Ed Dames, a former military remote viewer and TRV Institute director, verifies Cuba’s 2,200-foot-deep "lost city" via sonar and remote viewing, suggesting rapid submersion around 12,000 years ago—contradicting geological timelines. He links shadow people to ghostly energy shadows detectable by animals, now captured in high-tech footage, while dismissing ethical concerns about studying them. Dames warns of ozone-driven ecocide, predicting dead water and agricultural collapse as solar activity disrupts ecosystems, framing it as an inevitable crisis humanity must confront. His blunt prophecies, including a false prophet harvesting souls via child manipulation, clash with mainstream skepticism, yet he insists remote viewing’s practical applications—like GoldenEye’s murder recovery—prove its validity. [Automatically generated summary]
From the high desert in the great American Southwest.
I bid you all good evening, good morning, good afternoon, wherever you may be across the cosmos out there in the world and beyond.
Commercially, from the island of Guam in the west eastward to the Caribbean and the U.S. Virgin Islands south into South America, north all the way to the Pole.
And worldwide, of course, on the internet, this is Coast to Coast AM.
I want to say hi to Paul Galtelli, I believe it is, Vice President, General Manager, John Winfield, the ops director there, and remind all of you that we're getting that close to 500 affiliates.
In addition to that, we have pre-feeds every night.
Three hours of the previous night's program are available for any radio station that cares for the ratings and any listeners who would like to listen.
Of course, you can urge your radio station to perhaps try and pick up the refeeds three hours every night before the live show begins as it does now.
Boy, have I got something for y'all.
Now, with anything that's sent to you anonymously, you have no way of knowing, of course, the validity of it.
But I must tell you that I have in my hot little palm, and available for you on my website right now, one of the best UFO videos I've ever seen.
It's entitled Video, UFO Video from North Bay, Ontario.
Oh, you have got to see this.
It's from Mark Hutchins, and it was shot supposedly about three years ago near North Bay, Ontario.
The website which originally had this, says Mark, is no longer operating.
If it's a fake, it's a good one.
I agree, Mark.
If it's a fake, it's a good one.
This one is awesome.
I mean, it's really awesome, folks.
Even the sound is awesome.
And there is sound with this.
So if you have Windows Media Player, or it can be done on RealPlayer as well, don't forget to turn up the sound.
Pretty wild stuff on my website right now.
And I don't know that I can really get close enough to my speakers to play you the sound that goes with this.
But I guess I could try.
the microphone really is oriented that way Saucer's coming.
It's obviously a British voice as you listen to it a few times.
But this one's awesome.
I mean, as he points out, if it's a fake, it's really, really, really a good one.
You can see the saucer clearly.
It has structure.
It's obviously a flying saucer.
Period.
I mean, it has structure.
It has detail.
And it's all in a moving video.
And it comes right over the cameraman's head.
My, my, my, my, my.
Is it a good one?
A really good one.
May not be real.
You never know.
It's that good.
You're going to go too good.
You know, that's what people do.
And speaking of videos, there is a second case that we're going to talk about here in a moment.
Maybe you've seen the news on the BBC.
It was front page over there entitled UFO Video Goes to Hollywood.
A Derbyshousewife has sold what she says is a video of a flying saucer to a Hollywood producer.
Sharon Rowlands, 44 from the village of Bosnell in the Peak District, has reportedly been paid 20,000, they say pounds, but it's dollars for the footage.
And officials at NASA are said to have been asked to examine the tape because they believe it shows the same type of craft once spotted by the space agency's own cameras during a space shuttle mission.
Ms. Roland said that she took the film with a camcorder after hearing an eerie noise outside her home one evening in October of last year.
She says she filmed the object while it hovered in the sky about two miles away.
And I'm reading from the BBC report, which we've got on my website right now.
Now, in addition to that, who, you might ask, did she sell it to?
Well, she sold it to the man that I've got on the line right now, Robert Kiviat.
Robert Kiviat, we've had on before.
He came to Burbank, California in 1992 after writing a cover article for Omni magazine about the face on Mars, producing a high-profile mystery for Geraldo Rivera's nationally syndicated TV show, Now Can Be Told.
Robert was seeking the largest viewing audience and finest production value for his many exclusive stories and agreed to move from New York and join NBC's Unsolved Mysteries.
After his Canadian UFO landing, video-driven story led the NBC show to a whopping 16.5 rating, oh my God, slash 25 share on February 3rd of 93.
The network's on-air promo department utilized many of Robert's stories to promote the series' episodes.
By the mid-1990s, Fox Network brought Robert in to help establish credibility for a new show called Encounters, and it was shortly thereafter that Robert scooped other journalists by securing exclusive rights to the alien autopsy footage and North American television coverage.
NBC ironically passed on Robert's Alien Autopsy Project, but you'll recall Fox eagerly picked it up and jump-started their reality TV specials department with the airing of Alien Autopsy Factor Fiction on August 28th of 95.
Unprecedented Fox ratings, full-page article in Time magazine, an enormous amount of other media buzz led Fox to pick up a succession of widely watched primetime TV specials from Robert, including Alien Autopsy, Factor Fiction, Miracles and Visions, Factor Fiction, Prophecies of the Millennium, UFOs, the best evidence ever caught on tape, world's greatest hoaxes, secrets finally revealed, ghosts caught on tape, fact or fiction, and UFOs the best evidence ever caught on tape.
So now Robert has again secured what nobody else could get, a very special tape from Great Britain that the BBC ran as front page right at the top of the newscast type news.
So we've got a link to this article, the BBC, which you can read now on my website.
moment Robert Kvyat will actually explain to us all why he forked over 20 grand for this film.
Well, at moments of high drama, very high drama in the past, like the alien autopsy, and oh, just all kinds of high drama in the UFO world, the man behind it has been Robert Kiviot, as he is now behind something brand new.
And he's always been kind enough to come here and usually give us a little sneak preview of what he just got in the bag.
I went, wow, this must be good stuff for somebody to pay 20 grand.
And I thought, I wonder who did this.
And then somebody mentioned your name.
So you gave this lady 20 grand, huh?
unidentified
Well, what seems to have happened is, and it's one of those things that something from our general research development area in our company, and Kivia Productions, my company, we were researching for many, many stories of the phenomena kind for a series that we're developing called Could It Be True?
And in this series, we're literally going to separate the fact and fiction or fiction from all the great cases that may well be true proof of either UFOs, phenomena, whatever this category I think a lot of people call it paranormal.
But I don't even understand that term because I came in as a journalist for Ami magazine and for TV in general.
And to me, a journalist is looking for a great story.
It doesn't really matter whether or not it's UFOs or this is not the paranormal, or at least I don't think it is.
unidentified
I don't even understand what that term means.
And I've heard people call paranormal TV and put my shows in those categories.
Even the X-Files, I mean, I'm not sure what would be paranormal TV.
But anyway, we're developing this series, and we're doing our general covering the beat of UFOs, which is one of our big beats of all the phenomena we cover.
And sure enough, we came across this videotape.
Now, this videotape probably, and the main reason that the British press picked it up as a huge story, I don't think is about the license fee.
And again, what people are keying on is the supposed license fee of what this woman who shot the video will earn for letting the broadcasters of the world, including me if I break it exclusively, which now I am in position to do.
I don't think that's that big a deal because if you break it down per minute of how long of a clip this is, it's not really that much money.
What we're really talking about is how great is the video?
Actually, I look down my nose at most, 99% of what's sent to me never sees my website.
The only ones that I put up are the ones where, and still I don't know, it could be a total fake, but the ones where I go, oh my God, when I do that, I know it has to go off.
unidentified
And usually the ones we've noticed is that we go, oh my God, about are the ones that come in anonymously that nobody wants to stand behind.
And let's face it, if you shot a video of what might be an extraterrestrial spacecraft from God knows where, you're not going to be silent and anonymous about it.
I mean, if you happen to get one like this woman shot it, which is a perfect, if there might be a perfect scenario, this might be the perfect scenario.
It was a wave of UFO activity over this part of England to the later part of last year.
And at the time of this UFO wave, not unlike Gulf Breeze, not unlike other places here in the United States, Mexico City for one, that's not the United States obviously, but other parts of this continent and the lower part of it, we have seen waves of activity.
And so this was just like that.
And nobody had yet captured during the wave anything on tape.
And sure enough, this woman captured on tape what might be the best visual evidence of a structured craft appearing to come close to her, look at her, give her a good look, and then go back and come forward and go back.
Bob, everybody who's got a computer is going to be able to see the craft or whatever it is in a still photograph that we've got a link up to right now.
But that's all we can see.
What you have is a video that, what, lasts about how long?
And what has to be kept in mind about the video is it's just one of those things where she had, you can tell just by the way she shot it.
Not only have we researched it and met the woman, but of course you can hear the reality of it just by watching it.
And there she appears to be just happenstance.
She had the video camera fairly close by, noticed something out the window or out our front door, got outside, stood there, shot the thing, not knowing what she's looking at, and it all takes place in that six and a half minutes right on recorded video.
So there's no question what we're looking at.
Now, the problem seems to be with cases like these, some experts will say, well, the camera can create very strange shapes when it's struggling to see and make focus or focus a bright light in a distance.
And when you take all the issues into account, you realize that there's a light that appears out of nowhere, appears to come right at her and shine or display, whichever you may want to call it.
It shoots very close to her and then seems to drop back, but it shows the same pulsing color pattern, changing a little bit here and there, colors definitely, but as it gets smaller, it maintains its form.
And if it was indeed an in-camera artifact of some kind, you would not see that.
So all the experts that we've shown it to so far believe that it is literally what you see.
Bob, NASA, and I've seen a craft like this before.
And I think you've seen a craft like this before, haven't you?
We are.
unidentified
And again, I don't want to come on the show tonight and act utterly sensational and start saying things that sound like an X-File or, you know, due respect to Chris Carter.
I don't think he can make this up.
So let's get right to the point you're saying.
Last year on Fox, we had a show called UFO is the best evidence ever caught on tape number two.
Based on the success of the first one and a lot of other things, we did the second one during their May sweeps.
And in that show, we premiered.
It had been on the internet a little bit, but it was a videotape shot by NASA, or better yet, a live event sent down to the Earth where one of their satellites had a malfunction.
And the cameras were watching us float off into space, this very technical move, without getting into all the technicalities, it was a very long tether of material that was glowing with a kind of phosphorus material.
And as the cameras zoomed in to watch this thing float away, because even disasters in space, they record that too.
Sure.
Or go live, in this case live, sure enough, these UFOs appear.
And they appear to be circling with a rotating pattern and sort of a revolving pattern as well.
And they seem to be going behind this tether.
So we aired this footage on Fox for the first time last year.
We noticed that the UFO seemed to have a very classic shape, a disc, a very clear disc, with a very weird notch on the edge, like someone had taken a bite out of it.
And there was also a little circle in the middle that was pulsing weirdly and almost seeming to spin in place.
Now, NASA and other people that we've spoken to, mostly off the record, have not been able to explain anything logically about this.
And I know there are people on the internet right now that could, as they're listening right now, can go to certain websites and they could actually see these UFOs that appear to be behind the tether.
So here's the X-File, if you will, if you're writing a drama, which I like to stay in the reality end.
So let's stick with the basics.
A good story, usually a true one, is as good as any fiction, if not better.
So here's the line.
The line is, can you imagine a UFO shot by NASA and recorded on videotaped by many people here down on Earth that appears to show UFOs going behind this 90-mile away tether?
That means these UFOs are like three miles wide.
The same thing or very similar was recorded over England in October.
So why would that be?
Now, if a camera is the same as NASA uses, then maybe we could say it's the same shape caused by the camera trying to make sense of light.
But I don't see it.
So right now, if you remove that, you're dealing with a great mystery, and we are now talking to the right people, really, to get NASA to go public about this and say, okay, well, why don't we consider discussing for the first time the chance that our own cameras have captured UFOs in space?
They tend to always poo-poo the stuff as if it's debris, ice that was released by the exhaust of the shuttle or anything like that.
Never that there's an object out there that, you know what, guys, we don't know what this is.
Now, the explanations for what they saw in space that we aired last year and the new one, I mean, God only knows what they're going to say about the new one, but the old one from last year, and it actually was shot three years or videotaped three years before, I have to say to you that the answers that we're getting are rather nonsensical.
And I say that with all due respect, things like, well, the camera was trying to make sense again of an object far away.
And, you know, some of the answers I've gotten, and not from NASA particularly, keep in mind, NASA is a huge organization.
And there's many scientists that have been affiliated, and there's many that will talk to you either on the record or off the record about UFOs.
If it's a light being emitted by some special lighting device to emulate a UFO, to hoax an entire town where UFOs have been seen for months before and after.
Robert Kiviov is here, Rob Kiviov, who's been responsible for a lot of what you've seen, Alien Autopsy, Factor Fiction, Miracles and Visions, Factor Figion, Prophecies of the Millennium, UFOs, the best evidence ever caught on tape, and on and on and on.
And now, he's found this housewife in Great Britain who has this incredible hunger footage of a craft, which you will be seeing.
And you can sort of get a sense of it.
It's very much like one NASA took, as he mentioned.
It's on my website under a program and tonight's guest info.
And you can link right over to the BBC article, which has a photograph of the video that Bob has.
And he's paid the license fee for.
And then I tell you, without providence, absolutely without providence, I have one up there that will take your breath away under what's new video, UFO video from North Bay, Ontario, will take your breath away.
But there is zero providence on it.
And I don't know if I'd say zero confidence.
It's one of the best fakes I've ever seen or it's the real thing.
You decide.
It's up there right now.
Back now to Bob Kiviat.
And Bob, I'm curious, this housewife, why did she go outside with a camcorder in the first place?
I mean, how did she happen to catch this part of the province?
unidentified
It's a good question.
Our understanding is that she actually was watching TV.
It's wonderful.
She's watching television, and she's glancing off in the distance past the TV, one side or the other, and there she sees something, and she mentions to her husband to take a look.
And you kind of hear it unfold on the tape, and she kind of gets interested as she sees this as a viewfinder, and then it starts to behave very strangely, and you hear her kind of narrate the whole thing.
It's rather incredible, because again, and Providence isn't always the best.
And one of the things I aired on NBC back in 93, and you mentioned at the introduction, was this video that's known as the Guardian video.
Here's a videotape that was disseminated rather nicely.
It was given to two top UFO researchers, one in England, one in the USA.
Luckily, we had just had on our show, now it can be told with Araldo Rivera, a guy that, when I was there in New York, and as I was moving over to Unsolved Mysteries, I had this story that had just broken of a UFO appearing to land in a Canadian field, and it was sent in by the Guardian with a fingerprint, and no one knows who this guy is.
So here we are, probably, what, now almost 10 years later, you know, with a mystery that no one knows where the video came from.
I was figuring maybe the Guardian would be back shortly for his residuals with his fingerprint.
unidentified
You know, it's one of the most amazing videos to date, and I don't think there's been like an ounce of research that found any closure who this person is.
And there are people, and I will mention on the radio tonight who are studying it very heavily.
And the guy who broke it, a guy named Bob Exler, and to some degree, a guy named Timothy Good, they were the ones who got this videotape sent to them.
And Bob Exler for sure has been studying it to this day.
These things aren't like the one I've got up there tonight.
They're dropped in my lap.
No providence.
Here it is, bud.
unidentified
Well, those are the cases that, unfortunately, most TV producers and journalists alike, and being both, I have to tell you that we tend to shy away from anonymousness, or anonymity, if you were.
But I will say this, that that does not mean you throw it out.
You have to look at it.
You have to say, why would someone send in?
In this case, the one they just send their website was 20 seconds.
Well, we think we showed this, and again, we're trying.
And if the viewers at home go, well, I watched your shows, or listeners at home say, well, we were viewers and we saw our shows, and it's not 100% proven, but I could say one thing: there are cases that we've shown in our shows across the board that we cannot explain.
They're as mysterious as the day we saw it.
And there are cases, like in our World's Greatest Hoaxes show for Fox that we believed you could stamp them hoax right now.
And we were revealing for the first time evidentiary.
I mean, we're talking about courtroom-type evidence that looked like the case, the entire alien autopsy, was a hoax.
We were the same production, same producer, me, same writer, same guy who said it might be real, and was now saying three years later, I don't think it is.
We did almost as well on a Monday night against Monday Night Football.
I said to the guys at Fox, come on, I mean, look at this.
We need to get into many more cases, a lot of stuff to clean up and great stuff to break.
And they're like, well, we'll think about it.
And sure enough, here we are doing specials for them.
But we're trying and we're talking about doing the new case as well.
So again, Could It Be True is the series that we hope will sort of clean up the phenomenical end of TV and get to what's possibly real and throw out the stuff that's completely ridiculous.
And I have to say, there are a few cases that look great at the start, but they fall apart.
And you've got to be honest and say, you know what?
The case is looking a little shaky.
And if it looks really shaky, you tell the public.
And that's what we're doing.
moving up story from from a maybe for possibility maybe not so and this is this uh...
There's another case breaking, and I think you may have heard about it.
A very nice guy, a guy named Santiago Yuture is a, I'm probably not saying his name particularly right there, but he's from Mexico.
And he has done a wonderful job with a case that's really making a lot of people who've seen it, like me, extremely interested.
It appears that this family was going from Washington State down to Monterey, Mexico, and so they're crossing the Texas area back in December.
And again, the video camera's out.
They're on a trip, and sure enough, something is outside their car window.
And they pull over to the side of the road, and what unfolds, again, in about a, I would say, five, six, seven minutes is a wonderful UFO event that, again, has to be put into the same echelon as what we're talking about here.
An incredible display of what appears to be a UFO form into a plume of some kind, like a mushroom.
Then it seems to transform into a rocket-like device, all on video.
And again, I think you can say with a degree of certainty, any jury, I think, if they showed the video to any jury without knowing much more than this family claims they shot it, I don't think you could argue that innocent family members are in a car and they appear to be shooting it, and it's not a hoax.
And again, the provenance is clear.
There is no issue.
But what's even more amazing, and Santiago's been trying to educate me about this the last couple of weeks.
I've been really busy on this other case, but sure enough, I've been hearing a lot about it.
And it looks like the family had UFOs follow them back to their house in Washington State, and sure enough, they're videotaping them.
So it's like the Gulf Breeze-like case down in Florida from years ago, but now it's a woman, and the UFOs seem to be following her on her trips.
Now, I say the woman because there seems to be some feeling that the wife in this family might be the center of it, but who knows?
I mean, she was holding the video camera when the first event happened in Texas.
I'm not sure if that means whoever's on this craft.
And again, you know, Art, I think it's important to start saying words clearly.
You know, the term reality TV hasn't meant very much lately with shows like Survivor.
have you secured this new video uh...
we're now negotiating and you know i'm not going to start talking about money because every time That's right.
The issue is that Santiago, again, like David Serrita, who talked about the UFO event back in Tether footage that we talked about, NASA, which compares to the new British case, David Serrita was on your show.
David was on my last UFO show.
Santiago was on my last UFO show.
It's a natural for sources to come back to you with the cases that you have.
So basically, Santiago and I are talking.
There's no guarantee that it will pan out.
Neither will.
We never know if any case art isn't going to become something other than what we thought, even during or before the airing, and even after the airing.
So we're trying to get the public the best evidence and see if it stands to the right.
This is purely speculative, so you don't have to answer this.
But I mean, if Dan Golden is sitting at home, NASA's Dan Golden, watching, I don't know, he probably watches NASA Select all the time.
I don't know.
And he notices something out the window.
Honey, look at that.
Grabs his camcorder.
Dan Golden runs out into his front yard and films something like this lady did.
Comes back in.
What do you think Dan Golden does with the footage?
That's a more important question than you know.
unidentified
That's an interesting question because if there was undisputed evidence of any UFO, that clearly was a mechanical craft that didn't come from any country on Earth.
I have to believe that any NASA organization or any one of our Defense Department organizations, and there are many you know, I got to believe they would go public with that.
Well, we're about to test it because here's where we're going.
We're going to ask the top people at NASA, the office you just said, to comment finally about two things: the UFO video in space that was captured during a tether footage on tape by some intrepid videographers down here with their VCRs, and the new video in Britain.
And we may throw in the bonus question is, was David Solita blacked out during one of the Arfell shows?
And, you know, he's the guy who talked about that footage.
Well, then I would say, I don't know, I would say a few things that I better not repeat on the radio about NASA.
No, I think you're really, you paid a good license fee here is what I think.
I think this is a good thing you've got, and I think it's going to be inexplicable for NASA, but I don't know.
Maybe they'll say, let's see, if I were going to try to pretend to be NASA, I might say, well, under similar lighting conditions, we could produce similar results, both for the lady in England and for our own footage.
unidentified
And that's what could it be true is about art.
We're about to try to find out by that and be active in some way and say, okay, if you make a claim that the video can be explained that easily.
And do you think you've got the channels open wide enough to actually get them on camera and talk about this?
unidentified
Well, my feeling is the openness.
See, when I wrote for Outline Magazine back in the early 90s and they talked about the face on Mars with me, one thing they said about the face on Mars, we're going to try to get one good picture and dispute and hopefully once and for all be able to dispute any claim that it is artificial.
Well, you know, I think it doesn't end the controversy.
When I first looked at the image, I said, they were right all along.
You know, it looks like a pile of rocks.
And I still, to some degree, think that.
However, I do also see what all the people who are making lots of noise now are saying.
And that is if you cover half the face and you look at it, it becomes something else.
And then look at the other half and it becomes something else again.
And as you know, Mr. Hoagland has said all along, all these many years, that it would be hominoid and feline.
And sure enough, if you look at it carefully, you can see how people arrive at that conclusion.
Now, what does that mean?
Does that mean that it really is that?
I haven't made up my mind at all.
unidentified
And I always find it interesting when they leave out, they describe the face on Mars, and they being any debunker, any skeptic, anybody who thinks it couldn't be.
And I'm not just saying NASA, anybody.
Anybody who doesn't believe it's a face that was created by some unknown species or some unknown race, keep in mind that you have a pyramid very nearby, as Richard, I'm sure, has educated your listeners over the years.
An amazing array of objects positioned on the surface by Sidonia, which doesn't seem to make sense.
I know.
And people who look at that area, like Errol Turin formerly from the Defense Mapping Agency, I'm not sure if he's even there anymore, guys like this, I mean, top guys, Dr. Mark Carlado, these are people that rival anybody that the NASA group has.
And these guys have worked with those same sectors, and they believe, at least until now I believe, I haven't heard anything otherwise, that it still looks artificial to them.
So I'm sitting here going, when will we really start to study these things seriously so that we can say once and for all, it is or it isn't, and move on.
Based on Mars, we may have to go there, we may have to actually get a piece of that thing and bring it back and look at it before anyone's going to be conclusively.
Well, you know, when they finally do set the Mars mission, the manned mission, if we ever get one, it's going to be interesting to see where they decide to land.
unidentified
Well, I still believe, there's a cover of that Omni magazine article from many, many years ago in 94 that I wrote, I still believe the cover said it all.
Eventually you'll see an astronaut walking toward the face of pyramid-like structures, and TV people are going to be watching on television.
Listen, the providence on the pictures, I know, is really good.
I mean, the lady, that was not given to any news organization nor sold.
The lady gave it to the Sheriff's Department.
unidentified
Right.
Now, you're talking about the one that is most recent, and it's tied to that other video I'm telling you about.
And again, it's a local area where some might say orangutan, some might say there are creatures similar to this that could be explained as natural or known species.
But again, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster.
Again, I have two cases now.
Two.
One in Australia where a sea monster apparently washed up on an Australian beach.
Major Dames was involved in the original American remote viewing program that lasted 20 years.
Major Ed Dames is a straightforward guy.
A lot of people, he's a very controversial guy, and a lot of people are on his case all the time.
But I happen to know there's providence here relating to our last hour.
I have a copy of Major Ed Dames' full military record, and I've read every bit of it.
Everything he says about what he did stands up.
The things he has to say are pretty wild, no question about that.
And tonight, he's come to do us all a big favor, for some of the things he's going to be talking about are pretty close to the heart for me right now.
Ed Dames is going to be talking about and has taken a look at the city under the water off the Cuban coast.
Ed Dames tonight is going to report on what he found when he looked at the shadow people.
And I understand he tells me he's really got something to tell me about the shadow people.
Should be very, very interesting, huh?
All right, I've got a couple of announcements that I want to make up front before Ed gets on the air.
One of them is, I have got one of the most kick-butt pieces of UFO video you've ever seen.
It could be totally a fake, but if it is, it's really a good one.
Even the audio is excellent.
So it's an AVI file, and you can download it from my website right now.
Just go to artbell.com, go to What's New, click on Video, UFO Video from North Bay, Ontario, with a question mark there, and that has to do, of course, with the Providence.
But oh my, oh my, this is some hunk of video.
In fact, we may have an Ed take a look at it.
It's a little late for tonight.
We just got it today.
It was sent to me anonymously, Of course.
Not actually.
Actually, Mark, in fact, Hutchins sent it to me.
So, not totally anonymously, though he found it on some other website that no longer exists.
And he says the same thing.
The video, and it's got audio with it, by the way.
If it's a fake, it's a good one.
It really is a good one.
So you're going to want to take a look at that.
That's on my website now at artbell.com.
And no licensing fees here, folks.
You can just take a look at it.
I guess it's a Providence that costs all that money.
And that's a statement probably not very far from the truth.
Nobody has a way of knowing, certainly not me, whether this is real or not.
But boy, it's exciting.
It's really exciting.
So check it out, artbell.com, what's new?
And video, UFO video from North Bay, Ontario.
Download it.
Keep it.
Enjoy it from me to you.
In fact, from Mark and myself to you.
So there you have it.
Coming up in a moment, the ever controversial, ever exciting, ever fascinating Major Ed Daines.
And now, from out of the mist comes our favorite remote viewer, Major Ed Dames.
There's about nominally, I'd say, 400 things to learn in a basic course.
And so if one had never gone into a kitchen before and one had signed up to take a baking course and you had never seen a stove, ingredients, oven, or a recipe book, that's what it's like.
At the end of the week, you would know how to bake.
What in fact it is, though, remote viewing, we'll spend about a minute on here or two minutes because by now I have a pretty educated audience, but there's always new people there.
In a nutshell, it's a way of turning the unconscious part of our individual minds toward the collective unconscious and again toward a specific pattern of information, something we call a target, a person, a place, a thing, or event, and locking on to that target, which happens to be very easy, and describing the target in great detail, in a very rigorous fashion.
The rigor comes in because we have to hold our imagination at bay and keep our ego out of the way, keep the ego from analyzing the data, and hold on to the target for 45 minutes of time and then describe in great detail a specific person, place, thing, or event.
It pops up in the basic course, in basic training.
I'm the director, as you know, of the Technical Remote Viewing Institute, which is a center for excellence for this, 20 years of research, government.
And once it goes out the door, it's out.
Once you recognize the damage that it can cause in terms of destroying your ability to describe a remote target, you'll never let it enter a session again.
So we train that away.
In other words, we train the student to recognize when it's entering into the description of a target.
We train that in the first week of training.
The other higher level courses, TRV 200 and 300 at the Institute, it's gone.
I was part of the original prototype team, and it was an experimental team to see if with an understanding, a laboratory understanding that the ability to remote view, the ability to be psychic, to possess extrasensory possession, is innate, could we take that and train it to individuals who are not natural psychics?
When that discovery about the model, this is the model that we use in our production kit.
Stephen Schwartz was, actually, I chaired a panel.
I was on a panel with Stephen Schwartz once.
Stephen Schwartz worked with natural psychics, some of the best in America, Harold Sherman, Ingo Swann, Hella Hammett, before she died.
And Stephen Schwartz was a master at, I want to use spy terminology since I was a spy master at one point in my life.
He was a master at exploiting the natural abilities of natural psychics and putting it together into a usable picture to produce some, to do something, find archaeological ruins, the same kind of things we do in technical remote viewing, but using natural psychics.
And the deal with natural psychics, when we use them at various times in the military, is that you're not dealing with a technique that can be trained.
The natural psychic normally does not know how he or she is producing information, and one does not know, since they're not trained, the natural psychic doesn't know when they cross that line into imagination.
All those problems were transcended with the advent of remote viewing the way we teach it today.
The life experiences are necessary because once we turn your mind onto a target and ask you to describe something at a distance, that perception can be taught to a child.
A child can be taught very easily to do the same thing that an adult can do.
But when you come back with this perception that does not have a label on it, no word idea, your memory needs to come up with a label, a word to describe what you're getting or the ability to sketch, at least, what you're perceiving.
A child doesn't have that lexicon.
The thesaurus is missing.
They haven't had enough life experiences directly or indirectly to be able to say, this is whatever.
You see what I mean?
We'll run into the same thing with a housewife, for instance.
A housewife can be taught to become an extremely good remote viewer if she had never done anything in her life.
But she might have trouble describing, let's say, the inside of a nuclear weapon or klystron tubes or something like that and may have to revert to imagination and say, well, this is like a cuisinart.
In other words, I can see, for example, a remote viewer who's got some target and they're sketching it, and at some point, it must be almost irresistible when they themselves realize what they're sketching.
Well, I've already seen it, and now it may have been in one of your tapes, but the fact of the matter is, no, I've seen it on TV shows that you participated in, Ed, where they send a camera crew out to an unknown location.
And by God, a remote viewer will sit there and sketch out beyond any question, to everybody's satisfaction, sufficiently close enough rendition of where it is in the world or what the setting is.
We took one student in my TRV Institute 300 course, in the advanced course, and only with one student, not a team, just the student, the student not only described the target, but named it, called it, and described what was going on in the minds of the people in the site.
They were non-plus, to say the least, because people really don't know how powerful this tool is until they actually see it.
And I would not do that television show unless I was promised that the viewing audience would see how much work it is to remote view.
I did not want the viewing, the television viewing audience, to be left with the idea that this was a layback, relax, close your eyes, and tell me what you see.
Instead of a definition, I'll give you a good example.
A child prodigy who would learn to play the piano in an unbelievable way after they're taught this creativity can take off and knows no bounds.
Well, there are other children, autistic savants, autistic children who magically, who having never been taught mathematics or piano, can produce the same type, the same caliber of magic, but never have been exposed to the techniques at all.
They're dipping into the collective unconscious to pull the information in.
By the way, another big head shaker, only this time in an impossible place in Japan.
Eight children were killed, 15 people injured at a Japanese elementary school on Friday when a former janitor with a history of mental illness went on a stabbing rampage and this time decided to stab children in Japan of all places.
So, horrible news.
CNN was covering it all day.
Just absolutely horrible news.
Once again, back to Major Ed Dames.
Major Dames, welcome back.
Thank you.
Okay.
I guess the best place for us to begin tonight might be the city, supposed city under the water in Cuba.
Now, we've done some pretty serious investigation of this story.
I'd like to read the audience just a little bit of what I got that started the whole thing out.
It's a Reuters story, and I'm just going to read you a portion of the Reuters story, everybody.
It's entitled Lost City Off Western Cuba with a question mark.
And I'm picking it out of the middle.
Most intriguingly, researchers using sonar equipment have discovered at a depth of about 2,200 feet, that's almost half mile under, a huge land plateau with clear images of what appears to be urban development partly covered by sand.
From above, the shapes resemble pyramids, roads, and buildings.
ADC, that's a company, is excited but reluctant to speculate until a joint investigation with the Cuban Academy of Sciences and the U.S. National Geographic Society takes place early this summer.
Now, a lady named Zelitsky, who apparently found this, said, quote, it is stunning.
What we see in our high-resolution sonar images, a side scan, using a side scan, by the way, are limitless rolling white sand plains.
And in the middle of this beautiful white sand, there are clear, man-made, large-size architectural designs.
It looks like when you fly over an urban development in a plane and you see highways, tunnels, and buildings.
We don't know what it is, and we don't have the videotaped evidence of this yet, but we do not believe that nature is capable of producing planned symmetrical architecture unless it is a miracle, she added in an interview at her office at Taroa along the coast east of Havana.
Now, Linda Moulton Howe, for us, bless her heart, contacted the U.S. National Geographic Society, and you may recall, if you heard it, they admitted, albeit like pulling teeth, but they admitted that they were going after this project.
Now, it is impossible for Linda, and certainly for me to believe, that the National Geographic Society would make one tiny move without having these sonar images clearly showing large architectural buildings located 2,200 feet under the water.
That's, again, almost a half mile.
The last ice age perhaps would allow for 300 feet.
300 feet.
So something down 2,200 feet would have to be shockingly, shockingly old, millions and millions of years old.
And so with the National Geographic admitting they were going after it, in all probability, there's great weight.
Ms. Zelitsky is off at sea right now.
We can't get hold of her.
Linda will do that as soon as she returns to dry land somewhere, if she will talk.
But in the meantime, I said when I last talked to him, hey, Ed, how about taking a look at this?
We set this problem up the way that we do in technical remote viewing to make sure that we're targeting, that our minds, our unconscious attention is targeting this specific area off of Cuba at this specific time, present time.
Because mind is outside of time.
So we have to make sure that we qualify our search in terms of the present time today.
And this we did.
So the good news is, fascinating news, is that Ms. Zelitsky has what she says she has.
She has what NASA has so often called non-fractal images.
These are artificial structures.
There is a tremendous amount of rubble, heavy-duty rubble at the 2,200 feet level.
And in that rubble is at least one, at least one, possibly two, at least we locked onto one or two, my colleagues and I, very large pyramids that are intact.
There's a lot of rubble on this plane, but the pyramids are intact, aren't they?
Yes, very large.
They're on a square base.
It isn't like the pyramids that you see in Egypt on the Giza Plateau, where the pyramid goes down and meets the ground.
These two pyramids are on a square base, raised base.
I'm aware of what people say, but it would be very difficult for us as remote viewers to take the idea of Atlantis and gain chain of custody.
For instance, what is Atlantis in the minds of people?
Is it simply an idea, a myth?
Is it a combination of a city that was real in addition to myth?
So we are much more comfortable looking at a physical area and then describing it.
That's what the military team was commissioned to do 20 years ago, was to get inside of secret buildings and describe what kind of weapon systems are there.
So we're very comfortable with this kind of work, remote viewing.
It doesn't matter whether it's 2,200 feet under the ocean or 2.2 parsecs out there in the galaxy.
The bad news is that this particular urban environment, let's call it, met its fate, its demise, extremely quickly in a matter of minutes.
This thing went under art very, very fast.
And so what we did was that we turn our attention, instead of describing the culture and who built this and who these people were, which we'll do at a later time, it became immediately apparent to my team that, whoa, this place went down fast, literally.
What caused that?
And so we turned our attention to the cause, the source of this catastrophe.
The source was a very large heavenly body very close to Earth, passing near the Earth.
And it meets, for all intents and purposes, all of the descriptions that Zacharias Sitchin has of this planet that he calls the tenth planet, or of what we call Nemesis, Nibiru.
So you're saying there was some incredible geologic disturbance as a result of some large planetary body or some large whatever it would be coming very close to Earth?
We can describe the event, but we'd have to sit down with archaeologists or geologists together in tandem.
And we as observers would have to be interrogated by these people.
They could ask us, for instance, could you describe what was going on here or there at the time?
We could turn our attention to that, and 45 minutes later, that's how long it takes to technically remote view a target, we could describe the answer to their question.
And they might be able to deduce what window, what time frame, what aperture and time for a particular event.
Well, you're injecting an event that, of course, would make what they're saying irrelevant to what happened to this city, because if some planetary body didn't indeed come that close, obviously the normal geological rules go out the window.
Because we don't believe that the city is that old.
It doesn't feel that old to us, Art.
Whereas in remote viewing, in the Institute, training targets, for instance, are specific animals, the largest land animal that ever lived in a Jurassic era on Earth.
I'm telling you right now, I'll hang my hat and my reputation, the reputation of my institute on the fact that there's one and possibly two very large intact pyramids there now.
That will be immediately apparent when they take the equipment down.
We use her mind, the pattern, her memory as a reference point.
And we just jump from her to her images, and then from the images down to the actual source of the images, and describe what that instrumentation picked up, whether it's a natural environment.
Very quickly, we can determine whether we're dealing with just a bunch of stones or hills or natural terrain.
He has pledges from a great number of people who, when they found out that I was going to remove that million dollars from his coffers, they backed out.
And then when these people found that, uh-oh, these are the people that were the military remote viewing team that the tax dollars went into supporting.
Well, you know, if Randy really was so confident that he can easily dispatch anybody who makes claims of the paranormal or whatever, then I have always wondered why he is so chickened as to not come on the program chicken, chicken, chicken.
In fact, didn't I once invite him on with respect to you?
I think he was upset that his backers were pulling out, that he wouldn't have been able to have the pledges that he needed because people were pulling out because they found out who was taking the challenge, who picked up the gauntlet.
Said some pretty wild things, and we'll talk about some of those as the night wears on, no doubt.
but coming up in a moment we're going to talk about one of his tougher assignments the shadow people Just before we take off on the shadow people, which is coming up, there's something I've been wanting to say, so I'll say it now, because I'm going to make Ed do a plug for his product.
You all should know, whether you believe it or not, what I'm about to tell you is the dead center truth.
And that is when we have guests on the show, which we do on a frequent basis, you know, people who have written books or people who have products for sale, as is the case with Ed, and he's got a wonderful new remote viewing product, you all should know that neither my network nor myself ever get one penny from it, nor any penny from anything that's sold here other than what's advertised on the program on our own behalf.
Otherwise, whenever any guests come on, we as a consideration for their valuable presentation here on the air, allow them to advertise whatever it is they have.
Be that a book, a videotape, a remote viewing project, whatever it might be.
So, no, that's true.
People have wondered about that for years.
unidentified
Well, Bell must be getting rich off those books or those remote viewing products or whatever.
It's a result of 20 years of my experience and all of the knowledge that we have as a military team piled into the most beautiful work of art that you've ever seen.
And it is remote viewing as a hobby.
If you want to learn it as a profession, you go to the TRV Institute.
But if you want to do this as a hobby and have a load of fun and prove to yourself that there's a whole universe inside of you, then buy Mind Dazzle, the remote viewing training kit.
You put it in this beautiful little holder and you start the timer and it's all in this elegant black so you don't have anything bright in front of you to interfere with bright colors and off you go.
And in three minutes, we teach you using a very special, very patented way of exploring your own conscious awareness how to lock on to a target that's described by one of these 180 sealed envelopes.
There's no way you can see through this opaque envelope.
Let me just briefly set this up, painful as it may be for some.
Shadow people are what people are calling these things that they used to see out of the corner of their eye, their peripheral vision.
You know, every now and then, I think we've all experienced that, where you see a movement in your peripheral vision, you go, turn around, what was that?
Well, I began getting calls from people who were seeing these things, and then I began to get calls from people who were seeing them full-on.
Not just the little peripheral vision movement, but seeing them full-on.
These dark forms that resemble humans to a degree, have a honoid-like shape, sort of, kind of, in some cases, and resemble other things at other times.
But the fact of the matter is, I began receiving, oh God, thousands and thousands now, countless, maybe 10,000 by now, emails from people who have seen these creatures full-on.
The latest installment, and it's pretty wild stuff, is on my website right now.
And if you have not yet seen it, you're welcome to take a look.
It involves a young lady named Amy who called my program on him.
Now, we have, by the way, so that you might know, we noticed that Amy on her website smudged out her son's face a little bit.
So without her even asking us to do so, because she did send me the email and told me on the air to go ahead and post it, we put it up originally, but we have now smudged out his face a little bit.
We did that just for his own protection.
She writes, my name is Amy.
I have an 11-year-old son.
He tells me he sees things at night, sometimes during the day.
He has many problems that just seem to be getting worse.
He sees a psychiatrist and is on five different medications that do not seem to be working.
The doctor thinks he has schizophrenia.
I'm beginning to think that he is not hallucinating, but really seeing things that really are there.
I took this picture of him about two weeks ago.
I see a skeleton laying on top of him with a hand reaching out to his face.
Look at the picture sideways.
This is the fourth picture in a series of four.
You can go to my website.
We've got a link there and see all four pictures.
And this creature appears in the series of pictures to be crawling up his body.
It is bone-chilling.
She continues, I'm very worried about him, and I'm disturbed with what I captured on film.
I also showed my son your shadow people pictures.
These are pictures that people drew of what they saw.
And he picked out about four pictures that he says he has seen.
Any information or any help would be greatly appreciated.
I'll be listening to your show tonight.
Thank you.
Amy.
She provides his picture of her son lying on the bed at a very odd angle with his head hanging off the bed on a pillow.
You know, the way some young people sleep.
It's pretty strange.
And oh my God, there is this thing crawling up his body.
I just wanted you to know the little smudging we did on his face.
We did, actually at my request after I found out she had done it on her website, even though she was not asking us to do it.
Obviously, we've got the big exposure, so at my request, we went ahead and smudged his face a little bit, which otherwise was clear.
It's not relevant to what's on his body.
And that, my friend, is bone-chilling.
It may or may not be one of what we call the shadow people.
All I know is we have stumbled into something gigantic.
Some have said so.
And so I asked Major Ed Dames to take a look at the whole shadow people thing.
And with that set up, so you now know, here's Ed once again, Ed.
Well, I feel pretty trained, like almost a shadow of my former self.
But I went about it by I received many letters that you shunted my way to the Technical Remote Viewing Institute.
Many of your listeners sent letters my way and asked me to look at each of these sundry and varied experiences that they described.
I sorted through those and I took a cross-section.
And I sorted through the cross-section.
I selected out several different instances and used those as remote viewing targets and set the targets up in a very technical way that I don't want to go into at this moment.
I do want to make a distinction, though, between yes, there is something that you and others are seeing and have photographed in terms of the shadow form.
I'm going to talk about that momentarily and what causes it.
That was a very difficult target, but we got that.
It is difficult because it requires, as a remote viewer, it requires many years of experience to be able to discern what is happening in terms of this paranormal experience.
Because it doesn't meet the norms for what remote viewers are trained to do.
Remote viewers are trained to accurately, in great detail, describe a remote target, whether it's a technical thing or a pyramid or something like that, physical thing.
When it comes down to these transient phenomena that are outside the bandwidth of normal operating vision or bicameral brain processing, that is a very difficult thing to do.
And one must have experience with paranormal things to begin with in order to have a basketful, a toolbox of labels and concepts with which to handle that.
The classic poltergeist art is a pre-pubescent child, 11, 12, 13.
If you want to guarantee a poltergeist activity where you'll see a tremendous amount of energy that is projected out from the child, then that child would be a 13-year-old epileptic girl who is undergoing a seizure.
At that moment, there is a tremendous amount of energy, and this is recorded and documented by people in South Carolina.
That amount of energy is tremendous.
And you can actually see a black form.
The eye, visually, humans can pick up a black form, and this is a poltergeist.
This is energy, so to speak.
And I won't go into all the details in parapsychology.
No, it's coming from the body of the child, not the mind.
It's part of the body of the child, and it's an extension of that child's energy.
Very apparent.
And when you have a schizophrenic person, a child particularly, pultopast activity is very apparent in prepubescent and pubescent children, especially epileptics.
Yeah, it's not paranormal, for lack of a better word, and it is creepy.
But it is an extension of ourselves in abnormal circumstances.
It is not normal.
To a certain degree, all children pass through this phase, and there is an extension of the sexual energy and the psyche, and it's projected outward.
But in the case where people have wiring problems, schizophrenia, epilepsy, it is greatly amplified, greatly amplified, and you will actually see a black fuzzy ball projected outward from the person.
Can I ask you anything about the nature of this projection or this polargeist?
other words something like this actually harm a child well or it will since the child is in effect projecting the energy that allows it would it would it I guess I'm asking if it can be dangerous in any way.
No, I have to in most cases, unless we're dealing with paranormal types of things where there's very few people out there that have that kind of experience.
And there, either I have to do it myself, or I must be in a room with someone while they're working blind in order to see what's going on.
In this case, I have to admit, I worked it myself over a six-day period.
In other words, where the work you did on the first day is a little piece of the puzzle, and then the second day is more of a piece of the puzzle until finally it clicks all together at the end?
By that, what I did in the case of Shadow People, after screening many, many of the examples and looking at the similarities, I chose one specific moment, one event as my target that was representative of a wide class of phenomena.
Now, what I mean by this is that all the shadow people related emails that I was sent, and many of them were forwarded from you, not all of them were necessarily the same phenomenon.
There were different classes of phenomena.
But most of them were these two-dimensional shadow-like forms that were moving along walls.
That's the class of phenomenon that I chose to concentrate on, and the one I think that you mean when you talk about shadow forms.
It was the majority of the emails.
So the specific target that I chose was an event that was described by someone who emailed you, and you posted, I think Heath posted this letter on your website on the 29th of May from a former Ranger Ranger?
And number two is, I would like, there was a project.
Let me digress here for a moment.
A number of years ago, a very prominent figure hired me to put together a scientific team and go to a place where remote viewing had determined was a very hot zone for UFO activity so that we could set up instrumentation and validate the existence of the phenomenon and perhaps record some parameters.
I would like to do that, to use remote viewing to not only to describe the conditions under which ghosts, whatever they are, appear, the energetics behind their appearance, and to set up the equipment to actually measure that, to actually trap or bait them, but maybe we can do that too.
All right, I still haven't fully figured out, in other words, to have a shadow, you have to have, at least as we understand shadows, you have to have form, right?
That's correct.
And in this case, we appear to have the shadow without form, that is to say, the solid form producing the shadow.
It's not a solid form art, but it is something that is interfering with the passage of light.
It's an energy presence.
It actually is an energy.
think of a bunch of neutrinos that were just kind of loosely scattered in the room the light would hit them and then and then would create all kinds of optical effects that would result in the shadow right a lot of people have been saying that one of the letters i found very compelling uh...
ed was somebody said that he has begun to see them and that he works with high-frame rate, high-tech stuff, you know, TVs running or monitors running very high frame rates, and that he believes that this actually accounts for people beginning to see what they have not previously seen.
We've noticed Jose Escamilla has suggested that a similar effect of all of a sudden rods, what he calls rods, are popping up on film, too, because we have technology that's fast enough to record these images.
In fact, and I can't speak about it because it's classified, but some of our photoreconsent satellites in the 80s and 90s were picking up.
The cameras were very fast in the old satellites, the KH satellites.
Now, the reason the American public is not privy to those objects are mostly because it would show what we're interested in in terms of a military target.
And it would give away, although it's kind of antiquated now, it's still classified.
It would give away the operational capabilities of the cameras in those days.
we have much more sophisticated systems now nevertheless the most that the american public it would be a sketching artist rendition of what one of those things look look like that was captured on a on a i still
In fact, of dogs, dogs and some animals, birds, birds and dogs can pick up.
It seems to the artifact of the presence, the signature of the presence of one of these other ghosts appears to bleed into the low ultraviolet so that you can just barely detect it out of the corner of your eye.
And it's interfering with, it's actually, because there's a presence there, there is some mass.
There's some actual coalescence of some type of mass that's in the room.
So then, do you agree that, and I think I heard you agree, that all of this high-tech stuff that we've got with these high frame rates and flicker rates and all the rest of it is what is enabling us now to see these shadows?
Because I don't have a lot of reports, Ed, of people seeing shadows and ghosts.
Just of shadows.
Not of the form part.
Now, you may say, well, okay, look between the source of light and where the shadow is for the ghost, but I don't have reports of people seeing the ghost.
unidentified
Because they're attracted to the shadow itself part.
Another great commonality that people talk about with respect to these shadow people is when the humans seeing these things see them, the shadow people almost seem shocked or disturbed greatly that they have been seen, and they usually take off like crazy.
They're just out, and the way they are massed, they do have form, albeit not solid, but the spectrum that they're visible in, it's just outside the range of human vision.
Where the dog can pick it up, that's why dogs track something across the room, and you're wondering, what is the dog looking at?
The dog puts its head back down and goes to sleep.
Well, you know, okay, I guess I can buy all of that.
I think the surprise would be, I mean, ghost reports, by virtue of their numbers, are very small, Ed, compared to the kind of numbers of shadow being reports that we've had.
But if, in fact, what you say is true, and these shadow beings represent the shadows or the presence of ghosts as yet to be defined by you, then there's a whole lot more ghosts than anybody ever thought.
And the value of technical remote pooing is to be able to qualify how a ghost arises, how it moves and what it is, and to either set up the conditions that attract this phenomenon or to go to a place,
as we did in terms of the UFO events, to go to a hot zone where they're find it using technical remote viewing, where we can always go and see ghosts.
Maybe almost everywhere is a hot zone for these things.
I guess what I was saying, that they're so common that maybe they're virtually all around us, kind of like Mr. Escamilia's rods, which you did reading on.
And in a lot of ways, you said rods were real.
Rods were virtually beings or life sharing the planet with us.
So we can, knowing this and using technical remote viewing data, results, we can design equipment which are cheap and point it in the right direction to make more measurements, not only to detect these things, but to record them and understand them more.
And I mean, this flies in the face of the idea that ghosts appear to be interacting with humans mind to mind.
It looks like they're looking at you and moving away.
But in fact, there's no mind there.
There's an energy, sort of an emotional energy presence.
But there's no thinking involved.
The mind's gone, but the presence is there.
So by turning our attention to this phenomenon and actually studying it and sitting down with some technicians, we can either bait something and attract this, who knows what they're attracted to, but we're going to find out using remote viewing, if they're not attracted to anything in particular, at least we can find the zones, the hot zones, where we can go and where the likelihood of seeing a ghost over and over and over again is very high.
Although you cannot fully yet understand whether you might have an ethical dilemma until you really find out what a ghost is, though, minus a mind, whatever it is, there still might be an ethical dilemma when you figure out what it is, right?
We've talked about several critical things already and a whole lot of surprises already.
Coming up, we're going to have a little talk about our weather.
They know all about Houston where our affiliate has broken away from normally carrying this program to carry information on what's happening around Houston where they're just more or less going underwater from a system that's more or less just sitting right over them and has been and went virtually undetected till it happened.
As our weather continues to get stranger and stranger, even U.S. News and World Report February 5th edition said it well on the cover.
It just simply said, scary weather.
All right, here we go.
We're about to take on the sound, the weather.
I just want to ask about it, Ed, because it's really getting bad.
The weather extremes in this country right now are as they have never been before.
The concern about global warming in all scientific reports I'm now reading.
In fact, I read earlier today the president is now prepared to get on the global warming bandwagon.
President Bush of all people, Mr. Coal and Oil, now says he's going to get on the way he read the last presidential approval ratings.
And in the environmental areas, he didn't do too well.
So anyway, he's on board, he says, now.
And it appears to be pretty scary and pretty real.
And I know you've done some work on our weather, Ed.
In the short term, in terms of a technical remote viewing survey, geophysical survey of what's going on weatherwise, over the last eight or nine years of work, we've seen that there's a tremendous linkage between the sun, Earth's sun, and our weather has really not been understood by meteorology and only now is beginning to be recognized.
It reminds me in a way of the unconscious.
The unconscious up until the early 60s was eschewed as having any bearing whatsoever on psychology.
So it sort of reminds me of that in my own field.
But the sun, and now we're in a solar max, and there is a very, very great linkage, a flux between the sun and Earth's weather.
So you have these short-term changes that are really not understood.
Lots of energy being pumped into the Earth's atmosphere.
In addition, the global warming.
But in the long term, we've got a very serious situation.
And you have really written about it in the coming global superstorm.
These long-term changes are a result of Earth's diminishing ozone layer.
As I've mentioned before, not only is there an increasingly larger seasonal ozone hull that's resulting in lots of weather surprises, but what science doesn't understand, and actually what some meteorologists do know and they are not saying to the public, is that not only is there an ozone hull, but there is a metastasis of the ozone layer around the rest of the globe.
And I think that we've seen, I'm trying to remember how many percent change over North America, which equates to the rest of the world pretty much, but it was several percent.
And with each percent, I'm recalling that skin cancers go up by some percent.
And it's really getting pretty bad pretty fast.
And you're right, they don't talk about that.
They talk about the whole like it's somewhere else.
Well, I would put antenna up and watch for the following.
And for real perceptive people, you might suspect that if science is aware, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, in conjunction with NASA and the Department of Defense, is aware that there is a very big problem out there.
If that problem becomes one of national security, ironically, where ecology becomes a national security issue, and that's happening now, I have inside information.
And at that, you might see classified projects to manipulate, I won't use the word term manipulate, that's too strong, to attempt to ameliorate and mitigate those conditions.
Well, I would never have imagined a point or in my life, I would have never imagined a situation where ecology, global ecology, Would become a national defense issue, and yet we are now faced with that.
And so you might expect to see some classified or sense, let's say, use that word, some classified projects that concern themselves with reestablishing homeostasis or equilibrium at certain levels of the environment.
The question on a lot of minds out there, I mean, if things continue as they are now, for example, Ed, farming will begin to move from the temperate zone it resides in now, in the U.S. and Canada, north.
I mean, that's certainly one possible outcome.
And agriculture is going to suffer, leading to perhaps a lot of the hunger that you saw not that far downline for us.
It's been about four years since I started doing your show.
And the first time I was ever on your show, I talked about a contract that my former company did.
My former company was made up of the best and the brightest in the military remote viewing team that I hired.
I trained them.
I hire them, I fire them.
In fact, many of those people will be showing up at the International Remote Viewing Conference in Las Vegas near your neck of the woods in June 15th to 17th.
Now, you know, the scientists are saying that the ozone layer will replenish itself.
When we stop putting CFCs by the tonful into the atmosphere, why there would be a period of time, the scientists said, and then the ozone would begin to replenish itself.
Well, the holes are getting bigger and bigger still.
Nobody's seen any replenishment yet, and you're saying they're not?
We are not going to be able to repair the damage in the ozone layer.
It does not appear to be just a natural, periodic, cyclic thing in terms of geophysics.
It appears that the damage, if it is a cycle, that is the ebb and the flow of the ozone hole, we have aggravated it, us humans have aggravated it to the point where it cannot and will not, according to remote viewing, over-the-horizon work, will not re-establish equilibrium.
Earth will not re-establish homeostasis, and the ozone layer will decay and degrade to the point where a tremendous damage will be done.
And that damage will be primarily, primarily the greatest amount of damage will be to the upper few feet of the ocean, phytoplankton, the very bottom of the food chain for the world.
And that will start the very serious chain of events.
Now, right now, you've seen over the years, I've been jumping up and down about frogs, eggs, frogs, and amphibians.
In fact, other things that we've described are that, because of the vicissitudes of weather, and I've said this on your program over the years, and now I think it's becoming immediately apparent, an in-your-face type of thing.
We're not going to be able to raise food en masse like we used to raise it, regardless whether it's genetically engineered or not.
We're just not going to be able to raise food without covering it and putting it in hermetically sealed biospheres.
When we do that, and we need to start doing it soon so the technology can mature, because the weather is going to degrade even further, these big, big biospheres will actually become the templates for human habitats.
Humans will begin to migrate into these farms as the weather begins to degrade.
The wealthier countries will be able to afford to do this.
The third world, the lesser developed countries, will not have the money to do this, but they will not be hit so hard except in Africa and in the Mideast.
In biblical prophecy, there is a time when man is beset by all these ills.
And someone comes, springs up automatically.
This person in Christian literature is called the false prophet.
The false prophet begins to work miracles and solve a lot, almost miraculously solve mankind's problems and points the way and points over there and says, and points in the direction of a person, a human being.
If this person who you're describing the Antichrist, if the Antichrist points to the Antichrist.
Well, all right.
If this false prophet comes and begins to deliver mankind, or apparently is delivering mankind from extinction, then that person would be regarded as a real prophet indeed, right?
So 2,500 years ago, Ed, if we were all facing death, then there is no way we would not regard such a person for working miracles that would head off extinction, death, the worst case scenario, not just for us, but for all of mankind.
At least when we pass, we have some idea that mankind shall continue.
Somebody of that magnitude would indeed be considered a god.
Well, I don't see how anybody's going to have any Choice, but to believe if they're saving our species and our planet.
That's the most bottom-line thing of all.
Hold on, we'll be right back.
Bottom of the hour.
I'm Art Bell.
unidentified
You're listening to Art Bell Somewhere in Time on Premier Radio Networks.
Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from June 8th, 2001.
I look around me and I see it isn't so.
Some people wanna fill the world with silly love songs.
And what's wrong with that?
I'd like to know,'cause here I go.
I can feel it coming in the air of the night.
Oh Lord.
And I've been waiting for this over for all my life.
Oh Lord.
Can you feel it coming in the air of the night?
Oh, Lord.
Well, if you told me you were drowning of the Land of Henry, you're listening to Arkbell somewhere in time tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from June 8, 2001.
By the way, somebody fast blasts me a pretty profound thought on the ghosts, the shadow people, the shadows of these ghosts.
This person comes to the following conclusion.
Art, Ed, we were provided with a veil out of mercy.
Sometimes bliss is ignorance.
This, in fact, is one of those times.
This is going to be really interesting, I think.
It's going to be a really hard question for Ed.
Hard question.
Ed, you do have a rep, sort of a handle that you acquired over the years of Dr. Doom, because you present a lot of end-of-the-world type scenarios, things that you have seen that you've talked about, and this is the basis of my question.
By the way, you're my kind of guy.
I've read every end of the world book that has ever existed.
And I have interviewed, I think, almost all of your old colleagues and friends.
And I can tell you that privately, most of them have a good, healthy respect for you and speak well of you, privately when they don't have to, by the way, on the phone.
We try not to have remote viewers commenting on each other very much, just because it leads to internet warfare, you know, the kind you see on the net all the time, and who needs that, baloney, tearing each other apart.
It's not worth it.
However, I do have this question, and it is as follows.
Most of your colleagues, Ed, don't say the things you say with respect to really big stuff like our climate, like the ozone going away, like starvation, and they don't talk a lot about that kind of stuff, Ed.
And the question, a natural question would be, why do you think they're silent on the matter?
If they're good remote viewers, then they've probably seen what you have seen.
And if they're at all curious, certainly they've listened to you on this program over the years, Ed, many of them, if not all of them.
And having said what you've said, you would think they would have gone out of sheer curiosity and taken a look at a few of these same things and would speak out about them publicly, but they don't.
I'm not speaking of any individual now, but of the other remote viewers collectively.
So then would it be your position, Ed, that they have, in fact, seen these things and know these things as well, but they are just loath to talk about it?
That's all I'm suggesting, is that people really take a hard look at death and on a massive scale, at grim stuff, and right now, turn around and go inside.
That's why this Mind Dazzle kit is so important to me, because it forces people to go inside themselves for the answers.
Sometimes often when you hear somebody talk or say something, it goes to your head and you cogitate and intellectualize and raceostheny and think about it.
But this time it didn't go to my head.
It went somewhere else and it was, hmm, maybe she's got something.
It's a pool of humans that are potential choices for the Antichrist.
Bear with me for just a moment, if you will.
I will.
Okay.
These are two or three children.
They are alive today.
They are potential candidates to be the Antichrist.
The Antichrist will be unwitting, but the false prophet will not be.
I cannot overemphasize this false prophet.
The false prophet will not be a human being.
He will look like a human being, but he will not be one.
He will arrive suddenly.
The whole world will be astounded at this person.
And he will point to the, as he performs these miracles, people will gravitate toward him, and he will begin to point toward this person that will become a natural leader, a human, who will unwittingly be the Antichrist.
You know, again, Ed, there is something here I don't get.
I understand the Antichrist, and I understand that most or all, you know, so many will be fooled.
But gee whiz, you know, if man, again, was facing the end of man, not just the end of any one life, my life or your life, but the end of everything, or very nearly so, then anybody who would come along who would, in effect, work miracles, put it in quotes, to fix the environment or whatever threatened our end, our virtual end, how would we not either worship that person or that entity as a god?
Well, you know, if you understand the system, if you can see the mechanics and the dynamics and perceive what's going on, there really aren't any miracles per se.
It's all natural.
The supernatural is only super because it's invisible.
That's where this idea of faith comes in.
But as remote purers, as a technical remote purer, you get to see the system out there, whether it's invisible or not, and how it works, and what the dynamics and the mechanics are, and what the system's standards and demands are.
And then you get to choose.
You're in more of a position to make a choice.
That's all.
I won't talk in terms of responsibility or duty or anything else, but you're in a better position.
You're on with more information with which to make a choice.
If you remote view the concept of hell, it is associated with the idea of two things.
One, this false prophet, the matrix, what we call the matrix, the collective unconscious, where all information is stored with patterns.
When you go into this as a trained remote viewer, as a professional, and you look at the topic of hell just as an idea, you could look at Atlantis or Buenavir or Quetzalcoatl, the Inca Sung, but you go in with hell.
What pops out is this false prophet that's on its way and the idea of the murder and the torture of children.
Those two things pop out of that search.
By the way, there's a percentage of these mind-dazzle sales go to support my institute's operation in GoldenEye, which is funded by me.
We search for child murderers right now.
If you go to my website, you'll see...
We have pinpointed.
We know that one child was murdered on the night of her abduction.
We have identified her murderer, and now we almost have a pinpoint location on her body.
So the money from the sales goes to a dog, get our dog on the ground, and get us in place so we can dig her up with her father by our side.
I'd rather apply it and go out in the field and show people what we can do with it and how what a wonderful tool it is rather than just talk, talk, talk about it.
I'd rather just use the time and my resources to do this.
And, you know, if some of the people in the listening audience could see what I have seen with regard to remote viewing, or maybe go to one of these big confabs like in Las Vegas, they would come away from it with a solid understanding that this is as real as anything around you.
Remote viewing is real, demonstrated again and again and again and again.
I know you'd rather be doing it than talking about it, but I'm trying to say talking about it so that eventually something is done is probably pretty important stuff.
You do understand, Ed, you do understand that when you say the things you say, which are very blunt and very worrisome and very concerning for everybody, that those who want to reject what you say want to put their head in the sand.
And when it comes to subjects like this, there are a lot of people who want to put their heads in the sand, understandably.
As I mentioned to you, coming up on Monday night, there'll be a repeat as I take a day off.
And that repeat will be a remarkable program to hear with Dr. David Anderson and one of the wildest shows I've ever done on the subject of time travel.
It's one you don't want to miss.
He's actually doing it now in the lab.
I'm serious.
And if you'll listen Monday night, you'll understand.