
		Because when we are feeling really good or stoned or whatever, we're not productive.
		And if we're not productive, we're not paying many taxes and we're not supporting the government.
		Now, what you have envisioned in terms of, for example, uploading a human brain, or no, no, no, let's back off from that.
		Let's just say being able to experience what somebody else has experienced.
		Oh, my God.
		Now we can live entirely vicariously.
		We can do it 24 hours a day if we want to.
		No, we still have to sleep.
		So we could do it most of our waking hours.
		Wonderful, vicarious life.
		You know damn well it's going to be a war against chips.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Could be.
		I think at first there will be that.
		There'll be the have chips and not have chips kind of arguments.
		But I think the drug war is a different matter.
		I think that's like slavery was.
		People know that the arguments aren't there.
		They know that a black market in any substance kicks up the price.
		We have the evidence of alcohol prohibition.
		They know that's wrong.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This would be every bit.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, no, it would be more psychologically addicting than any drug we've got today.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		But when the ship is going in a certain direction, like the ship of state has been on this, and it hit a fever frenzy in the 70s and 80s on this, I think it takes a while to turn around.
		And just as it did with alcohol prohibition and it was slavery, people knew that was wrong long before.
		But still, you read the Constitution, there's a slavery clause in there.
		It's been struck out by the 13th Amendment, but what was that doing in there in 1790?
		And I think the same thing Here, when a certain generation, an older generation, frankly dies off, I think you'll see the drug war is just a bad memory of the past.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But you're not dying off.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're going to freeze yourself.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I am going to, right.
		I'm talking about the current power structure.
		And I want to stress also for the listener art how easy it is to do this and how only a thousand people have done this.
		This is not a big deal financially.
		If you advertise it out, paying a little bit each month for an insurance contract, how big a deal is that as a kind of backup?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now let's try a little, let me ask you a question about this, all right?
		Let us say in the next 30 or 40 years, you're close to death and you're frozen.
		You managed to get by the barriers and you're frozen pretty instantly and you've got good prospects of being revived.
		As you look technologically into the future, when do you think, Professor, that you will likely wake up?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think our usual window of what we can't predict beyond is 50 years.
		And if we ask what kind of technology would you need to bring someone out.
		Today, you know, it'd be like trying, as the critics have often said, trying to resurrect the cow from the hamburger.
		We couldn't do that at all.
		But if you view the body as a container of information, the DNA is very clear evidence of that, but there's much more beyond it.
		Like, for example, what's concoded at the synapse at a higher level.
		If you view that as information, all that is maintained when you're in the tank.
		Sure, there's incredible ice damage now, despite the efforts to minimize it with glycerin and other antifreezes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we're not that far from the cow from the hamburger.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Okay, but let me make this point.
		But if you view that as information, then what do we really need to restructure?
		You need little devices doing manufacturing and construction at the cell level, at the nano level, not at the molecular, not at the microprocessor level.
		Right now we're working with big blobs of molecules.
		So in theory, for example, you couldn't take an orange and unstack the orange molecules and restack them as apple molecules, and you've just turned an orange into an apple.
		It would look like black magic today.
		I suspect it would be commonplace to some future generations.
		So we know that's okay, and that's doable.
		It requires a level of molecular engineering because several trillion cells in the body.
		And it's a big problem, but it's an engineering problem.
		It's not a religious problem.
		It's not a government problem.
		It's something in theory we can knock out.
		And with the increasing efficiencies of science and markets, we'll, in all likelihood, do that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		May I ask you a personal question?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you married?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I am.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Children?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I have one yet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How about the prospect of you, because after all you are thinking about you, being revived at a time when your wife will be long gone, your son will be long gone, maybe your grandchildren or daughter, I'm sorry, will be long gone.
		You may have grandchildren or great-grandchildren or even greater.
		Who knows?
		But everybody you know, everything you knew, it's all gone.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think we call this the tears of the Buddha.
		It'll be so sad that all my friends and non-friends and strangers I would like to have met simply didn't take that simple precautionary step.
		They were grasshoppers, not ants, and they weren't backed up.
		That'll be sad, but I suspect there'll be so many distractions and entertainments of the day.
		And my question is, will my PhD still be good?
		I don't know.
		I'll be happy to get another one.
		But I think it'll be a lot of fun.
		Just imagine again if it were 100 years ago, or 1,000 years ago, if you were a Viking, somehow frozen and revived now, you'd miss the old days to be sure, but I think you'd fit right in and you'd be watching Survivor after a week.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So in other words, we're adaptable.
		Now we sit at a computer.
		Oops, there's the blue screen of death.
		Oh, we try to reboot.
		Oh, it won't boot.
		Oh, it says there's not even a hard drive there.
		You put your head in your hands.
		That's death.
		All right?
		And you're imagining that before that moment, we simply copied the hard drive, and so we...
		The software, ID.
		The software, yes.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		We're freezing the hard drive that has a software.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Equating the hard drive to the brain.
		Okay.
		And so there you are.
		You imagine that every bit of you, again, all the emotions, all the feelings, all the memories, all the everything, it would all be there.
		The only thing is that the people who are running this machine.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		If they're people, yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, if they're people, could begin to administer all kinds of changes, cause you to forget your wife and your children and in fact your life.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And in fact, they could actually, couldn't they, Professor, virtually erase everything that was your identity using you as a machine for their own purposes, whatever those might be.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That could certainly happen.
		They could implant politically correct chips to filter out bad thoughts of the day.
		Especially they might be very afraid of someone coming back who's born in the 20th century in the future.
		That's certainly possible.
		Or they might view you as a kind of precious time relic to be cherished.
		But I just don't think it would be a big deal.
		I think in the end, there'll come a point when death is, disease is conquered first, that's inevitable, and death becomes something largely voluntary.
		People, lifespans will go up to a few hundred years when cells in a factory generate.
		There's a lot of schemes how that might happen.
		And there'll be proportionally a small number of people still floating in a tank.
		And maybe just for sentimental reasons, they'll bring them out and resurrect them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you remember the Star Trek episode where all the little brains in the tea tree dishes or whatever they were were sitting around betting on gladiators?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It's ringing a distant bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A distant bell.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, anyway, there's another Star Trek episode that does come to mind.
		And at the end of this, there's the fellow in the shiny suit, and the big revelatory moment when Bones and Spock say, we can't figure this out, man in the shiny suit.
		What seems to be here is an authentic manuscript of Johannes Brahms of music.
		And this seems to be a sculpture done by Michelangelo.
		He says, well, there's a reason for that, because I am Brahms.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Because I am Michelangelo, because back in ancient Babylonia, I happened by random chance to have cells that were regenerating.
		And I was sort of an average guy.
		It's just that I learned a lot along the way.
		And, you know, after 2,000, 3, 4,000 years, I got pretty good at making statues and writing music.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So your heaven in a chip could be exactly that.
		Heaven in a chip.
		Or it could be hell in a chip.
unidentified		Could be.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Could be a constrained heaven in a chip.
		Could be a well-managed, well-regulated heaven in a chip.
		But the alternative art is synaptic obliteration.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you imagine, though, a time given digital immortality that an entity would choose itself, for any reason you could imagine, to be terminated.
unidentified		Sure.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		And again, I'll cite the great Sir Arthur Clark here.
		He has a famous novella called The City in the Stars.
		It takes place a billion years from now.
		We've been to the stars, come back, we're bored with that.
		And people basically are information patterns, they get tired of it, and they go into the blue flames and, in effect, upload and wait for another time.
		That could happen.
		But this is what it ought to be.
		Death should be purely voluntary.
		No coercion, no duress.
		And we live under duress now.
		As you get older, it gets worse by the day.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But would there not be infinite knowledge to be sought after?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Infinite's a tricky mathematical term, as you know, but practically speaking, huge amounts of knowledge that to us would seem infinite.
unidentified		Sure.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I mean, wouldn't you like to read a few thousand more books and see a few thousand more movies?
		And that's just the beginning of it.
		It is just on this earth today as we know it.
		We have such a short lifespan.
		We sample so few things out there now.
		I mean, how many people have been to more than five countries?
		It's a small number.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would a separated intellect miss the physical body?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would we suffer the, at first at least, or for a while, the missing limb syndrome?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Could be, yeah.
		Would you miss those toothaches and those pains?
		And I think, you know, you would, number one, have the ability to continue the illusion, the illusion of the body.
		Remember, the brain sits up there and all these signals come up an imperfect pipe from the spine fed in.
		We can replicate that if you want.
		Or I would suspect if you want to go the old-fashioned way, maybe again for entertainment's sake, you could go back and all slow me time and slog around under gravity as a big, lumbering, reproducing machine.
		But that, again, should be something of pure choice.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let me quickly, we're going to go to calls here shortly.
		I just want to grab one on our international line.
		Where are you calling from, please?
unidentified		Yes, this is Thomas from Rosarita Beach, Mexico.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Mexico.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How are you doing?
unidentified		I'm doing pretty good.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, well, you're on the air with Professor Costco.
unidentified		Oh, great.
		Actually, I'm not really calling for that.
		I'm actually calling about a UFO sighting down here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, actually, we're not taking that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You mean right now?
unidentified		Right now.
unidentified		20 flights.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor, hold on just a moment.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What are you seeing, please?
unidentified		We're seeing like a Big Dipper formation.
		We've seen over 25 flights of these.
		25 so far?
		25 flights.
		They're moving at about a little bit faster than satellites do.
		They look like satellites, but there are no flashing lights at all.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And they're moving in a formation of some sort?
unidentified		They're moving in a formation that looks like a big dipper, but there's one after another, and they're all kind of going at different trajectories.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		At what apparent speed?
unidentified		Let's see.
unidentified		They're crossing from about our northern view to our southern view of about seven minutes more.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So they're moving south, then?
unidentified		Uh-huh.
unidentified		They are moving south mostly, south, southeast.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, then it would not be of value for people here in the U.S. to run out and try to get a look.
unidentified		Oh, definitely in San Diego they could.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		San Diego.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, in San Diego, take a look to your south, right?
unidentified		Uh-huh.
unidentified		North to south.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, sir.
		I appreciate the report.
		Thank you.
		I'm sure we'll get more.
unidentified		Thank you very much.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Take care.
		How about that, Professor?
		Gee.
		We speak.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I'm looking down my window.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I'm in L.A. I don't see it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm sure the light pollution there in L.A. is going to stop you.
		Yeah, I didn't even know you were in L.A. That's where you are, huh?
		USC, Craig.
		Oh, you're at USC.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I'm home now, but University of Southern California.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you teach all this?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, I teach the technology behind it.
		For example, tonight I gave a lecture on smart machines, on neural networks, on the nature of memory and learning.
		So the answer is yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you get the same kinds of questions that you've been getting from me tonight?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		No, I don't, and that's too bad that I don't.
		Probably because there's just so much to learn.
		Each year we cram more material into a technological advanced degree or undergraduate degree.
		And people are just often too busy to raise these issues.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How do you design a child that's 40% yours, 40% your spouse's, and 20%, who knows, somebody else's?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You can do it by realizing that what you are is one little point, like on a big sheet of paper, and that's your point in what we call genome space.
		And your mom and dad are two other points, and you lie right in the line between those two.
		And if we were to move your point a little bit, we can have any mathematical combination possible.
		So I think it's quite reasonable to expect that people will want to mix their genes with the pop star or the televangelist of the day.
		There'll be legal issues of identity here.
		So a real issue arises, Art.
		I mean, if somebody says, I want to have Art Bell's child, and a man and wife say, yeah, we've got three kids, let's have the fourth kid, and let's put in something that's 40%.
		Someone released Art's genome on the net.
		In theory, you can work out the mathematics of it.
		Not with today's computers, maybe in 10, 15, 20 years.
		And you've got a real question of privacy invasion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What do you mean somebody releases my genome on the net?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is that going to be possible?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think a lot of us will carry more and more of our biological information on the credit card.
		It's easy to get that.
		Anything in a public database is subject to exploitation, especially to public figures.
		You bet you could happen.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But I'd feel so violated.
unidentified		Yeah.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, you're touching on the deeper issue of, you know, we have these ancient laws.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Some are being adapted like a case of spam email, but we're really not catching up to the digital technology in terms of privacy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You good to go for another hour?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You bet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, stay right there.
		Professor Bart Costco is my guest.
		Good morning.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time on Premier Radio Networks.
		Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
		My dreams in me and the quietest in the way When the history goes from the show It's all that we're feeding itself Why do you?
		I'm just feeding you on the road Why do you?
		I'm just looking forevermore Why do you?
		Couldn't escape if I wanted you Why do you?
		Knowing I'm taking you Oh, oh, oh, oh, why do you?
		Why do you?
		I'm just looking forevermore Why do you?
		I'm just looking forever Why do you?
		I'm just looking forever You're listening to Arch Bell Somewhere in Time on Premier Radio Networks.
		Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor Bart Cosco is here, and we're talking about his book, Heaven in a Chip, or is it Hell in a Chip?
		I really don't know.
		I guess that's part of what we're talking about tonight.
		it certainly could be a heaven it also certainly could be a hell Back now to Professor Costco.
		Bart Costco, welcome back.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Good to be back.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		there are a lot of people that want to talk to you and ask questions but i have one first in this one no doubt comes from eight And I remember a movie in which somebody decided to view a person's death.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, wouldn't that be high on the list of things if you had the ability to actually experience and view, but experience precisely what that person experienced, then the moment of death would be of high interest to a lot of people.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yes, it would.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think it would create a new kind of extreme sport.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, I would imagine that you would think that the moment of death would be fade to black, right?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, remember, though, Art, by definition, you have no sensory ability, so it cuts off before that.
		Have you ever been to the dentist or something?
		You've been knocked out?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You're waiting for the operation.
		Next thing you know, you wake up in pain.
		You never experience the absence of sensation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, people don't know.
		There's no little fuzzy logic applies here.
		In other words, the process of death is not instant, is it?
		In some cases, I mean, you could be hit by a truck or something.
		But aside from that, a lot of deaths are not instantaneous.
		They are perhaps even agonizing.
		We don't know past a certain point what somebody experiences, right?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		We can make some educated guesses, but you're right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		There's often a flickering light there at the end.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
		A little fuzzy logic there at the end.
		And so that would be an interesting thing to view.
		Would it surprise you if, in viewing that, you went through the darkness and came out on some other side?
		I guess that would really surprise you, wouldn't it?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It would surprise me to know it.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Would it literally surprise the Bejesus out of it?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I'm sure it would.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would it cause you to give up pursuing this technology?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It might.
		I'm not sure why.
		Oh, yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's interesting.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I'm not sure why that should happen.
		At the same time, Art, if I turned around and a biblical prophet walked up to me and could prove that, I think I would probably become a priest overnight.
		That's pretty powerful evidence.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
		Yes, it is.
		But you would pursue experiencing that moment.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think you would.
		I think we're all fascinated by the end.
		By the way, I want to just point out there's a famous story by Robert Heinlein, the science fiction author.
		In fact, his first sold short story called Lifeline about a man who devises a technology.
		In principle, it's possible.
		That just we have something called the leaky cable equation.
		If there's a leak in a telephone cable in the ocean, you can send an electrical signal through it and find out where the leak is, and the ships go out and fix it.
		He used that with the principle of a general relativity, and you're kind of a big pink worm in space-time, with your birth and with your death, and you could send a signal down, and he would sell you the answer to when you would die and how.
unidentified		And the story proceeds from there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I want to get to a few calls now.
		So here we go.
		West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Professor Costco.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Hello, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hello.
unidentified		And hello, Professor.
		This thing raises many questions.
		I've been thinking about it a long time.
		And it raises questions both for the individual and our society.
		One thing I really question is whether our society any time in the near future could even cope with this.
		I mean, if you had people living hundreds of times longer than they do now and still would be in possession of their assets and they might want a place to live physically and stuff, where would you put all of these people?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That's a standard concern about cryotics and in general about life extension.
		And there's several things to say.
		The first one is there's a lot more land out there than people realize.
		Let me give you some quick back of the napkin numbers.
		If you took all the people today on the planet and gave them all a city lot or a housing lot, they would all fit in the state of Texas.
		Give everybody a complete acre and they fit comfortably within Australia.
		You may not like that kind of density.
unidentified		Well, yeah, that might not be exactly a very acceptable lifestyle for some people.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		It may not be.
		The other thing that a lot of futurists have seen here, I think it's inevitable, is even if we were to continue these accelerated rates of growth, we ultimately spread out, not just to the nearby planets, but between in high Earth orbit and elsewhere, taking advantage of a lot of excess mass flying around up there in the skies and the heavens, and convert that into big diamond-shielded bubbles in which we have our own greenhouses and universes.
		if you look at it in that sense, you've got to remember we're talking volumes.
		Right.
unidentified		We would almost have to have habitats or something.
		Well, I guess I question whether our society could make that transition.
		Let me ask you another question.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, if we survived the Springer Show, I think we couldn't survive the Springer.
unidentified		Yeah, let me ask you another question.
		You know, we have normal people right now.
		The brain's kind of a delicately balanced mechanism.
		We have people now that go through wars and come back with traumatic stress, even though they're young people in their 20s and their bodies are perfectly functional.
		But they go through psychosis and they're never the same.
		I really question whether I'd want to continue living if I had only a mechanical body.
		That's one thing.
		I don't know how you would replace all the quantum effects of a physical body.
		But I question whether trying to transition a physical body into a mechanical body, whether the brain wouldn't be tipped into such a psychosis, it could not survive.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, I assume if you didn't do the operation right, but again, we are mechanical bodies, biomechanical bodies perhaps.
		And if you did this operation delicately, Art and I talked earlier about transferring up a chunk at a time to the chip, you could make it up there smoothly.
		You could certainly botch the procedure, but there's nothing in principle here.
		There's nothing in principle here that says the procedure should fail.
		And, for example, we're not violating the speed of light and anything like that.
		All such complicated procedures have a risk associated with them, and we hope those will be intelligently managed at the time.
		What's hard here is trying to envision a snapshot in the future.
		Of course, that would shock us today.
		But we get on these things a step at a time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Thank you, Carler.
		Wouldn't a snapshot of our future, that future, which you imagine, include traditional reproduction virtually disappearing?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I don't know, Art.
		I think a lot of people would still want to continue to do it the old-fashioned way.
		I think there'll be a complicated place.
		I do think what will be different, though, is there'll be a lot of people walking around that don't look like people today.
		They will have so manipulated their genome that they may be merged.
		They may have multiple organs, sense organs, or others.
		And that's all within the realm of genomic possibility, just as we understand the principles of genomes today.
		So the crucial thing is this.
		Someone 100 years ago, checking ahead, would have imagined very fast, horse-drawn buggies on freeways.
		It just didn't work out that way.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But, Professor, maybe we can't draw the analogy because the times will be different.
		But not much has changed in mankind's reign so far, and we've had wars over differences far smaller than the ones you just described.
		Correct.
		So wouldn't traditional human beings fear, loathe, ultimately kill anything that different?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That's a good question.
		I think the first order, they would demand that the governments regulate it, as we're seeing now with the case of simple cloning for fertility.
		At the first blush, Art, I think there'll be great fear and reaction to any of these kinds of technology.
		But on the other hand, it moves in step by fuzzy step.
		And so when we see the technology giving sight back to the blinded, boosting grandmother's IQ after she was suffering from Alzheimer's, letting people with spinal damage walk.
		There's a lot of work being done on that right now to repair the neural junctions there.
		You're going to feel very differently about it.
		And if you did it in one fell swoop, yes, but I just think we're going to get there by very comfortable, fuzzy degrees.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I don't know.
		We're at kind of a fuzzy junction right now with cloning, for example.
		Cloning is suddenly upon us as a human.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		In the animal kingdom, we've been in the plant kingdom for a long time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, but we're getting close.
		As a matter of fact, the Raelians that I told you about that are going to clone, they were sitting in front of Congress the other day trying to explain why government should not make any regulation with regard to cloning.
		Would you support that?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That's a tricky question.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I mean, there's always the issue of external effects and liability.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I specialize in tricky questions.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That's good.
		That's good.
		But to first order, this is still an issue of somebody's reproduction.
		So you want to make anybody who creates one or 50 children fully legally responsible in a family court kind of way for those offspring.
		The trouble with any new technology is it's possible, like mass manufacturing of medicines, to make a mistake and cause great harm.
		The law has dealt with that through product liability.
		And in extreme cases, what are called ultra-hazardous activities, through strict liability.
		And I suspect for quite a while, any kind of cloning efforts that proceed will be under the legal banner of strict liability.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, Yes, but you're saying we're going to get some of this exotic stuff by 2020, 2030.
		That's not that far away.
		It's not that far.
		Cloning right now is suddenly upon us, and we hardly know how to handle it, whether to legislate, not legislate, leave it alone, regulate it.
		We don't know where to do with it right now.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		So the post office felt about email tenure.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that's right.
		Well, we're going to have other moments like that as we go to 2020 and 2030, right?
		Absolutely.
		Not such fuzzy moments.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		My point is I think we can take our existing legal system and adapt that.
		Just think about the legal system of 100 years ago adapted to the computer industry.
		It did it just fine.
		Yeah, there were a lot of cases and so forth, but it made it just fine.
		And I don't think there'll be that much different here.
		There's nothing in principle different about bringing someone into being through sexy old-fashioned way or through a vitro fertilization, a variety of other techniques, and that shades into cloning.
		The probabilities or possibilities of damage are a different matter.
		And the law has traditionally dealt with that in terms of expanding the sphere of liability.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, but we're not that far away from the ability to improve human beings.
		The genome is now unraveled, I'm told.
		And the next step, of course, is the manipulation of the genome, and then you can begin to improve human beings.
		And then when you have improved human beings, you have a problem.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Why?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, because you have, you know, regular human beings.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You have to have improved human beings, and they're not going to like each other.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		They may not.
		I think the trouble is the unforeseen accident.
		I'm trying to allow for that with a technology we don't understand.
		This has always been the problem.
		It's going to continue to be the problem deep into this century and next as technologies become more powerful.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I've talked to scientists, Professor, about cloning, and they admit there are going to be some monsters.
		There are going to be some mistakes.
		And some of them are going to live.
		And they have deep questions about A proceeding with human cloning based on that.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That's a fair point.
		Just as the ability to keep more fetuses alive have led to another nutrition things to children being born who might otherwise have died, the issue here, Art, is who assumes the risk.
		And if somebody's doing it and imposing those risks on third parties, then I think there's a legitimate role for the state or whatever the future of that role is, that entity is, to make sure those who reap the benefits also pay the costs.
		And liability has been the way.
		We've come a long way.
		We've had a reasonably safe nuclear power industry, not here in California, and we have the blackouts to show for it.
		But France is 70% nuclear.
		Japan and all this earthquake is 50% nuclear.
		Done pretty well.
		Those are scary technologies.
		I think, frankly, far more scary than cloning.
		They've done intelligently and step at a time.
		They've been manageable.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, manageable, maybe.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But if you live here in Nevada where I am, there's this little problem of all the waste from these nuclear plants that they're going to begin trucking into the side of a mountain where it's going to have to be kept safely for tens of thousands of people.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Come out there.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, come out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, yes.
		Well, so we feel a little disturbed about that out here.
		First time caller line, you're on the air with Professor Costco.
		Hello.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Hello?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hello, you're on the air, sir.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Hi, how are you doing?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Archie should be on seven days a week, 24 hours a day.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, they'll get me in a machine if they can, and then...
unidentified		I've got a couple of comments and one question.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Professor, it sounds like you're with the external senses, you're internalizing them.
		You know, the five senses that you do have.
		And it sounds like that you're postulating the self as a hegemony?
		What I said is that the self, the current model of that, consists of a lot of neural circuits competing for control.
		For example, if you look at an image and there's an apple in the image, and you say, now focus on that apple.
		And you can do that.
		You can say you were looking at it before, but you didn't really pay attention.
		How does one pay attention?
		We now know that's brought about by, in effect, one neural circuit winning out in the competition versus the others.
		And that seems to be the basis of this illusion of consciousness.
		Well, it sounds like you're putting the physical hierarchy through a fuzzy logic circuit.
		Well, it doesn't have to be a fuzzy logic circuit, but they are in fact neural circuits.
		Well, I mean a fuzzy logic circuit in the way that the most insistent comes to the fore.
		As you're saying, there is a competition, and whoever gets the biggest stimulation tends to win the competition, which is, by the way, exactly how our eyes work in processing retinal data that comes in.
		And these are called lateral inhibition networks.
		And if you just look at, just take that case.
		So if you look at the eye and a signal, whatever you're looking at right now, there are signals that bombarding your retina, light.
		It's getting transduced into electricity through some neural filters.
		It goes around the eye and all that.
		And then it goes through layer upon layer of neural network filters.
		And we still don't know what's going on there.
		We have a rough sense.
		It goes through the thalamus.
		It goes all the way back to area 17 of the brain where this illusion of the visual object is reconstructed.
		It takes about a quarter of your brain to do visual processing.
		But man, there are an awful lot of not just filters, but feedback loops and back and forth.
		And we can capture that now in terms of groups of neurons interacting.
		It's not that your grandmother's memory, your memory of your grandmother is stored in a particular cell.
		It's distributed out in these different fields.
		And they do compete.
		It turns out in biology, just as in neural network biology, just as in economic competition, that the organizing principle is competition.
		And you're right, that whoever tends to get the biggest stimulation wins.
		And moreover, we think what's going on is the neurons, a group of neurons, trying to predict a reward stimulus, maybe in the form of dopamine, is the current term.
		One question, though.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		When do machines get awareness, self-awareness?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, how about when they get natural language and abuse it like you and I do?
		But I mean, the thing is, if I'm taking your postulation and I'm saying, okay, a machine or a computer, whatever, if the mind can be downloaded or uploaded into a machine, then why not a machine having the ability to attain consciousness because of the fact that we can put the human intellect into a machine or the human awareness.
		It would have the same illusion of consciousness that you and I have.
		Let me, if I can, cite the great Scottish philosopher David Hume, who opened this up for us in the West.
		Though Buddhists and Hindus were looking at this for thousands of years, a couple hundred years anyway, in the Far East.
		And that is, Hume said, whenever I look inward at myself, all I see is a perception and nothing but a perception.
		Therefore, I'm nothing but a bundle of perceptions.
		I'm the central repository of signals flowing in.
		And evidence today bears Hume out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor Daniel up in Wisconsin asks, you know, your guest sounds as though he's studied Buddhism.
		As a Buddhist myself, he sounds like he's given up on what we can do naturally in favor of technology.
		Our brains just need to be reprogrammed.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, he's right.
		I have studied Buddhism.
		I have great respect for that.
		And of all the classical religions, I think it is, for me, the most reasonable, although I can't subscribe to an organized religion.
		And don't forget, the Buddha, so far as we know, was an atheist.
		And he had a very different view.
		But the Buddha, in the end, had a very simple argument.
		He said, look, the world is full of suffering, as it plainly is.
		Life is suffering.
		Dukkha is, I believe, the Sanskrit word for that.
		And he had a simple solution.
		That is, it comes from desire.
		And if you're worried about losing your life or the life of a loved one, here's a simple solution.
		Quit worrying.
		Don't value your life.
		It's kind of a cop-out answer.
		It's very clever.
		And what it really is, though, Art, Buddhism is not a religion per se in terms of spiritualism.
		It's a kind of intellectual pain pill.
		And we have better pain pills now.
		We're going to have much better ones.
		But in the end, when you're up on that fuzzy boundary of life and death, and you're looking at the last moments, I think Buddhism is something to consider.
unidentified		So you think there would be a lot of foxhole Buddhists?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Professor, hold on.
		We're at the bottom of the hour, so we'll be right back.
		My guest is Professor Bart Costco.
		His book is Heaven in a Chip, and before I forget about it, as we come back from the break, we're going to tell you exactly how to get this book and any others that he has written, but particularly Heaven in a Chip.
		Sounds to me like you ought to be doing some reading on this subject because, well, because it sounds inevitable, doesn't it?
		This is Coast to Coast AM.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
		Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
		Music Music Music Music We've been traveling far without a home without a farm.
		Only one will be free.
		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in Time, tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 4th, 2001.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My guest is Professor Bart Costco, and we're talking about his book, Heaven in a Chip.
		That's right.
		Heaven in a Chip.
		Whether or not it's heaven depends, I guess, on your perspective.
		Though none of us have yet tried it, we know it's coming.
		We'll be right back.
		Just a couple of station-keeping notes here.
		I'm getting quite a few fast blast messages of the following sort from James in Palestine, Texas.
		Hey, Art, please tell everyone in Texas to get outside and see these things.
		Now, I got a call from Mexico indicating they were having some massive sightings there.
		Apparently, they're seeing these things, whatever they are, in Texas, too.
		So let's get as many eyes on this as we can.
		It appears to be a contemporary occurrence.
		In other words, whatever it is, is occurring right now.
		So I guess if you're in Texas, go take a look outside and see if you see a bunch of things moving in formation, one direction or the other.
		I would guess to begin by looking south based on the other report, but take a good look around the sky in Texas, maybe New Mexico, border states.
		Let's see what you see.
		One other thing, as we get ready to go back to Professor Costco, if you're outside the U.S., we've got a toll-free line for you.
		Try it.
		Whether you're in Europe or the Orient, South America, wherever you are, give it a try.
		There may be a sequence of numbers that you have to dial.
		You might check my website for those.
		And then our 800 number.
		Or you may just simply get hold of the AT ⁇ T operator and have her do it for you.
		But it's a free call no matter where in the world you are.
		The number is 800-893-0903.
		That's 800-893-0903 from any point in the world.
		All right, back now to Professor Costco.
		Welcome back, Professor.
		Man, what a show.
		What a program.
		What a concept.
		What a thing to even consider.
		It's been fun.
		Well, I guess it is fun.
		Let's go here.
		Welcome to the Rockies.
		You're on the air with Professor Costco.
unidentified		Hello.
unidentified		Hello?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, hello.
unidentified		Hi, I had a question for Dr. Costco.
		What is your opinion of the concept of the brain as a receiver, as a quantum receiver for mind?
		And I had a comment after that, if that's okay.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Brain as a quantum receiver, well, mind.
unidentified		As presented by Roger Penrose?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Ah, different story.
		Let me comment in general than specific.
		The idea of the brain as a quantum receiver, this reflects my colleague Professor Stephen Grossberg, one of the great unsung heroes of the mind.
		He's at Boston University.
		And he has said the brain is a measurement device operating at the quantum level.
		A measurement device operating at the quantum level.
		And the example, again, is if you're hit with a single photon of light, that's recorded in your brain and potentially encoded into your neural networks and possibly downloaded into those synapses.
		So in that sense, great things to be said for that.
		In terms of Professor Penrose's theory, this is a theory kind of trying to stick in the old classical linguistic notion of a free will and what are called microtubules.
		I don't think it makes sense on its face.
		I don't think he's worked out the information threadic structure.
		Same kind of problem people have with souls.
		What's the information compression mechanism here in the coding, decoding?
		But worst of all, there's been absolutely no evidence for it and no critical test proposed on how to refute the hypothesis.
		I think so far, so bad.
unidentified		My comment would be that for me anyway, I know it doesn't hold any weight with you, but for me, it's a matter of experience that consciousness precedes materiality.
unidentified		And I suggest that experiences such as out-of-body experiences, past life remembrances, and direct conscious telepathy work against the claim of meat as creating consciousness.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Let me rebut that.
		I published in my book, Fuzzy Thinking, a mechanistic theory, a neural network-based theory of the sense of seeing the light flash before your eyes right before you have a traumatic accident.
		Now, there's been a tremendous amount of evidence of people reporting this experience.
		And I don't want to deny that.
		But let's think about that for a minute.
		Why would it be the case?
		And we have a really easy way to explain that with neural networks.
		The basic idea is when you're in a tight spot, when the adrenal hormones flow, and you're in a fight-flight scenario, like seeing a Mac truck coming straight at you, we would expect the following, a massive search through your associative memory for anything that could save your butt.
		The effect would be in your mind's eye, not of your life playing out in serial like a movie, but rather a flash in parallel of similar incidents in your past that could have some probative value, some value in helping you find a solution to that problem.
		And so a psychological effect that is well documented can be explained in this case with simple neural circuits.
unidentified		Well, I think that I have a motto for this sort of thing, is that an infinitesimal amount of direct experience is worth an infinite amount of theory.
		And I remember about 50 lifetimes.
		I remember my last lifetime on this planet, which is about 10,000 years from now.
		And we will have one machine of...
		And it'll take the form of an old woman.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		An old woman.
unidentified		An old woman who is basically our grandmother figure.
		There'll be about 40 people left of the planet.
		The whole planet is conscious.
		Everyone's uploaded?
		The whole planet is conscious with one intelligence, a vast, almost omniscient consciousness as far as the planet's concerned.
		And yet it was extremely sad because it knew something was missing.
		So that's all I have to say.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I appreciate that, and I'm sure the old woman does too.
		Scientists are really lousy at selling books, so I'm going to take time here, and we're going to sell your book.
		It's Heaven in a Chip.
		Now, I presume it's available nationwide?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yes, it is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is it in bookstores?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		In bookstores, and I have a lot of books, Art, and Amazon.com or your website is the easiest way to go to get them.
		And if you want the hardcore stuff, I have textbooks with mathematics and problems in it.
		You can take a shot at it.
		If you're an instructor, you can even get a solutions manual.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My guess is, though, that a lot of the audience is going to want to read heaven in a chip.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's designed, is it not, not as a scientific paper, but it's written about, I guess it's a kind of future shock, right?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		To some extent.
		And the text is straightforward.
		The footnotes are complicated, should you choose to explore that.
		And my website at USC, which people can access, has that as well.
		Also, again, for those looking for low-homework, you can download some recent technical papers that are there as well.
		But Heaven and Ship is by far the simplest way to get this and to see the vast literature on almost all the points that we've talked about.
		You'd be surprised how many scientists have covered this ground well.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, well, off you go again.
		It's available on Amazon.com through my website.
		We've got a link, obviously.
		But how about an 800 number?
		Do you have one of those?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		No, I don't.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You don't have an 800 number.
		Wow.
		You really are free.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I'm trusting random housers.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		That's going to be a great risk.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So we'd point everybody then at Amazon.com where you get a really cool discount until someday they can't afford it anymore and they've got to have business.
		Right now, though, Amazon.com will sell it to you.
		Very inexpensive.
		How much is it?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think it's around $14.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Quality paper back now.
		Wow.
		$14.
		All right.
		Amazon.com, folks, go to my website.
		Go to tonight's guest info, and there'll be a trail to buy the book right there.
		And I can't imagine you wouldn't.
		Now, here's something that I want to bring up with you, Professor.
		I've interviewed another man that a lot of people love to hate, whose name is Matthew Alper.
		And I want to discuss what he believes with you for a second.
unidentified		Sure.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		He says that mankind has always worshipped something, a god, the sun.
		If you go and you find a tribe in the deepest, darkest Amazon that nobody has ever been around before, they probably worship the sun.
		They worship something, that mankind always will worship something, that mankind's greatest fear is the fear of death.
		And to assuage that fear, our brains, as a matter of continuing evolution, have concocted what Matthew Alper calls a God part of the brain.
		A part of the brain that demands worship, demands a belief in the afterlife.
		I have this feeling that you might agree with that probability.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I do.
		Several points there.
		The crucial one is whether there's some genetic basis for the uniform belief in religion.
		Let's look at the evidence.
		At the beginning of the 20th century, with men like Bertrand Russell and all the scientists coming and rediscovering mathematics and the results of Einstein and quantum mechanics, there was a feeling among scientists that science would kill religion.
		And if you look at the evidence, it didn't.
		In fact, religion is stronger now more than ever.
		I mean, it was communism that fell.
		The Falen Gong is working its way through China.
		It is something that, for better or for worse, it's there in a deep way.
		The question is why.
		I think you can make a case for a genetic basis.
		No question, the fear of death.
		But I think that the better answer, the broader answer, is that we have in us evolved genes for obedience to authority to slew up the chain of command.
		And this is the kind of way of doing that, sleeping up to the chain of command of religion or the state, and usually very closely coupled throughout history, maybe not so much in this country.
		But even, you know, look at the Taliban blowing up those Buddhas in Afghanistan.
		And the question you would ask is why?
		And the usual answer is that even a brutal system can stabilize a hierarchy.
		And somebody in a hunter-gatherer scenario doesn't want to stop.
		And if you ask Woody Allen-like existential questions, he's more likely to get eaten by the beast than to eat the beast and not pass on his genes.
		So I think you can make a case that we have obedience to authority.
		I mean, I'll give you an example that really disturbs a lot of us who are fans of Thomas Jefferson.
		People talk about the president running the country and having things like drug czars, and now a faith czar.
		You know, this concept of a king or a czar comes from Caesar.
		People and the media love to personify complex political processes in one person, whether it's Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or whoever, there is a sense to have a visible, palpable leader.
		There is a real will to follow.
		And it has to have a genetic basis.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Dave asks, and maybe it's a good moment for it, why are 99% of scientists nihilists with no ethics nor morals?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, I don't know because that's not true, but what we do know is that a study taken about 100 years ago found to the shock of polite Victorian society that only 40% of scientists professed belief in a God or afterlife.
		And then the same study taken about five years ago also shocked folks because it's the same number.
		Still about only 40% of scientists believe in that, and people thought it was much lower.
		But the majority, a good number of scientists maintain these beliefs.
		I'm not one of them, but there's a good number who do.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, one would imagine that Mr. Alpert's scenarios could pretty much cross the board, and that would include scientists as well.
		They all have families.
		They all have loved ones.
		They all have hopes for some sort of conscious continuation.
		And you think the best bet for that is in a chip.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Chip and as a backup of chronic.
		Let me say one other thing, looking at the data on this.
		If you look at the scientists polled of those who are most skeptical and those who are most believers, the most skeptical are biologists who kind of work with Flesh and Darwin.
		And the least skeptical, the most fanciful in terms of religion are mathematicians.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		First time caller line, you are on the air with Professor Cusco.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, this is Charlie in Seattle, and I got a question and a comment for Professor Bart.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		He was talking about cloning a little while ago, and I wanted to ask him, if I was a clone you, Professor, would your clone have the same soul as you?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Well, it would have the same psychic capacity and behavioral capacity, I think, that you call the soul.
		Remember, these are terms of art or terms of last resort, terms like soul and mind.
		We try to define them, we can't.
		We give some behavioral attributes, we don't really have it.
		It's the same thing again in miniature.
		If we look at the watch and the watch stops moving, where did the motion go?
		This kind of animism projected.
		But don't forget, if you really had a soul, you got a big problem because it doesn't obey laws.
		A ghost in a machine is a very dangerous thing.
unidentified		Okay, you guys are talking about just now about how they worship gods back when mankind started, I guess.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
unidentified		And what I find weird is like back, way back, they started out worshiping a bunch of gods, and up till now, it narrowed down to one god.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		You know what I mean?
		Yeah, it's kind of an efficiency there.
		What's that?
		There is a kind of efficiency, a kind of competitive influence among gods, and they coalesce into one.
		It's like many physical forces into one.
unidentified		Yeah.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Atheism has been the trend, that's right.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Until the New Age movement, I think.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, thank you.
		Again, I'm getting reports from Janie in Edna, Texas.
		Art, there are a bunch of light balls flying near the coast.
		You can see them even with the street lights.
		Is there some sort of meteor shower tonight?
		There's kind of some kind of mass sighting going on in northern Mexico and the southern U.S. You might want to take a look.
		Wildcard line, you're on the air with Dr. Bart Costco.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning.
		Good morning, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, good morning.
unidentified		It is, you know, it's an honor to be on your show.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where are you?
unidentified		I'm in Minneapolis, KSTP 1500.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		And, you know, it's a really honor, really amazing topic going on here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, then, contribute.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you have a contribution?
unidentified		It reminds me of that movie Demolition Man.
		And, you know, it's kind of the perfect scenario.
		The guy gets woken up from the cryo freeze, and he's the same guy he was before.
		You know?
		He's perfectly intact.
		He can actually run after he's unfrozen.
		Yes.
		Which, you know, is just completely unrealistic.
		And so.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, all right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is it Doctor, completely unrealistic that you would be cryogenically frozen?
unidentified		Cryonically.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Revived.
		I'm sorry.
		I'm never going to get that right.
		Cryonically frozen.
		And then 100, 200 years from now, revived.
		And whatever was wrong is now fixed.
		You're either uploaded or your body is now perpetually healthy.
		They've managed to do something about immortality.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Several things.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Whatever.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		And this movie is an interesting movie.
		Wesley Snipes is a bad guy, and he's frozen, and the cop goes after him, so let's just loan.
		They both come back.
		But the caller is correct.
		I mean, it's unrealistic to think you'd pop right out and five minutes later resume where you left off.
		But to your point, though, Art, whether you would have your old capabilities, remember this, though.
		Most of us think that the way it will work is if you save part of your tissue, like your brain, that will reclone the body from the headstump if you really want the body.
		And so it's not so much of keeping the old parts around, because after all, the kind of nanotechnology or molecular engineering you'll need to fix the eyes damage and do a lot of other things at the cell level for the brain, that it trivializes the science involved to grow a body back from the clonal, the DNA material.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Isn't that going to be concurrently possible or even possible before the uploading of a brain, that is to say, growing a new arm, leg, liver, heart, individual organs?
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think for transplant a will are, but if you lose your arm and want to see it kind of grow back versus three inches long and it grows out to the full size, I think that will take longer and just because information is so efficient and working with matter and flesh is so relatively inefficient that I would bet on the information technology happening first.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Professor Costco.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes.
		Hello, Art.
		Dr. Costco?
		Hi.
		I started out with two questions, but I think you've already answered the first.
		It was a brief one basically on your theological beliefs, but I believe I've heard enough to kind of get an idea there.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		By the way, I can say everything about theology in two words.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		No evidence.
unidentified		Thank you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		right now there are a really good your second question is
unidentified		I was wondering what your thoughts were on the possibility of these, I believe you said, sugar cube-sized brain repositories or mind repositories possibly being the start Of a true diaspora where individuals could transfer into this with whatever kind of,
unidentified		you know, maybe possibly nuclear, who knows what, power source, small vessels, and spread in all directions from the earth and basically explore, who knows, the universe.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I think you touched on a wonderful word, the diaspora, like the diaspora of the Jews.
		It took many thousand years to come back to Israel.
		I think that once we're, for example, doing time in a bottle and liquid nitrogen, whoever of you out there joined me and the thousands signed up to do that, we sort of are people without a home, without a country, maybe without a society.
		We are a great diaspora of nothing but suspended minds.
		And so once you bring them back in whatever form, information form, and you may very well not want to inhabit a body or bounce around up to Mars or have copies as back up on Mars or somewhere else, and that could over time look like a spread of almost a disease or some kind of new life form throughout the solar system, maybe beyond.
		You can certainly, for example, take the information in these chips and just shoot it up in a bit stream into deep space.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So maybe that's our key to eventual interstellar travel, eh?
unidentified		Yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Never thought about it that way.
		Well, lots of material to do another program.
		What a pleasure it has been to have you here.
		But you've held up after a three-hour lecture and then coming on here and doing, what, a four-hour lecture virtually, you're holding up pretty well at this time of the morning.
		You must be a late, you must be a night person.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		I typically am.
		It's been a lot of fun.
		I appreciate it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Thank you very much.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good night, Doctor.
bart kosko ▲ ● ▼		Good night.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let me just take one second to mention that we have massive sightings, and I mean massive sightings going on during the program.
		In fact, right now, people are still seeing these things out across the entire Southwest U.S. Now, we are hampered here in the desert by, believe it or not, clouds.
		We have clouds out there.
unidentified		Damn it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So I'm going to depend on a lot of you out there to grab your cameras, grab your video cameras with night shot, grab whatever you've got that will capture the images and send them to me.
		And no doubt tomorrow night we'll have something of a discussion of what's been going on tonight.
		I'm a little sheltered in here, but I do have access to a lot of information.
		And I'm telling you, we've been getting hundreds of reports.
		So something's happening out there.
		We'll find out, no doubt, by tomorrow what it was.
		For tonight, I'm Art Bell.
		That's it from the high desert.

▲