Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 18, 2006 - Art Bell

02:37:36

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - James Canton - Extreme Future Trends

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	From the Southeast Asian capital city of the Philippines, Manila.
	Hi everybody!
	Welcome to Coast to Coast AM Worldwide.
	Coast to coast to coast to coast all around the world covering all the time zones.
	It is my honor and privilege to be escorting you through this weekend.
	I'm Art Bell and Well, it's just going to be a very interesting weekend.
	It's going to begin tonight with the fact that our guest is jet-lagged, not feeling very well, so the guest we're going to have is only going to be here for two hours, Dr. James Canton, who has just flown back from Indonesia, actually near me, and he's jet-lagged as hell, and I understand that.
	You cannot make that kind of flight without really getting whacked.
	So that's the situation with our guests.
	Therefore, we will have lots of open lines tonight.
	First hour and last hour.
	Purity open lines.
	That means you can begin dialing right now.
	Let me catch you up on just a couple of things before we begin.
	The webcam shot tonight is just simply me.
	I just poked my face in front of the webcam a few minutes ago and took a shot and sent it.
	So, no prep.
	Whatever it is, is, is.
	Now, my wife is currently watching a big fight going on between a Filipino fighter and a Mexican fighter, and I imagine some of you are probably getting it on HBO Live, and it is being telecast here live.
	It's a big event, so if you hear a scream from the other room, she's pretty much into fights.
	So if you hear a scream, that'll be her and she can't help herself, I guess.
	What's happened?
	I couldn't stand it anymore, and I went up to the roof of our condo building late at night, and I dangled some coax down toward my window.
	We're on the 19th floor of this building of 20 floors.
	And Irene, or Aaron if you will, hooked it with an umbrella and brought it in, and then I went up and climbed a ladder which is on top of the 200 foot mark, actually is a little area up above, and I put in a sneaky antenna that they really can't see.
	Well, they'll see it if they really go to a lot of trouble, but they can't see it.
	So I actually am on, for those hands out there, I'm on 20 meters right now.
	And I wish to note something totally bizarre, and I'm sure it can be explained to me by somebody who knows an awful lot more about the ionosphere than I guess I do.
	I thought I knew about propagation on shortwave, but now that I've been on the air here for about three or four days, I've got to tell you, it's weird.
	20 meters, or 14 megahertz if you will, is in the United States, in North America, mainly at this part of the sunspot cycle, if anything at all, only a daytime band.
	It opens up during the day and you hear whatever you're going to hear and then at night it closes down just like a bar closing early about when the sun goes down.
	Well, here in the Philippines, it is the exact opposite and I simply don't understand the physics behind what's going on.
	So one of you, brighter than I am people out there, explain this to me.
	I always thought of the ionosphere kind of like loosely, a loose analogy would be like a cloud.
	And when the Sun is ionizing the ionosphere during the day, This cloud gets thicker and therefore begins reflecting signals at 14 megahertz.
	Right?
	Sort of right?
	Well, here in the Philippines, I was shocked to find out the band is deader than a doornail during the day when the sun is ionizing.
	And within minutes of the sun going down, the exact opposite of North America, within minutes of the sun going down, the band begins to open here.
	And I begin to be able to talk to stations in, oh, you know, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, China, Africa, and they all tell me the same thing.
	Everybody that I'm able to talk to at these hours tells me the same thing, that their band also traditionally opens up at night.
	Now that is so completely opposite of anything that I've ever been used to that I just don't understand the physics behind it.
	Now, it must have to do with being closer to, you know, we're fairly close to the equator here, so maybe that's it.
	I don't know.
	It is bizarre.
	Let me tell you, it's bizarre.
	I waited all day long, nada, nothing, and then the sun goes down, and I was ready to pack it in, and then the signals begin to come in, and I'm going, what?
	So anyway, there you have it.
	There I was, dangling a couple hundred feet above ground, putting up this antenna in a place that they're unlikely to see for at least a little while, so I'm having fun.
	Looking briefly at the world.
	Always a little depressing.
	Lobbying world leaders, our President, President Bush, sought China's support Sunday for pressuring long-defiant North Korea to prove that it's serious about dismantling its nuclear weapons program.
	China is a very important nation and the United States believes strongly that by working together we can help solve problems such as North Korea and Iran.
	That's President Bush as he sat down for talks with the Chinese President.
	Like North Korea, Iran is also suspected of pursuing nuclear weapons.
	Speaking of that region of the world near Iran, Iraq, Iraqi and American forces fought Sunni insurgents in an hours-long street battle Saturday in the increasingly violent city of Baquabwa as residents fled indoors under a rattle of automatic weapons fire and the blasts of rocket-propelled grenades.
	City Police said at least 18 are dead, 19 wounded.
	Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes exchanged vows Saturday in a lavish star-studded wedding celebration in a kind of a fairytale setting.
	A glowing 15th century castle in this medieval lakeside town.
	Richard Gere, Jennifer Lopez, she was there, huh?
	And Jim Carrey, among more than 150 relatives and friends at the Union of Tomcat.
	That's what they call it.
	Tomcat, whose relationship has created a media firestorm since the superstar couple announced it a little more than a year and a half ago.
	What is it with the stars marrying each other anyway?
	In the beginning, there were eight.
	A squad of seven Marines and a Navy Corpsman charged with kidnapping and murdering an Iraqi man.
	A crime described by prosecutors as especially brutal.
	They faced military trials.
	The death penalty is on the table, so you might want to watch that one.
	The Sudanese army and government-backed militias are committing acts of inexplicable terror against civilians, including children.
	In Darfur, the UN's top humanitarian official said Saturday the accusations by Jan England, UN Undersecretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, came as Sudanese officials indicated they might backtrack from a deal for a mixed UN and African peacekeeping force.
	One person killed, another critically injured in an incident involving a bus carrying Kansas State University fans to Saturday's football game at the University of Kansas.
	The one vehicle accident happened around 11.30 in the morning, less than two miles from Memorial Stadium.
	Few details available by late afternoon, but police would not identify the dead and injured, except to say both were male.
	Nintendo's quirky new video game console goes on sale Sunday.
	Just two days after the launch of the rival PlayStation 3 from Sony turned violent at some stores.
	The release of this new little goody expected to be less dramatic, mainly because Nintendo has made sure that there's a good supply out there.
	Sony didn't muster as many, and so the world, as you've heard, went wild with representatives and other people extending influence, or perhaps their Their assistance, it was said, extending influence to get one for Congress people and that sort of thing, so I guess PlayStation 3 is a big deal.
	in a moment we'll look at some of the rest of the news
	by the way progress to report I have gone from smoking well chain
	smoking actually I was a chain smoker, no doubt about it.
	And I've gone from chain smoking to about four cigarettes a day.
	Four cigarettes a day.
	Never in all my life did I think I could accomplish that, but that's where I am right now, and I'm on the verge of Casting them away now.
	I'm most of the rest of the time.
	I'm chewing nicotine gum As you know there was a big earthquake during the week 8.1 that rocked the northern Japanese islands, and then there was a tsunami a small one albeit a But it hit the Northern California coast at about 2.30 in the afternoon.
	Water was pulled out to sea at about 30 miles an hour, tearing apart many docks in the harbor, disrupting the shoreline.
	Officials described it as a river-like current, not a wave.
	The surge, of course, returning a short time later again, wreaking havoc on the harbor.
	Officials say the worst hit docks were three large docks that catered to sports boats.
	No injuries have been reported, but some boats have been damaged.
	Officials say about half the Crescent City Harbor is destroyed.
	They say several smaller docks simply are gone.
	The water didn't reach past beaches, and officials say besides the fishing industry, they don't think any businesses were harmed.
	Beaches weren't evacuated, but authorities warned beachgoers and boaters they were at risk.
	There are no public safety concerns as of now.
	At the southern end of Madagascar lie four enormous, wedge-shaped sediment deposits called chevrons.
	They're composed of material from the ocean floor, each covering about twice the area of Manhattan, with sediment as deep as the Chrysler Building is high.
	That's one hell of a lot of sediment.
	On close inspection, the Chevron deposits contain deep ocean microfossils that are fused with a medley of metals typically formed by cosmic impacts.
	And all of them point in the same direction.
	Toward the middle of the Indian Ocean, where a newly discovered crater 18 miles in diameter lies 12,500 feet below the surface.
	Now what does all this mean?
	I bet you know.
	The explanation is obvious to a lot of scientists.
	A large asteroid, or perhaps comet, the kind that could kill a quarter of the world's population, smashed into the ocean about 4,800 years ago, producing a tsunami, get this, since we were talking about tsunamis, at least 600 feet high, about 13 times the size of the one that inundated Indonesia nearly two years ago.
	The wave carried the huge deposits of sediment to land.
	Most astronomers doubt that any large comets or asteroids have crashed into the Earth in the last 10,000 years.
	But the self-described band of misfits that make up the two-year-old Holocene Impact Working Group say the astronomers simply have not known how or where to look for evidence of impacts along the world's shorelines and the deep ocean.
	In other words, they don't think land has been hit in that period of time, but Remember, we are more ocean than we are land.
	Scientists in the working group say the evidence for such impacts during the last 10,000 years, known as the Hypocene Epoch, is strong enough to overturn current estimates of how often the Earth suffers a violent impact.
	Get this on the order of a 10 megaton explosion.
	Instead of once in every 500,000 to 1 million years, as astronomers now calculate, catastrophic impacts could happen every A few thousand years.
	It is indeed the stuff of nightmares, and until now, Hollywood thrillers.
	A huge asteroid is on a catastrophic collision course with Earth, and mankind is poised to go as the dinosaurs went.
	To save the day, NASA now has plans to go where only Bruce Willis has gone before, the U.S.
	Space Agency.
	Drawing up plans right now to land an astronaut on an asteroid hurtling through space at more than 30,000 miles an hour.
	Wants to know whether humans could master techniques needed to deflect such a doomsday object when it is eventually identified.
	Now, the proposals are at a very early stage.
	The spacecraft needed to send astronauts that far into space exists only on the drawing board.
	They are deadly serious.
	A smallish asteroid called Apophlis, I'm sure you've heard about that, right, has been identified as a possible threat to Earth in 2036.
	Chris McKay of the NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston told the website space.com that there's a lot of public resonance with the notion that NASA ought to be doing something about killer asteroids to be able to send serious equipment to an asteroid.
	Publix wants us to have mastered the problem of dealing with asteroids.
	So, being able to have astronauts go out there and sort of poke one with a stick would be scientifically valuable, as well as demonstrate human capabilities.
	A one billion ton asteroid, just one kilometer across, striking Earth at, say, 45 degrees of an angle, could create the equivalent of a 50,000 megaton thermonuclear explosion.
	Attempting to break it up with an atomic warhead might only generate thousands of smaller objects on a similar course, which could have time then to reform into one object.
	Scientists agree the best approach, given enough warning, would be to gently nudge the object into a safer orbit.
	A human mission to a near-Earth asteroid would be scientifically worthwhile, said McKay.
	There could be testing of various approaches.
	We don't know enough about asteroids right now to know the best strategy for mitigation.
	Matt Genge, a space researcher at Imperial College London, this is very interesting, has calculated that something with a mass, acceleration and thrust of, say, a small car, could push an asteroid weighing a billion tons out of the path of Earth In just 75 days!
	Now that's worth going over again.
	They've calculated that something with the mass acceleration and thrust of a small car could actually push an asteroid weighing a billion tons out of its path headed toward Earth and our death in 75 days.
	That's amazing.
	An asteroid expert at Glasgow University said the best approach would be to land a device to dig into the object.
	You could then place something on the surface to eject material that would push the asteroid in the other direction.
	Mirrors, lights, even a paint job could change the way the asteroid absorbed light and heat just enough to shift its direction over 20 years or so.
	With less notice, which I'm sure we'd have, much less, mankind could be forced to take more drastic measures, like setting off a massive explosion on or near the object to change its course.
	In 2005, NASA's Deep Impact mission, in fact, tested a different technique when it placed an object in the path of a comet.
	So you see, for some on account, boy, I've been getting an awful lot of stories about this lately.
	I wonder if they have decided that Apophilus or one other object that they haven't told us about yet is somehow on an Earth-likely trajectory, and we are going to have to do something like this.
	I'm frankly very curious.
	I've just been getting story after story after story, and there's got to be a reason for that.
	Usually when you begin getting a lot of stories like this, something is going on out there.
	All right, let's see if we can Let's see if we can pick up a call before we get to the bottom of the hour.
	Brad in Sacramento, California, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hello?
	Hello?
	Hello, Brad.
	Okay, Brad, I guess you're not there.
	Daniel in Missouri, how about you?
	Yes.
	Daniel, you're on the air.
	Okay.
	Um, well, I was at school and I was swinging.
	What grade?
	What grade of school are you in?
	Second grade.
	Second grade.
	Okay.
	I was just swinging at recess and then I looked up and then I saw sort of a UFO shape.
	I saw like a circle of different lights.
	In the sky.
	You did.
	If you were at recess, then you must have been with many of your friends, right?
	Yeah.
	Did they also see it?
	No.
	They didn't.
	Didn't you say, look at that?
	No.
	Why?
	Were you shocked and you couldn't speak?
	Or what?
	Well...
	Sort of.
	Go ahead, Daniel.
	Anything else?
	Nope.
	That's pretty much it.
	That's it?
	All right.
	You should immediately have your mom or dad report this to somebody other than myself.
	Daniel, thank you for calling.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	See you later.
	Seven years old, in second grade.
	And he had a sighting.
	That none of his... He just didn't think, apparently, to... You know, when you're seven, though, you might not... You might not... When you're seven years old, you might not think that something is so odd that you should report it to your friends.
	When you're seven years old, you might just stand there in the recess yard, staring up at it, not alerting anybody else, because you just don't know Then it's not unusual.
	At seven, those are just pretty lights in the sky, right?
	But I'm sure Daniel came home and told Mom and Dad, and maybe they're the ones that recommended that he call Art Bell.
	I don't know.
	But there you go.
	It begins early.
	A sighting like that, at seven years of age, That can propel a lifetime of investigation, and who knows, maybe Daniel's going to become a ufologist.
	Sightings at that age do that kind of thing.
	From Manila, in the Philippines, I'm Art Bell.
	Indeed, here I am.
	We should have run the phone numbers there.
	So those of you that know the phone numbers, feel free to dial us up.
	We're in open lines this hour, and also tonight.
	Because, well, because my guest has flown all the way from Indonesia back to the U.S., he is totally lagged, jet lagged, and so we'll only have him for two hours.
	He's an extreme futurist, so it should be very interesting.
	Everybody is interested in what's coming.
	So those of you that know the numbers, please proceed and I'll get you on the air.
	Any subject is fair game for open lines.
	We'll get right back to it.
	My God, what a voice.
	I really don't like following Ross.
	You know, I've got a fair voice, I know that, but that's a killer voice.
	I mean, that's a voice that could be doing movie trailers, right?
	And so following him isn't all that wise, but nevertheless, here we go.
	Let's try Brian in Sacramento, California on the wildcard line.
	Hello, Brian.
	Hey, how you doing, Mark?
	I am doing well.
	I have a question.
	I just finished up the book, a little bit behind, I guess, called Memoirs of a Psychic Spy by Joseph McMoneagle, I think his name is.
	McMoneagle, yes.
	Yeah, and I have kind of a question.
	I kind of really never had an opinion either way on it, but after reading this, I'm currently in the military, do you think they're still recruiting that type of way?
	I mean, just coming into uniform?
	I do.
	Yeah, the answer is I do.
	Now, every single one of the remote viewers says that there is no current program, but But I'm suspicious of that for a whole lot of reasons.
	One, it's only the past remote viewers, the ones that we knew were remote viewers in the CIA program, they are the only ones who are saying, we don't have a program now.
	Everybody else suspects, including me, that we do.
	What they say doesn't make sense.
	They say on the one hand, it worked.
	We could find gas canisters and all that kind of terrible stuff on the other side of the world.
	Boy, if it worked, then we would still be using it, wouldn't we?
	That's my point as well.
	I was kind of confused.
	Well, your confusion is understandable, so I think we still have a program underway and it's very black and so the answer is yeah, I think we do.
	All right, thanks Art.
	You're very welcome.
	I mean, you've got to admit, it's suspicious.
	All those who were in the secret CIA program, they all say, oh, no, no, no, no.
	It was too embarrassing for the government.
	They stopped the program.
	Well, they stopped the program they were in and sent them forth to inform the world about remote viewing.
	But since then, God knows how far they could have gone.
	I'm only rendering an opinion, but based on what they say, if it works, and they all agree it works, if we're not using it, then, well, then some other country somewhere, like China, or Russia, or one other country that would be our enemy, and there are many who don't like us, there would be a giant remote viewing gap and we would be behind.
	Or, they're right.
	About there not being a program because it doesn't work.
	It seems to me you cannot have it both ways.
	Chris in Staten Island, New York.
	Hello.
	How are you doing, Art?
	I'm doing well.
	I like your program.
	Thank you.
	You're welcome.
	Basically, I wanted to ask you about your recording, like the hell recording.
	Yes.
	Actually, you know, I tried a little investigation of my own.
	And I called up, like, the Archdiocese of New York, and they said it's not true.
	Well, that's a matter of opinion, because of all kinds of things.
	First of all, it was a real news story.
	In fact, I think it was a Reuters news story, and every time we've talked about this, I've had them dig it out.
	Right.
	Ran on Reuters.
	Right.
	So the story was real.
	And I can't imagine a major U.S.
	news service making a story up, so there you are.
	Well, believe it or not, they've been investigating that SG3 for years.
	And they sent an exorcist up there.
	Up where?
	Up to the Russian borehole that you were talking about a couple of... They sent an exorcist up there?
	Yes, they did.
	Huh.
	Okay.
	And they said they have proof, and they also go along with the person in the story... Excuse me, but what were they going to attempt to do?
	Exorcise hell?
	Well, that's what they said they did.
	I mean, if it really was hell, that's quite an undertaking.
	That's not like getting rid of one's spirit.
	I mean, that's a whole cauldron, a boiling pit of sewage, as J.C.
	puts it.
	And they said they sent a priest up to the location also.
	Well I find that a little suspicious.
	I know, well they said it's still under investigation just in case anybody says anything more basically about it.
	And they have proof and all that stuff too.
	Okay, well I wonder what proof they have.
	In the case of myself, as you know, I have a recording.
	Sent to me many years ago by a source claiming that it was the real McCoy.
	And I don't know.
	I don't know.
	Most of the people that we have as guests on the program who talk about the other side one way or the other don't believe there even is a hell.
	That the only hell there is, is sort of a self-imposed thing.
	As you do a life review and you are meant to feel the pain of those that you have inflicted pain on during your life.
	And that's as much of a hell as there really is.
	I'm told.
	So maybe it's not real.
	But no matter what, it sure is scary stuff, isn't it?
	West of the Rockies in California.
	Jacob, hi.
	Hey Art.
	I remember last week you were talking to a scientist about time travel and parallel universes.
	What a hell of a show that was, yes.
	Yeah.
	Well, some caller or somebody emailed you a question about you might not be able to wreck your universe, but you could really mess up somebody else's.
	That's right.
	Yeah.
	Well, I think I have a theory for an answer for that.
	Okay.
	Well, as you time travel to the other universe, or whatever, and you go back and make your grandfather not have a kid, your father, and you stop him from doing that, and then... In other words, you fix it so your dad never existed, right?
	Yeah.
	Now in the universe that you're in at that moment, you and your father never existed.
	But in your universe, nothing happened.
	Because you're in the other guy's universe.
	So in your universe... Well, that's exactly what the guest said.
	Yeah.
	So you're repeating what the guest said.
	That's exactly what he said.
	That you would...
	You would not really disturb anything in your own universe that you would only affect that other universe.
	Leaving true the proposition that you could definitely screw up somebody else's universe.
	It's not going to happen in our lifetimes, but I suspect within a few more lifetimes we're going to prove or disprove and actually be able to communicate if it's true with other universes.
	And I suspect that it is true.
	I really do suspect it is true.
	And I think it's also very, very possible that a lot of what we regard as extraterrestrial in origin is actually extra-dimensional in origin.
	And that's not to say there are not ETs, because there probably are.
	Go out and look at the night sky.
	All those things you see up there are suns.
	We call them stars because they dot the night sky.
	But in reality, they're suns.
	And we have now come to find out, around most of those suns, there are planets.
	And if that's true, and there's not life out there, given all those billions and billions of stars and planets, trillions of planets I suppose, trillions of suns I suppose, I mean the numbers are ridiculous to even talk about and not imagine that there's life out there.
	So there is.
	But whether or not it could reach us is an entirely different question.
	Now, could something from another universe reach us?
	I suspect so.
	And do we have to thank for an awful lot of what we regard as paranormal, the fact that we are in a multi-universe situation?
	I think so.
	Things that seem to pop in and out of reality, things that are seen by police officers and other people who are good observers wouldn't screw around with us and they've seen these things and so many millions of people have seen craft and different things that appear and disappear and how else would you explain that other than the strong possibility that there are multiple universes and we get little peaks every now and then across them.
	Let's go to Canada, I guess.
	Let's see, this would be wildcard line 1, 2, 3, 4.
	You're on the air, Linda.
	Hi, Art.
	I'm from another dimension.
	I thought I'd peek in for a bit.
	I wanted to know, have you heard that the Russians have stated that any foreign psychic spy or remote viewer that comes into their, say, realm to look in on them, That they have a way that they could actually send them a virus that could lead to insanity and even death?
	Having interviewed almost all of the remote viewers, I could get comfortable with that notion, at least the first part of it, yes.
	Are they ahead of us in that way?
	I don't know.
	You know, it goes back to a caller we had a little while ago, Linda.
	If it works, if remote viewing works, and we're not still doing it, then there's something drastically wrong with our national security setup, isn't there?
	I agree.
	If it works and we're not doing it, what the hell?
	I agree.
	So, yeah, I mean, why not?
	Sure, I think so.
	That was a little bit of a jab, and I should really take that back.
	They're not crazy.
	But if remote viewing is real, then I suppose somebody on the recipient end who had made a lot of progress in remote viewing could essentially plant a virus that could cause insanity.
	Why not?
	You're going brain to brain or consciousness to consciousness, right?
	And so very much like a computer, what is human insanity?
	It may be nothing more or less than a sophisticated computer virus.
	What a very interesting thought that is.
	Let's go to Kathy in Sacramento, California.
	Okay, we'll go to Kathy in a moment.
	Let's go ahead and take our break right now.
	Let's do what I said I was going to do before the break that was sort of.
	Kathy, you're on the air from Sacramento.
	Hello, Kathy.
	Wouldn't it be interesting to find out that what we find to be extraterrestrials are calling us paranormal in the future?
	But the reason I was calling is I too have had many questions as to remote viewing and if we are using it in a non-conventional way of finding our enemy in the war.
	And I had an opportunity, I have a wonderful job, I shine shoes and I get 15 minutes of everyone's world and with my background in news I get so many neat people.
	Well I got a fighter pilot that came in and I asked him and he said they're using remote viewers.
	Well, so you also believe it.
	Look at this.
	Call after call after call.
	And I completely agree.
	Absolutely.
	But we're the only ones.
	Talk to any one of the remote viewers and they say, oh, no, no, no, no.
	There's no program going on now.
	I believe him.
	I do.
	And people really open up to me.
	It's very interesting.
	But I believe him.
	And he made a couple of references.
	He didn't give me anything in detail.
	But he'll be coming back, so I'll be able to get more information.
	I don't try to...
	Well, look, if this is somebody really in the know, hon, you get a hold of me, artbell at mindspring.com, and let me interview him.
	I really would like to interview somebody who knows what they're talking about on the subject.
	Can you do that for me?
	Will do, will do.
	Thanks for taking my call, Art.
	Alright, thanks for making it, Kathy.
	Absolutely agree with that.
	And I've been curious and suspicious.
	I'm sure those of you who have heard the interviews I've done with the remote viewers, and over the years I've done many, many, many with just about every single known remote viewer out there, including Ingo Swann and, you know, the big ones in the field, and they all deny there's anything going on now.
	And I think that's suspicious.
	I'm not calling them liars.
	It may well be that somebody in one of the lettered agencies told them, look, we're going to allow you to admit so much publicly, and that's that.
	But you're going to have to deny adamantly that there's any ongoing program, that we're done with it.
	I mean, look, just use simple human logic.
	On the one hand, every single one of them certifies that it works.
	You can find gas canisters, nuclear weapons, bad people.
	You can do all of that, they say, and it works.
	But oh no, we're not doing it anymore.
	Now how much sense does that make?
	Hmm?
	Let's travel east, way east it would be.
	Linda in Georgia.
	Hi.
	Hello, Mr. Bale.
	The reason I call, you know, a while back you were mentioning this technology, you know, for making humans visible.
	Well, it occurred to me... Invisible, yes.
	Huh?
	Invisible, yes.
	It occurred to me, you know, if that, you know, could make humans invisible, could it be too far removed from having, you know, ghosts visible?
	You know, ghosts, shadow people?
	Well, that's worth thinking about.
	I mean, yes, if you could make humans invisible, then perhaps you would be in the realm of those that are now invisible to us.
	Yes, who knows?
	Linda, if you were invisible, Linda, what would you do?
	If I were invisible?
	Yep.
	you could more for me you know physics or whatever. Linda if you were if you were
	invisible Linda what would you do? If I were invisible? Yep.
	I haven't fogged it.
	Oh come on.
	There's something I haven't really thought about.
	I'm sure I could come up with something good.
	I'm sure you could.
	Alright, next time you call, you let me know what you would do.
	We did a whole night on that once, if you were invisible.
	From Manila in the Philippines, I'm Art Bell.
	You are indeed.
	And we're about to take a trip into the future.
	Very interesting guest, Dr. James Canton, PhD, is a renowned global futurist, social scientist, author, and sought-after business advisor.
	For the past 25 years, he has been insightfully forecasting the impact of future trends and innovations on business, customers, and society.
	He is the chairman and CEO of the Institute for Global Futures, which is an internationally recognized San Francisco think tank, which he founded in 1990 to help clients better anticipate the future.
	Dr. Canton advises Fortune 1000 corporations and governments worldwide.
	Dr. Canton advises the National Science Foundation.
	He is a senior fellow at the Center for Research in Technology and Innovation at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.
	He also served as an advisor to the White House Office of Science and Technology, Motorola, and MIT's Media Lab, Europe.
	His newest book is Entitled, The Extreme Future.
	In a moment, Dr. Canton.
	Sound of thunder.
	Music.
	Alright, just before getting to Dr. Canton, Chuck K...
	Well, actually I shouldn't give his call letters. Sedona, Arizona, a friend of mine actually, perhaps cleared this up
	for me regarding 20 meters and why it opens at 90.
	He says, are in equatorial regions...
	That would be here.
	A significant amount of ionization remains after dark, and daytime ionization makes for a really absorptive D-layer.
	What you're seeing is rather normal for this time of year in that part of the sunspot cycle where you are, meaning here near the equator.
	And speaking of the equator, just back from also near the equator is Dr. James Kenton.
	Doctor, welcome to the program.
	Thank you.
	I understand you are severely jet-lagged, having just flown back from Indonesia.
	Is that correct?
	Singapore and China, but I'm good to go.
	I'm good to go.
	Well, as you know, I'm in Manila in the Philippines, so I know how long a plane trip it is.
	You sound pretty good for having made that trip.
	Well, I live on Krakatoa at times.
	All right, you are an extreme futurist.
	Now, how does an extreme futurist differ from your normal, everyday, run-of-the-mill futurist?
	Well, the book is called The Extreme Future.
	I would say that I am a futurist that covers all ranges of forecasts.
	This particular book is, of course, about the extreme future, which does have within it a variety of extreme forecasts covering a number of subjects I assume we'll be talking about.
	All right, well, let's get to it.
	There sure is plenty to talk about, and let's begin with oil.
	Oil is, I guess, the reason we have wars, some wars now, and we'll have many, many more wars with regard to it in the future.
	There's a group of people out there, Doctor, who think that it's kind of like the, you know, It's never going to end.
	The oil wells are filling back up, and Mother Earth is replenishing the oil wells with oil, and therefore there is no such thing as peak oil, and we're not going to run out of oil.
	Do you want to dispense with that one now?
	Yes.
	At some point, we will run out of oil.
	The only question is how long, and I have a forecast for that in my book I talk about.
	I think, again, the best way to talk about this is to Uh, give you, uh, not just what we think is a forecast, but of course the folks that control, uh, you know, a lot of that oil, which is, uh, the Saudis, uh, in a private meeting, uh, we went ahead and reviewed with the Saudis and other, uh, parties on two occasions, both in the U.S.
	government and around the world.
	And the general consensus that I take away from is that 25 to 30 years, Is the horizon for what we still think is the abundance of oil, but I believe that it will eventually, if it doesn't go away, it will become very expensive.
	The really interesting phenomena is that the necessity of the next generation of breakthroughs is going to be born over the next, again, three to five years.
	You're going to see breakthroughs, and these breakthroughs may become more efficient.
	More effective than oil as a fuel source.
	And that's what's going to drive all of this.
	Not just the abundance issue.
	If you get outside of that, there's other things to talk about.
	Okay.
	Well, all right.
	Let's talk about breakthroughs.
	Do you have any clues for us where these breakthroughs are likely to come?
	Absolutely.
	There's three areas that are very important.
	One is you're going to see a breakthrough in hydrogen right away.
	Now, everybody's been waiting for this.
	This is kind of like the conversation around the human genome.
	If you're in life sciences, or your scientists have been tracking any of this, or just the general consumer, right up to the mapping of the human genome, which is a fairly new phenomena, the best case scenarios were, gee, it was going to happen somewhere north of 2010, 2015, maybe 2020.
	you know, 2010, 2015, maybe 2020. And of course, once you got the private sector involved,
	then you all of a sudden accelerated this time frame. And of course, lo and behold,
	within three years, the genome was mapped.
	The same thing is going to happen here with energy.
	So, solar voltaics, nano energy, and hydrogen are three technology areas we can talk about.
	There's going to be breakthroughs, and people are working on them.
	You're going to see a big, I think, breakthrough in each of these, starting with solar voltaics very shortly.
	As you mentioned, from China and a meeting in Hong Kong, I was happy to hear about a new solar technology that's being developed, produced in China, U.S.
	innovation, and will be available to be able to grow that business very quickly, just one of dozens of innovations.
	And of course, other kind of, you know, on the edge, extreme innovations yet to be fully worked out are things such as, you know, nano Nanotechnology and its relationship.
	Nano-solar or nano-energy for the next generation.
	The ability to manipulate matter at the atomic level to make, if you will, new kinds of energy sources.
	Sounds science fiction, but I think it's not.
	Do you have any specifics on this solar voltaic breakthrough in China?
	What is the change?
	Well, the change is inexpensive solar panels.
	Very super-efficient technology to be able to convert to electricity and a lot more, again, leveraging off of low-cost manufacturing in China and Yankee innovation together with, again, just being us all the beneficiaries of Moore's Law.
	As Moore's Law progresses, we're going to be beneficiaries in things that are smaller, smarter, more powerful.
	For a fraction of the cost.
	That's inevitable.
	You know, as we live longer, we're going to be able to benefit from any of these breakthroughs.
	So, solar voltaics are going to be able to give us higher yield efficiencies, meaning more power from the sun, if you will.
	Well, that's certainly going to be important.
	I've heard that, you know, talking about hydrogen for a moment, that there are some holes in the whole hydrogen idea.
	In other words, it takes energy to create and then store the hydrogen as we currently understand it.
	So, it's not exactly the great winner, according to some people, that it's been ballyhooed to be.
	Well, that's true.
	And you know, Art, I drove in a Honda's hydrogen car, and it was a very strange experience because we were on the highway, and there was no noise.
	There was no engine.
	And the only exhaust was water.
	Now, that car is $1.2 million today.
	But again, and when I was last in China, and I met with the president of GM China, I asked him about this question about, you know, are they working on hydrogen?
	You know, where will it come from?
	It couldn't tell me exactly, but I think it's somewhat of a secret that they're working on things in China.
	If it happens first, it'll probably happen there.
	I think you're going to see, again, within the next half, not even half a decade here, you're going to see breakthroughs in hydrogen fuel cells.
	And you're right.
	Up to this point, we've needed a lot of carbon, a lot of petrol energy to be able to make hydrogen.
	There are going to be, again, the secret is the convergence of these technologies together.
	Nanobio and solar, for instance.
	Nanobio and hydrogen.
	The secret to solving most of the problems which I talk about in my book, The Extreme Future, is based on us being able to take a more systems approach to solving these problems with convergent technologies, particularly in the area of energy.
	I'll relate one particular story in a meeting With government officials, Secretary Abraham, before he left as Secretary of Energy, he made it very clear that the government knows at the highest levels that there's not enough energy in the ground or alternatives to be able to sustain GDP, that's growth, for the United States or any other countries unless we discover new sources.
	Now that's both existing oil, it's certainly nuclear, and it's absolutely new alternatives
	like hydrogen that have to be developed.
	Doctor, maybe you can explain this to me.
	I was in Hong Kong a month and a half ago or so.
	Two months ago, actually, to be specific.
	And if you go up into the New Territories, north of Hong Kong, the amount of industry up there just scares the hell out of you.
	Their economy is going crazy.
	Now, we come up with technological ideas, and they immediately go to China, where they're produced And then exported.
	Now, a lot of people wonder how that bodes for the U.S.
	economy.
	We have the ideas, but they're produced and then marketed and distributed from China.
	Now, how does the U.S.
	economy survive that in the long term?
	Great question.
	First of all, it's the intimate linkage globally of economies that's already occurred.
	So, let's just talk about the China-U.S.
	linkage.
	There's a fundamental linkage that's already occurred, kind of what I call global economic intimacy between the United States and China.
	China holds, one of the key reasons why their economy is stable and growing is because they're holding over a trillion dollars worth of U.S.
	treasuries and currencies.
	So they've used that as a hedge against a currency that is not convertible, number one.
	Number two, if you were to take away Walmart's purchasing alone, all right?
	This is the largest retail establishment in the world.
	If you were to take away their purchasing alone, meaning buying 90% of their products from China, you'd probably see the Chinese economy crash.
	Just that alone, number one.
	And the next really is that we benefit, and here's the bottom line.
	The U.S.
	economy actually has grown the manufacturing sector, but it's the higher end of the manufacturing sector.
	It's your higher innovation.
	In my chapter on the innovation economy, and I talk about this, if you're concerned about jobs disappearing here, I don't think you need to be.
	We can't fill over a million high-tech jobs today in the economy that go lagging.
	That will grow to be almost 10 million within a decade and change.
	The issue is, one, a very large, growing global economy, and two, this intimacy between China and U.S.
	economies.
	We're linked in a fundamental way, and I think it's a productive thing.
	And three, it's the higher innovation industries in the U.S., more IT, nanobio, neuro, IT, of course, but it's the higher-level innovation industries Where manufacturing is not going to go.
	In other words, as the innovation bar gets raised higher and higher here in the United States, there will still be a robust manufacturing sector, but it will transform.
	So there's enough to go around for everybody.
	It's not a scarcity of ideas or innovation that's going to drive the global economy.
	Well, is Japan a good bellwether for it?
	In other words, Japan went through what China's going through now and ended up holding a lot of U.S.
	dollars, buying a lot of U.S.
	property.
	We all got really scared about Japan, and then the whole scare shifted to China.
	Now, the world didn't end because Japan produced a lot of goods that we bought, and you're saying the same thing is going to end up being true of China.
	Absolutely, even more so.
	Japan has a number of problems that they never resolve.
	And, for instance, as we look at these difficult futures, sometimes what you don't invest in, or what you don't cure, ends up becoming... Let me give you an example.
	For instance, Japan is making the largest investments in robots and androids.
	Now, that's going to benefit the whole world, but particularly it's going to benefit Japan, Really anti-immigration, they're a very, you know, monocultural society, and it's a society that's not growing.
	People are not, you know, it's depopulating, okay?
	But for all intents and purposes, there are some similarities.
	Americans have to kind of get over this Sino fear that they have about whether first you write it was Japan and now it's China.
	Be kind of ending our world.
	I just think that that's it's one.
	It's wrong thinking.
	It's limited mindsets.
	And two, I don't I think that the Chinese have so many issues, so many problems to deal with that it's not like you're going to remember our economy and their economy are growing very robustly.
	Their economy may be growing more, but this is still the largest economy in the world, the United States.
	And you feel that it will remain so, even though so much manufacturing is going on in China and we're the consumers of a great majority of that.
	You think we'll still maintain our position?
	Again, there are danger signals that I report on in the book.
	We've done a number of studies which confirm Some of the work that's been done at the National Science Foundation and other leading authorities, which would indicate, as we would agree, that unless the United States continues to kind of get over this anti-science phenomena and reinvest in advanced technology, reinvest in science, research and development, both academics, private sector support, and of course research and government,
	Unless we reinvest at a higher level than we have been, then we could be at risk.
	Because, again, put these two things together, it's raising the innovation bar.
	Well, if you're going to do that, you've got to invest in technologies and pure science now to get the products.
	All of the major breakthroughs that have driven the world for the past 20 years have come out of investments led by the United States, if you will.
	You know, computing, the Internet, certainly nanotechnology, materials.
	I was the first We're going to be in trouble.
	to the National Nanotechnology Initiative when it was called the
	Interagency Working Group on Nano. Again, this has led to a very robust
	ten billion dollar marketplace, but also it's led to many countries investing in
	this. We, America, must lead on innovation and continue to be on the leading edge.
	And I talk about that in my book. It's very critically important. If we don't
	renew that investment art, we're going to be in trouble. We're going to be in
	trouble in terms of jobs, the economy, quality of life, and I think that that will be difficult.
	How soon?
	Well, again, if we don't do it, I think that you're going to see within three to five years, and certainly within 10 years, you'll see quality of life will be hurt.
	You'll see economic competitiveness will be hurt.
	Already it's happening now.
	I mean, that's kind of one of the dirty little secrets about outsourcing.
	It's not just that, you know, all of the major technology companies and now financial service companies Are outsourcing jobs because, you know, you can get an engineer for a fraction of the price or somebody to do your, you know, particular research.
	It's because you can't find the talent here.
	You can't get them in.
	Remember, what's grown the U.S.
	economy has been immigration, and particularly smart immigrants who came here, studied here, and stayed here.
	If we don't have that flow, if we don't invest in education at the highest levels, We're building a future where our children and grandchildren will not be living the kind of prosperity that we enjoy today.
	Well, we're certainly not science-oriented right now.
	There's no question about it.
	And the U.S.
	educational system, if you look at it, has fallen quite considerably over the last many years compared, you know, in world surveys.
	It's actually a little frightening.
	Somebody told me about it and I said, no, you're full of it.
	The U.S.
	has always been number one.
	No, we're not.
	Well, you know, that's true to a certain extent.
	There are other factors at play, and it's not as if you can't turn that around, okay?
	And we must turn it around, and it's one of the central theses of my book, and many other voices as well.
	I'm not the only futurist or person who's led this charge.
	It's now become, I think, on everybody's radar, and I think we can turn it around.
	There's something else about Americans, though, that we tend to be very entrepreneurial.
	We tend to be able to You know, embrace change and make changes fairly quickly.
	And I think, don't forget that our productivity is higher than any place else in the world.
	We may not be having as long vacations and not have the quality of life of the Europeans, if you will, but there is something to be said about our ability to make money, be entrepreneurs, start new businesses, you know, and exploit innovation, if you will.
	I don't see that necessarily going away, but I do think that this, you're right, this fundamental science investment Is a hedge against the future where it will be a lot more complex.
	Challenging.
	You're exactly right.
	We're at the bottom of the hour, Doctor.
	I'll hold it right there.
	And he's right.
	If you go to Europe, for example, they take five and six week vacations.
	I spent some time in France and it certainly is a beautiful country and Paris is a beautiful city.
	But I'll tell you, you look around France and you wonder how anything ever gets done because Nobody's working.
	From Manila in the Philippines, I'm Art Bell.
	It is, and Dr. James Canton, a futurist, who's written a book called The Top Ten Trends of the Extreme Future.
	Now, we've only made it through one.
	We've talked about fuel, energy, oil, and alternatives there, too, a little bit.
	But if we're going to make it through all ten, we're going to have to hurry.
	So in a moment, once again, Dr. Canton.
	How long do you want to live?
	Over the years I've interviewed a number of longevity medicine physicians and it's been fascinating what they've had to say and offer us.
	Dr. Kandon, what do you see in longevity medicine?
	It is a fascinating area.
	Well this is an unprecedented time for longevity because this is the first time that we have the ability to be able to look into the mechanism of how life extends, begins, where disease begins.
	You realize up to this point in time, it's really been a crapshoot in terms of understanding what is the mechanism and being able to look into DNA and being able to understand your particular DNA and how it influences your health, your forecast for your life.
	We're going to have these tools right now.
	Probably the biggest part of this revolution is the convergence of, of course, genomics with healthcare.
	You realize healthcare is pretty dumb today.
	You wait until you have a lump or you have a problem, you go to the doctor, the doctor takes some tests.
	At the end of the day, it's a very imprecise practice.
	Having the capacity to be able to look into your genomic profile, where we can then predict And prevent will make for an entirely revolution in life extension.
	And that's just one problem to wait for.
	Yeah, one problem though.
	You said predict and then prevent.
	Well, there's going to be a big chasm there, and we're going to be able to unfortunately predict long before we can prevent.
	And so you're going to have a situation where they can look at your DNA, and they can essentially say, look at, oh, 51 years old.
	You're going to get some sort of incurable cancer.
	Now, the day will come when we can cure that cancer, but that day is not today.
	So, if an insurance company gets hold of that information, my God, the economy will go topsy-turvy because, well, obviously.
	Well, you already have started to see that happen, and you're absolutely right.
	We could screen all the women in the world and determine where they stand in terms of two very prevalent breast cancers.
	We could do a test right now and determine You know, when you might have the beginnings of Alzheimer's.
	One out of three men over the ages of 70 are at risk for Alzheimer's.
	So you're absolutely right.
	There's going to be this gap between being able to know what the potential risks are and then, of course, being able to cure them.
	But that's where we are.
	This is the Middle Ages.
	This is not the Renaissance that's coming in terms of health care.
	Now, the issue that you talked about in terms of medical privacy, This is a very big issue.
	In my chapter on the invisible war in the book, I go into these issues and inevitably you're going to end up with, given the degree of security that's on the planet today, somebody's going to have a look at your genomic history and it will influence your privacy.
	That's right.
	And so, here's a good question for you.
	How much of a gap are we talking about between when we can predict when these diseases are going to strike and when we're going to be able to cure them?
	How many years are we talking about here?
	Well, I believe within a decade that cancer will be an issue of disease management.
	I believe we will be able to manage cancer as a disease that will not kill people.
	We'll not destroy their lives and their families, but we'll be able to manage it with drugs, manage it with medical devices.
	The very fast emergence, again, this convergence of nanobio, IT, and cognitive science.
	These are the four key innovation tools that will drive this transformation in healthcare and, of course, life extension.
	And I believe that, again, some of these, and this is just the ugly truth, we're going to have a lot more information than we're going to have cures.
	But there's new areas.
	Translational medicine, systems biology, synthetic biology, there's big breakthroughs in using supercomputing to be able to better do predictive analysis.
	So I'm going to say within Three to five years for certain kinds of treatments, particularly related to cancer.
	But then within eight to ten years, cancer will be a managed disease.
	People can live with it.
	That's very interesting.
	When you say a managed disease with respect to cancer, do you mean managed, for example, in the sense that AIDS is now managed?
	That's correct.
	Exactly.
	How do we afford it, Doctor?
	You know, AIDS is managed alright, and I think on average you can expect to live 24 years after diagnosis or something like that is the latest, but my God, at a hundred and some odd thousand dollars in cost per year, per patient, so if we manage cancer in the same way, who could afford it?
	Well, this is, again, this is the other part of all of this.
	The other part of all of this is that The cost of who pays?
	Who gets the medicines?
	And then, of course, the other side of this is, who gets enhanced?
	We haven't gotten to that part of the life extension phenomena, which, of course, is the post-human and human enhancement and designed evolution.
	But let's save that for a moment and address this question, because it's a legitimate one.
	I think you're going to have, particularly in democratic societies, you're going to have challenges.
	We're going to have to subsidize a certain amount of this care, and this is not something that individuals will be able to necessarily afford.
	And there's going to be huge social and ethical imbalances until we work this out.
	But this is an area where government is going to have to step up, and there's going to be much more opportunities for partnership between the private sector, certainly, and governments to enable and enhance.
	And let me put this together with the earlier trend we talked about in terms of shifts in the workforce and depopulation, right?
	We're going to need to, governments are going to need to enhance the well-being and health and the longevity of their citizens because, one, we are going to be, again, the two drags on growth, if you will, and security and certainly productivity in the future are going to be people and energy.
	Okay?
	So, of course, how do you deal with energy?
	We talked about that, but how do you deal with people?
	Well, help enhance them, live them longer.
	Now, governments are just beginning to wake up to this now, and I'm doing my part to get them to wake up so they can enhance the health of their citizens.
	They're going to pay more because it's going to be the interest to have people live longer, be productive members of society.
	Places like Japan, for instance, you could have 10 people left in Japan by 2050.
	I mean that metaphorically.
	People aren't having babies there.
	They have no immigration there.
	They really have major challenges.
	There's a bounty if you're willing to get married, for instance, in Japan.
	You know, there's more people leaving Japan than coming, you know, anyplace else.
	For instance, in Italy alone, there's more people on the dole, right?
	And there's more people in pensions than there are working in the workforce.
	They cannot exist in Italy and much of Europe without opening up the arms to immigration.
	You're going to have to enhance people's longevity or you're not going to have enough people.
	Yeah, that sounds right.
	Let's move on to enhancement.
	That's a fascinating word.
	When you say enhancement, human enhancement, you mean what?
	Well, there's different kinds of enhancement.
	So in the book, The Extreme Future, I break it down into a couple areas.
	There's three different key phases.
	One phase is where we rejuvenate, you know, we heal, we fix.
	You've had a disease or you're born blind or you've got a problem with your hearing.
	We're going to fix that.
	You've got cancer.
	We're going to fix that.
	Or we're going to prevent that cancer from ever happening by turning on or turning off genes.
	Okay, that's fixing.
	That's the first phase.
	The second phase is we're going to go ahead and enhance certain capabilities.
	It's augmentation.
	We're going to go ahead, for instance, and you'd like to, for instance, have a You'd have to have total recall, in terms of your memory.
	Or you'd like to be able to maybe learn a language in an afternoon.
	Or perhaps you'd like to go ahead and have super memories.
	Okay?
	So it's not just fixing, it's now enhancing cognition, enhancing maybe intelligence.
	Okay?
	How far are we from that kind of ability?
	Oh, we're there.
	We're already there.
	That's the whole, when you put us, when you look underneath Really, you set aside, you open up the kimono of this whole steroids and sports phenomena.
	What you find is it's all about the future of human enhancement.
	When you start to look at what's happening in fertility clinics, how people can choose the sex, how they can start to choose certain attributes, it's all about human enhancement.
	What are HIPs?
	I mean, we've got the first cybernetically enhanced vice president.
	In the history of the world.
	He would not be alive if it wasn't for this bit of technology.
	He's got more computing in his chest than existed in the entire world before 1970.
	People don't realize that the hips that are going in, this is a $50 billion business.
	The future of medical devices is all about enhancement.
	Giving people greater mobility.
	Giving people more memories.
	So we're already down that path.
	For instance, 10% to 15% of the folks that are on Prozac are on it to eliminate their anxieties so they can perform better or be more creative.
	Again, we're already there, but the next generation of this is going to be, for instance, Viagra and Cialis are used as lifestyle enhancement drugs.
	I want to have more pleasure longer.
	This is the beginning of all of this psychopharmacology of pleasure.
	So, at the end of the day, you're now talking about, and somebody will be working on the next generation of cognosceuticals.
	We did a report on the neurotech centers on the planet with a group, NeuroNexus, Zach Lynch's group, and you know what?
	I've got to tell you, Art, this is already happening.
	You combine the breakthroughs in stem cells and neuroscience.
	Are you going to go someplace for a smart pill treatment?
	Are you going to go someplace for a device that's going to give you a total recall memory?
	Is it going to give you super mobility?
	Again, that's a whole other issue between those that are enhanced and those that are not.
	While we're on the subject, Doctor, the United States is restricting for, frankly, religious reasons, a lot of the The baseline research that's going to lead to a lot of these things, and we're sort of crippling ourselves with laws that won't allow U.S.
	physicians and scientists to experiment in a lot of these areas.
	You want to comment on that?
	Well, I think it's just wrong.
	I can't comment on it.
	I've been advising four administrations.
	I go back to advising, and I'm independent, but I can tell you it's a mistake.
	This country, particularly in this administration, has gone ahead and become very anti-science.
	I think it's ill-advised, and it's advice is not helping the future of the economy and jobs and innovation.
	And quite frankly, all of our innovations born in the U.S., invested in the U.S., tax dollars at work, have led to prosperity throughout the world.
	So, and that of course helps with, you know, dealing with terrorism and deals with, you know, creating a more collaborative, global, connected world in terms of globalization.
	So, one, it's a mistake.
	Two, I think that this current change in leadership in Washington with the Democrats coming in are going to shake up that equation.
	And I can tell you whether it's stem cells or the quantum technology or advanced technologies that I believe that we have turned the corner on this, and it can only get better in terms of our investment.
	So I'm pleading with, you know, certainly listeners and policymakers that I talk to in government at the highest levels, and of course my corporate clients, we're all very concerned and working towards putting science back in on top of the priorities in terms of our agenda, because we've got a brain drain.
	That's the other part of it.
	You know what's going on around the world.
	You know, our kids need to Embrace science, and they need to be taught by the best scientists.
	The irony is, and I'm forecasting this, that unfortunately until this is changed, and I'm hoping it will be changed shortly, you could have American kids that need to go offshore to places like, you know, Singapore and China to get training from professors that were not able to exercise, if you will, their work in the United States.
	So this is untenable, it's got to change and it will change.
	All right.
	You have this under the category of weird science, but I guess it's the norm that we discuss on this radio program.
	Things like teleportation, multiverses, you know, multiple universes, that sort of theoretical physics that we talk about so much on this program.
	How close, I mean, are you beginning to feel a little bit of pressure from that sort of fringe area?
	I hesitate to use that word, but I have to, of science.
	Is it going to be a breakthrough?
	Are we going to find another universe?
	Are we going to figure out how to transport not just a molecule, but perhaps much more from one place to another?
	That kind of really wild science.
	In this chapter, you're absolutely right.
	I don't view it as fringe.
	I view it as speculative, but let me say and forecast this.
	Yes, we can teleport photons today.
	We've done that in the past two years.
	The ability to be able to then teleport other kinds of inorganic objects within eight to ten years, as far as I'm concerned, is possible.
	Again, when you think about teleportation, think about it as a basic The mechanics of nanotechnology, where you are assembling and reassembling matter at the atomic level, as we begin to get better at those tool sets, will do that.
	Now, let's talk about the big picture.
	And this is, again, speculative science, but it's science.
	We don't understand the information, the quantum information toolbox, that That leads to the construction of our universe and every other universe, or the metaverse.
	We don't understand that yet.
	And there is a raging battle going on in physics right now.
	The Einsteinians and, of course, the quantum physicists can't both be right about the universe because they're incompatible theories, and superstrings is obviously under attack.
	And your viewers are familiar with that.
	That poses another challenge, and that is, as we begin to understand the information, the quantum information toolkit, as we begin to understand the laws and the tools, as we're beginning, for instance, to understand with STM equipment, to look into the understanding of how, you know, molecules and atoms work with nanotechnology, as we begin to unlock this toolkit, we could then start to validate some of these theories, such as super-strengths.
	I believe that this is still a very immature theory, but let me just say, there is a possibility that your show, for instance, talks to, and there have been other shows as well, that have talked to the notion of there being other kinds of extra-normal intelligences from a variety of other places.
	They may not be aliens, by the way.
	They may be echoes Our voices from the time-space continuum that actually are reaching out across these multiple universes.
	So, will we find another universe in our lifetime?
	The probability is yes.
	Will there be life there?
	We don't know.
	Will there be other kinds of intelligence in the universe, given a universe, by the way, that we know that 90% of the universe is, you know, exotic matter and we don't understand the basic fundamentals?
	The mystery of life?
	I think there is a great possibility we will.
	Perhaps when we develop a quantum computer.
	Now, you mentioned Moore's Law earlier.
	Is Moore's Law holding up?
	In other words, are we continuing to double, what is it, every 18 months or something?
	Is that still holding or is it beginning to fall apart and will it be replaced by quantum computing at some point?
	Well, you know, think about Moore's Law as a metric.
	Let's just say every year, every technology, every fundamental technology doubles in power.
	Just every single one.
	The internet, computing, you know, DNA sequence, just every single computer and in every single area, nanobio, IT networks, is doubling in power.
	At the same time, the cost of that power, in general, is decreasing by half.
	Very interesting, right?
	So there's a cost driver here.
	That's right.
	Are we talking about Are we potentially another paradigm for computing such as, you know, quantum computing?
	Yes, we are.
	There's actually two companies right now that are working on very hard encryption and they're actually selling products in the quantum encryption area.
	But I think that quantum computers, what's interesting about them is that they, again, are just the beginnings.
	They're just a reflection of potential of another whole tool set.
	That's the application of this quantum information tool set.
	Yes, I don't believe they represent necessarily an entirely new Moore's Law, if you will, but they're going to provide another tool set for us to be able to perhaps create energy or more secure networks or maybe to be able to solve some of the vexing problems we have on the planet today.
	And again, I think it's a very exciting development.
	Oh, it is.
	It is indeed.
	All right.
	Dr. James Canton, stay right where you are.
	We'll be right back.
	He's a futurist, and we certainly are looking into the future, and the future is certainly approaching quickly, perhaps doubling its speed coming at us every year or so.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Well, Moore says Moore's Law is dead.
	Gordon Moore says Moore's Law is dead.
	The extrapolation of a trend that was becoming clear even as long ago as 1965 and has been the pulse of the IT industry Ever since, we'll eventually end, said Moore, who is now retired from Intel, 40 years after the publication of his law, which states that transistor density on integrated circuits doubles about every two years.
	Moore said this morning, meaning a few days ago now, it just can't continue forever.
	The nature of Exponentials is that you push them out and eventually disaster happens.
	In terms of size of transistors, you can see that we're approaching the size of atoms, which is, he says, a fundamental barrier.
	So according to the man who made the law, there is no more.
	Moore says Moore's Law is dead.
	We'll get back to Dr. Kent Hahn in a moment.
	Fascinating.
	Dr. Quintana, had you heard about the statement by Moore?
	Yes, I have, and I would say that there have been significant breakthroughs that have extended, if you will, Moore's Law.
	Breakthroughs that IBM and Fujitsu and a number of other companies have gone down the path.
	I just want to point out, not that I would challenge Moore to Talk to the demise of his own law, but I think that it has already, it's grown beyond that, if you will.
	I think there are technologies that he never conceptualized at the time, such as nanotechnology and quantum technology, that have already offered new opportunities to continue to, again, deal with this metric.
	This is the doubling of power.
	He may have been talking about the particular semiconductor industry as such, but I think it's gone on and will continue to go on as a metaphor for the doubling, the exponential increase in power.
	Well, in fact, it may be a lot.
	If we jump, if we really jump to quantum, for example, it may be a lot more than a doubling.
	It may be something we can barely handle.
	Let's move on, just in the interest of time.
	Climate change.
	This is something I've been screeching about for years and years and years now, Doctor.
	Climate change, and now we're beginning to really see it happen.
	We're beginning to, I think, see most scientists agree now that global warming is a reality.
	It was a great controversy just a few years ago.
	Now most agree it's really happening.
	I mean, you need only look at the North Pole, which is ready to be navigated by Well, I think that climate change is now accepted as the inevitable.
	is melting but that's the only beginning the beginning of the the changes that
	we're going to the whole world is going to face. How do you see it? Well I
	think that climate change is now accepted as the inevitable.
	What's not of course pleasant to embrace is that there's a certain
	portion of climate change that is irreversible. It's not like we all get to
	stop using you know oil tomorrow and we start to turn the lights out and that
	we can stop climate There is a certain amount of climate change that is irreversible and it's going to have permanent changes and it's not well understood.
	We're forecasting, for instance, an increase in different parts of the world, particularly parts of Asia, you're going to start to see an increase in Increase in tidal areas, particularly on the coast.
	Now, there's a couple of these trends that we look at together that, if you will, create the perfect storm.
	One is that you've got a large migration of a couple of billion people on the planet that are moving to cities.
	China alone, you have a million people moving to cities.
	Now, most of these cities, this is a day, a million people moving a day.
	Most of these cities that two and a half to three billion people are moving to, Are on the coasts.
	Many of these coasts are in areas that could suffer, not the kind of prolonged climate change, but could suffer from drastic storms, tsunamis, such as we encountered here with Katrina and the Cat 5.
	You're going to see more extreme weather that's going to hit coastal areas where there are large urban concentrations, and you could see that happening sporadically.
	And the truth of the matter is that we're messing with a system that, for all intents and purposes, we don't have good data to be able to do good forecasting.
	Oh no, that's true.
	That's absolutely true.
	And while the East Coast sort of relaxed this year because they didn't get Katrina again, here in the Pacific we've had some incredible typhoons.
	Just monstrous typhoons.
	So the world works in strange ways.
	Everybody sighs a big sigh of relief back on the East Coast of the United States.
	But it's still continuing, and here in the Pacific it's been one rough year, let me tell you.
	There is a global warming, and that warming, we know there's a certain portion of that that is naturally occurring.
	We know a certain portion of that is occurring due to our use of fossil fuels.
	Now, what we don't know is where the next disaster may occur and how much of it is, again, you want to think about this as a convergence of natural Uh, forces and unnatural or man-made forces.
	I do think climate change.
	I was just, uh, again, you know, on the East Coast, United States and Southwest United States, there have been, we've looked at some major studies there where you're looking about, about 10 degrees warmer, and that's going to have a huge impact on real estate impact on, on when summer begins.
	And if there ever is going to be a winter again, this is going to happen in our lifetime.
	It's going to happen over the next, you're going to see within, Of five to eight years, a lot more drastic changes.
	It's happening now, right now.
	There's no question about it.
	For example, driven by climate change, weather disasters could cost as much as a trillion dollars in a single year by 2040.
	This comes from the UN's Conference on Global Warming.
	So they're saying, they don't know what it is, but they think that the combined disasters we're going to have by 2040 are going to cost A trillion dollars?
	A trillion dollars in one year?
	Again, I don't think that that, again, I would challenge that data.
	Part of this is we're getting better at more accurately putting metrics to what disasters cost us.
	So in all fairness, I think the UN tends to be a bit alarmist.
	Their heart's in the right place.
	Again, that data... We've been in the insurance industry, you know, has been looking at this for a long time.
	So let's say it's not a trillion, let's say it's, you know, it's a half a trillion, right?
	The point is that climate change is here, it's a reality.
	Two, it should influence our decisions about new energy sources and how we expend carbon.
	And we should start to conserve more and move towards alternatives as fast as possible.
	So all of this is just another wake-up call.
	The world is changing.
	And there are increased risks.
	I read another story last week that said that within the next X number of years, 50 years or something like that, there will be no more fish in the ocean.
	Well, again, we've overfished.
	Overfishing of fishery areas in the world has led to moratoriums on things like Chilean sea bass.
	And then salmon, of course, in the U.S.
	This is only going to continue.
	Now, again, the reaction to that is better aquaculture.
	The reaction to that is conservation, if you will.
	This is not a phenomena that is unusual in the world.
	There was a time when people heated their homes with whale oil, and then all of a sudden there were no whales.
	What happened?
	Well, there was new inventions, new innovations, and people had other sources to heat their homes, and then it led to electricity.
	You have to kind of look at this in a larger context and say, well, will there be reactions to this in terms of there being 9 billion people on the planet?
	What's the carrying capacity of the planet to be able to feed, to be able to have access to fish or agriculture?
	There are going to be clear challenges, and we could be looking at areas that, if they're not protected, they could disappear.
	Yes, that's going to happen.
	Doctor, you mentioned what is the carrying capacity of Earth.
	That's a really interesting question.
	If you project technology and you project population, are people going to keep eating?
	Or if present trends continue, when do a lot of people stop eating?
	Well, let's put it in a larger perspective.
	Nobody knows for sure what The metrics of the carrying capacity is fully, but I can tell you this, there's going to be close to, certainly there'll be 8 billion people, there'll be an increase we know.
	The UN says somewhere between 8 billion and 9 billion.
	Okay.
	Will we have, let me put it this way, we will not be able to feed the planet without using advanced innovation.
	So all day long, people can say, well, We don't want GM foods, we don't want this, we don't want that.
	There is no agriculture on the planet today, even inorganic small farms, that don't use some kind of innovation.
	So, you know, give it up, number one.
	Number two, we don't have the Ukraine, which is a very vital, fertile area to feed Europe and Russia.
	We don't have, in the Andes, the productive food-producing areas where we used to.
	I'm talking about over the span of a couple hundred years, right?
	Maybe a thousand years.
	So, we're going to have to use innovation to be able to feed people on the planet, number one.
	Number two, it's just, you know, if you look at what's happened to agriculture worldwide, it's still feeding people, but with the, again, you have to look at carrying capacity based on supply and demand.
	Is there going to be 80% more demand for food, stuff such as, you know, meat, grains, soybeans, From China alone?
	Over the next 25-30 years?
	Yes, it's going to be a huge demand.
	Now, we've done analysis of this, and again, you know, this demand is going to not be met unless we use advanced innovation.
	This is not just about, you know, planting every place you can in the United States.
	This is about a very fundamental shift in the carrying capacity, greater population, greater food demands, And they're eating more of our lifestyle, which is not necessarily good in terms of longevity we talked about earlier.
	Well, part of meeting that demand is going to mean understanding this warming planet and where we do our agriculture, because it is changing so quickly that where this agriculture that's going to feed this immense number of people is going to come from is going to have to change, isn't it?
	That's correct, but we're going to have time to be able to forecast and see that.
	There's very good forecasting done in agriculture, very good forecasting, and some of the work that we've done in Talk to our clients.
	I mean, this is on the horizon of a number of governments and, again, corporations and regional folks that are operating within Asia or within Southeast Asia or within South America.
	So, if you spend any time outside the United States, you realize that there are very robust regional areas where there's local foodstuffs and agriculture that can serve those populations.
	So, again, I'm not concerned about Taxing out the carrying capacity, but I am concerned about things like water.
	There are certain things you can grow, certain things you can do with technology, but water is one of those issues.
	Now, again, you've got to put this in the bigger context and say, well, gee, well, one of the advantages of warming, global warming, is you're going to have more snow melt, which means more fresh water.
	Well, guess what?
	We're going to need that because the water tables are low and they're getting polluted So, in a funny kind of way, the people in Greenland, for instance, are happy to have climate change and global warming because they have more green land to actually put out their pasture to for their animals and to plant on.
	Will we be extending agriculture to planting in the Arctic regions in our lifetime because of global warming?
	The answer is yes.
	Will global warming lead to feeding more people on the planet?
	Yes!
	I know we don't think like that, but that's part of this linearity of thinking.
	We think, OK, we've got to stop climate change.
	There is a natural evolution of which we are part of that may be part of a design for addressing some of the same problems that problems seem to be creating.
	But it requires a very different kind of mindset to think about that, and it's not always one that's popular in the short term.
	Well, I wrote a book called The Quickening, and I want to bring it up now.
	I mean, here you and I are talking about the end of economically feasible oil, newer technologies, the fact that our climate is changing before our eyes.
	Now, these are generally things.
	That humans didn't see changing in their lifetimes.
	Climate change, for example, occurred over many, many lifetimes.
	Hundreds of years.
	Not single human short lifetimes.
	But these are all occurring in our lifetime.
	So things are speeding up.
	The change is speeding up.
	Yes?
	Absolutely.
	I even read your book and I think it was a good thesis for laying out this accelerated change.
	Are we really prepared to deal with the rate of change?
	No, well, that's the whole notion of, again, you know, your book, my book talks, there's a certain synergy there of ideas, where what I basically say in The Extreme Future is, look, the level of complexity of challenges that are facing us outpace our leaders' understanding of how to deal with change.
	These complex changes, nobody's ever had to deal with.
	You can't think about them, number one, in isolation.
	You've got to think about them in the totality, and it requires a different approach.
	Einstein talked about this.
	He said, look, you know, the problems that we have, which, of course, things like poverty or hunger or war, conflict, they're not going to be solved with the current thinking that we have, the consciousness that we have.
	We have to get to another level of consciousness to solve these problems.
	And again, in my book, I'm basically saying, look, the level of complexity that we have Maybe we need a different framework to be able to deal with them.
	Of course, I point towards these particular innovations because, you know, let's take nanotechnology.
	When you get down at the nanoscale, something happens about time.
	Time flows differently.
	Yes.
	When you start to get into quantum computing, you realize it's not about just more efficient or more secure computers.
	It's about that you can have simultaneous events occurring.
	All those are like Two different dimensions occurring.
	You can have two different simultaneous things happening.
	It's not a linear approach.
	It's a multi-dimensional approach.
	It's multitasking.
	Yeah, multitasking.
	Well, here's something that I'm concerned about with the change occurring as rapidly as it's occurring.
	Well, for example, Doctor, when I was a child, I was told that by the time I'm an adult, and I'm 61 years old now, Well, gee, robots would be just doing everything for me.
	We'd all have our hands lying slackly at our side with not very much to do, because robots would be doing it all well.
	I worry about saying nanotechnology will come along and save our butts, because if it moves as slowly as, for example, robot technology has moved, then it's not going to be fast enough for the changes we see in front of us right now.
	Well, I don't disagree.
	And I'm not saying that, you know, I'm not saying that certainly in my book, you know, The Extreme Future.
	What I'm basically saying is, look, we live in this unprecedented time.
	On one hand, we have these complex risks and challenges that are facing us that without advanced technology, as an example, we're not going to be able to resolve these issues, right?
	The other is I'm saying, look, we need a new way to think about these problems, and probably it's a more systems approach.
	The third thing I'm saying is, look, when This is not about finding the silver bullet.
	There will be challenges that we will not have fixes on.
	It's kind of like being able to understand that you've got a gene for Alzheimer's before you have a genetic vaccine to fix it.
	So look, you're talking about the evolutionary path of humanity, which has started on this journey and now has kind of, you know, Pandora's box is open and we've Everything is out, and we're looking at it.
	We have huge issues and problems.
	We have not evolved beyond them, and we're starting to try to fix them.
	Will we fix them in time before extinction faces us, or war, or conflicts?
	Well, this has been the challenge for the millennia, and we're still at that point.
	It's just that we have more complex issues in front of us, and now we're We have tools that on one hand are destabilizing the planet, on the other hand may lead to fixing the planet and enabling us to build a sustainable future.
	That is the point we're reaching.
	Will we build a sustainable future?
	Will we build one that will stave off these issues and manage them better before they become issues that are irreversible?
	Well, I certainly can, and you can document the speed of the change that we see occurring right now.
	Now, whether the technologies that would support our, you know, surviving these changes, whether they're moving quickly enough, nanotechnology specifically is a very, very good one.
	We really need an awful lot of what's promised by nanotechnology, and if we don't get it, then we lose the race.
	Is that fair to say?
	I think that that's one of them.
	But again, it's nanobiology and cognitive science.
	You know, it's just overall, yes, you're right.
	And I think inevitably there'll be some challenges we will not be able to face and deal with effectively.
	And there will be some that we will.
	And that's yet to be, again, that's yet to be resolved.
	All right.
	There's nothing about this coming break that I can change.
	So, we'll take it and be right back with Dr. James Canton.
	I'm Mark Bell in Manila, Philippines.
	I want to remind everybody, we only have Dr. Canton for the next segment.
	He's kind of jet-lagged, just back from China.
	And let me tell you, I know, it's a very, very long trip.
	In a moment, we'll ask him about top threats to our freedom.
	In fact, our very lives as we move into the future.
	Then at the top of the hour, we'll let all of you talk about anything you want.
	We'll do an open line.
	So hang in there for that.
	I'm Art Bell.
	this is Coast to Coast AM.
	Once again, Dr. James Canton and Dr. Canton has a book that you might want to
	read if you're interested in the future.
	It is called The Extreme Future, and I assume it's available at Amazon.com and all the usual places, doctor?
	Yes, that's true.
	Your bookstores and certainly Amazon, Barnes & Noble, etc.
	How long has it been out?
	It just came out a couple of weeks ago.
	A couple of weeks ago, okay.
	Yep, brand new, fresh.
	Okay.
	We have plenty of threats to our freedom and to our very lives in this day and age.
	I wonder what, as we go into the future, you consider to be the really big ones.
	Are they more buildings coming down?
	People pointing airliners at them?
	Or what do we have to look forward to?
	Well, clearly, security is one of the key threats that faces us in the near future, certainly.
	The future of, you know, two seconds from now, two years from now.
	The battle for the future is the key challenge that we face, whether we like it or not.
	For all intents and purposes, there is an organized cabal of people around the world, With a religious bent, a criminal bent, a for-profit bent, and that somewhat organized, some unorganized network of rogues, has your wealth, your bank account, your life and your lifestyle
	Uh, in their sights.
	And I think that, uh, we live in a world where that means potentially threats like, you know, pandemics.
	It means bioterrorism.
	It means, uh, terrorism, global war on terrorism.
	All those things are certainly in the offing as there are more subtle threats to our future, which are such as I refer to in my book on the invisible war, which is the war against, of course, individual choice and privacy that will be Well, there you are.
	will by both private and government forces.
	So the individual is at risk.
	That's the bottom line.
	The question, of course, is whether it's fairly benign or it is identity theft or it will
	rob you of your very life, let alone your freedom.
	Well, there you are.
	And the big question is, of course, can we fight this war on identity theft, on terrorism,
	on all of these other security issues without giving up these very basic freedoms that are
	outlined in our Constitution and Bill of Rights to fight them?
	I mean, to fight them, we're going to have to give up so much of what we cherish, and so it's kind of like we lose either way.
	Well, you know, I'm not really a fatalist about this.
	I'm calling in my book for folks to become more aware of this so they can organize more and have their voices heard more.
	And certainly in a democracy, this is what we do best.
	The squeaky tool gets the oil.
	I think that what we need to do is, one, become aware of what all these threats are.
	And there are a number of them.
	And then, two, decide which of those that we can deal with.
	Locally, and you could do a lot locally in terms of supporting, you know, first responders or simple things in terms of disaster recovery.
	You know, are you ready wherever you are living in your community to do that?
	A lot of people just don't want to get involved.
	They just, you know, they want to be thinking that all these things are going to be taken care of for them.
	And at the end of the day, they're not.
	That's number one.
	Number two, I think that there are Inevitably, I'm forecasting that people will be trading their certain rights, such as privacy, for more security.
	Now, I think a certain amount of this is inevitable, and then a certain amount of this is dangerous.
	Where we go to change the Constitution to give government more power over individuals, we should fight back about.
	When we go to give corporations rights to invade our privacy and have access to our data to make decisions About us by having private health information, the way we talked about earlier in terms of, you know, this fast-moving genomic onslaught of personalized information.
	We should push back on that.
	But there's a lot of things like identity theft that are kind of exploding out of control that people seem not able to make much impact on.
	And I fear there will be more of these kinds of threats coming that, again, you can't stick your head in the sand.
	You've got to become aware of.
	Then there are pandemics.
	Perhaps you'd like to comment on those.
	We perhaps dodged a bullet with the bird flu thing last year.
	I don't know that we'll dodge it this year, but inevitably there's this feeling that people have, and I'm one of those people, I guess I'm a professional skeptic, but As we have more and more and more people on Earth, and nobody can deny we're getting that right now, it seems as though eventually nature, if it sees that it's not supportable, that we're not supportable at these present numbers, will figure out a way to thin us out.
	Well yeah, it's interesting.
	You may be right, and again this goes to, there's been some very interesting theories, you know, Gaia's theory, Love Luxury, the Gaia, you know, and all of that.
	This goes to the notion of carrying capacity, too, but when you look globally, as I do as a futurist, you look at the planet, right?
	Like, you look at the current state.
	We've got about, I don't know, 15, 20 micro wars going on.
	There are a variety of regionalized pandemics.
	Certainly, HIV is a pandemic, okay?
	We've got other pandemics.
	SARS, you're right, we narrowly missed SARS getting out of control, bird flu, okay?
	And that's not gone away, right?
	But at the same time, are there other things that will emerge that will impact our immune system?
	Well, I know, you know, it's not often thought about this, but is cancer and cardiovascular disease pandemics?
	Yeah, well, they kill more people than any other diseases.
	And as people live longer, they're more at risk for cardiovascular disease and cancers.
	Do we understand how to deal with these right now?
	But is it possible that there are new diseases?
	And I forecast in my book I have four or five new diseases that may emerge as pandemics.
	I think the likelihood is that just with more, interestingly, more collaboration, more people moving around the planet, more, you know, in this post-industrial world that we're creating, More mobility, if you will, and more migration.
	I mean, look at you!
	You just made it back from China in, what, 14, 15 hours?
	Exactly.
	You know, at the end of the day, the likelihood of all of this mobility movement, greater numbers, are going to lead to our ability to be able to, on one hand, have greater commerce, greater trade, globalization, but, yes, it may certainly lead to pandemics.
	I mean, if you end up with, let's say you're in Africa, Where there's a lot of very dangerous diseases for a variety of reasons.
	Ebola, there's dysentery, there's malaria, there's encephalitis, there's a lot of serious diseases.
	Some of them are very highly communicable.
	You could get on a plane, the incubation period would be longer than your ride, stopping off in Frankfurt from Mombasa, then you end up, of course, in New York, then you go on to San Francisco, and for every city that you came into, You know, on your trip, even though you might have symptoms of it at the beginning of a cold, you might have infected a large radius.
	So again, I'm not trying to scare anybody, but I do think it's prudent to recognize that we don't have yet the global, yet national public health networks that are in place to be able to really monitor and protect as well as we should, particularly in a post-9-11 world.
	And these things, the risks are rather high.
	Now, there are other risks, too, that we could talk about, but that's just one that I'm particularly concerned about because of its widespread effect.
	In your book, what are the diseases that you talk about as possible pandemics?
	Well, the thing about viruses and just different kinds of disease entities, particularly viruses, they're an older species, if you will, an older life form than humans.
	That's right.
	That means that they've survived, they've morphed, they've mutated in terms of survival, they've adapted, and they've been living, if you will, millions of years longer than we have, okay?
	So it was the likelihood that they, it's part of the problem, vexing problem with HIV is it keeps morphing, it keeps changing, it keeps mutating, so therefore it's not really one entity, it's a Again, not conscious the way we would understand, you know, beings, but it has a certain kind of survivability to be able to adapt.
	Now, is it likely that with the broad use of antibiotics that we have so impacted our capacity to fight off certain diseases that we are now, if you will, catalyzing a new adaptive virus that will be able to overcome Our ability to be able to stop it?
	The answer is probably yes.
	Probably yes.
	Will there be new SARS or new flesh-eating diseases?
	I think probably yes.
	Will HIV continue to morph?
	It's a very virulent disease.
	It certainly is, and I've heard rumors that in Africa there are strains now of HIV that are not treatable.
	Now that may be an internet rumor, but I have this sinking feeling It's not unusual.
	I mean, you could see as much as a quarter of Africa disappear over the next 25 years.
	All right.
	I mean, again, you also have AIDS in Asia and in Latin America, certainly, Brazil, Thailand, certainly the largest is in Africa.
	Again, here's what I'm forecasting.
	If you don't have a global Awareness systems set up with the ability to be able to have very strong communications, collaborative communications, then you're not just talking about HIV or SARS, you're talking about the next morphable virus and that then converges with the next morphable virus.
	You could have a cascading kind of event that explodes on the scene and happens very quickly.
	Thank God the Chinese We're smart enough to be able to, you know, start to report on and deal with the issues regarding bird flu, right?
	I noticed something interesting.
	I mentioned to you I was in China two months ago, and when I went to China, I noticed that as you board an aircraft, I think it says you board an aircraft, or perhaps as we came off, I can't recall, or both, they'd hit your forehead With a laser.
	If you weren't watching for it, you didn't even notice it, but they'd hit your forehead with a laser and take your temperature very quickly.
	Did you happen to notice that when you traveled?
	I did notice that they're using certain kinds of thermal and heat signature products.
	I can't tell you what's coming.
	I can't tell you that the Chinese will be the first A nation to roll out biometric cards.
	They'll roll out, they have identity cards, they're going to roll out biometrics for identity cards, and they're going to have the ability to be able to do localized testing for different kinds of disease.
	They're going to have to do that.
	And then again, that's just a society that's, you know, 1.3 billion people at the end of the day, you're going to have to manage that society, given the ability of pandemics to emerge.
	You know, and wipe out, you know, 100 million people like that, right?
	Yes.
	Yes, I did notice those technologies.
	You're going to see a lot more of that.
	And that's just inevitable.
	I mean... All right.
	Well, what do you see in the future?
	Right now, as you know, China has the baby policy.
	Now, China is China.
	It's still communist.
	They can... They're a dictatorship.
	They can say, here is what it is.
	You will have this number of children and no more.
	But the rest of the world is, well, for example, I'm here in the Philippines, which is Catholic, and is growing out of control.
	So there are not a lot of countries left, like China, that can simply tell its population, here is what you're going to do, and if you do anything else, you're going to be in big trouble.
	So how does the world deal with religion that says, no, no, no?
	Well, again, this is the issue of You've got to look at things in the context.
	So, religion that says, you know, no, no, no, in terms of starting to... Let's put things in perspective.
	Birth control.
	Birth control.
	I mean, the carrying capacity of the Philippines, you can get good data on if they're going to be able to, within 20 years, based on the growth of the population, manage GDP to be able to feed themselves, okay?
	You can get good data on that.
	I can tell you in China, and I've talked to the Chinese leadership, they recognize that they have a, even though they've got a one baby rule, that people are not, one, always following that, two, that they're more concerned about making people prosperous than they are about the population issue.
	But at any given point in time, They've got 70,000.
	Well, they had 70,000 protests last year alone, okay?
	They have 30 separate languages.
	I mean, you're talking about a very complex society that requires... It'd be absurd to think that, you know, Beijing is... The Central Committee is controlling everything that goes on in China, number one.
	Number two, the ability to be able to try to deal with creating prosperity is their
	way of kind of saying, look, we can grow the prosperity of this economy, you know, it's
	growing at 12 to 14 percent on a GDP.
	You know, if they can grow that prosperity, they've got a better chance of managing healthcare,
	which is what this is about, right?
	And keeping people mobile and keeping people in jobs.
	Their biggest concerns are actually keeping that prosperity moving so people have jobs
	and have an enhanced quality.
	Well, I certainly agree with that.
	It does come back to caring capacity, and caring capacity is related to how governments lay down the law in terms of how many children we can have.
	You know, so most of the world is not going to be able to do what China has attempted to do, and they've been at least partially successful in what they've done, right?
	So what about the rest of the world?
	A lot of the rest of the world is Catholic, and it's just not going to happen.
	Yeah, and I understand, and that's where governments play a role, because you have in India, for instance, you have selective birth control.
	So you have boys better than girls.
	In a lot of Asia, you have girls not being welcome.
	So in countries where... I mean, here's the point.
	Think about carrying capacity not just as a global challenge, but a regional or national challenge.
	So you can have situations where you have a collision of the economics of carrying capacity collide with religion.
	And you have some nations that basically abandon, if you will, religion.
	Uh, because they have to change their values because, one, it's taxing out the carrying capacity.
	And that could happen.
	I sure don't see it happening, at least for example here in the Philippines.
	In the United States, we separate religion and the state.
	In the Philippines, religion basically drives the state.
	It drives the kind of laws that are made and or not made.
	And I can just assure you this is true.
	Trust me when I tell you, there are not going to be any laws limiting the number of children you can have in the Philippines, and many other Catholic countries, not just the Philippines.
	That's a problem in Latin America, right?
	You've got that.
	Of course.
	It's a huge problem in Latin America, but again, you've got much of, particularly South America, you've got a lot of land, they have regional prosperity in terms of, you know, they're feeding 98% of the foodstuffs Our come from, you know, Argentina, Brazil, Peru, you know, I've done business and gone, traveled down there.
	I mean, that region can feed itself, right?
	So, it's more locally driven.
	Now, again, I don't know what the situation is with the Philippines, but until you have, again, this goes back to this notion of carrying capacity, until you have governments who are really starting to monitor carrying capacity forecasts, Yes.
	And until you have government leaders that are, quite frankly, a lot smarter and more aware of the regional and national carrying capacity, until you get carrying capacity on the radar of leaders, this is mute.
	This is just, you know, another conversation about, gee, we're going to just let these things kind of collide.
	Religion will collide with We're out of time.
	of carrying capacity and hopefully we'll fit everybody.
	Doctor, we're out of time.
	Your book, The Extreme Future, is available.
	I suggest people go and grab it.
	I thank you for being here.
	I think it's time for you to go rest.
	It was a very, very, very long flight, but it has been fascinating.
	We'll do it again sometime, Doctor.
	I'd like to do that.
	Thanks so much.
	All right.
	Take care.
	Excellent.
	Thank you and good night, sir.
	That's Dr. James Canton.
	He's a futurist and I don't want to...
	Well, I am a pessimist.
	I mean you just heard the last two hours.
	Let me ask you all, which I will do when we come back, what do you think?
	I'm Art Bell.
	Well, I've got a good idea.
	We just had Dr. James Canton on for two hours.
	He's a futurist.
	His book is The Extreme Future.
	But you know what?
	I think all of you out there are probably, if not as good, very nearly every bit as good As he is in a lot of ways, and I don't in any way mean to belittle his talents, you know, he's got a PhD in all this, but when it comes to the Earth's carrying capacity, when it comes to our changing climate, when it comes to the possibility of diseases, when it comes to what's going on with America and the world, longevity, fuel,
	Energy, all the rest of that.
	You know, I just think that a lot of you are, in a lot of ways, every bit as good at looking at the future as a futurist, as Dr. Quintana, or many others.
	So, how about it?
	What do all of you see in, just say, the next 10 or 20 years?
	What do you see ahead for the United States?
	For the world?
	I'm curious.
	Let's go to Open Lines and find out.
	That or anything else you want to talk about.
	Fair game coming right up.
	by Mart Bell.
	Alright, we take the big plunge into open lines.
	And again, anything you want to talk about is fair game.
	But I just think that a lot of you...
	Are certainly up on what's going on in the world.
	My God, we read you stories every week, week in and week out, many of them ahead of what you hear in the mainstream press.
	And so your prognosis for what's up with the world, I think, is nearly as good as anybody else's.
	So let's explore that a little bit.
	And of course, remember, toward the end of the year, I think I'm going to pick up a few extra days, we're going to do the traditional And by the way, I did come up with a list of predictions, fortunately, that were made for 2006.
	So we're going to be able to review those, thank heavens, and go on to predict what you think is coming for 2007.
	That's certainly not what I'm soliciting at the moment.
	More of a generalized look into the future is what I'm suggesting we perhaps discuss right now.
	But open lines is what it's all about.
	First time caller line, Lou in New Jersey, you're on the air.
	Yeah, Art.
	Blue in New Jersey.
	Right.
	I have a hypothetical question about time travel.
	All right.
	Let's say someone developed either a device or a method to travel, and for instance, they did it and they were in Kansas City, and that was the point they started off at.
	No matter how long they're gone or whether they go to the future or the past, because the Earth turns on its axis and because the Earth revolves around the Sun, Do you think the travel would come back to the spot he left, which might even be empty space, or the spot that the method took him from?
	Well, one would hope that he would come back to the same rough space.
	Now, I understand what you're saying.
	The Earth is, of course, all the time moving, and so would you suddenly appear, for example, in empty space, a place where the Earth currently is not?
	And I suppose that's a possibility.
	But one would hope, whatever time travel method they came up with, that it would automatically return you But it's a very good question, and I don't have the full answer to it, that's for sure.
	If I did, I guess we'd have a time machine already, and we'd be traveling.
	So, his question has been asked by many, and that is, of course, that the Earth is in orbit around the Sun.
	So, if you did time travel, would you suddenly appear in the vacuum of space, which wouldn't do you a whole lot of good, would it?
	Wildcard Line, Sean in New York, you're on the air.
	Yeah, hi Art.
	Thanks for taking my call.
	Dr. Canton alluded to the supposition that he said that he thought that certain aspects of climate change were irreversible.
	That's correct.
	Well, I don't know that that's entirely... My opinion is a bit different.
	I think climate change is reversible, and it's reversible, at least in my opinion, to whatever extent we'd like to make it.
	By what method?
	By what method?
	Yes.
	The method would involve the oceans.
	As you know, the oceans are saline bodies of water.
	They contain salt.
	And as you may know, if you've ever been seen in a high school chemistry class, for example, when a piece of ice is put in a beaker full of fresh water and a beaker full of salt water, the ice in the salt water will evaporate quicker than it will in the fresh.
	My point is that it could be possible to construct evaporation fields in places like the Great Sonora Desert, perhaps, and in Saudi Arabia, wherein relatively large quantities of seawater would be pumped in during the summer and spring and fall months, when it's always very, very hot, to evaporate that seawater On a daily basis during the day, and then at night, the salt would be collected by trucks, let's say, and gathered up and compressed, for example, into little blocks, which would then be sheathed in, let's say, quarter-inch plexiglass, and then those blocks could be used in construction projects to build boats for various and sundry different purposes.
	Somewhat like the glass blocks, if you've ever seen glass blocks in Yes, I'm trying to picture how this changes the global climate.
	Well, by steadily decreasing the salinity, by literally taking the salt out of the equation, such as it is, it's a mathematical equation, But that's the problem we're having right now, is the decreasing salinity of the oceans.
	In other words, as the ice at the North Pole and or South Pole or Greenland or wherever else melts, the salinity of the oceans is decreasing, causing problems.
	No, no, no.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	By decreasing the salinity in places where the ocean is overly saline, say like drawing the water from the Gulf of California, for example, or from the Red Sea, where the salinity content is very, very high, it would slow down, it would reverse it over time.
	it would slow down, it would reverse it, over time.
	Why?
	Why?
	Yes.
	Because, because it would, because it would reduce
	the overall saline content and the fresh, the ice would be less susceptible to melting.
	Oh, I see, by having less salt.
	I don't think I necessarily follow that as logical.
	Right now we are having a significant problem with ocean currents because of the decreasing salinity of many parts of the oceans.
	Or at least that's my understanding of what the scientists are saying.
	That as much of the ice melts, we get less salinity in the oceans and some of the ocean currents that we depend on for moderating climates, for example Europe's climate, Are in quite a bit of danger.
	So if we were to remove more salt from the oceans, which I guess with the process he talked about certainly would be possible, I'm not sure we wouldn't make the problem worse.
	I don't know.
	I'm obviously not a scientist, but it didn't sound right to me.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air, Liz.
	Hi Art.
	Hi.
	Long time listener, by the way, and it's a pleasure to talk to you.
	I've tried to call a few times with a shadow person story from when I was 15.
	My mom had a very, very severe stroke when I was 15, and she was reading in the National Enquirer an ad for this book written by a husband and wife team.
	They called themselves Witches.
	She got this book, and she was reading it to my nana.
	And I could hear her reading it out loud from my bedroom.
	I was just lying on my stomach, reading a book, and while she was reading this, and I could hear this blather that she was reading, I just kind of saw something out of the corner of my eye in the hallway, and it was the shadow of a man, just a dark shadow of a man, with a fedora hat, and he looked like The silhouette of the Exorcist looking up at the window in the Exorcist, in the poster of the Exorcist?
	Oh yes.
	And I said, my God, what, what is that thing?
	And I, you know, I got off the bed.
	I, I, I didn't know what it was.
	And the shadow literally just ran down the wall and ducked into the little tiny alcove, uh, into the bathroom and then it was gone.
	And then, so I told, I, I, um, I told my Nana, I said, you know, we got to get that book out of the house.
	Because I think that things like that open windows to problems much like a Ouija board.
	That may be, Liz.
	I'm not sure.
	I do agree that windows to another universe or the other side or however we want to think of it can be opened by things like Ouija boards and perhaps the reading of that book, but it may be that the two were totally disconnected.
	Now, the phenomena of shadow people is something else again.
	And it appears to be increasing exponentially.
	More and more people are seeing what may be artifacts from another universe.
	Little flashes and little pieces of what may be from another universe.
	It's really a fascinating phenomena and one that I'm going to continue to watch shadow people.
	And they're generally described in the way she just did, with these fedora hats, and I don't know, it's a strange phenomena, but more and more people are beginning to see them for whatever reason.
	Wildcard Line, Jim in Cleveland, you're on the air.
	Hi Art, pertaining to the future and addressing the inevitable, do you, Art, see any significant change in the way we manage our future funeral arrangements?
	Cemeteries currently are accommodating the dead, but geographically things are significantly sprawling.
	Where I live in Northeast Ohio, I see evidence that a plot may soon be prime real estate.
	So in short, Catholic or not, could cremation not just be an alternative in the future, but a necessity?
	It certainly could.
	Yes, of course it could.
	We, as the billions pile up, so to speak, both of the living and the dead, yes, what you're saying, I mean, there's one thing that God, other than the recent addition of a volcanic island, which we think appeared, is not making any more of, and that's real estate.
	There you go.
	Well, Art, thanks very much for your time.
	You're very welcome and have a good day.
	It's true.
	Real estate has inevitably always been one of the best investments you could make because, as I just said, God is not making any more of it, generally.
	So, he makes a very good point.
	The number of dead will continue to pile up, and the Western tradition, and I'm not sure it's not just the West, of burying people may eventually become a thing of the past.
	It may have to.
	Let's go to wildcard line three and say, Vance, you are on the air.
	Hello.
	Well, hello, Art.
	I've been listening for about a decade, and I've never called before.
	Thanks for taking my call.
	You're very welcome.
	The first thing I'd like to say is I'm very empathetic with you guys in the Philippines.
	I'm calling from beautiful downtown Katrinaville.
	Ah, very, very nice.
	El Nino has kept our currents to keep the storms out in the Atlantic, and you're getting it all this year.
	That's fact.
	And we've had some really wicked ones.
	In fact, the last typhoon that we had over, I think, about a six to ten hour period dropped 75 millibars, which would have been one of the largest drops, the fastest drops in all of history.
	Well, I went through it in a truck just north of Biloxi at 170 miles an hour.
	And I'm here talking to you.
	In 2005, the cost of Katrina was $210 billion, $120 billion of which was inflicted directly by the hurricane.
	The Washington insiders are, we're going to wind up with about 2% and everybody else is getting fat.
	I still haven't received hardly anything from anybody.
	So I'm now presently living in the middle of a national forest in a deer camp.
	And thank God to have it, I'm not in the Katrina box anymore.
	Yeah, I've heard a lot of really bad stories about Katrina survivors.
	Katrina was the first weather event to create Climate refugees in the kind of numbers that we're talking about here.
	The cost of that storm could have been even higher.
	It could have hit the wealthiest parts of New Orleans.
	Those were largely spared from the flood.
	But make no mistake about it, though it has been a light year due to weather patterns, here in the Pacific, it has not.
	And so when those patterns switch, it's going to be right back to the boiling plate.
	For the Gulf Coast and Florida and other areas of the East Coast.
	I mean, it's just, it's getting rougher and rougher and rougher.
	One year in the clear does not put you in the clear.
	We're going to face increasingly violent weather.
	There's simply no question about it.
	How we deal with it, I don't know.
	On the first time caller line from Tennessee, Matt, you're the one.
	Hello, am I on?
	Yes.
	Thank you very much for taking my call.
	Sure.
	I've been a listener for about a year.
	And I'm totally addicted to it.
	Anyway, I wanted to talk about the end times.
	I believe they're here.
	I believe that we are going to face a new age within the next 10 years.
	How do you think this will manifest?
	I mean there are so many possibilities.
	Our guests talked about many of them.
	Disease, weather changes, the changes of economies and science and all the rest of it.
	How do you think these end times will manifest?
	Well, I think that they've already manifest.
	I think that as far as the Bible talks about how the The skies will be filled with grasshoppers, planes looking, you know, like grasshoppers and they are.
	Rumors of wars.
	Wars and rumors of wars.
	Well, we've always had that.
	Well, especially now with the nuclear crisis that we've got going on.
	And I really don't see my future going any Further than, you know, 20 years, you know?
	And by that you mean you don't see the world's future going more than another 20 years, is that correct?
	Or just your own personal future?
	Right, well, no, both.
	Both?
	I certainly, I hope you're wrong.
	I hope that's incorrect.
	Hold on a sec.
	Man has always carried signs around saying the end is near or this is it and quoted the Bible and of course eventually I guess the Bible will be correct and there will be an end but we all hope that our children will have a better life than we had I don't know that that's going to be true anymore.
	Do you remember a few elections ago when I think it was Ronald Reagan who won by suggesting that everybody review their lifestyle and ask themselves if they were better off now than they were four years ago.
	Remember that?
	I thought that was a catchy little phrase.
	It certainly worked very well at the time.
	But if you ask yourself that question now, right now, Are you better off than you were four, eight, or ten years ago?
	What is your answer?
	What is your answer?
	Are you better off?
	Do you have a better lifestyle?
	Are you getting more and working less?
	I'm not sure how you define a good lifestyle, but I would think it's perhaps greater riches, more comfort with less work.
	In the United States, people are working their tail ends off.
	They tend not to take vacations as Europeans do so much.
	They're very, very hard workers.
	And do they have a better lifestyle?
	Is it easier to buy that first house?
	Is it easier to feed your family than it was four or eight years ago?
	Or is it tougher?
	So when you ask yourself that question, if the answer is no, it's much harder to feed my family, it's much harder to secure my home, and all the rest of it, then what is another 10 or 20 years going to bring?
	If you can articulate that, then I guess that makes you a futurist.
	Indeed, Sean in Toronto, Canada says, cremation will be mandatory.
	Uh, it's gonna be because of the future zombie threat, not Cemetery Overcrowd.
	And, you know, it's interesting, Sean, that you would, uh, fast-blast that to me.
	I just finished watching yet another zombie movie last night, and I can't recall the name of it, um, but, uh, but it was, it was like The Night of the Living Dead, and I, I've noticed there have been more and more of those movies lately, and I guess they're particularly cool because Nobody can say much to you about mindless violence when you're killing the already dead.
	Nobody minds killing the already dead.
	And of course you have to make it a headshot because... And I was wondering about that.
	What difference does it make?
	If you're a zombie, what difference does it make whether you're shot in the head or not?
	But it seems to be the only way you can kill a zombie in the movies anyway, is a direct headshot.
	And maybe one of you will think of the name of this movie.
	It had this machine in it whose chief job was to Uh, to protect this enclave of rich people.
	But the zombies, of course, broke through all the barriers and for the most part, until the very end, ate the rich people.
	Notice that mindless violence in zombie movies is perfectly alright.
	It doesn't matter.
	You can see people munching on other people.
	You can see endless number of people shot and mowed down by machine guns because they're already dead.
	killing the already dead seems to be an okay thing to do.
	Alright, back to open lines.
	Anything you want to talk about is fair game, but we are sort of generally talking about the future.
	Let's go to wildcard line three.
	It's Paul in Chicago.
	Hi, Paul.
	Hey, how you doing, George?
	I just wanted to talk about the futurist that was on earlier.
	Wait a sec.
	George is not here.
	I'm Art.
	I think George is pretty well.
	He's probably relaxing over the weekend.
	Yeah, I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry, Art.
	No, I just wanted to speak about the gentleman that was on earlier talking about futurism.
	Yes.
	Well, there was already a show done on either National Geographic or also done on Discovery Channel that talked about AIDS and the connection with the Black Plague that explained that there was a gay man that was out here in the United States that they've done tests on his blood and found that he's immune to the AIDS To the AIDS and HIV.
	And actually, there are quite a number of prostitutes in Africa that also have been shown to be immune to the AIDS virus.
	Yeah, and with that, a lot of people, you know, from that, I have understood that some people are thinking that it's actually been created in the lab, the AIDS virus that's going around now, and what he was talking about, the AIDS virus that's, the stronger AIDS that you had mentioned, Art.
	Well, what I mentioned is that I've been hearing rumors and I don't want to start any panic because that's all they are is rumors at this point.
	But I have been, unfortunately, hearing rumors of strains of the AIDS virus that are not treatable with the current life-extending drugs that they have.
	Now, what they can do right now, generally, is to reduce the viral count in your body so that you live longer.
	It still eventually kills you.
	They may come up with a vaccine for AIDS eventually, or even a cure for AIDS.
	Who knows?
	But right now, about the best they can do, it is my understanding, is to reduce the viral count in your body through sort of a cocktail of antiviral medicines and that extends your life.
	But I'm hearing these rumors that in Africa they have now begun to see strains that are not affected by these antiviral drugs.
	I hope that's inaccurate.
	West of the Rockies, Don in Washington, you're on the air.
	Well, it says Don, but if it's John, so be it.
	I put you down in the queue of quality.
	Thank you, sir.
	Very much.
	I'm really surprised that I actually got through.
	I'll make it as fast as I can.
	I do have a couple of questions.
	You've heard of Eagle Rock or Crow's Nest in Washington?
	In California, I'm sorry.
	Yes, I have.
	In 93, my wife and I were driving up to Bellingham, Washington, and we were approached by some kind of a bat-like creature.
	Not a creature, I guess.
	I really thought it was man-made, and it had flexible wings, and it was dead silent.
	Was it flying, or was it walking?
	Pardon?
	Was it flying or was it on the ground?
	It was flying.
	It was flying above us.
	And it flew up as quickly as it could.
	Stopped.
	And we were doing about 60, 70 on the freeway.
	And wow.
	What do you mean it stopped?
	It stopped and it observed us.
	That's eerie.
	Yeah.
	But I heard similar things on your shows, and I thank you so much for your shows.
	They're so fun and very entertaining and informing.
	Okay, John, I appreciate the call.
	I don't know what that, maybe that was the American equivalent of the Filipino household.
	I don't know.
	Something that was bat-like.
	And the stopping part floors me a little bit.
	I don't know what can fly and what can stop.
	Not in the animal world, anyway.
	Maybe a hummingbird.
	That's about all I'm aware of that can do that.
	Let's go to this line and say it's Jim in Alabama.
	How you doing, Art?
	I've been listening to you for about 10 years now.
	I was an over-the-road truck driver for a while, various other jobs, and I was curious.
	You may have told the audience, but I don't think I ever heard, how did Father Martin actually die?
	Was it in an exorcism?
	No.
	No?
	Have you ever released that?
	The story that I got, Jim, was that Father Martin fell down a step, a stairway, and then was in the hospital for a period of time and then passed.
	So he fell down some steps.
	There are rumors, of course, that there was something else involved, but I don't feel qualified or have the information to comment on them.
	Well, I did hear, I believe it was the second really long interview that you did.
	I want to say it was before George took over, like in 99 or 2000.
	Oh, it would have been long before, yes.
	Was it before then?
	Oh, yes.
	Well, I remember one of the interviews that you had done, it might have been earlier, where he said that when he did those exorcisms, the spirits that he pulled out or that he dealt with or whatever, Stuck around him to torment him for the rest of his life.
	Is that a possibility that it had something to do with his demise?
	Of course it's possible.
	I have no way of knowing for sure, Jim.
	As I mentioned to you, the only thing I know, and toward the end, when Father Martin was in the hospital, those around him controlled the information very strictly, very strongly.
	Almost nothing.
	About his final days got out or about the accident that Allegedly took his life.
	So I you know, I don't know a lot about it I would like to know more but I do know that those who were close to him those that were caring for him simply didn't report very much about what happened at the end.
	I mean, there was just an extreme control of information.
	East of the Rockies, Mary, you're on the air.
	Hey Art, how you doing?
	I'm doing alright.
	I've never talked to anybody on the other side of the world, so thanks, you're my first.
	Okay, I have stumbled upon some strange things here lately, and you're just the person to talk to about.
	I am a registered nurse, and I have been out for several months due to a recent injury.
	And I have met several Muslim, Arab Muslim persuasion, like used car lots, that kind of thing.
	And you know, it seems very, very strange to me.
	They have no family.
	They haven't seen their family in, you know, 15, 17, 20 years.
	Long, long, long periods of time.
	They don't appear to be putting down roots.
	They all seem to go to gather in places like Alabama for the weekend.
	It's very strange.
	And let me tie that to this comment.
	If they ever, or if anyone ever really wanted to do damage to this nation, do you realize that to basically import HIV infected men, young men, single men, with lots of money and access to, you know, whatever kind of indulgence people like.
	Do you realize that before we even realized what had even happened, how many people could be infected?
	Yeah, Mary, I do.
	It's not just HIV either.
	There have been quite a number of novels based on terrorist action of that sort.
	In other words, oh, for example, you get an outbreak of SARS and the Chinese government, of course, very strictly confined the areas.
	You can do that when you're a dictatorship.
	Or bird flu or some other Ebola or some sort of disease of that nature and there have been a number of books and movies based on terrorists getting in, getting a sample of the blood and then simply distributing it across North America and that kind of thing could occur.
	That's the kind of day and age we live in and so when you look at the future I'm sorry to say, that's one of the things that you have to be concerned about when you have a group of people, small or large as you may believe them to be, who simply want us dead.
	People who are willing to sacrifice, it's very, very difficult to stop anybody who's willing to sacrifice their own life to kill you.
	Or I'm sorry to say in this modern day and age, to kill many.
	So that's something we have to worry about.
	If you ever get an opportunity to see 12 Monkeys, be sure and take a look at that movie.
	That's one of them, suggestive of that sort of thing.
	Fourth wildcard line, Roger, in Nebraska, you're on the air.
	With all this technology that we have, for example, me talking to you in Nebraska, you being on the other side of the world, why is it art that they can come up with technology for cordless phones Uh, what I mean by that is, you know the little button on your cordless phone?
	If you ever lose it, you can push it and it'll start beep.
	Your phone will beep.
	It'll let you know where it's at.
	Yes.
	Well, I'm always losing my remote control for my television.
	Why don't they put a button on my TV?
	Well, because we all know it's behind the couch.
	No, it's a good point.
	Why don't they put a button on the TV to press so that your remote control begins to beep?
	It's a very good idea.
	I'm sure some manufacturer out there will hear that and take it up if they haven't already done it.
	All remotes should be equipped with that kind of deal.
	It is amazing, isn't it?
	I marvel, I'm in the communications business, and I truly marvel at the fact that I'm able to sit here on the other side of the world from the great majority of you and conduct a long-form talk show.
	Now again, to the very best of my knowledge, I am the first to conduct a long-form talk show, that means three or four or five hours, whatever, every single weekend from the flip side of the world.
	That's something that, to the best of my knowledge, has not been done before.
	That's not to say reporters obviously have not reported from the flip side of the world, but to do a talk show of this nature Every weekend, from one side of the world to the other, I do believe this is a first.
	It really is a first, isn't that something?
	West of the Rockies, Olin and Culver City.
	How about that?
	Yes, on May the 20th, 2003, Robert Felix said that there is a 100 mile long string of underwater volcanoes, bigger than the Himalayan Mountains, under the Arctic Ocean.
	Now that could account for melting the Arctic ice sheet and killing a lot of fish.
	And I was wondering, those typhoons you've been having that have been built up to record-breaking size, are they coming from an area where there's warm ocean water and underwater volcanoes?
	Not necessarily, Owen.
	The typhoons that we have, I'll get here in pretty much the traditional way.
	Some of them have formed all the way off the west coast of Mexico, as typhoons tend to.
	They begin as hurricanes, of course, off the North American coast and then they travel across the Pacific.
	Now, the reason they get to be so large as compared to hurricanes is because the Pacific is so much
	larger.
	In other words, they have a very great deal of ocean to travel across before they hit land here on
	on the Asian continent. Now, many typhoons also begin very close by. For example, the one we had, the recent one
	we had, actually became a tropical storm and then became
	a typhoon in the space of about 24 hours and it did that.
	Uh, to the, uh, to the, let's see, it would be to the east of the Philippine Islands, and then in just no time at all became a very, very large typhoon and slammed into the Philippines.
	So they can either form very close by or very far away off the Mexican coast is pretty typical.
	Now, as far as undersea volcanoes are concerned, I think it's been pretty well documented that the melting of the Arctic is due to a sort of a runaway process that has begun.
	In other words, as the world begins to warm, as we get more sunshine, the ice melts.
	Now the ice has traditionally reflected sunlight, but as more ice melts, there is more water
	to absorb the sunlight instead of reflect it, and so the process begins a sort of an
	acceleration that feeds on itself.
	That's what the scientists are worried about.
	That we get a kind of a triggering point where it really gets going.
	And we're watching, I should say, the scientists are watching all that very very carefully.
	Let's go to the international line and say hello Charlene from Calvary, Alberta.
	Hello Art, and I'm so proud of you bringing upon to this world the much-needed radio talk show that we needed.
	So having said that, I have a question Art.
	And I have a few comments to follow.
	Shouldn't life be getting better, Art?
	It should be, yes.
	You'd think, eh?
	You'd think we'd be learning something.
	But it should be getting a lot healthier and, you know, all towards more compassion for all living species.
	But if we look at our world for the way it is, the way it's been going, on the path it's been going, there's so much more and more and more corruption.
	And right from the top on down, what chance does anyone have With all that.
	So, I say that what we need on this path of exploitation to life really requires a real purification intervention, Art.
	And in other words, a beyond miracle.
	Because I don't see how individuals can really change this course for what power there is behind it all.
	And I wish for all of us a much better world and sometime soon before it's all gone.
	And we need someone to really make the difference, to have a caring path, to help life, to help
	all of life, not to hurt as it's doing.
	It seems to me that people are being coerced in a very camouflaged manner, and I'm sure
	you're well aware of what I'm speaking of.
	It makes it look as though we have such, what's this?
	That's a great question, isn't it?
	technology, but really it's so barbaric with all this high sophistication it's
	really a barbaric world so what's it all for? I'm not sure Charlene, that's a great
	question isn't it? It sure is Art.
	I- You're- You're very welcome.
	I don't think that we know.
	I really don't think that we know.
	It's like asking, what is the purpose of life?
	And my guest, of course, was talking about the carrying capacity of the Earth.
	I think that really is the big question, and that's population.
	How much population can the Earth really support?
	Well, at some point, Mother Nature may have a word with us about that.
	You know, Mother Nature Somebody said, does not get angry.
	Mother Nature gets even.
	And there's really no evil intent in that.
	It's just that if there get to be too many of us, Mother Nature will figure something out.
	It may be something very small, like a little virus or who knows what.
	This certainly deserves more conversation than we've been able to give it tonight.
	We'll be back tomorrow night.
	We'll have a good guest, Jim Bell.
	I like those bells.
	So from the other side of the world, see you tomorrow night.

▲