All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 8, 2001 - Art Bell
02:54:38
Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Stephan Schwartz - Remote Viewer
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001.
From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening, good afternoon, good morning, wherever you may be across the globe.
I'm Art Bell, and now cleared on over 500 stations internationally, this is Coast to Coast AM.
Good morning.
I would like to first pass on my condolences to the Reagan family.
Maureen Reagan, if you've been watching the news today, you know the daughter of former President Ronald Reagan, actress Jane Wyman, died peacefully in her Granite Bay, California home this morning, surrounded by loved ones after a courageous five-year-long battle with malignant melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer.
She was 60 years old.
Mike Reagan is a good friend of mine, and my condolences for the whole family.
I'm so very sorry.
But, uh, many times, uh, after such a long fight, and that's, uh, how my, uh, own dad went, malignant, uh, melanoma, uh, you don't say it's a relief, but in a way it is a relief, uh, for, for the person, for the family, for everybody involved.
But, uh, very valiant fight, and not everybody would choose to make it.
She did.
My condolences to everybody concerned.
It looks to me as though, uh, touching on the subject, uh, just so that you can be updated, We have Linda Moulton Howe, and now Robert W. Morgan involved in the hunt for the Bigfoot that was supposedly hit by a high-speed car wreck.
And remember, we talked to that fellow on the air here.
It is probably baloney.
I say again, probably baloney.
You'll recall that night I urged him to take the so-called Bigfoot 700-pound something to a veterinarian, which he claims that he did.
But he is now unable to successfully name that veterinarian, and a painstaking search by Linda Moulton Howe of veterinarians in the area has turned up squat.
Now, I only say baloney tentatively, because you can never really say for sure on these things.
You'll recall that I asked the caller, Rob, that night, to take this creature to a veterinarian.
Based on the possibility that it was still alive, based on what he said, right?
So, he may have done that, soliciting, as I suggested, the complete confidence of the veterinarian, and it may well be we couldn't get the name, but there are other aspects of this story, relayed by Linda tonight, that makes one think that, you know, would make one think that it's kind of belonging.
We'll see.
Coming up in a moment is Whitley's, my good friend, co-author, Whitley Streber.
And if you've been thinking lately that the weather has been really, really weird, even here in the high desert, and certainly around the world, you're absolutely correct.
It certainly has been.
And we're going to talk a little bit about that, as well as Whitley's new book.
He's on an author tour right now.
He's always doing that, always off on an author tour somewhere.
So all of that coming up directly.
Next hour, Stephen Schwartz, the remote viewer who I wanted to have back because he was such a fascinating guy.
Back next hour.
All of that directly ahead.
Take Coast to Coast AM with you anywhere on your mobile phone.
Coast-to-CoastAM.com can be conveniently accessed on your iPhone and most Android platforms, which means that you are never without your Coast-to-Coast AM fix.
If you're a Coast-to-Coast Insider subscriber, you can listen to the show live in the middle of the night, or previous shows 24-7.
Plus, you can browse all the great photos, videos, and news stories.
Keeping up with Coast-to-Coast AM has never been easier with our Coast Insider service.
You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001.
As you know, Whitley Streber and myself wrote a book some time ago, long time ago now, called
The Coming Global Superstorm.
and...
And, interestingly, the news beginning about a year after our book began to reflect exactly what it was that we said in that book.
In fact, from CNN, weather researchers think the evidence is now clear.
Let me quote here.
Quote, a major shift in the climate has taken place that has brought about an increase in major hurricanes.
The period of heightened activity could last for, they're saying, Decades and unleash, quoting now, a catastrophic storm on the United States.
End quote.
That would be a meteorologist.
Since the climate shift began six years ago when the Atlantic Ocean began looking like a hurricane freeway, the number of hurricanes that have formed in the Atlantic has doubled according to of scientists at the U.S.
Hurricane Research Division, and I could read story after story after story like this.
It's quite clear we are in the middle of a climate change.
Here from I don't know where is Whitley Strieber.
Whitley, welcome.
Hi, Art.
I'm in Denver, actually, tonight.
Denver, okay.
Yeah, I'll be signing books tomorrow night at the Boulder Bookstore in Boulder at 7.30.
7.30 p.m.? ?
Yeah, 7.30 p.m.
I hope it's p.m.
Let me look.
No, it's 7 p.m.
Oh, 7 p.m.
Signing books at 7 a.m.
would be interesting.
You're on an author tour, which means that you're here and there and everywhere.
Like, if today's today, it must be Denver.
Yes.
Monday, I'm going to be in, let's see, San Francisco.
I think I'm going to be at Booksmith's at like 7 in the evening also.
And I'm going to be on Politically Incorrect later in the week, which should be quite incorrect.
Interesting to do that.
Ah, you're something else.
You love doing this, don't you?
Well, I do, actually.
I don't do it often.
You know, I do it once a year.
I go out on author tour, and this time I have fiction that's a sequel to The Hunger.
Oh, yeah.
What's it called?
The Last Vampire.
The Last Vampire.
It's going to be made into a movie.
We're talking about and thinking about actors and actresses for it now.
It's exciting.
It's got amazing good reviews.
The publishing industry has certain reviewers.
There's a company called Kirkus Reviews that alerts the industry of what they think is good and what isn't.
Normally, I get just savaged.
Because my subject matter, they punish me because my subject matter is a little weird.
Well, I know.
We got pretty punished after Superstorm.
Superstorm, you know.
As it turns out, the only thing that we aired in is we said it would happen far later than it actually will.
Yeah, it's happening fast.
That's exactly right.
But anyway, the last vampire got great reviews and all those things, and it's exciting to be back doing fiction, and I'm just having a wonderful time.
What is it, Ridley, that women like so much about vampires?
I don't know.
Would you like to comment on that?
I wouldn't.
I'm glad you said that, because I wouldn't either.
I like vampires, and I'm not a woman.
I'm fascinated.
My wife is fascinated by vampires as well, as most women are in some sort of Probably better not to comment on it, I suppose.
Whitley, listen, I could read, you heard me read the story from CNN that was airing, I think, yesterday or the day before on CNN.
There was an article in Nature magazine, which is that super prestigious scientific magazine, I think in issue before last, or about a month ago anyway, to the effect essentially saying that What we said in our book could happen.
I mean, that the ocean currents are slowing down, and if they stop, or when they stop, there's going to be a huge climate flip.
And I thought to myself, you know, why did... We went out there, and we got the lousy reviews basically saying, oh, that couldn't happen.
We got that Matt Lauer coming after us, looking down his nose at us on the Today Show.
At least, I thought he did.
Oh, yes, he did.
And we were dead right!
I know.
We were right!
I know.
Let's discuss now a little bit of what's actually going on that's underscoring all of this dire prediction with regard to the weather.
You've got a couple of items for us, I know.
Yeah, well, there's a lot of weird stuff happening under the radar, but before we get into that, let's talk a little bit, like right now, If you think back, turn your mind back to the month of June, just a few weeks ago, we were having record cold.
Record cold all over the United States.
I live here in the high desert, not far from Death Valley, closer to Death Valley, frankly, than Las Vegas.
During the month of June, particularly from the first week of June or so onward here, it should be in the 109, 110, 113, 114.
Those are typical temperatures.
Now, what we had were 80s and low 90s.
It's finally gotten hot here now, but we have never seen anything like that here in the desert.
It was weird, Whitley.
Well, it was weird all over the world.
All over the northern hemisphere.
The southern hemisphere, actually, In the past year has had a more normal climate than the northern hemisphere, although they've been suffering from extraordinary heat waves and droughts.
What has happened now is that we have an amazing series of heat waves and they're worldwide.
The last week in July, Japan temperatures were Records were broken, completely blown out of the water all over Japan, all over China, all over Southeast Asia.
Now, there's going to be 101 in Philly tomorrow?
That's unbelievable!
It was 99, no, I believe it was 100 in New York today.
But here's the one, in terms of warming, that is the scary one, the one that really has got me concerned.
And that is that there was a major warming event in the Arctic.
In the Arctic?
Way up in the Arctic.
It went up to 75 degrees and it doesn't sound like much.
Oh yes it is.
That is a lot.
Because of course, as you know, one of the key triggers to this whole climate change is sustained temperatures of 80 and 90 well above the Arctic Circle.
It happened 14,000 years ago.
It's not happening right now.
I mean, the heat wave only lasted a week.
It's back down to normal now up there.
But to give you an idea, it's usually no hotter than 50 there.
That is as hot as it gets.
It went up to 75.
Four records were broken in that area in the week of July the 27th.
twenty-seventh uh...
incredible that that they uh... that that they would have that much
heat But they also had a stagnant air mass over the area, which is something that they have never experienced.
They didn't know what to make of it.
In addition, on my website, on Unknown Country, we have a little thing on the website called Quick Watch.
And it watches the key superstorm or climate change points.
It watches the temperature at the North Pole.
Right.
It watches the flow of the Gulf Stream.
It watches water temperature off the Grand Banks.
The reason it does these things, and it watches a few other things too, is that these are key early indicators.
If temperatures at the North Pole go way high, and the ice begins to melt, you can expect to see Sudden cooling of water in the northern, way up in the North Atlantic, which may mean that the Gulf Stream has stopped flowing, that's the trigger.
I don't think, my instinct is, and of course I'm not a scientist, it's not going to happen tomorrow, but we're moving in that direction and maybe a little faster than I think that you and I would have thought a year ago when we were working on the book.
Most people say, well, okay, fine.
What does that mean for me in Iowa or in New York or LA?
Or wherever they are in the world.
If things go wrong in the Arctic or down at the Antarctic, if ice shelves break off, if ponds or frozen lakes are being seen by people who are coming back from the Arctic as not so frozen anymore, that sort of thing, what does it mean?
Well, let's go back to ancient Egypt to talk about what it means.
Okay.
For many years there has been a mystery.
Egypt is divided into two kingdoms, so-called the Old Kingdom and the New Kingdom, and there was about a 500-year period between them of chaos, and nobody ever knew why.
There are a few inscriptions from that period, not many, but that would say things like people are eating their children and awful stuff like that.
Now, a climatologist has figured it out.
A mini sudden climate change event took place
and it destroyed the climate of egypt it dried up the mile
well from from mankind's perspective uh... what you call a mini change
doesn't have to be uh... uh...
all you know it doesn't have to be that big at all not from a total geologic
uh... full-time perspective i mean only thirty four dollars
I mean, these things go on for thousands of years.
40 years could bring down a civilization.
Yeah, well, it did in this case.
And that's what we are absolutely weather dependent.
And wherever you live in the world, when the climate changes, everything else is going to change, too.
Everything.
All right.
So many people, when you talk about global warming, rapid climate change, They go, oh, it's such baloney, we've only been keeping records as a human race for a little while anyway, and it's just a politically inspired baloney.
Well, it's been politicized.
But you know, the truth of the matter is, like, for example, the Kyoto Agreement.
The president is not wrong about the Kyoto Agreement at all.
He claims that there's got to be a better way, and he's right.
Interestingly enough, just a couple of weeks ago, there was a big study published about one of the features of the Kyoto Agreement is that countries can grow trees in order to offset their carbon dioxide emissions.
However, it turns out that trees are not necessarily going to do that and may even add to global warming.
That's what Ronald Reagan said.
Well, he wasn't wrong either.
This is a darn good study.
It's a really important study.
And there's another thing.
And that is, and this is why this shouldn't even be part of politics.
It's not, it's nothing to do with politics.
It happens all the time.
It's part of the way the earth works.
It's happened, I think we found 11 instances during our, when we were doing the research on our book, where this had happened before it happened as recently as
fourteen thousand years ago but everything that uh... would leave it is
political and that affects our locker or let me put this way
everything that affects our lives in such a profound way
is inherently political
well that's true but instead of a making it into an inject into into these
agendas and and basically just debating about it we have a distinct set
it's part of nature yes we can plan for it
and yes without a whole lot of effort we can probably make ourselves reasonably
safe from it Well, in America, our temperate, for the most part, climate has meant that we have been, and are now, a giant food basket for the world.
Right.
Now, is it not possible that even a short-term climate change Could change all of that, and that's not a trivial matter.
I mean, as far as our economy and world position are concerned, it's not trivial.
Two years of crop failure in the United States would starve the world.
That is how close to the edge this whole thing is.
Yes, that's what I was essentially trying to point out.
On the one hand, you can say, well, it's a natural course, and it may well be, whether it's natural or with help from man's hand.
Either way, the net effect of it could be catastrophic.
Oh, absolutely.
It could be.
Unless we plan.
Unless we plan.
People beat each other over the head about it.
The environmentalists are saying, you know, you're wrong to do this and you're wrong to do that.
People are just trying to live.
And then on the other hand, the other extreme, they're now saying, we don't need any conservation.
But conservation is part of productivity.
DuPont, for example.
Unless you're an oil company or the electric company.
Even if you are.
I mean, well, it's true.
Have you checked into the revenues of the oil companies and what they've been reporting lately?
Yeah, they've been doing very well.
And the oil company is not necessarily going to want conservation, but A chemical company like DuPont made an independent commitment to make a massive reduction in its carbon dioxide emissions as a company.
And they have found out that their conservation efforts are a big profit center.
Because the way you do that is you become more efficient.
And more efficient means more money, more profits, conservation, and productivity.
What do we do if we have two years of virtual crop failures in the Midwest?
Well, if that happens, then anywhere, it's not just in the Midwest.
It's worldwide.
I'm selfishly thinking of the effect on the U.S., of course.
On the U.S.?
Well, the first effect would be that we would soon, our own grain reserves would get depleted And if we couldn't buy grain from abroad, would we have to go get it and force them to give it to us?
I would presume the possibility of the Grain Belt moving north toward Canada.
Would you think that might occur?
The problem there is that north of where it is now, the soil cannot sustain the Grain Belt.
The Grain Belt actually stops farther south than the weather would demand it.
So then my plan of invading Canada is probably not viable?
Well, Alberta and Saskatchewan are full of grain, but north of that, the land is just not going to do it.
Alright, well, we'll have to think about that one.
It is warm out there.
But that's not, by the way, all global warming is going to do.
Some people think it's only going to make it hot out there.
Well, it will.
But it's also going to get cold in strange places.
People have kind of a twisted, wrong idea of what global warming really is.
When we come back, we'll talk a little bit about that with Whitley Strever.
I'm Art Bell.
This is Coast to Coast AM.
This is Premier Networks.
That was Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM on this Somewhere in Time.
I'm wheezing like a bus stop, running upstairs, gonna meet you on the rooftop.
But at night it's a different world, go out and find a girl.
Come on, come on, but that's all night.
Despite the heat it'll be all right.
And babe, don't you know it's a little bit blazed?
Can't be like the nights in the summer, in the city, in the summer, in the city.
Love is all around me, and so the feeling grows.
It's written on the wind, it's everywhere I go.
You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001.
It's written on the wind.
I can feel it in my fingers, I can feel it in my bones.
Can't you?
The change is already underway.
As Whitley pointed out, we wrote about something we thought would happen in the fairly distant future from a current mortal's perspective.
But we were wrong.
It's already begun.
You're listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time.
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001.
I guess we're gonna have to just get down to it.
People are saying that global warming is baloney, and some people say that because it's cool, and other people who are warm suggest other things.
I guess what I'm getting at is global warming is really no single Well, there's a lot of weird stuff going on.
uh... they just want to school here you're so full of it i mean you said
yourself it was cool where you were in june strangely unusually cool that's not global warming that's
what they say with well there's a lot of weird stuff going on
uh... though whether it is
it's just it's beginning to do things that nobody predicted
nobody understand
Well, that's for sure.
I mean, the meteorologists are all saying that.
They now note the change has begun, but they don't understand it.
If we really go into this fairly short-term thing that has occurred in Egypt, what would we likely see?
Well, if we went into that now, the main issue is famine.
World grain supplies, world food supplies are not all that high.
Food's plentiful now, But there's not a lot in storage, and every year the actual amount in storage grows less because the population is growing a little bit faster than the increase in the production of food, and that has been true for some years.
If we had a major problem in a big grain-producing area like the United States, basically there would be famine, starting in the places which are least able to afford Well, what would constitute a change of the magnitude that could virtually destroy the cross?
Do you have any idea how many degrees in change and which direction it might be?
Well, it would be a change in the structure of the climate more than an increase in heat, because it might be caused by an increase in heat, but something that would cause that kind of a drought over the central United States.
In southern Canada would be the problem.
The global warming models, which I'm not so sure any of them are really correct, because I think that they assume, all of them assume, a lot more gradual change than we're seeing.
But they all see the Midwest, as the earth gets hotter, the Midwest gets drier.
Back in the 11th century, when the Anasazi disappeared in the Southwest, there was a drought that lasted 70 or 80 years that covered the whole Midwest and all across the Southwest, where if that happened now, that would just be, it would be like the end of the world for us almost.
And we have no idea why it happened.
It's probably what brought the Mayan civilization to an end.
And we have no idea why it happened.
It could just have been a fluke and won't happen again.
We just don't know.
Well, one thing's for sure.
They weren't driving around combustion engines at that point.
No, they clearly weren't helping it, whatever it was that happened.
But some of the weird stuff, like right after our book came out, there was a weird thing in Spain, and something equally strange has happened in, actually it's in the Spanish, the little Spanish enclave in Morocco recently.
About, right after our book came out, there was a storm, which dropped these gigantic ice blocks.
Oh yes!
Which weighed 13 and 14 pounds, and turned out to be gigantic hailstones.
Nobody knows how they formed, or how What kind of storm could have created hailstones that big and heavy?
How much did they weigh?
I think it was 13 to 14 pounds.
It's impossible to even comprehend how any atmosphere could sustain something of that weight long enough to create it.
That's the problem.
No one was able to figure it out and it finally just became a scientific mystery and disappeared into the past.
But now, The Spanish part of Morocco, in northern Melilla, in northern Morocco, they had the following thing happen in the last week of July.
The temperature rose 30 degrees Fahrenheit from 75 to 105 in 15 minutes.
15 minutes?
For no apparent reason.
to a hundred and five in 15 minutes. 15 minutes? With no, for no apparent reason.
There was no weather front.
There was no blast of wind coming up from North Africa.
No one knows why it happened.
And then it just went down again.
That's some kind of a warning.
But what is happening in India right now is even weirder.
In Kerala State in India, and we have incidentally, I think one of the stories on Unknown Country right now is this story.
It's a really interesting story to read.
In Corolla State, there was a red rain that fell, followed by a plague of black insects that nobody could recognize.
Unfortunately, I'd love to get a sample of some of those insects, but... A red rain?
Red rain.
Now, the theory, it was not just red.
It's described as scarlet in color, like blood.
And of course, where do you remember that from?
The Bible, sure.
But also, it's reported in the 6th century A.D.
in England, and it was in the 6th century A.D., and again this story is on Unknown Country, in the 6th century A.D.
there was a worldwide catastrophe that involved some sort of strange dust coming down from the sky.
and this is probably what brought the roman empire to an end
among other things so you're saying that uh... some of the great civilizations
that have come and gone really have gone in your opinion because of weather
weather uh... related uh... catastrophes weather is a big player there is a game of life
believe me well um...
we've had uh... some of the same strange temperature changes with without apparent cause
uh... even here in the u.s.
I mean, it's just been an extremely weird year.
And if you think it's bad so far, just wait, because it has really only just begun, hasn't it?
Well, I think that 15 minutes for 30 degrees Fahrenheit is probably a world record of some kind.
But what's going on?
I'm not quite finished with India.
After the red rain, it was assumed that it must have been that a meteor exploded over, above the clouds, and dust from the meteor caused the red rain.
But then, wells began to collapse all over the state, all over Corolla, where the wells would, the walls of the wells would give way and the wells would be destroyed.
Meanwhile, There were a couple of cases where wells appeared naturally.
They just started flowing up out of the ground without explanation.
And then there was this plague of small black insects.
It is a very, very strange story.
And it suggests just basically there's some awful lot about this older of the bars.
We don't know, and maybe we're going to find out a little bit more about that pretty soon, because it seems like these things are sort of coming to the surface.
Well, the insect population of the Earth, a very non-trivial thing, by the way, is rather directly affected, in one way or the other, by the weather, is it not?
Oh, yeah.
Well, like, for example, you know, in the Northeast, in the past few weeks, there's been an invasion of army worms.
People go away for the weekend and come back and find their lawns are gone.
Yes.
And it's too bad when it's lawns, but it's also getting farms.
And it could be that you have entire cornfields that are just literally leveled by these worms.
And they're there because it's much warmer than normal in the Northeast.
And Tropical Storm Allison brought the eggs and The tiny larva up with it when it came up the East Coast a few weeks ago.
Well, if there is a better way than the pending treaty, Kyoto Treaty, what is it?
In other words, what do we do?
There are a lot of innovative programs and ideas out there basically about how to draw carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.
People are working hard on these So in other words, science may pull our fat out of the fire.
realize that the solutions that have been put forward so far are not going to work and
maybe even be counterproductive.
But there is, what I can say is that there is work being done and it may be that it's
possible to deploy this pretty quickly if we need to once we've got it figured out.
So hopefully that will bear fruit.
So in other words, science may pull our fat out of the fire, maybe?
Well, I think it will.
I think that we have a will to survive, and we will figure this thing out.
Once we get past the blaming each other for global warming and realizing it's here and we're here, we're going to decide, well, let's do something about it, and then I think we will.
Yeah, I'm all for that.
I've been saying on the air that I think it's Not an issue worth arguing about anymore, period.
It's occurring, it's happening right now, and we had better figure out how to handle it.
At least that's my attitude.
You know, when I put out a newsletter every week or so, and I put out a global warming special a couple of weeks ago, I got about 300 immediate removes.
They didn't want it.
They didn't want it?
Didn't want it.
And you know, it's ridiculous to hide your head in the sand, especially when it's actually something that It's part of a natural cycle, but we can do a lot to make it better.
Here's one question for you.
A lot of people right now, Whitley, think that there are black programs underway, as we speak, to try and affect the weather.
And I, for one, don't necessarily doubt it.
Is it not possible?
It is possible.
I mean, there's a company in Florida which recently developed a powder Which is capable of completely eliminating a thunderstorm if it's dropped on it.
Now, you have to believe that, and of course this is extremely dangerous, because... I saw the story.
It virtually absorbs, somehow, the moisture and takes all the power out of it, right?
Right.
Because this is one of the main ways that the Earth has of handling heat.
And if you start going around destroying those storms, You're really going to turn this thing into a heat sink.
Yeah, it seems to me that Mother Nature, in some way or another, needs to express itself.
I mean, you could put it that way.
As you point out, the thunderstorms dissipate the energy and dissipate the heat.
Everybody knows that.
When one comes near you, lots of energy released, and what do you get?
A nice, cool downdraft.
It's Mother Nature's way of equaling things out.
And if we go around preventing that from occurring, it's foolish.
As far as weather control is concerned, there's a lot of smoke out there.
I mean, there's probably fire there.
Some years ago, a couple years ago, Dr. Edward Teller proposed the idea of putting an aerosol of, I believe, of particles of aluminum in the upper atmosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the surface of the planet.
Scientists said it probably would not work.
I'm laughing because of the whole contrail thing, you know.
Well, I think, yeah, and people are finding, like, I think out in Santa Fe on Cliff Carnicom's website, there is a story about how they found aluminum particles, large numbers of them, in raindrops.
And, you know, where there's smoke, there's fire.
It seems to me that maybe somebody is trying this, and it always, to me, gets back to something I say all the time.
It sounds like it's on a completely different subject, but it's not.
We need to do something about the National Security Act of 1947 that enables all this stuff to be kept secret.
The Cold War is over, and I want my freedom back.
If the United States, or a consortium of countries, is in fact engaging in a massive undercover black ops weather modification, Do the people of the world have a right to know that?
They have absolutely got a right to know that.
And if we're in more trouble than we know, we even have a right to know that.
I mean, the idea that we're out here, that we're all a bunch of helpless babies who should be left uninformed while the insiders make all of the decisions is absolutely ridiculous.
The public, in the end, makes the best decisions, in my opinion.
And if you look at the history, at least of this country, that has almost always been true.
If the people of this country understood that a weather calamity was in their relatively near future, do you think they would endorse what we would probably consider a fairly wild scientific effort to modify it, or would we, and this is a really important question, or would we destroy the project by screeching and yelling about it?
We would work miracles.
We would work miracles because we want to live, and we're responsible and competent.
We have a highly organized, extremely effectively put together society.
We could do that.
We could fix it.
If we knew we needed to fix it for certain, we could fix it.
I have no doubt in my mind about that whatsoever.
But if someone knows it needs fixing and they're hiding that information, it's awful.
Maybe it's awful unless they have concluded in one way or another That to make it public would be virtually to kill it.
And I'm not sure, but we don't live in times when there would be big efforts to kill it.
You mean to let nature take its course?
Something like that, yes.
Maybe the program, for example, if the program is operating, it's not working.
Clearly.
Well, either that or there would have been more change by now had they not been doing whatever they're doing.
You're saying it could be working, but it could be... I'm saying a lot of things.
I'm saying that the detractors could even be right.
It could be that we are attempting, for example, to modify the weather in this hemisphere only or in the other hemisphere.
Who knows?
Well, except that one of the most spectacular contrails events that ever took place took place over Australia.
And it was just absolutely mind-bending.
So they're definitely in on it, whoever's doing it.
Well, what should we look forward to, assuming that everything continues as it is right now, when we're looking at the relative near-term, say, five years?
The next five years, I do not agree that we will see more hurricanes.
The stratosphere is getting warmer, and what we're going to see is fewer big storms, but they're going to be huge when they come, because when the storm tops penetrate above the stratosphere, into the layer of atmosphere above it, which is now getting much colder, it's really going to be some fireworks.
But usually they don't get that hot, even now.
We'll see that.
We're going to see extremes of Drought and extremes of rain like we are seeing here in this country right now where parts of the country are just drowning and other parts are parched.
And that's going to become more the norm where one area is in one extreme and another area is in another extreme.
We're also going to see periods, long periods of stagnation where there's very little air circulation.
And like it's true over the whole Central and Eastern United States right now, and it was true over Japan and China recently a few weeks ago, and it was true over Russia a couple of weeks ago, and on Baffin Island where these areas of stagnant, motionless air just settle and sit.
Because there's not enough cool air anywhere near them to make them move around.
Well, we shall continue to report on this, despite what people may scream and yell at us.
Whitley, again, you're on an author tour right now, and I want to get that in again later.
Today, you're going to be where and when?
Well, I'm going to be at the Boulder Bookstore at 7.30 in the evening tomorrow, or now it's today.
In Boulder, Colorado.
Then on Monday, I'm going to be at Booksmith in San Francisco at 7.
And then on Thursday, I'm going to be at Brentano Century City in L.A.
also at 7.
And that night, I'm going to be on Politically Incorrect, which I'm really looking forward to because I love that show and it's probably going to be a lot of fun.
Well, what are you going to be talking about?
I don't know.
I'll find out when I get there.
They pre-interviewed me about a whole bunch of different things.
Did they mention Superstorm?
Climate was one of the things we talked about, absolutely.
I'll be watching myself, Whitley.
I would love the chance to defend our position on that.
I wish you all the luck in the world.
I'll be watching, my friend.
And there's something everybody ought to do.
Read a good vampire novel and forget all this weather stuff for a while.
The Last Vampire.
The Last Vampire.
Alright, Lee, thank you.
It's been great, Art.
Good night, my friend.
Good night.
He also wrote another book that was my favorite of all time called War Day.
Don't know how many of you ever read that, but ooh, what a book.
Okay, we're going to take a break here at the top of the hour, as usual, and then Stephen A. Schwartz is going to be my guest.
He was here just before I went on vacation.
Vacation.
I call that a vacation.
And he'll be back because there are so many things that intrigued me that we never did get a chance to touch on.
Stephen A. Schwartz coming up next.
This is Coast to Coast AM.
The trip back in time continues with Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM.
More somewhere in time coming up.
I don't know.
I said no one can take your place And if you get hurt
By the little things I say I can put that smile back on your face
When it's all right and it's coming up We gotta get right back to where we started off
Love is good, love can be strong Love can be strong.
We gotta get right back to where we started from.
A love like ours.
A love like ours.
Can never fade away.
You know it's only just begun.
Good morning everybody.
presents Art Bell, Somewhere in Time. Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8, 2001.
Good morning everybody. Coming up in a moment, a return by popular request, Stephen A. Schwartz,
a remote viewer and much more is going to be my guest tonight.
He was here just prior to going on vacation, question mark.
And he's back because a lot of what he had to say was absolutely riveting, and we just didn't get to enough of what he had to offer.
So I told him on that show, want to have you back.
Had to postpone it a few times, but back he is tonight.
And all of that will be coming up in just a moment, so stay right where you are.
**thunder** **music**
Coast to Coast AM sure sounds great in the middle of the night.
But you know, you don't have to be nocturnal to enjoy this amazing show.
The Coast Insider is your key to a normal life.
For 15 cents a day, you can wake up refreshed knowing that last night's show is waiting for you with podcasting.
Listen on your way to work and again on the way home.
Or listen to one of over a thousand archived shows from the past three years.
As a member, you'll have access to our monthly live chat sessions with George Noory and special guests.
The Coast Insiders Club is a must-have feature for all Coast to Coast AM listeners.
Visit coasttocoastam.com to sign up today.
You'll sleep like a baby knowing you'll never miss your favorite guests and topics ever again.
Remember, a one-year subscription comes out to only 15 cents a day.
Sign up today at coasttocoastam.com.
Looking for the truth?
You'll find it on Coast to Coast AM.
Let's talk a little bit about the shadow government.
Do you believe it's there?
Yeah, we've heard that term, you know, for so many years and I thought it was this group in the Netherlands that sit behind smoked windows and make decisions like, you know, giant players of chess.
But it isn't.
We don't have the government anymore.
What we have is a loose coalition of bureaucracies.
But we have no representation in that government.
So when I look at the Constitution, I see it as a really inspired and eternal document that has been sidestepped in almost every legal way possible.
So the process itself has been intentionally manipulated to facilitate a certain style of government.
And it's taken a while to set up.
But I think it's set up now, and it's working just the way they like it.
We need a systemic change.
in order to let the republic be representative of the people again
you're listening to art bell somewhere in time tonight featuring coast to coast a m from august eighth two
thousand one now steven a shorts and by the way of those who are used to
going to a website when i talk about guest
forget it It looks like we have killed yet another website.
All you have to do is post the link on our website, and down she goes, and Stephen's website has gone down.
Only about the 50 millionth victim of an awful lot of hits.
Who is Stephen A. Schwartz?
A remote viewer, to be sure.
Responsible for the Alexandria Project.
You may recall that we talked about it last time.
Volume 2 is The Secret Vaults of Time.
Mind Rover through time and space.
He's written so many really good books that bear examination through time and space.
We're going to go there.
He has done all kinds of television and film, Mind Over Matter, Interspecies Communications, MCA Universal, that's kind of an interesting one, Crop Circles, we could certainly talk about that, Healing, I'm very interested in healing lately, Psychic Detectives, the Alexandria Project, so much more, general circulation articles for Harper's, Intuition, Kindred Spirit, New Age Journal, Omni, Smithsonian, Washington Post, New York Times, Washington Star, Virginia Pilot, Washingtonian, Venture Inward, Ghost, Has Ghost Written, get this now, Has Ghost Written for Admiral Elmo Zumwalt?
Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral James Holloway, Chief of Naval Operations, Richard M. Nixon, James Schlesinger, Secretary of Defense, and John Warner, as Secretary of the Navy and as Chairman of the Bicentennial Commission, has been on expeditions all over the world, Jamaica, Grand Bahamas, Lake Erie.
This man is really something.
He's a member of all kinds of prestigious clubs around the world.
Here's Stephen A. Schwartz.
Stephen, welcome back.
How are you, Art?
I'm much better, thank you.
Oh, good.
Stephen, gee, where to even begin?
You've been involved in some television and film involving the subject of time, haven't you?
Time, but mostly the issue of consciousness, and particularly the issue of remote viewing.
But remote viewing claims to be able to virtually ignore time in its doing.
In other words, the present, the future, the past, they're all virtually intermingled, I hear from most.
Well, I think that's true.
I mean, what we know, we don't know a lot, but the little bit that we do know is that there is some aspect of human consciousness that has the demonstrated ability to move through time and space.
I mean, we know from just rigorously, I mean just extraordinarily high quality research with every conceivable kind of control and randomization that people are able to do this, that they can describe persons and places and events that either have not yet happened that lie in the future or
that existed at some distant time in the past.
If you look at the evidence, it isn't really a very credible position to argue that it does not exist.
Okay. Uh...
All of this over the years must have led you at times, I would imagine, to speculate about the nature of time itself.
What is time?
If it is so vulnerable to, you know, directed consciousness, so vulnerable, then what should we think about time or imagine about time?
Well, I would say this, actually, and that is that I think this is really the realm of the will, and that time-space is the longitude and latitude of intention.
What we're doing here is making choices, and the latitude and longitude of those choices lies in time-space.
I mean, nobody understands time.
I certainly don't understand time, but clearly there is this aspect of us that seems to exist outside of the reference of time.
I mean, when you ask someone to describe like a horse race, and I came up in 1976 or 77.
I came up in 1976 or 77.
I came up with an idea and worked with Ed May who was then at SRI and we designed a
protocol called associated remote viewing where we asked people to describe an event
and then we, without their even knowing it, randomly assigned a value to that event.
So let's say the child's high chair represents Horse 1, and the football represents Horse 2.
We know that people are not very good at getting analytical information through this information channel.
I mean, it does happen.
I have seen extraordinary occurrences of people getting, you know, license plates or numbers on machinery.
That's interesting.
A lot of remote viewers claim that's impossible.
Well, it happens.
It doesn't happen a lot, but it definitely does happen, and there are Unimpeachable examples of it.
But the thing is that as a general proposition, it doesn't work very well because the analytical part of the mind usually is the source of most of the noise.
We genetically, I think, probably going back to our very earliest, the very earliest man, we have been training ourselves and thus genetically self-selecting For the ability to take partial information and act on it.
And it's probably what kept you alive as you were going through the woods from having the bear catch you.
You never actually saw the bear.
You just saw a little rustle.
And out of that partial information, you made an analysis and took a course of action and saved your life.
And so your genes got to go on.
And the guy who didn't have a very good skill at that, his didn't.
And so I think partly genetically we have programmed ourselves for this, and partly our culture teaches us from the very earliest years to analyze things.
You get rewarded in our culture if you're a good analyst.
I mean, that's most of what school is about.
You know, memorizing things and then analyzing what they mean.
Doesn't our modern culture, many would say, dull these intuitive skills that we certainly once have, and I think have to some degree faded, or maybe we're simply using them for other things at the moment?
I don't know.
What do you think?
Well, there are two answers to that, I think.
The first is that my own view is that probably about the time we urbanized, When we moved into cities, we began to suppress the more overt manifestations of psychic functioning.
I mean, the truth is, when you go down the street, do you really want to know what everybody that you pass thinks of your waistline?
No, of course you don't.
And so, I think we dulled that part of ourselves.
But I don't think for a moment that this aspect of human consciousness is missing.
Is missing?
Well, but the average dot-commerce certainly would be bear food.
Well, not necessarily.
Just stay with me a minute.
What's really happening is that this is an information channel and an ability, a human ability, a normal ability that we have all the time.
It gets culturally context, by which I mean When we were hunter-gatherers, what really mattered was knowing where the gazelle was.
That was what kept you and your family alive.
Today, if you're a high-tech guy and you're writing a program, for instance, or you're making decisions about which direction to take your little startup company, the guys who have high intuition are going to make it, and the ones who don't, don't.
This is such a strong correlation.
There was some research done at the New Jersey Institute of Technology by a guy named Doug Dean and another man named Michalowski.
It was about 25 years ago.
Nobody followed up on this.
And he found out that by asking the executives of corporations to do a simple precognitive test, that's a simple future-guessing test, right?
Sure.
And this was in the early days of computers when they had to lug around these little cards.
You had to punch these little cards.
So, they asked these guys to do this test, and then they asked them to give them the balance sheets of the corporation.
Now, all of these CEOs were CEOs for at least five years, so they had put their mark on the company.
And they then took this little test, and he discovered that the correlation was so strong that he could look at the test results of his little test and tell you how this company was doing.
Those guys who scored high in sciability, their companies doubled or better their profits in the preceding years.
Not surprised at all.
So you're saying then, it's still there, every bit as strong as it ever was.
It simply has changed with the changed requirements of the modern world.
That's right, exactly.
I mean, sure, it's true.
We don't have some of the sensitivities we used to have, but We have different sensitivities because we have a different cultural context.
Still fair to say the average dot-commer would be bear-meat.
Well, he would certainly be bear-meat in that context, but he may be the guy who figures out the code that solves the problem or that creates the next word.
Indeed, sure.
Do you think that it's generally, in our modern world, just restricting your comments for a modern world, do you think it's Development, let's see, how can I put this?
Do you think that it's ability, an ability that can be developed or, let's face facts folks, it's either there or it's not?
I think it's exactly like any other creative ability because it is one of the creative abilities in a way.
You have an innate potential that you come in with.
That's just whatever you got.
You know, just like you have musical skills or mathematical skills and then on top of that you have intention And you have the development of a discipline which allows you to access this part of yourself.
Does it relate to IQ?
No.
No, it does not relate to IQ.
Isn't that interesting?
And the reason that's interesting is because you may recall in school there were those kids who got straight A's.
Oh, I remember those kids.
Straight A's.
And they didn't even have to really try.
And yet A lot of those kids are not the ones who went on to manage and become CEOs of large corporations and become very successful.
Many of them languished in academia or just didn't do well in life at all.
Well, what we know is... I'm writing a book about this called Singular People.
Oh?
And about that creativity, religious ecstasy, and psychic functioning.
Our three manifestations are the same information channel.
Really?
They're very closely related.
It's not a relationship to IQ.
What it is, at least in part, it's a capacity to see over the wall.
There's a six-step process that all these people go through.
If you read their biographies, the biographies of The Madame Curies and the Einsteins and the Brahmses and the Michelangelos, right?
The people to whom history unequivocally accords the title genius.
And if you read also the biographies of saints, and they're, you know, the Catholics have very good records about a lot of this.
Oh, yes.
And you listen to what people who are very gifted, intuitive, psychically say, they all tell you the same kind of stuff.
They say, for instance, it comes in an instant.
It's like I see something holographically.
Yes.
Uh, Brahms says that he was, that he was in a kind of an exalted, he calls it an exalted trance state.
And he could hear this music.
And he, what he did was write it down.
Mozart says the same thing.
He was in this state and his job was really to, an alter state of consciousness.
And his job was to write down the stuff.
And if you look at the transcription of his music, it has almost no corrections
since because well then should we revere him for the uh...
uh... the wonderful uh... talents and ability musical ability that that he had
or should we imagine
that his p s i ability was simply incredible and that he may have in effect remote
viewed and plucked this from
uh... uh... non non local consciousness and really isn't do that sort of uh... credit at all no no
no no no no no no the top there
uh... no i think what we should say about all of these people whether they
are uh...
uh...
saints or psychics and our differences but that the contact is what i'm
really talking about
What we need to say about these people, and Mozart being one of them, is that they have this gift.
They have a gift of contact.
What makes them stand out from lots of people who have a gift of contact is that they develop the discipline to do it.
The six stages you've got to go through to have one of these moments, whether you're doing remote viewing or whether you're trying to solve an equation, whatever it is.
If you look at the people who actually do it, they tell you that they go through, first you have to be the master of your craft.
You have to be good at whatever it is you're doing.
So that's sort of the intellectual side, the discipline side.
Then you have to have a belief that there is a solution.
They all describe this, you know, I just knew there was an answer.
I knew it could be done.
I knew I couldn't see it, but it was out there.
So you have to have some capacity.
You have to have a belief that it's going to happen.
You have to have the ability to surrender cherished outcomes and all of your biases.
And this is where most of it breaks down.
The man who started Edwin Land, the guy who started Polaroid cameras, who is of course a great genius.
Are we absolutely certain, Stephen, in your opinion, that we know where ideas come from, i.e.
from the brain of the inventor?
that he had hired that the guys that really made it and made a difference
where the people who could look at the same old information that everybody else
was looking at but they could see it in a new way are we absolutely
certain uh... steven in your opinion that we know where ideas come from i.e. from
the uh...
uh... the brain of the inventor well i don't know that they come from the brain
but i'm not going to go to the end No, I don't know that I would say that.
I would say, personally, that I think these ideas are coming out of the collective.
Oh, okay.
Well, that's where I was going when I went over the top.
We'll be right back.
I'm Art Bell.
This is Coast to Coast AM.
This is Premier Networks.
That was Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM on this Somewhere in Time.
Holding you is a warmth that I thought I could never find.
Just trying to decide.
Just trying to be silent Or stay by your side
I know I could cry I just can't find the answers to the questions that keep
going through my mind Hey babe, is that...
I've got the will to try and fight Against the new tomorrow
So I guess I'll just believe it's tomorrow I'll never come back, I said
Tonight, I'm living in the forest of a dream I know the night is not as it would seem
I must believe in something So I'll make myself believe it's tonight
I'll never go Oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh
Oh the night is my world City lights painted dark
In the day, nothing matters It's the night, time matters
Somewhere in Time, with Art Bell, continues, courtesy of Premier Networks.
Stephen A. Schwartz is, my guess, the collective unconscious.
You know, I guess that's really what it is.
The collective consciousness is really the collective unconscious, in a way, at least from our point of view, even though it may be a total consciousness.
So, did the idea come from the mind of the CEO, or was he simply really good at weeding out The answer from the collective consciousness.
I guess we'll pick up on that and then another little idea I have that I want to ask about in just a moment.
I'm Art Bell and this is Coast to Coast AM.
Now, we take you back to the past on Art Bell Somewhere in Time.
Stephen, welcome back.
How you doing?
Alright, this collective consciousness business, does that mean then that the people, the CEOs who are so successful, the people who come up with the grand ideas, are simply more adept at plucking the answer from the collective?
Is that fair?
You know, I think it's fairer than you'd imagine, and I'll tell you why.
If you look at the question of simultaneity, What you see is it's as if the collective gets pregnant and a bunch of people have an idea.
Yes.
I mean, you know, Edison was, I think, the 37th patent of a light bulb, but he was the one who figured out how to make the filament work.
So a lot of people got the idea of putting some kind of filament in a glass ball and evacuating the air and running electricity through it.
He was the guy who figured out how to make it work.
And I think what happens is, is that these ideas, there is a kind of pregnancy.
And these ideas come through, and certain people sort of hear them.
They're just attuned to them, because they've prepared themselves, because they are interested in being open to it, you know, whatever.
And that a certain number of them just, for one reason or another, don't make it, but a few do.
And I think what does sort these people out is that, yes, they do hear an idea whose time has come.
I mean, we even have a cliché about it.
And they are the more successful people in plucking the idea out, and then knowing how to nurture it, because that's part of the steps.
Once you have the aha moment, you have to know how to explain it to other people, so they understand it, and you have to know how to do it again, so that it can actually work.
And the other thing is, is that you have to be on time.
Yes, right idea at the right time.
So in other words... Yeah, if you're not on the right... If you don't... If it doesn't happen at the right time, If people aren't ready to hear it, and there are a number of examples of this.
Many, actually.
Yeah, then it just, you know, people think you're a crank, and it's only years later that they understand what a brilliant insight it was.
So then, for success, sigh ability actually may be more important than raw IQ.
No, you're not going to get me there.
I thought I'd walk you out of the place.
It takes both of them.
Well, sure, but the raw IQ is more the follow-up than it is the moment of epiphany, yes?
Yes, high IQ clearly gives you certain advantages, but if you look at the number of people over the world, let me put it this way, there are about 250,000 People of genius IQ that are born on the planet every day.
And there are, at any given time, right now, there's probably about 8 million of them.
People who are geniuses.
I mean, we're talking big-time geniuses.
And yet, if you think about the course of human history, I mean, if I asked you to name all the geniuses you could name, you know, you'd say, well, Leonardo da Vinci, Albert Einstein, you know, You'd have a list of about 25 or 30 people, but you'd be amazed.
Most people run out before they get to 50.
And so if you can only name 50 geniuses, and there's 7 or 8 million of these people with genius IQs out there on any given Sunday, why aren't there more people that you can name who have made these huge creative breakthroughs?
And the answer is that it takes something more than high IQ to make these big breakthroughs that move the
course of history.
All right, then let me take another leap. I'm good at that and you can stop me all you want.
If there is, as we are discussing, this collective, then why might it not be possible to inject an idea,
to inject a powerful concept except.
into the collective kind of as you might uh...
uh... cdn dot as you might see the lake with uh... with fish you know
now it's not the lake or whatever to to put some sort of powerful idea either
either positive or negative into the collective i think it happened
i mean i can give you a half a dozen examples mickey mouse
papa mickey mouse around Absolutely.
You show Mickey Mouse's little ears anywhere on the planet, he'll be amazed.
It's true.
And you will see it.
We do.
That's how archetypes get created.
You know, the thing about them is that they're immortal, but they're not eternal.
That is, they live in a time frame that is greater than a human span.
But they do change, and things do get added.
Good things and bad things, by the way.
It's possible to add bad things into the collective if you get enough people to hold that idea.
Well, I was going to suggest exactly that, and I suppose that too has been done.
In other words, you're not the originator of the idea, or maybe in a sense you are the originator of the idea, but in some way somebody with the talent of a remote viewer.
Could they attempt to inject some sort of idea that would, again, either be positive or negative?
Would that be something?
No.
No, it's done at the group level.
You have to do it at a mass level.
You have to be able to get an idea that becomes iconographic, so that millions of people hold a shared, intentioned awareness about something.
There are individuals who have done it.
I mean, I think that Gandhi is an example, Muhammad Ali is an example of just living human beings.
There are people who have lived within our, you know, people who would hear this lifetime.
I mean, there are a number of these people.
I think that's part of, you know, Gandhi, just before he was assassinated, he was interviewed by the Times of India in a little-known interview that You don't see much quoted anymore.
And the reporters who went to see him in his ashram said to him, you know, how did you do this?
How did you get the British who had been in India for 350 years and were the most powerful nation at that point on the planet?
How did you get them to leave?
I mean, you never held a public office.
You don't have any money.
Uh, you don't have any army.
And Gandhi's answer is very instructive because what he said was, Um, it was our beingness that got the British to leave India.
That he created a core, a cadre of people who were as committed to the warrior way of non-violence as others were committed to violence, and he simply out The very strength of the idea.
Yeah, and the strength of the people, the people who were willing.
You know, I interviewed years ago, I interviewed a bunch of people, I was writing a piece, and I interviewed a bunch of people who had been involved in the salt riots.
And if you remember that, the British wouldn't let the Indians make salt without paying a tax on it.
Right.
And so, to stop this, to break this, because the poor people couldn't afford it, he trained Gandhi, trained a whole, essentially an army.
of people and they would they walked forward and they were struck down by these indian troops commanded
by british officers who had
uh... bamboo staffs
and the women would pull them away and bind up their heads in the next eighteen
or whatever was would walk forward and they too would be struck to the ground this went on for
a long while and all of a sudden
and then these people reported the indians all of a sudden the troops
turned essentially to the officers said they looked at what they were doing
There were now enough people that it was clear what they were doing.
These people were not resisting.
We're not going to go forward.
We're not going to do the same thing.
We can no longer do it.
Right.
So, I mean, when you think about that, the power of beingness, if you look at how all major social change occurs, you find out it always gets down to one or two people and who attract a small group.
And it's these small groups that cause massive change, either for good or ill.
Indeed.
Another thing that we might note here is that great change seems to occur at moments of greatest stress.
When we have had our large wars, we've had the greatest degree of change of one sort or another.
Sure, because all the rules break down, and there's a period of time where Things are labile there.
They're capable of being remolded.
I mean, the Civil War is, of course, the classic example of that.
We reinvented the country.
It's a different country on the other side of the Civil War than it was in the beginning, and that is a change in collective consciousness.
That's what I'm talking about.
When you reach this critical consensus of mass awareness, you get a change.
A really good example of how it works, you can see in Romania.
I mean, here is a country that under Ceausescu, there was a guy who, he was a nutcase, but he wouldn't let people live in buildings above 50 degrees in the winter and he would only allow one lightbulb in a room.
I mean, just weird stuff.
And women had to go in and either he wanted them pregnant or he didn't want them pregnant.
And people put up with this for years.
It's amazing.
In a way, though, he represents exactly the same thing, just a very negative force.
Oh, that's what I'm saying.
I keep stressing this.
This doesn't come with values.
The values come from the individual, how you put it to work.
That's the thing.
The impulse and the imagery and the energy comes through, but how it gets translated into an actuality, that's where the Individual will and the integrity of the beingness of the person makes a difference.
I mean, Gandhi could have got all those people to run forward and set themselves on fire and burn down all the British.
You know, I mean, it could have gone a very different way.
Sure.
Do you think then, Stephen, that the collective is progressing socially and not regressing?
Yes, we're getting better.
We're getting a lot better.
I mean, we're also in terrible danger because of this climate change stuff, but putting that to the side, sure we're better.
I mean, in my lifetime, I have seen, I have been involved in three major social transformations.
The Civil Rights Movement in the early 60s, and the change of the military from a conscription um... elitist organization to an all-volunteer meritocracy and then later on in the eighties in this that was in the seventies and then in the eighties citizen diplomacy between the soviet union and the united states and and and i can i know from personal experience small groups of people and profound changes when it really is
It's extraordinary what a small group of people with a clear intention can do.
And do you think this change can continue to massively occur without some gigantic crisis, whether it be the weather or another war or some really major worldwide struggle of some sort?
That's a really good question.
That is a really good question.
Oh, can I go back and just finish a thought?
Absolutely.
I left a sentence sort of hanging, because you asked me a question I didn't fully answer, and that is, things are getting better.
There have been changes in civil rights.
There's changes in the military.
My mother lived at a time when women couldn't vote.
My grandmother lived at a time when people owned people.
We are definitely changing.
It takes a long time and it's very painful for individuals.
But in the overarc of history, we are trying desperately to get better.
I mean, we are a mess.
As a species, you could make a very good case that we're a kind of cancer cell.
But we are trying to get better.
I do.
I have hope.
Okay, then forward to the question, and that is, can we make continued great social strides without social strife of some major proportion?
Or do they absolutely go together?
Well, you have to have enough pressure that the critical consensus changes.
What has to happen is that things have to get fluid.
And it's just like putting stress on a material.
You put stress on it, and there comes a point where its molecular structure becomes fluid for a moment.
And that's what has to happen socially.
You have to get enough people who are willing to make the change.
I mean, when the revolution occurred in this country, about a third of the people were Tories, and about a third of them really didn't know what they wanted.
And they just basically didn't want to be bothered.
And a third of them, it's approximately, this is sort of John Adams view, and a third of them were really for liberty.
And it was touch and go there for a while.
I mean, you know, it was not a popular movement and suddenly it took a while to reach that and it had to occur when there was enormous stress.
So, I mean, your question is a really good one.
Is it possible to have growth without having Having violent stress, and I think that the key is you are going to have stress.
It's how you manage it.
And the answer to how you manage it is you want to choose the most harmless, most life-affirming path that you can find.
And just as a general policy, you can make physical policy, you can make economic policy, whatever.
You want to find the thing that is most harmless and most life-affirming, because in the long run, that's what works.
Well, I see, for example, a very stressful situation almost immediately ahead in the Middle East.
I see another Middle East war just around the corner.
And, of course, the balance is that it may ultimately come out well if we don't end up blowing ourselves off the face of the globe.
And that was great danger, I'm sure you were talking about earlier.
Yeah, well, no, the great danger I'm worried about is climate change.
Yes, I know.
Well, you know, the Middle East, the problem is that we aren't honest with ourselves.
Nobody's honest with themselves in the whole deal.
We, who support democracy, don't support democracy because we have a drug addiction as a culture.
I mean, you know, you can really see history as a series of addictions.
And the problem with the Middle East is that the United States is a junkie.
And our dealer is a corrupt, non-democratic, But always willing to deal, supplier, and then we've got these other people who've got this problem that we've got to deal with because morally we feel responsible, but on the other hand we don't want to deal with it too strongly because then our dealer might get angry and we're junkies.
With this energy, if there was not oil in the Middle East, do you think that the United States State Department would be spending the kind of energy that it spends on the Middle East?
Not for a second.
I mean, you know, give me a break.
There are countries that have been having war.
I mean, look at the Sudan.
They've had civil strife for generations now.
We don't care.
No oil.
We ignore it.
No oil.
You're right.
And so we're not honest.
We can't deal with the issue honestly because we do acknowledge, but we don't want to talk about openly the fact that we are unwilling to wed ourselves from of petroleum energy and i read a thing the other day
studies just come out that you could generate all the electrical needs of the
united states if you could put up enough wind farms in just three states
well that's absolutely correct Absolutely correct.
I mean, think about that.
Yes, indeed.
Actually, wind power is cheaper than other power.
It's about three cents per kilowatt hour, which is really inexpensive.
But that is not, of course, the road we are taking right now.
No.
No.
We seem absolutely intent on getting the last bit of oil out of the ground before turning our attention to anything else.
Yeah.
The thing about it, we know that oil is going to run out.
I mean, nobody argues about that.
I mean, Crudo Bay is about gone, for instance.
I mean, all of that that we went through for Prudhoe Bay, that's gone.
I mean, I've forgotten how much is left, but it's very little.
The Anwar that they want to open up now, that's 30 years.
I mean, 30 years is nothing.
That's less than, you know, a child born today won't even be in middle age yet.
That oil will be gone.
We need to acknowledge, I think, that somebody's got to control energy.
I don't care if the oil people control energy.
What I want them to do It's like a smoker.
I mean, I hope you're not a smoker, I don't know.
I like them.
I don't want them to die.
I don't want them to kill me either.
I don't mind the fact that they want to control energy.
I just want them to find an energy that doesn't pollute, because the long-range implications of that kind of pollution are expensive, deadly, cause horrible things to happen, and it's not fair to have a small group of people Support their addiction and their short-term needs to the long-term detriment of everybody else.
Stephen, I'm a smoker.
I'm sorry.
That's absolutely all right.
I realize fully I'm addicted.
I've known that for a long time.
And you're right.
Well, if you know that you've got an addiction, then that's all right.
And we, nationally, absolutely have an addiction to the oil.
that remains available.
And I don't so much fault the administration for going after ANWR because in the short term we have to have it.
We have to have it.
But what I do fault them for is not moving toward alternative energy sources at the same time.
They're politicians.
They're in charge of all this.
They're charged with looking ahead a little bit and they're not looking ahead at all.
That's right.
They're all complicit.
The reason we're in the situation where you have to even consider the ANWR Is that the decisions that should have been made years ago didn't get made.
And still haven't been made.
No, absolutely.
Hold it right there, Stephen.
We're at the top of the hour.
This is Coast to Coast AM.
The trip back in time continues with Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM.
More, somewhere in time, coming up.
Doing alright, a little jiving on a Saturday night.
I'll be home this Saturday night Bye.
Come with me I
I I
I You
You You
Art Bell somewhere in time.
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM, from August 8th, 2001.
My guest is Stephen A. Schwartz.
He mentioned climate several times, so I think we'll ask about that in a moment, subject of the first hour of the program as well, with Whitley Strieber, and of course you know about our book, The Coming Global Superstorm, which was collectively a little ahead of its time, and we took a lot of heat for that, but now the climatologists are saying it's happening right now.
Actually, it has already begun.
So, in a moment, we'll ask about that.
Coast to Coast AM sure sounds great in the middle of the night.
But you know, you don't have to be nocturnal to enjoy this amazing show.
The Coast Insider is your key to a normal life.
For 15 cents a day, you can wake up refreshed knowing that last night's show is waiting for you with podcasting.
As a member, you'll have access to our monthly live chat sessions with George Noory and special guests.
The Coast Insiders Club is a must-have feature for all Coast to Coast AM listeners.
Visit coasttocoastam.com to sign up today.
Coast to Coast AM.
It's way out there.
The Catholic Church a few years ago came out with a report that the belief in extraterrestrial life does not negate one's belief system in God.
I found that fascinating, didn't you?
This is something that is certainly a very plausible event, but nevertheless, what we're saying is, it is a setup.
Or the Antichrist.
And we had better wake up, because if we don't, we are going to find ourselves part of that alien agenda.
You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001.
Music Once again back to Stephen A. Schwartz.
And Stephen, you've mentioned the climate yourself several times.
What do you see happening with our climate?
And I wonder if, as a remote viewer, if you've looked at any of the probabilities for the future?
Okay, let me do the second one first.
Yes, I've been doing... I've been actually getting people to remote view the year 2050.
And in fact, I have on my website, which is down.
Which they'll get up again after all the hits that we've gotten.
Sorry.
No, those are all good things.
That shows what an influence you are on the country.
It's good.
I guess.
We've killed a lot of websites.
Anyhow, I've gotten people to look at the year 2050, and the reason I went 2050 Was it if you go more than 50 years out, you have no idea what they're talking about.
I mean, if you can imagine trying to explain to, I don't know, Benjamin Harrison, that there was this little box and you could see pictures of people dancing around.
I mean, you know, it's impossible.
We begin to lose our reference.
Yeah, you just lose your references.
So I only went 50 years out.
I mean, look at it this way.
In 1935, President Roosevelt put together a blue ribbon panel on the future.
And he put together really serious people.
And he asked them if they would look at the year 1952.
It was only 17 years out, right?
And so they really labored long and hard at this.
And they issued one of those wonderful white paper reports, you know, just by the pound.
And it was a really thoughtful document.
It has a few problems.
It doesn't mention jet aircraft or atomic energy or Or the ubiquity of television or computers or antibiotics or anything else.
I mean, that was only 17 years.
It's very tough.
Right.
But the remote viewers, so anyway, I went 50 years out and I've done this.
It's in a little CD and you can take the, you can do the experience and then go up on the website and fill out what you experienced.
And I will eventually, when I get enough, I will do an analysis and report on what, what people see.
I will tell you this.
That I started doing this in 1978, and in 1978-79, people began talking about this blood disease that was going to come out of Africa.
This was pre-AIDS.
Right.
And they said it was going to sweep over Africa at the end of the century, and in the early years of the next century it would get even worse, and particularly it would decimate Africa.
Now these are people looking at the year 2050, this is in about 1978-79.
Uh, they began describing what I now see in retrospect was virtual reality, although I couldn't understand what they were trying to talk about.
They would say things like, well, you know, people don't travel as much.
They go to, um, they go into this other kind of place.
It's like an electronic place and, and they all go there from all over the world and you can be whoever you want to be.
This is the way they're describing it.
And, of course, now you think about virtual reality, and I think, you know, the next great wave is going to be creating environments for people to have conferences.
You can come as an aardvark, and another guy can come as an angel, and someone else can come as a mermaid, and, you know, whatever.
I mean, you have an avatar, and it's already happening, and we can already see this happening.
Anyhow, so the 2050 people are beginning to describe a very interesting world, and one of the most interesting parts, just as an example, Is that when I got started with this, because I came out of environmentalism, that sort of thing, and I had all of the received wisdom that was there, most of it wrong, and not a lot of it wrong, we were terribly worried about overpopulation.
Overpopulation is a problem, but in 2050, these people said, no, you know, this is not the big issue.
The population is going down.
And that, in fact, there have been major decimations of population.
The latest reports that have just come out now tell us that the world population is probably going to peak at about 9 billion and then it's going to start coming down because the greatest birth control in history is prosperity under democracy.
Oh yes.
Because all of the countries that develop equality and democracy to some degree and that have a private sector economy and have developed affluence People stop having a lot of kids, and you have to have a sustainable rate of children in order to keep population growing.
And so countries like Germany and Italy, they're going to have population loss.
Japan, the population's going to go way down.
Even China.
Some might say they get conservative, others might say they get selfish.
Well, it's no longer as important to have a lot of people to support you in your old age, or to work on the farm.
I mean, the reason people have lots of children is that when you're very poor, the work is back-breaking.
You know, going back to nature, I mean, in sort of an absolute sense, is really tough, and especially on women, because they're the ones who end up having to do all the heavy lifting.
And so, they have lots of children because the mortality rate is high.
You know, when you read about the founders, for instance, of the country, their correspondence is just filled with the description, and this is in the 18th century, of people dying and being sick chronically, and you can imagine what an impoverished country this is.
They're all over the third world.
You have to have a lot of kids, because you want your gene pool to survive, and only a certain number of them are going to make it.
You're going to get old, and nobody's going to be around to look after you.
Sure.
If you don't have children, who's going to take care of you?
All right, so fewer people.
What about the climate?
Well, you know, it isn't really my opinion.
It's the UN's opinion, and it's not even the UN.
It's the worldwide collection of scientists who joined together to do this exhaustive climate study.
I mean, you can get it off the UN database.
Oh, yes.
Off their website.
And they describe a world which is, I mean, let's just take a few examples.
Water.
There's going to be a lot of increased rainfall in some places, and they're going to be terrible droughts.
So in areas like northern Europe and Britain, there's going to be more rainfall.
And in areas of North Africa and Australia, particularly in North Africa where they're in desperate shape already anyway, It's going to get very, very dry.
We were talking about the Middle East earlier.
The big issue in the Middle East, I believe, is going to be water.
I mean, it's going to be a killing issue.
People are going to go crazy over water because they're going to get, it's going to get much drier.
Now, the other thing is, as you know, we already have an example of what this will do.
There's recently been a bunch of research that has explored What happened to the Egyptian Old Kingdom?
And what happened to them was they had a climate change.
That's right.
You sound just like the guest in my first hour, Woodley Strieber.
He said, I don't know whether you heard it, you probably didn't, but he said exactly that.
He gave that as an example of what could easily occur with a rapid climate change today.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, if you really want to get into really freaky stuff, pull down the Oh, I'm terrible.
It's going to crash these poor guys.
I shouldn't do this.
July 1999, American Scientist.
There is a piece about ice coring and climate change that really is one of the best things written.
I know that these people are going to hate me, but anyway, it's the truth.
It's real stuff.
What is really scary is that we now have evidence that the shift from an interglacial to a glacial period May occur in as little as 40 years and might be as small as 10.
And if you think about what moving the earth into a glacial period would be like, I mean, there I've seen models where 40% of the human race gets wiped out to say nothing of thousands of species.
40% of the human race?
I mean, this is big time stuff over a very short space of time.
So then when remote viewers look at 2050, what does it look like?
Twenty-fifty.
Well, no, I don't want to tell them.
I don't want to tell you because I want people to go do it.
And I want them to tell me.
So I will tell you when we have enough of that.
I'll come back.
I'll talk to you about it.
It's going to take a while, but I think that it's possible to tap using the same principles that we use to describe objects or locate sites or hidden vehicles.
I think we can use this same protocol to develop Information about what the future is going to look like.
Now, we're not going to be able to know how it's accurate or not until after the fact, but it will... We will see emerging trends, and that's the important part, and it'll allow us to make different choices.
You sound like you imagine it is dire.
Oh, I think climate change is a big-time, serious problem.
Absolutely.
I think it's the biggest problem on the planet right now.
I really do.
I think that... Do you think that our government is, either A, planning for it properly now, knowing what's coming, or B, possibly even conducting some black programs right now, trying to modify it?
Well, as to the latter, I don't know about that, although I don't think so, because, you know, there was this recent story about the seeding of the This new chemical they found that produces rain, and it produces localized rain, but you see weather, climate change, that's not a good solution.
In fact, that's a really dumb solution.
Because we know that this is a global system.
We have got to approach this globally.
You can't do it locally.
Well, this is going to sound exactly like a repeat of the first hour, but for example, recently they found a way to Drop some sort of powder into thunderstorms and virtually dry them up.
Now, a thunderstorm, as Whitley pointed out, is nature's way of dissipating energy.
And if you toy around with it and prevent that energy from dissipating at one point, is it not likely to dissipate, whether you like it or not, at another point, perhaps even more violently?
It could, but it could do something even worse.
And I don't want to repeat it.
We've done this hour.
We can go to talk about it.
We can talk about something else.
But just to finish this thought off, the truth of the matter is that we don't really know what it will do, because we don't fully appreciate the complexity of the global interactions.
And so this is part of chaos theory.
I mean, you really don't know.
We don't know yet, because we don't have the computational power to do the modeling To a sufficiently fine degree to know.
We don't actually know what happens when you stop a thunderstorm in Kansas from occurring, for instance.
Does that make a difference?
Is the storm going to come out worse in Missouri?
Or perhaps divert a hurricane.
That's the point.
Well, maybe it won't come out in Missouri.
Maybe that little bit of energy will get spread out and it'll join a bunch of other little rivulets of energy moving around in this general system.
And something really nasty will occur at someplace halfway across the globe.
We just don't know.
And what we do know is that when you fool around with large global systems, you really are causing enormous, and sometimes in human historical terms, irreparable damage.
How comfortable are you, Stephen, that science will tread very carefully and will not plunge ahead where it ought not?
And I would remind you of the testing of the atomic bomb, when an awful lot of scientists thought why the whole atmosphere might go into a chain reaction and burn us all to a crisp, and right up until the very moment when they pushed the button, they still weren't sure that that would not happen, and yet they went ahead and they pushed the button anyway.
Yes.
Well, that's because the politicians push the button, not the scientists.
Well, right.
Right.
But if the politicians are faced with the inevitable economic consequences, which will come very quickly, of a climate change, they're liable to push any sort of button.
Well, sure, if you don't plan for it properly.
I actually could make a case for you that if we use the climate, the potential for climate change, just what we understand now, just what's in that UN report.
Right.
I mean, that ought to scare the bejesus out of anybody.
Sure.
So just taking that as the wake-up call, and that comment I made earlier about you could build enough wind farms in three states to power all the electrical needs of the United States, I actually believe, and I think that it's beginning to prove out, that doing things that work with large global natural systems actually end up being the most efficient way to do the job, and they end up being the most profitable way to do the job.
You just have to have a slightly longer term view.
You know, we don't have any problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars building a weapons system for an attack that is highly improbable.
But that same amount of money, if it were put into alternative energy, for instance, would transform not only the energy package that we deal with, but would also transform the climate.
Well, we can do things in a good way.
We don't have to do bad things.
Our technology is sufficient that we can make different choices, and it's going to take citizen involvement.
It really gets down to individual choices.
If you buy an SUV, I hate to say this, but if you buy an SUV, you are not serious about energy.
Because that is a ridiculously gas-consuming vehicle.
And you ought to be pressuring the companies that make those things to produce better mileage.
I mean, we know how to do this.
We just have not made a political priority out of it, and that's because as individual citizens, we are not willing to get up and stand up and be counted.
That's it.
What's it going to take?
Well, I think you're going to have to, you, metaphorically all of us, We're going to have to hurt enough.
Look at what happened in California.
Yeah, but look at human nature.
I mean, as long as you can go get gas, the price of gas has fallen again, right?
If it got up to the predicted $3 a gallon in Chicago over the summer, which it didn't, the screeching and screaming would be incredible.
And I really think that it didn't go to those prices precisely because they knew the level of noise, the pressure would be so great that they would be forced to change.
Yes, that's correct.
I think you're correct.
And I also think you could see in Vice President Cheney's comment about conservation is a good personal virtue, but of no use as a social policy.
And then you look at what actually happened in California.
All people did was become mindful of it, so that you didn't leave that light burning in the room.
Reality is the aggregate of billions of little bitty acts of intentioned will and observation.
You know, it's little decisions.
Do I buy the biodegradable soap or do I buy the, you know, flashy whatever soap?
Do I drive a car that is energy efficient or do I not?
Do I leave lights on in the house when I'm not there or when I leave a room?
All those little bitty decisions all add up to the reality we live with.
You know, the great secret cabal about all this, the conspiracy, is that This really does get down to us as individuals.
That's what the founders understood.
That's why they put the country together the way they did.
I guess I'm a compromise.
In other words, I'm an energy pig.
There's no question about it.
I have enough electronics around to sink a ship.
It's my hobby.
But on the other hand, I also went out and spent a whole bunch of money on solar panels and wind generators, which I had in my backyard.
And so I generate the lion's share of my own Energy.
Then you're doing okay.
No one says we have to go back to living in log cabins.
Trust me, particularly women, you don't want to go back and live in log cabins.
I've been looking at what it was like to live in a log cabin, and believe me, you don't want to do it.
It's very tough.
Sounds romantic, but probably in practice isn't quite that nice.
No, not at all.
We have the ability to live comfortably, for everybody to live comfortably.
We just have to live consciously.
If we're smart.
But are we acting in a smart way now politically?
Not even close?
No.
All right, Stephen, hold on.
We'll be right back.
An attack on anybody's current administration.
Although I can see how it might be viewed that way.
I'm Art Bell and this is Coast to Coast AM.
The trip back in time continues with Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM.
More somewhere in time, coming up.
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to get up there.
Silver threads and golden needles Can I bend this heart of mine?
And I dare not drown my sorrow in the warm glow of your wife.
But you think I should be happy with your money and your name.
And hide myself in sorrow while you play your cheatin' game Silver threads and golden needles can't mend this heart of
mine Premier Networks presents Art Bell's Somewhere in Time
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001 Speaking of thunderstorms and weird weather by the way, 29
palms just got blasted on...
I'm informed here on my computer.
Looking at the Intellicast radar, there's mean stuff out there.
It's missing my area, but it's all around us.
We're beginning to get some of the down drafts from it.
There's some pretty wicked thunderstorms out there.
Good morning, everybody.
I'm Art Bell.
Stephen A. Schwartz will be right back.
This is Coast to Coast AM.
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001.
Back once again to Stephen A. Schwartzman.
Welcome back, Stephen.
How you doing?
Alright, somebody points out they drive an SUV, not because they want to waste gas, because they don't want to die in an accident.
Okay, let's go there.
Then why don't we build smaller cars which are capable of sustaining the kinds of accidents that occur?
Why don't we demand that people take regular driving training?
These are all choices.
We're making social choices here.
The easy choice is we'll just go out and buy this thing, but the fact of the matter is that we could engineer a system where our roadways are infinitely safer than they are now.
It's not a priority.
People do not demand that attention be paid to that sort of thing.
I don't understand that.
50,000 people at least die on the highways every year.
Of course they do.
And, but that doesn't mean that they have to die.
That means that we have not made a sufficient priority to addressing how to reduce, I mean, the man right, or the person wrote in and said, I buy you an SUV so that I'll feel safer.
It's a great big thing.
There's lots more metal, right?
Sure.
Well, why can't we make a smaller car?
We can make it out.
Why can't we, we can make a smaller car, which is safe.
We don't have to have great big monster cars that guzzle gas and We don't have to have the kind of engines that we have in these cars.
We don't have to have that.
It is possible to change.
It just has to be made a priority where enough critical consensus of people says, we gotta deal with this.
When that happens, stuff happens.
I mean, that's what happened to the draft, is that a critical consensus of people in the United States said, we're not going to do that.
All right, let's get predictive for a moment.
Jason at Yale University writes, you were right last time you were on about the stock market.
I don't recall now what you said, but he's wondering, in view of that, what you see next for the stock market through next year.
I haven't thought about the stock market.
I don't know if I can answer that one tonight.
I've been focused on something very different, so I'm not current enough.
I'm not focused on that.
I can't answer that.
Alright, well then let me ask you what you have been focused on.
What has grabbed your interest recently?
What I'm really interested in is how individuals and small groups cause social change.
That's mostly what I'm focused on.
I'm doing two things.
I'm writing, I'm putting everything I know about remote viewing into these four books.
I'm doing Secret Vault of Time, Alexandria Project.
Secret Vaults is about, which was the first one, is a hundred years of research of remote viewing in practical situations, done all over the world by all kinds of people, not me.
The Alexandria Project is a book about a very focused project in Egypt that resulted in the discovery of Cleopatra's palace, all that stuff I talked about last time.
Sure, sure.
The third book, Mind Rover, is all of the papers that I have presented at scientific conferences Through the last 20 years.
So that the three of those books together, that's everything I know about remote viewing.
And now I'm just, I've written this book, Through Time and Space, the workbook on how to do remote viewing.
And it's got everything I and everybody in the scientific community knows about how to really do this.
And I've sent it out.
I've had, I'm having people read it who were from all, all the basic researchers who, who are my colleagues and who really know and whose views I respect.
I've asked everybody to take a look at this thing and tell me, and I'm going to put it together
so that it says everything I know about the subject of remote viewing.
Well, I know last time you were on, Stephen, you talked about a remote viewer who had gone
into a submarine to see if in fact remote viewing or communication could occur
through the depth of the ocean, right?
Yeah, that was the first experiment I did.
That was Project Deep Quest.
Yes.
Is there, in your view, any limitation to the distance?
No.
None whatsoever?
None whatever.
In fact, there's several experiments that demonstrate this.
Ingo Swann and Harold Sherman.
Harold was a man who wrote a number of books about ESP back in the 30s and 40s, early 50s.
He was very well known.
at the time, and was quite a gifted remote viewer.
And he and Ingo Swann became friendly, and they did an experiment, two experiments, I'll just talk about the Mercury one.
Before the Mercury satellite, the probe that we set up, my name has gone out of my head for the moment, but before we set it up to Mercury, they did a remote viewing.
And they described Mercury as having a slight atmosphere and a magnetic field that was shaped like a pear.
It's been so many years I can't remember all the things, but they gave a whole sequence of specific testable information weeks before the little surveyor got to the planet and went around.
And it turned out they were just spot on.
I mean, this is not... we're not talking about weird stuff that can never be tested.
This was stuff that they then got very clear, meticulous, standard, objective, instrumental feedback on.
Well, I have, over the years of interviewing so many remote viewers, I've certainly come to the point where I believe it's absolutely true.
I just... Remote viewing?
Oh, yes.
I simply, though, cannot understand Fully, or a grasp, I guess, and I've heard it all, believe me, conceptually, how it occurs.
How it occurs?
And why it occurs?
Yes, and why it can't be measured.
I mean, you can put somebody in a Faraday cage, it doesn't matter.
Oh, you mean measured in like you're going to put an electrode on them like an EKG and that there'll be a readout?
Absolutely.
No, we don't know the mechanism by which it enters the country.
I'm a hardware kind of guy.
I know you are, and it's in there somewhere.
We just haven't figured out how to look at it.
Here's the thing, Art.
All you're doing in remote viewing is allowing a normal sense channel that is available to you to surface into your conscious mind.
It's always there anyway.
It comes out as a gut feeling or as an intuition.
We have lots of words for it, but it's allowing this thing to surface in your consciousness.
It's there anyhow.
What all of these remote viewing techniques are about, I know the scientific one, all of them are a kind of mental martial art to teach you how to give yourself permission to hear this signal.
It's there anyway.
It's not that you go get it and then bring it back or that anybody teaches you anything in terms of Making the ability occur, what they teach you in one way or another is how to give yourself.
It's all about developing a kind of personal ritual that we can inform by certain intellectual choices.
Fine, but a signal to be sent requires energy of some sort.
That's not a signal.
I'm sorry, I shouldn't have used it.
It's so hard to talk about because... It is, yes.
I don't know that it's a signal.
I don't know that anything is transmitted.
I actually think That it is a function of being alive and it has something to do with the nature of life itself.
That all consciousness is interlinked at some level.
Because if you look at the research data, it's real clear that consciousness, human consciousness for instance, has affected cell colonies, sleeping mice, flowers, potatoes, bananas, little bean plants, all kinds of stuff.
Animals.
We know that these kinds of organism to organism interactions take place.
You did some sort of media something or another on television or film on interspecies communication, didn't you?
I have for the very longest time wanted to understand, and still don't, What animals think.
I just want to generally know what they think and I've had animal communicators galore on my program without any real luck.
I mean, they're very vague when they come on and talk about what an animal thinks.
What do you know about interspecies communications?
What is possible?
Well, I will tell you one little quick story and that is that I just read a Japanese company has taken all of the research that's been done about dog sounds.
You know, dogs have a whole... They just found out dogs laugh.
And they make a particular kind of gruff sound, and they only do it when they're playful or asking to play.
I see.
This was a paper published on this.
There's a company that's taken all of that information, all of those various papers, and they've put it together into a gadget that translates dog Really?
dog language into human language.
Really? And so when your dog makes a noise, I guess this little... I haven't heard it,
I've just read about it, this little mechanical voice comes out and says,
I'm worried, I'm worried, I'm worried. Really?
Yes, because they know that when they make these sounds, they have these
consistent... I mean, they've done brain studies and all sorts of stuff.
So, I'll tell you what I do know based on what I have seen in all of the research, and that is that
all beings have some measure of consciousness.
and that they are...
As a general proposition, animals, birds, are much smarter in terms of understanding what's going on in their reality than we have previously believed.
it is an act of species hubris that we do not accord consciousness to beings other than
human beings well it's i think it is a lot of the operas pigheaded snobbery
i think it has a lot to do with uh... our religious tenants doesn't it
In other words, if we don't assign the mysterious soul to a dog or a cat, well then, we don't have to assign constitutional rights.
But it's wrong.
It's all wrong, huh?
It's scientifically wrong.
The thing is, people who critique this kind of data, They get down and argue, well, if you'd only done this tiny little change, then you wouldn't have gotten the good result that you got.
But when you stand back from the data and you look across many different fields, you look in medicine, at the therapeutic intent and healing studies, you look at the animal cognition studies that are going on about animal consciousness, when you look at the remote viewing research, when you look at PK research, when you look at There's a whole spectrum of things.
When you look at the aggregate of all of this work going on, what you come away with, at least what I come away with, I don't know, maybe other people don't, but what I come away with is that all consciousness is interdependent and interconnected.
We are workstations in the cosmic internet, and we are both informing it and being informed by it.
Well then, if you were to strip away all of the arrogance And religious, and humorous, and all that.
Strip all that away.
Then how should we be treating animals?
It is in the nature of the way the system is set up that things eat other things.
That's just the way it works.
And what we need to do is be conscious of what we're doing.
Our problem is not that we do it, but that we are unconscious about it.
I think that, for instance, industrial agriculture, where you keep chickens and pigs and things in little boxes, this is utterly immoral.
And it doesn't have to happen.
That is not the way, it's not the only way it can be done.
And the idea of that we are treating animals like machines, which is what we are doing, we just make them sort of biological machines, And we create these horrible lives for them is deeply immoral and we're going to pay a big price for it.
Maybe we already are.
I think we are.
Mad Cow Disease.
Mad Cow Disease, the pollution of the Chesapeake Bay because of the chicken farmers that's destroying all of the fisheries and the oyster bed work.
This is a way of life and a culture that goes back to the colonial period.
And it's being destroyed because of the waste that's produced by large-scale industrial animal husbandry.
And it doesn't have to be that way.
We don't have to do these things.
We do not have to pollute.
Do you believe that we could feed ourselves and a good portion of the world as we presently do without these kind of farming practices?
Yes.
Absolutely.
We just need to make different priorities.
See, when we make our calculation of What's cheapest?
We don't build in the environmental impact, for instance.
I mean, if you actually figured out what those industrial chicken operations cost, if you factored in the amount of damage that they do to the environment down the line, and you made that a requirement in the accounting of that approach to farming... Bottom line would be very different.
There wouldn't be any bottom line.
There'd be this huge, gaping red pit that you fell into.
It's like nuclear energy.
I saw a thing the other day on nuclear energy.
They were arguing about whether this particular container was going to last 10,000 years.
The whole of human history is about 6,000 years.
So we're going to build this barrel that's going to last 10,000 years.
It was like going to the Mad Hatter's Tea Party.
Oh, about a year ago, when it was a big issue.
They were running these commercials on local television here, which showed these barrels going through various tests.
You know, being blown out of a truck and being train-wrecked.
And they would run these commercials on TV here in Nevada, trying to convince us that these things are really all right.
Yeah, right.
They're really all right.
You know, an eyedropper can wipe out the block.
If you want to know about nuclear energy, the thing to do is to get Hyman Rickover's final testimony to the U.S.
Congress.
He asked... Hyman Rickover created the nuclear navy and is one of the most extraordinary figures in American military history, and in scientific history in many ways, in terms of the application.
He literally created this nuclear navy.
And when it was all over, he went up and testified.
He asked to testify.
He testified many times.
But when it was all over and he was finally going to retire, He said, I'd like to go up and talk to the Congress one last time.
So they said, okay, you come up and talk to us.
And he said, you know, and looking back over this thing, I think we've made a mistake here because I don't think it's possible in the long periods of time that are involved with this energy system that it can be done except by imposing military discipline.
You have to make it really, really unattractive.
If you fail to do the job, which only the military can do, you know they can take you out and shoot you or whatever, that's what it takes to maintain the level of impeccability of maintenance that's required to deal with these energies.
It's a wonderful bit of testimony, totally forgotten of course, but this was from a man who really understood what the problem was.
Kind of like Eisenhower's Military-Industrial Complex Warning.
Yes, yes, yes.
Actually, that's a very good analogy.
I mean, Eisenhower understood.
You know, he had been the Supreme Commander.
He knew what he was dealing with when he talked about that.
Yes, and it was exactly the same thing.
I mean, Rickover's was an informed opinion in a unique way.
Well, alright then, step off the political edge here.
If you look at the current administration, With the plans they have and the plans they don't have, how many more administrations that act as this one is can we afford?
Oh, I don't... I think everybody's complicit in this, so I'm not politically partisan, although it's going to sound that way.
We can't... I think what's going to happen, here's my prediction, what's going to happen is is that the current administration is beginning to educate themselves and really learn that this is not the kind of stuff that when you sat around in the country club locker room at uh... where they can get down in the oil patch area that you came from banged on your golf shoes and talked about how you know these tree huggers were killing it now they're getting into it and i think they're beginning to discover
It's much more serious.
I think they're going to attack the wind.
What bothers me is the extreme unilateral activity that we're taking as a country.
You know, for the last 50 years, we have had a system of checks and balances that has been kind of cumbersome and inefficient, but it has kept the peace.
It's very interesting.
This is the first generation of young men Um, in American history, who has grown up without a war?
That's absolutely true.
A big worldwide war.
That's true.
Can you hold through the next hour?
Sure.
Alright, good.
Then hold tight.
We'll take a break and be right back.
This is Premier Networks.
That was Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM on this Somewhere in Time.
Only in America, can a kid without a set, get a break and maybe grow up to be president.
Only in America, land a life worth doing at the end.
Look like me girl, like you fall for a poor boy like me I'm in America, and a kid who's wild
Lonely days, lonely nights, where would I be without my woman
Lonely days, lonely nights, where would I be without my woman
Good morning Mr. Sunshine You brighten up my day
And sit beside me in your way Somewhere in Time with Art Bell continues, courtesy of
Premier Networks.
Speaking of interspecies communication, somebody named JD has sent me an email that I find absolutely instructive regarding what cats think.
Ever wonder what cats think?
Well, I think JD has it nailed.
Only day is good, your holy night, baby.
Where would I be without my heart?
And all of that's coming up.
Listen, if you would like to ask Stephen Schwartz a question, Stephen A. Schwartz, we're opening the line, so anything you've got on your mind, I guess, is fair game.
So, pick up your telephone and we'll get you on the air.
Sound of a plane taking off.
Somewhere in Time with Art Bell continues, courtesy of Premier Networks.
Music.
writes, being indigenous to this planet, cats are much more in tune than humans.
Don't ask.
They fit into the jigsaw puzzle in a way we don't.
They don't think in the same manner that humans do, because it's not necessary in their world to do so.
They function in a more moment-to-moment manner.
Cats obviously aren't goal-oriented, and their needs and actions arise according to their comfort levels and habit.
Cats have just as much emotion as we do.
They get bored, they get depressed, they love, they express anger, humor, pleasure, and many other emotions.
Thing is, they don't think it out.
They just do it as it happens.
After it's done, it's done.
They let it go.
Okay, so I'm not going to write a book, but here's an example.
My cat, for example.
6.30 a.m.
Time to eat.
Scoot over on the bed near Joe, husband.
Best place to be when he wakes up.
To feed me.
While eating, check out what Smudge is doing.
I don't know who Smudge is.
Might be a dog or another cat.
Anyway, while eating, check out what Smudge is doing and stay out of the way so he doesn't slap me.
6.40 a.m.
Lie down.
Stretch out.
Feel good.
Enjoy the feeling.
Watch what's going on.
See Joe leave for work.
Lie there for a while.
Relaxed.
Don't want Smudge to bother me.
Head for the bed.
7.10.
Climb up on the bed.
Ooh, this feels good.
Time for another nap.
Dream about chasing, running, eating, birds, being chased by Smudge.
7.45.
Hear a noise.
Wake up from dream and sit up fast.
Make sure Smudge isn't around looking for a fight.
Nope, everything's fine.
Go back to sleep.
9 o'clock.
Feeling a little stiff?
Stretch out and make the rounds.
Hop off to bed.
It is safe territory, is it?
Looks that way.
Take off for a walk.
Nope.
Nothing happening in the bathroom.
Nothing in the painting studio.
What's this?
Touches it.
Feels good.
Smells it.
Boring.
Off to the kitchen.
Smudges napping.
Geez, not him.
Don't make eye contact.
Look straight ahead.
Go for the water bowl.
Avoid trouble.
Phew.
Made it.
Basically, that's it.
Their days are the same as ours, but with littler things to buy their time.
Keep in mind that cats are very different in the fact that throughout the day they hear things and see things that we cannot see or hear, whereas a shadow person might be frightening and spectacular to a human.
To a cat, it's just another shadow entity moving across the room.
Interesting, huh?
That's only in part, and that's from J.D.
So, there you have it.
Let's get back to Stephen Schwartz.
Stephen, welcome back.
Hi, how are you?
I'm fine.
Let's go to the phones and let some folks ask you questions if you're up for it.
Sure.
Alright, here we go.
Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Stephen Schwartz.
Good morning.
Hi Eric, this is John from Goodland, Minnesota.
Hello, John.
Stephen, I'd like to ask about one, context, and two, dynamic.
It seems to me that the most important context that would be helpful for us to realize is We originated in some sense from Mars, as some remote viewers have suggested, and perhaps destroyed Mars is the key, as said, and we're heading perhaps towards the destruction of the Earth if we don't turn things around.
Not the least important of this being, at least to be able to face our own death in a larger context, but in terms of dynamic within this, it seems to me that the most important choice we have is to release free energy to all the systems of the world, to all the people of the world.
these free energy systems that seem to be bottled up or do we face the destruction of the planet and it seems to
me that's a very threatening thing to say
think about releasing free energy to China and Iran and Iraq
I wonder if you could maybe I think it would be okay myself and I wonder if you could
maybe help us through that uh... let me see if I, let me
first of all reframe your question see if I got what you're trying to ask me
you're asking me whether I think the that uh... the development of and and release general
distribution of free Free energy would be a good thing.
Thank you.
Yes, it seems to me it would be very threatening for us to release it to the rest of the world.
Well, it's going to make the world very different, but we are going to have an energy revolution just like we had an information revolution.
I mean, if you just look at the whole course of history, it's globalizing.
And so energy is going to globalize in another way, too.
We're going to have some kind of energy breakthrough is going to take place.
And I suspect that it will decentralize energy from its extreme centralization now.
But that doesn't mean that people aren't going to own it.
It's just that they're going to own a different part of the pipeline, different part of the process.
Right now, the whole energy equation is focused on just a particular part of of the whole process of getting and consuming energy, and it's just going to shift.
Somebody else, maybe the same people, but they're just going to do something different.
I think that the distribution of energy is actually going to be a good thing, because what it's going to allow is people to move out of extreme concentrations.
Because if you have energy freedom and you have informational freedom, And you increasingly have an economy that's predicated on energy.
Information, excuse me.
Then what's going to happen is it's going to be possible for people to live all over the place.
And to begin to rethink the way we use the Earth and its resources.
And one of the really good things would be not to have the intensity of concentration that we've got now.
So I actually think that That making energy freely available is going to be good.
And the other part of your question, my sense is that wherever you promote a democracy and private initiative, and sometimes you can promote it to a greater degree than others, that you have good things happen.
I mean, if you look at the way the planet is structured now, we're actually in a very strange historical period.
You really have to go back to the Middle Ages to find its equivalent.
We have, for the first time, and it's happened in our lifetime, and perhaps like the frog that sits in the water, we didn't really quite see it.
We have made a kind of global agreement that some ways of governing people work and others don't.
And in the fall of communism, we saw a huge global human experiment that went on for 70 years And it just proved that it didn't work.
So we're in a new space, and releasing energy is going to allow this process, I think.
I think it's part of the good.
And that we ought to encourage third world, even unpleasant countries, to have access to energy.
I don't think that that's where the threats are.
Alright, well we have cities in America and we concentrate the populations in cities basically for the distribution of services.
At least that was the original reason that we could get television and cable and water and sewer and all of the thin power and all of the things that people want and need and some of the luxuries that we now have to people easily and economically.
Is that fair?
Yeah, but suppose you could live in a small village and you could get those things that you needed.
I mean, I like to live, I personally live in a rural area up toward, at the foot of some mountains, but I'm within 45 minutes, 30 minutes of a city with a major university library.
I mean, there are lots of people that are already doing this.
We got together because the mechanisms for manufacturing and distribution and services That was the only way to do it, but imagine a world where you had a gadget that was about the size of the refrigerator, and this process is now going on, companies are trying to develop this, that you would give it, it would just be a sort of universal manufacturer of classes of things, and the orders would come down the pipeline from out of the satellite or down across the net, and this gadget would make whatever it was.
It's possible for communities to, we know.
You mean like a Walmart cube?
Yes, like a Walmart cube.
That's actually very good.
That's a good one.
Yeah, it's like a Walmart cube.
You think about all the things that are in your house.
Cups, saucers, plates, rolls, things that are sticks.
There's an awful lot of stuff that If you could manufacture it and you had a sort of material reservoir and somebody could send down the blueprints to make this thing, you could manufacture it.
Or maybe you'd do it at the village level, so you had a kind of village machine.
Yeah.
Isn't that kind of the promise of nanotechnology?
Well, it's one of the promises, or it's one aspect of the promises, yeah.
Okay.
Let's keep going.
We're moving into a different world.
Oh, we sure are.
East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Stephen A. Schwartz.
Hi.
Hey, Stephen.
Hi.
Where are you, sir?
This is John in Atlanta.
Good morning, Art.
Good morning.
I knew he was coming after me.
I'm still trying to imagine what free energy would do.
I mean, if it was just tomorrow, unleashed on us.
Well, but it won't.
It won't get unleashed in one day.
I know, but, you know, it's hard to imagine.
I think I can imagine it.
Caller, imagine for a second.
That it's not instant, because it probably won't be.
We'll get some interim something.
We'll get hydrogen fuel cells, and then another technology will come along, hopefully.
It's going to take time.
It's an aggregate process.
That's not where... Consider, how old are you?
May I ask how old you are?
38.
You're 38?
Yes.
Okay, so you remember the world before there were computers?
Yes.
I mean, if you were 20 years old, that probably wouldn't be true.
Right, but you remember what it was like when people didn't have computers.
Well, I mean, the head of IBM Computer at one point is on record as saying he couldn't imagine more than 15, why there would have to be more than 15 computers.
And yet, look at how that revolution took place.
And yes, there are disruptions that occurred as a result of it, but it took place over time and it's still taking place.
And the same thing is going to be true of energy.
We don't need to be afraid of this.
No, we shouldn't.
I agree wholeheartedly.
I spend a couple hundred dollars a week on fuel, and it would be nice to have that back in my pocket.
Yeah, absolutely.
Are you kidding?
I mean, you've got to drive down.
I talked to truckers the other day.
Diesel fuel, I mean, it's unbelievable.
It's crazy.
It is crazy.
Steve, I wanted to ask you about a remote viewer back early in the program, Pat Price.
I've heard mentioned several times in the program.
And I just recently read Jim Schnabel's book, Remote Viewers, and he doesn't talk much about Pat Price, but what he does say about Pat Price is it's amazing the capabilities that he seemed to have.
He was a hell of a viewer.
And I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about him, and also I was considering The Hemisync Program at the Monroe Institute?
Yeah.
And how that, you know, might facilitate out-of-body experiences, and what information you might have on that.
Alright, I'll get on with the questions.
Yeah, it is.
Let's start with Pat Price.
Okay.
I did not know Pat terribly well.
We met several times.
He was a policeman, and so he had the kind of, you gotta show me I don't want any nonsense.
I'm a down-to-earth kind of guy.
You know, that sort of consciousness that law enforcement people have, sort of self-select for?
Well, he was more jovial than that, but I mean, he was a very solid guy.
He was an extraordinarily gifted remote viewer.
There's a man up in Canada named George McMullen, who works principally in archaeology, and I've worked with him a lot, who was like Pat.
There aren't a lot of these people.
These are the equivalent of Yo-Yo Ma, or Heifetz, or Michael Jordan, or Tiger Woods.
These are guys who are at the absolute top of the game.
And remote viewing is like any other human activity or human skill.
It's a spread of people.
There are some people that are just dynamite at it, and there are some people that are kind of clunks.
You know, I flunk tissue paper and comb.
So, musical ability is not high on my particular skill set, but Pat Price was one of those guys who really could get the goods in a way that you could test, and he is a sort of unsung hero in many ways.
He asked about Hemisynch and the Monroe Institute.
Yes.
Actually, Collar, you can go up to my website.
I wrote an article about the Monroe Institute and its program.
So let me just give a quick answer because I know there are other people online and you can pull this down.
I've written all this up.
I knew Bob Monroe quite well for a number of years, very early when he was getting started.
Skip Atwater has got a book coming out that's going to deal with this.
Skip comes out of the Military Remote Viewing Program and is at the Monroe Institute now, which is not too far from me.
I do not think that you get out-of-body experiences except under rare conditions.
What I do think you get is a very, very deep altered state of awareness which permits you to remote view.
But when I talk about out-of-body experiences, what I mean is a process which incorporates as one of its early steps what's called otoscopy.
That is, you can turn around and see yourself as if you're looking at yourself objectively That does not happen in the Monroe Program, except under rare circumstances.
But Bob, he was a very interesting guy, just as a human being.
He was a really interesting man.
And he was one of those guys who just sort of put his money where his mouth was.
He came out of the radio business, made a lot of money, and he had a thing that he was interested in, and by God, he just went out and did it.
And the tapes that he has produced, and the Hemisync thing, produces unquestioned changes in states of consciousness
that have all kinds of implications
uh... and it's it's a good program i like the uh... monroe people there
they're clean folks uh... they deliver a good product
i mean their tapes and things really do to the goods
uh...
so i don't i don't have any
uh... problems suggesting that you take a look at it all right steven i would
like to ask you a question i have inside information and i know for an absolute
fact okay that there is going to be a gigantic announcement
in the future about
A sunken city off the coast of Cuba.
Oh yeah.
There are many who believe, in fact it may be Atlantis, but I'm telling you right now, I'm hearing that a lot of the information, the initial information we had, is accurate and there may even be more.
I mean there's going to be... I'm familiar with this.
Can you get somebody, have you looked at this or do you know anybody who has looked at this with remote viewing?
Well, I have been thinking about doing a remote viewing on this, because it's a classic experiment.
I mean, it's just wonderful, because it's completely unknown.
Everybody acknowledges it's unknown, and yet it's going to be known, and it's all going to be widely publicized.
It's a whiz-bang remote viewing experiment.
In fact, people could do it themselves, and we might even organize... I think we talked a little bit about this.
We did.
We could even organize an experiment.
It's a lovely experiment, because you will be able to... Verify it.
To verify it.
We're all going to know this.
I mean, they're going to get someone like Bob Ballard and a submersible down there, and they're going to take pictures of all of it, and we're going to know.
I don't know any more than you know about it, and probably less.
The National Geographic, as I understand it, controls the information.
That is correct.
And they're going to let it out, and I used to work there, and they're going to...
Let it out in due course, of course, but they will, and it's a good organization.
They're clean people.
Well, if you actually work there, then I might ask you a question.
Would it be normal for them to have a lot of side-scan sonar information and really already know a lot and clamp their mouths shut about it until they're prepared to tell everybody?
Absolutely.
I'm sure that's what they're doing.
This is a big deal, and they're going to release it, and you're going to have a big press conference, and then there'll be a television show, and the magazine will be filled up with it.
This is a big deal, because it's at 2,200 feet, and you have to ask yourself, how the hell did the city get down to 2,200 feet?
I mean, that's a hard one.
Your information agrees with that?
Oh, yes.
300 feet, maybe, but 2,200 feet is just geologically not Yeah, you're talking about major subsidence there.
Not really possible.
Right, so either that or you have something like they discovered up in the Balkans where there must have been a huge inflow of water, which we now know is true.
But this is out in the sea, so I think it's going to be fascinating.
It's a wonderful project to remote view.
I have been thinking about how to put together a project to do that.
and i think i will do it alright good uh... then we'll look forward to that i don't
know where i have the bottom of the hour here so we'll take yet another break
and uh...
the group of final segment coming up by the way uh... will probably be for four hours of show this week
and then uh... assuming all that is going well with my back i will return
program to five hours next week
So, that's the name of that game.
Things are getting a little better day by day by day.
I'm Art Bell, and this is Coast to Coast AM.
This is Premier Networks.
That was Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM on this Somewhere in Time.
She has only whispers of some quiet conversation She's coming in twelve thirty flights.
Moonlit wings reflect the stars that guide her toward salvation.
I stopped an old man along the way, hoping to find some old forgotten words or ancient melodies.
He turned to me as if...
...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.
To have all these things in our memories.
Or, and they use them to cover us.
Who's gonna come to find me?
Why?
Why was your soul taken place On this trip just for me?
Why, take a free ride, take a glance, have a seat, it's for free?
I wouldn't want to spend two years, sweat so hard just to end my fears.
I have to end my life before I rest But by now, I have a wish and I cry
You are listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001.
Good morning, everybody.
Somebody just blasted me on Test Last as being a hypocrite for calling for environmental measures, and yet buying my land yacht, which I have.
That runs on diesel, and we hardly ever use it.
But then again, I also own a Firebird Trans Am, which I love, because it's really fast.
And my wife has a Camaro, which is really fast.
They both eat a lot of gas, but you know what?
We hardly ever use them.
90% of all our driving is done... Did you know this?
In our Geo Metro.
And there are reasons for that.
And I guess they don't have a whole lot to do with comfort.
We just prefer it, believe it or not.
And I know many of you will not.
90% of our driving, I repeat, is done in our little Geo Metro.
And it's because of the price of gas.
It's because...
It's a cute little car to drive around, and I guess because we do have a little bit of conscience about what we're doing.
So, that's honestly the truth.
We do have those machines, because occasionally nothing beats a little speed, right?
But truth of the matter is, 90% is spent in that little Geo, which is a pretty cool car, by the way.
And that's truth.
You are listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time.
Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from August 8th, 2001.
♪♪ Steven, welcome back.
I just got blasted on Fast Blast, and you know, to some degree, they're absolutely right.
I mean, I'm hypocritical.
I talk about vanishing oil and gas, and I do.
I own a firebird, and every now and then, you know, I want to get in the Trans Am and blast down the highway at about a million miles an hour, and I do.
uh... yet at the same time i barely ever drive the thing it sits around collects
dust while i drive a geo i am kind of a hypocrite because it and and and you know i'm
not different than very very many other people there every now and then
you like to really get behind the wheel of a super powerful car and let her rip
her uh... i agree with you and and uh... it's honest of you to
acknowledge it but that
uh... the reality is that it would be possible propeller vehicle just that
fast without having that level of pollution.
How?
Well, you know, imagine that we would put into hydrogen fuel cells the money we're going to put into missile defense.
Just imagine what that would look like.
Within ten years we'd all be driving, I don't know, we'd be driving some kind of super fuel cell thing.
Mercedes would be making their version, and Toyota would be making their version, and it would have the same kind of characteristics that they always have.
The future is not a position of scarcity.
That's the whole thing.
We always have fear, and that's the way it gets defeated, is that people think of it as Scarcity.
There's no reason that there has to be scarcity.
That's right.
That's the exact answer that I wanted.
Everybody fears that the kind of thing you're saying means all the fun goes out of life.
No, that's not true at all.
The problem is that we are having fun without calculating the real cost, not only in terms of finances, but in terms of environmental impact.
That's the issue.
I agree with you.
I mean, I understand wanting to go fast.
Well, that had to be said.
West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Stephen A. Schwartz.
Hi.
How are you doing?
All right.
KPNW 1120 on the AM dial.
In Eugene, Oregon.
Oregon.
Yes, sir.
Correcto.
Life in the world.
Yes, sir.
I may have misheard your guess.
I thought he said maybe, you know, the math, 250,000 geniuses or people born every day.
And there's eight million geniuses living on the world at this time.
I'll disagree with that.
I only count four in the entire existence of human beings.
But the two questions I have is, in his remote viewing, does he see the theory of evolution, aka the theory of natural selection, or creationism as the beginning of human life?
And secondly, does he see the human race in the corporal form is lasting forever.
All right.
Both fair questions, I suppose.
Are you able to say anything about the concept of creation versus evolution?
Yeah, sure.
I think that the case for evolution is... I don't think there's any dispute about it.
The place where I think there's a potential for discussion, and I think it's going to get revealed in due course, is whether there is some design that set the thing in motion.
I mean, that's really the issue.
I don't think anybody, really and truly, I've read a lot about creationism, I've corresponded with a number of creationist researchers, and I just don't think the case is there.
I think evolution is pretty unimpeachably
a process that is going on i don't i don't even think that's the right question
anymore i i think the real question is
was there something that put the system in the motion
was their conscious intent behind it and uh...
well i think uh... that's a position i think that still remains largely
theological Yes, the evolutionists believe that there was perhaps this mixture or soup in the ocean, or wherever it was, and that a bolt of lightning hit it just the right way, and so it all began.
Well, who's to say that the hand of the Creator wasn't throwing the bolt in just the right place?
I've always felt comfortable with that.
Well, let me tell you two pieces of research that have just begun to emerge in the last year.
This is the most enchanting bit of research that I know about, what I'm about to tell you.
I just think this is great.
You've got to get into this.
You've got to see this conceptually.
There are two blocks of research.
The first one was that a scientist who was out at Caltech, I believe, I can't think of his name right now, but he began Doing research, and he discovered that the Earth is bombarded with blocks of ice.
Some as big as houses.
And they are raining.
It's like a rain through the universe.
And they strike the upper atmosphere, and they liquefy, vaporize, and then eventually enter the hydrologic cycle and turn into rain, right?
Yeah, sure.
That's one part.
The other part is, there's just been a paper published These two researchers have discovered that there is also a gentle rain of what looks like bacteria that's going through.
Now, this means that it's like the planets are moving through a kind of rainstorm.
Now, let's think about that a second.
Bacteria.
What you've got there is the simplest program that would allow the quickening of chemicals.
It's the rain of life.
That's right, it's a little, and what does life need?
It needs water.
So what this research suggests to us is that the planets are moving, everything in the universe is moving through this gentle rain of ice crystals and the little simple programs, the little life transmuters that have the capacity to take inorganic materials and turn them into life.
That I think is one of the most enchanting images That we have, and the question you have to ask is, how did that get set in motion?
You see, when people think about, oh, life came from Mars or whatever, that's really not, I don't believe, I would suggest, not asking the right question.
The real question is, how did the whole thing get started?
And what this is now talking about, with this research, is these little clumps of bacteria come down and set in motion the process, because All life on this planet share an enormous amount of similarities.
I mean, you have about 50% of the same genetic material as a flatworm.
And the reason that's true is that there are certain things that cells do, and they all do them the same way.
And so you only have to do it.
It got worked out one way and everybody pretty much does it at the cellular level.
Then a logical extension of that, Stephen, would suggest then that life would be common, a very common thing throughout the universe, right?
No.
Why not?
Possibly, but let's reframe that a little bit.
Forms of life may be common on a number of planets.
It takes very particular conditions to allow a species like human beings to arise on a planet.
So it's very much like that biblical phrase about casting the tarsier.
Some of them land on soil that is infertile and some of them bloom and some of it is rocky.
This rain is happening without consideration.
And various kinds of objects are going through it, and a certain number of those objects have the right conditions so that when you add these little tiny life programs, these things that transmute inorganic material into organic material, and you add the water, that on a certain number of planets, it will, evolution will begin and a process will arise that will eventually create a being that's sufficiently complex to have the attributes that human beings have got whether they look like human beings or not so but there may we know for instance in the latest stuff that's begun to come out that we know that there is a very strong probability of cellular life on Mars so when you say there's not life it's you mean that there's not bipedal you know warm-blooded whatever walking around no that's not that may be a very well be true but there are different kinds of life
The thing that's fascinating to me is that these little single cell transmuter gadgets, essentially, and the water and what it's needed to fuel them is passing through the universe like a rain and all of the planets are moving through it.
That's really an extraordinary concept.
Nolan, would you think it equally at least possible then that life at the level that human beings have achieved is either rare or non-existent off this planet?
Oh no, I'm sure, you know, that's kind of flat Earthism.
No, I mean there's so many gazillions of, I've forgotten how many planets they think there might be.
There's huge numbers.
No, the distances are great.
It may be that you have to get to a very highly advanced degree in order to move off of your planet.
Actually, Stephen, the distances are, at least from today's perspective, totally impossible.
Yeah, that's right.
It might or might not be that remote viewing, without consideration of distance, and even time, might be our first contact.
Well, it certainly, as I shared with that Mercury experiment that Ingo and Harold Sherman did, there's no question that remote viewing could be used, could be incorporated in the selection of sensing, remote sensing technologies that were used to explore planets.
Yes, I mean, think about it.
If a remote viewer could tell you which part of a planet was most likely to produce life, say you went to them and said, On this mission, we're only going to have enough fuel in the little lander to examine 10 places.
Right.
So the question is, we want to pick these 10 places.
And suppose a remote viewer could say to you, well, I think number 7 is going to be the most likely place to be successful, and why they think that.
And then number 3, and then number 5, and then number 8, or whatever.
I forgot how many numbers we had.
But if they could rank order it for you, What's the worst case scenario you could get?
The worst case scenario you would get is that you would examine all ten places as if there had been no remote viewing input.
But the best case scenario you could get is that the remote viewer was right, and on the very first place you went to, you actually got what you were looking for.
I mean, that's basically what I did with the archaeological stuff, is that you... You know, what remote viewers tell you is not only where to go, but they select, out of all the possible places you could look, A group of places and by analyzing their information you can rank order the priority for doing it so that the worst that's ever going to happen to you is the best that would have happened to you otherwise.
And how many years in the future do you think it will be before remote viewing is so well accepted that NASA as they send up their probe will first come to the remote viewers instead of going to their, I don't know, geologists or whoever?
Well, they'll go to both.
It's not an either-or.
I think you're going to see an incorporation of... The thing about remote viewing is that it's a protocol that produces a quantifiable result.
Yes.
And I think you're going to see increasingly adaptations of remote viewing within the next 10 to 15 years.
I mean, the very fact that you have as much programming about remote viewing as you do, and that people clearly are interested in it.
Shows you that there is a change occurring in the collective, what we started with at the beginning of this.
There is a shift that is going on.
I mean, when we started doing remote viewing research, when I first got into it, which is back in the late 60s, early 70s, there were like five people you could talk to about this.
You know, now you've got so many people, you crashed my website.
So, there is a shift that is taking place.
It's not necessarily going to look like The psychic, you know, woo-woo kind of psychic.
Sure.
I think it's going to become, I said this earlier, I think what we're really dealing with, we're watching the evolution of a mental martial art.
And it has all the things that our culture demands.
You know, in the Far East, in Asia, where the culture is developed by empirical observation, the medical systems or Vedic medicine and acupuncture developed because people looked at things and they observed and they didn't have any instruments.
Our culture is predicated on objective measurement, and what remote viewing provides, which the psychic has never been able to provide before, is very clear, quantifiable analysis, objective measurement of the accuracy of the information.
I mean, anybody who takes the time to look at the legitimate scientific remote viewing research is going to come away saying, I mean, there's something there, because the Probability of this all being some sort of statistical quirk.
I mean, even the serious skeptics, the guys who really sort of define themselves by being skeptics, who have looked at remote viewing, even if they don't fully acknowledge it, they don't talk about it much anyway.
That's not what they want to focus on.
Carl Sagan, for instance, at the end of his life recognized that remote viewing is a real thing.
You can do it.
It's easy to do.
Anybody can do it.
Absolutely no question about it, but then there are others.
The amazing Randy comes to mind.
I know Randy.
Yes, so do I. First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Stephen Schwartz.
Hi.
Hello.
Hello.
My question is, well, first off, your show is addicting.
Thank you.
Second off, my question is why, when we can make a car that will, you know, be totally efficient, why we can make a Why don't these things happen?
Because people don't make priorities out of it.
That's why.
They don't make an effort to buy the light bulb that lasts five years.
They cost a little bit more.
And so people make different kinds of choices.
It's all about aggregate choice.
You know, though, in the long run, they really don't cost more.
You buy, say, a Philips light bulb, and it goes for, you know, four or five years or whatever, and it runs at a quarter of the power.
Right.
But they just haven't, the people, it hasn't sunk in yet.
Believe me, I'll tell you, Collar, if the government would say, we'll give you a tax credit of 20% Are 25% of the cost of every light bulb that you can send us a receipt for having bought, you would see a wave go across this country of people buying energy-efficient light bulbs.
The cost would be practically nothing to run this relative to the scale of country-level costs.
And you would produce an immediate savings of millions of dollars, just with that one thing.
All right, listen, your website is down, perhaps for the count, and I would like to give you a chance to plug whatever you'd like, plug your latest book, whatever.
Well, I guess if I'm going to plug anything, there are a couple of things I'd like to say.
One is, which is not about me, there is a really good psychic test that's up on the net that all of us who are in
the research community are supporting.
It was created by a guy named Dean Radin, and it's at www.ions.org
And if you want to find out how you do psychically, this is a good thing to do because this is a really well-designed
test, and it's put together by very straight people.
www.ionsions.org, is that correct?
That's it.
That's one thing.
The other thing is that anybody, I've had a lot of people send me emails about the 2050 thing.
I've got a CD that will take you through the experience so you can have it yourself.
And I am reprinting in a new revised form a workbook on remote viewing that puts together everything That we know in the research community about how to actually do this.
This CD, since your website is down, how would they get it?
Oh, you order it off the website.
I don't have anybody else that's got it yet.
I'm not very good at marketing.
All right, then that would be when the website gets back up again.
Yeah, when the website will be up tomorrow, I'm sure.
Trust me.
All right, Stephen, as always, I want to thank you.
Fascinating program.
And by the way, if you really do tackle the Cuba question, Or get together a group that will.
I really want to know the results of that.
I'll let you know.
I have a good night, my friend.
Okay, you take care.
Take care.
That's Stephen A. Schwartz, and I'm Art Bell, and that's it for this night, folks.
We'll do this again tomorrow.
Let's see.
As a matter of fact, I can tell you, tomorrow night, Richard C. Hoagland is going to be here, and he says he solved the mystery of Mars.
Friday night, Saturday morning will be Sean David Morton from the high desert.
I'm Art Bell.
▲
Export Selection