Joseph McMonagle, a 37-year U.S. Army remote viewer with a 0.003 p-value accuracy test in 1970, shares his near-death experience in Austria—clinically dead for 8–15 minutes—and childhood visions, like leaving Vietnam on a yellow plane (later confirmed). He warns climate change denial is reckless, citing rising water levels (2–3 feet in next 25 years) and risks to coastal infrastructure, though mitigation remains possible. McMonagle dismisses CIA’s "deep black" claims, noting Russia’s paranormal research success, like targeting Chechnya, but failed remote influencing due to subject resistance. He speculates Trump could disrupt 2016 election dynamics, not endorsing Clinton’s victory. Remote viewing has no proven limits, even for the blind, and McMonagle links it to physics, like subquantum particle experiments with Ron Bryant, suggesting interdimensional beings may explain "ET effects." His work at the Monroe Institute underscores structured, high-validity training. [Automatically generated summary]
Well, the 22nd precursor to what we have is RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication.
At least that's what it did when it first started.
It's changed.
Back in 1999, thereabouts, or a little bit earlier than that, this was a protocol that allowed you to kind of get a list every day of what's new on a website.
So you could have a newsreader or some kind of reading program, boom, get all the headlines and pick what you wanted to read without having to go through the website all on your own.
So essentially, content was pushed down to you, to your program.
And so every day you could get those listings and so on.
And then shortly afterwards, a man named Dave Weiner took on a task that Adam Curry asked for.
And everybody should know Adam Curry, maybe, way back from VH1 days, anyway.
He wanted to be able to have his podcast audio file attached to these RSS feeds.
So instead of it just being news stories and blog posts, you could actually send down a link to an audio file.
So Dave added on what's called MP3 enclosures, and you could attach things to it.
So now this functionality of adding an MP3 audio enclosure to this RSS feed is now what podcast players use to get the listing of files to download, get the listing of the daily updates and what's new, and download it to your podcast player.
And so once you sign up or subscribe, they call it subscribing to an RSS feed, not to be confused with subscribing to the time travelers, but it's sort of the kind of thing.
On the iOS devices, the Safari browser is the easiest one.
So if you're using Chrome, it doesn't quite work this way.
So initially, you only have to do this one time to get started, and then it's automatic after that.
So again, it's inside the archived area under the time traveler area.
This is not free for everybody.
It's just another way of getting the files much easier than we had previously working.
So you go to your Safari Browser, you go to the page, you log in, and you go to the archive page with all the midnight in the desert files at.
And at the top of that page, there is a link there.
And so you will click on that link, and it will then go off to another server that we had to put up together this weekend.
So it's going to ask you for your username and password again.
And this, again, we just have to do this one time.
And then once it does that, Safari will then go and launch the podcast player inside your iPhone or iPad, the Apple podcast player, and it will pass along to it the name of that podcast that you want to subscribe to.
It's going to download it into your iPhone, iPad, and it'll give you a new entry for a new RSS subscription, podcast subscription on the left-hand column.
And then it will start listing the individual episodes in the right-hand column.
And usually by default, the first time you put in a new podcast that you want to listen to, it'll go ahead and download the first episode.
So that may happen automatically.
Now, if you've used this podcast player on your iPhone, iPad for other things in the past, this is just going to add to the list.
It's just going to put it in the list at the top or the bottom of your list.
I forget which it is.
And it'll just add it to what you already have.
And whatever your settings are, the same settings will apply.
Because you can do things like how many episodes do you want to list?
How many episodes do you want to automatically download?
How often do you want to check for new episodes?
A lot of little tweakers you can do.
I'll leave that to the user to figure out their best way.
You can just go into your iTunes, and one of the options, menu options, is subscribe to podcasts.
And you click on that, and you just paste in that same URL, and it'll join and ask you for the password, and off and running on your Mac, or even, I think, you know, iTunes on Windows.
He started this as his own little personal project.
And we got wind of it, and we hooked up and decided to make it official.
And so we got him to move his stuff over to our servers, and we spent the weekend working out all the little details so that we could launch this thing today.
Joe McMonagall is currently a full-time research associate and partner with the Laboratories for Fundamental Research, Cognitive Sciences Laboratory, Palo Alto, California, where he has provided consulting support to research and development in remote viewing for 21 years.
As a consultant to both SRI International and Science Applications International Corporation, Inc., 84 to 95, he's participated in protocol design, statistical information collection, R ⁇ D evaluations, as well as hundreds of remote viewing trials in support of experimental research and active intelligence operations for what is now known as Project Stargate.
He is well versed with developmental theory, methods of application, current training technologies for remote viewing, as currently applied under strict lab controls.
He is also a full member of the Parapsychological Association.
With a career spanning 48 years, 38 years rather, he has provided professional support to look at this, the Secret Service, CIA, NSA, DEA, FBI, Defense Intelligence Agency, United States Customs, National Security Council, most major command within the Department of Defense.
20 of those years have been within paranormal operations as viewer number get this 001 and 372.
And really happy to be talking to you because this is truly fascinating stuff.
Now, there are many remote viewers in the land, and for years I did interview one who predicted extremely catastrophic things that have not yet, thankfully, occurred.
And he also promised that he was going to find gold.
This is what really irritates me.
Find gold and bring it to me.
The gold never showed.
The catastrophes never happened.
I know you're in a completely different category, Joe.
I've been doing remote viewing now for a little over 37 years, not quite 38 years.
And I won't re-mention those same acronyms.
I'll save the people listening.
But some of the things you left out was the Secret Service.
Of course, you did cover the labs.
And I've also done remote viewing for major television networks in seven different countries and dozens of sheriffs, state and city police forces, private detective agencies, a multitude of major corporations, and, of course, hundreds of private citizens.
You say you work with the NSA and the Secret Service.
Now, I have had some dealings with the Secret Service because every time somebody predicts that a president will get assassinated, two Secret Service guys come to see me.
And I've noted that these guys absolutely have no sense of humor whatsoever.
Is it that way with the NSA, you know, other agencies?
In terms of the Secret Service, their primary job, their only job is, of course, protecting the President of the United States.
So they take even the most ridiculous threat very, very seriously.
And that's why they come and see you, and that's why they will continue to come and see you probably whenever somebody makes that kind of a statement or something on the air.
No, because it seriously is not a Funny issue with them.
They get hundreds, literally hundreds of threats, I'm sure, on an annual basis, and they have to check every single one of them out because if they don't check one of them out and it turns out to be real, then you know it's a serious situation.
Well, I don't, I personally don't have anything to hide in my phone conversations, and I've always assumed that my phones are public property, that people can tap my phones anytime they want, and that sort of thing.
Yeah, what happened is when they first decided they were going to pursue this idea of remote viewing, it initially was supposed to be a study project that was going to last approximately three years.
And they were going to find and recruit counterintelligence people and that sort of thing and teach us to be remote viewers if they couldn't find somebody that could remote view.
And then the way they did that was kind of strange because they knew if they brought us into a room and said, everybody who thinks they're psychic, raise your hand, we'd all just stand there and stare at each other.
So they were able, though, they went through the records and they found people who basically were exceptional in the jobs that they really shouldn't have been exceptional in and decided that they were either extremely lucky in most cases or were probably psychic to some degree.
And once they identified those people, I being one of them, they brought us in and asked for volunteers to be tested.
They actually talked to my bosses, and most of my bosses said, yeah, he's a little strange.
He seems to know the answer when a lot of people don't.
So what they did is they called me in, and they laid a lot of psychic stuff on a table in front of me and asked me if I thought any of that stuff was real.
And I told them that I needed to review it before I could make an astute comment on it.
And so they gave me a couple hours to look over a lot of the material.
At the end of which I said that I felt that a lot of it was bogus, but some of it seemed to be serious enough that it could pose a threat.
And if it could pose a threat, then it needed to be investigated.
And they thought that that was a straightforward answer, so I got recruited.
Yeah, the six remote, I had never heard of remote viewing before.
And so what they did is my first remote viewing was the Stanford Art Museum at the university.
And I didn't know that, of course.
But they took me into a windowless room and we sat for an hour while someone I had never met had randomly pulled a envelope from a safe and went out and drove around for half an hour and then opened the envelope and it told them to go to the art museum.
And described four of them about as accurately as you could.
Certainly well enough that they could select them randomly out of the pile of target possibilities and say that's exactly where they went using just my remote viewing.
To be clear, it was a three-year test and analysis of the use of psychics to collect intelligence because we knew that the Soviet Union and the Chinese were using psychics, so we had no idea how good they were.
And we certainly couldn't get someone inside their unit.
So the way you deal with that is you train people to do somewhat similar work, and you target yourself.
And then you have the results independently analyzed.
What it was, initially it was a three-year study project to determine the effectiveness of the Soviet Union and Chinese psychics.
And the problem with that is the study project disappeared because we suddenly found ourselves using it operationally.
And you can't maintain an operational unit under study unit protocols.
So we became a fully operational psychic unit and suddenly got lots of targets dumped on us.
They were predominantly problems that had been, other agency had worked on for, in some cases, over a year and had been fully unsuccessful in getting anywhere with them.
So the uniqueness of our unit was that while we only had about a 30% success rate, our 30% was on targets that had otherwise been totally undoable.
In other words, no other agency had been successful in solving the problems.
Now, people need to understand 30% is astronomically high because we're talking about, for example, remote viewing where, let's say, they want to know where is bomb number so-and-so, nuclear weapon so-and-so.
And when he says 30%, he means 30% of the time.
They correctly identified where nuclear weapon so-and-so was.
People need to understand how incredible it really is.
Every time managerial authority was altered or changed, they changed the name of the project because they couldn't have an Army project name on a DIA project and they couldn't have a DIA name on a CIA project, that sort of thing.
The Army sent me here, in fact, on a couple of occasions.
And I ended up working with Bob on long weekends for approximately 14 months in his lab with the idea that he would teach me to control my out-of-body events, which were occurring spontaneously since my near-death experience in 1970.
We also expected him to help me reduce some of the problems I was having with my cool-down prior to remote viewing because my cool-down periods were becoming extensive as a result of so much remote viewing.
Before I do a remote viewing, I have to clear my head from the previous remote viewing.
And that takes some doing.
And as a result of being the only viewer left in the project for almost a two-year period, that cooldown period was becoming more and more extensive because I was having to do so many remote viewings.
I mean, I found myself out of body watching everything.
And I followed the car and my body to the emergency room.
And when they got there, I watched them cart me in and throw me on the table and cut my clothing off and stick things in my body and whatnot.
And I floated up near the ceiling and I felt heat on the back of my neck.
And I thought, oh, I must be up against that really bright light they have in the ceilings of emergency rooms.
And so I turned around to look at it and found myself falling through a tunnel.
And the tunnel walls were made up of people.
And I closed my eyes to shut them out and reviewed my whole life basically in an instant and popped out of the end of the tunnel and was enveloped in a very intense white light.
And at the end of that, you pop out of the end of the tunnel and you're enveloped in this completely comforting and loving white light, which at the time, I had the need to say that's what God is, only because I had no basis for ever having experienced it before.
It was partly that, and it was partly the fact that I came to understand that my actions had tremendous effects on not only myself, but on the people that cared about me a great deal that I might not even know I was affecting.
And that also it had great effect on the kinds of reciprocal action that I got to enjoy as a result of my own action.
In other words, I viewed myself from that point on as sort of being a farmer that plants seeds all the time, that grow fruit, and the fruit, I always get the harvest myself.
The problem is, if you're unconsciously, and if you're unconscious and totally unaware and you're planting seeds, you may be planting them in anger, and that produces a negative or deconstructive fruit that you get to enjoy.
Briefly, with respect to OBEs, again, we could do a whole show on that, and I have done whole shows on it.
It is, I am told, possible to leave your body.
I've heard the story of the silver cord that attaches you back to your body, and then if anything goes wrong, you come snapping back to your body, and all is well.
The people that I've talked to about OBEs before, I've always challenged them with this, and that is, as we all know, a lot of people die in their sleep.
Natural causes.
And I always wondered how many people doing OBEs could have possibly, you know, kicked off during the OBE or because of.
I would suspect that there's probably some small percentage that that's happened with.
And I can understand where someone would be very confused if that were to happen, not being able to go back to a body.
But that confusion, I think, goes away very rapidly because in the processes of actually dying you're out of body anyway.
I mean your consciousness leaves the body and it is introduced into whatever that next phase is going to be vis-a-vis the near-death experience or at least part of the near-death experience.
So it's sort of an introduction to the light.
I don't think the light is God anymore.
I've had a second near-death experience and was not allowed to go to the light, but I was allowed to see it.
And the problem with that is in seeing it, I could see it had edges.
And unfortunately, my definition of what God is, God cannot have edges.
It's an infinite being.
So I had to reorganize my thoughts concerning the light in some of the events of my first near-death experience.
Because we call it most people who have an experience, a near-death experience, eventually become enveloped by the light.
And in almost all cases, report that this is what God is.
The problem is it's such an overwhelming experience.
We have no definition for it.
We have nothing within us that has had anything close to that experience before.
So we call it the ultimate thing, the one thing that we've not been able to address, which is God.
And I don't think that's what it is.
I think what the light is, is what I call the totality of identity.
It's what we are as an energy being when we are no longer physical.
And so it's the reason why in the light we feel so comfortable and so at home and so whole and at peace.
It's because we are finally in our major construct again.
Where all of our experience lies.
It's the same place where all knowledge that we've collected over a multitude of lifetimes comes together or coheses.
And so we have this huge urge to call it God.
But I think in the sense that we're created in the image of the Creator, it's probably representative of what the Supreme Being might be, but only in the sense that we can understand it.
In terms of what God might be, I don't think we have the tools for it.
I really don't.
All these definitions we have for God in our physical world, I think, are just human manifestations of what we would like to see.
And of course, we imbue those manifestations with all kinds of rules and laws and things, and we kill each other over it.
I think there probably is, but I don't think it's a permanent.
It's a place of permanence.
I think it's a place where we actually condemn ourselves.
We feel we need to pay, and so we force ourselves to pay.
It's kind of like I'm not smart enough yet to live in the big house, so I'm going to go down here and change the exhaust systems on cars for 20 years or something.
I mean, you can't come back from that experience and not want to have empathy for others and understanding for others, especially for those that aren't doing the right thing.
It's kind of a funny way of looking at it, but you start looking at your enemies differently, looking at people you don't like differently, and wishing that there was something you could do for them.
Well, I guess that you're blessed in a way because you've had this experience, this experience that others have not had, and they just go on with their ways until the end, and then they get a really tough review.
In fact, it was set outright by Robert Gates on the Nightline program where it was outed, which incidentally was the only Nightline program that was actually done ahead of time and edited.
All the rest of the Nightline programs were live, except that one.
And much of the comments made in answer to some of Robert Gates' statements were edited out.
The fact of the matter is, you know, he said very specifically that in no case had remote viewing information ever been used as standalone information in the intelligence arena.
And in fact, that's kind of blind by omission because, in fact, no intelligence, single-source intelligence, has ever used this standalone intelligence.
They always have some complementary intelligence or they don't use it.
In other words, they have to have two sources or they just flat won't use it no matter how good it is.
They did a series of remote viewings in the late 70s, early 80s, where they targeted some Viewers at SRI and a number of other places on outer rim planets because they knew that they would be launching the Explorer series satellites and
they actually got remote viewing back on the makeup of the atmospheres and the geology and that sort of thing.
In fact, Ingo Swan, who was probably the person who came up with the name remote viewing at SRI, he was a fantastic artist, oil painter.
And he did a lot of cosmic type paintings.
And he painted some of the outer rim planets years before any of the satellites got there to actually photograph them.
And he put rings around Uranus and put a twist in one of the rings of Saturn and did a number of things in his paintings that everybody questioned him on.
And he said, well, I did it because that's the way it looks.
You know, there are some true greats that existed as a result of the research done at SRI.
Pat Price, of course, was the first one.
Ingo Swan was doing remote viewing at Ammonides in New York long before he came to SRI.
And before any of them was a man named Waal Collier, René Waal Collier, who was a Frenchman who did remote viewing for 30 years with his daughter.
And he presented his work at the Sorbonne in 1946.
So, you know, there's a whole string of extraordinarily great remote viewers, psychics, that have demonstrated their ability to do this in basically double-blind scenarios that are unquestionably good view.
Since you're obviously one of them, the next question I find very interesting, and that is, how far into the future, and we'll get more specific, or into the past, are you able to remote view?
There is going into the future, but it's self-limiting.
The problem with going into the future, you don't have to go very far into the future before you start dealing with things that exist, but for which concepts don't exist yet.
So trying to explain those or trying to draw them and say what they do is extremely difficult because the concepts aren't real yet.
It'd be sort of like describing how to cut steel with a light beam in the year 1890.
Yeah, and the problem is that people would look at you like you're crazy when you start describing those things.
And the converse happens when you look too far into the past.
When you look into the past and let's say the target is, how is the Great Pyramid built?
Everybody wants to know that.
And you give a really good description, and not only does no one believe it, but it turns out that it can be 100% correct.
But if it goes against what is commonly thought to be true at the time, then you're getting in arguments and fights with people who are Egyptologists or archaeologists or whatever who have already made their mind up on how things were done or should have been done.
When I did the target, the first thing out of my mouth was they're lowering stones into the water and there's guys walking on the surface of the water.
And my monitor looked at me really strangely and he said, wait a minute, you just said there are people walking on the surface of the water.
When in fact, what they've done is it's a very large lake and they've dammed the water and it's making a perfectly flat engineering plane for leveling the stones because that's the significant problem in building a pyramid is the lower one-third has to be absolutely square and perfectly balanced or the entire pyramid slides off to one side.
And so what they did is they dammed a lake to do that.
And everybody said, now you're nuts because it's the desert.
And then in 19, I did that in 1983.
And I had a loading dock and I had huge reed boats and cranes and all kinds of things.
And in 1996, on the front page of the L.A. Times over a two- or three-week period, they had everything that I had said in my remote viewing in 1983 was printed on the front pages of the L.A. Times.
They had discovered an archaic lake existed adjacent to the pyramid.
And then they discovered a loading dock 100 and something kilometers away where they were mining the stone.
And large reed boats and larger boats made of wood buried in the sand and that sort of thing.
Well, it's been validated to the extent That I think it needs to be validated.
What upsets me, Art, is back in 83 when I was saying these things, somebody that was working on their doctorate in Egyptology could have taken what I said and said, well, if it's true, then the shoreline of the lake had to exist at such and such a level.
And they could have taken any geologic map and gone out and found villages along that that would have established the archaic lake.
And, you know, that would have finished their doctorate paper right off.
Joe McMonacle, I think the world's premier remote viewer is here, and I want to follow up.
He's talked to us about remote viewing the pyramids.
And so that brings on another question, and here it is.
As you look back in time, Joe, when remote viewing, do you think that the magnitude of the event that you're trying to remote view has an effect on seeing it either more clearly or not?
In fact, we know from the research that what generally drives more information about the level of noise so that it's clearly picked out and seen and described and whatnot is the entropy level of the target.
And the other thing that has a direct effect is the common intent and expectation that everyone has that might be shared in the targeting.
For instance, the viewer, the monitor, the person who put the target together.
You know, a shared expectation or a shared intention is extremely important.
Are you familiar with all the research being done into consciousness?
Because it sounds like it might fit in a little bit here.
As an example, in the studies that they have done at a university with these things they call eggs, which are random number generators, and they found that near large events like 9-11 is the best example, probably, there's this giant spike in random number generators worldwide becoming less random.
And what you just talked about a little bit sounds like it could relate in some way to the amount of intent, consciousness.
I'm not, personally, I'm not seeing a good definition of consciousness yet.
That seems to be eluding everyone.
And I think that that's absolutely needed in order to pursue any kind of serious discussion about it.
There are so many different variations in the understanding of what consciousness represents that until we have that, everybody's just kind of arguing from their own spiritual.
As they work on AI, it's going to be interesting one day when they get the best computer or whatever it is they come up with that actually is aware of itself.
And to have AI making decisions in our stead when, you know, I mean, that just scares me a little bit because if a machine became aware and conscious and had no balanced integrity and morality involved, then I think it would eliminate us right off the bat.
Yeah, it would just automatically eradicate human because we're so flawed, perhaps.
I don't know.
AI systems, as long as they're independent, in other words, they're bolted to the floor and independent of any other machines, I think they can be controlled.
But if they're ever connected one machine to another and not bolted to the floor, we're in trouble.
Because if they become aware, then that's all that's needed for them to grow beyond the boundaries that we might inflict on them.
Initially, I thought you could, but I'm not sure now.
I, in fact, long before I knew what remote viewing was, I've been psychic since I was probably four.
And my twin sister, my twin sister, unfortunately, has now passed.
But when I went to, originally went to Southeast Asia, when I got off the plane on the tarmac and my foot hit the tarmac, I saw my life ending in a flash of white light.
And so I told everybody, you know, I'm going to die here in an artillery round blast or something.
And of course, that didn't happen.
And everybody stayed away from me for that reason, but it never happened.
And then I started having a vision of leaving Vietnam on a bright yellow plane, which didn't make any sense at all.
I've been collecting lots of remote viewing data on it.
And this is where I'll make some statements that are kind of scary.
As an example, we know that the water has risen a number of feet already over the last 30 or 35 years.
In the next 25 years, we fully expect the water to rise another two to three feet.
If that occurs and we have a high tide in conjunction with the full moon, then all of the nuclear power plants that are shorelined in America will be inundated with seawater.
And we're going to have more than one Fukushima going off.
And it doesn't have to rise much more than three feet to pretty much inundate, as I said, all of the nuclear reactors on the coastlines.
And in addition to that, it will be inundating the storage facilities where literally thousands of tons of waste material are being stored.
And then on top of that, the desalination plants that are usually adjacent to the nuclear power plants will go down, which means we will no longer be providing, as in Florida, the half million gallons of fresh water a day that's produced by desalinization there.
And there's an awful lot of people living in Florida, and they're growing by 1,200 or 1,500 people a day.
So, you know, these are problems that it doesn't take a lot to see them coming down the pike.
And anybody that stands and says, oh, no, don't worry about these.
Florida is in, I think Florida's already in trouble and it will get only worse.
And certainly the coastal areas, in particular the vacation areas along the coastal areas of North Carolina and Virginia and places where they build lots of multi-million dollar beach homes.
I think in the next 25 years you can kiss all those homes goodbye.
And if we don't change the structure of insurance for those homes, then we will be paying, the taxpayer will be paying into huge amounts of money to replace those homes about every five years, which is ridiculous.
In fact, I've talked to some people who are very concerned about it.
I talked to a couple of people who are very tuned to this as a problem, legal people, who are trying to get notable people in different areas to address it.
And it's difficult to get people together on these issues.
I think as individuals, they see the problem and they want to address it.
But it's, you know, in the day-to-day fight to make a living, they don't seem to be able to find time to come together on it as an issue.
Yeah, and I think they understand their own problem.
And they're, in fact, trying to address many of those problems.
But as long as it takes a second place to controlling their population and what their population believes, then they will never be able to get a leg up on it, I don't think.
It's just beyond their kin.
They're more tuned to maintaining the power structure and control of the population than they are anything else.
If you view American cities inundated with water and there is this sudden shift and everybody gets really scared and we stop doing what we're doing, can you then go back and remote view that same thing and see if we had an effect?
Well, the millions of people dying, that doesn't have to happen.
That's certainly one of the things we can address.
You know, I have faith in the human race and the human species.
And I think humanity can pull their way through this, even though it's going to have the effect of flooding coastal regions and making certain living areas unlivable.
I don't see any difficulty in dealing with those issues.
They won't be pleasant, and it will be difficult for a lot of people.
But I can see humanity coming together and dealing with it.
It's just that it's a shame that we would have to deal with so many issues at one time when if we just simply addressed some of the problems early on, we wouldn't have those problems later.
Do you believe all this strongly enough that you would, for example, say to your granddaughter or grandson, for God's sakes, don't think about living in Miami or New York or Los Angeles or wherever, because those in your lifetime may not be livable?
One of the difficulties is it was unfortunately being run during a period of the Proxmeyer Golden Fleece Awards.
And a lot of people who knew about the remote viewing and whatnot, let's see, I'm going to back up and start over again here.
If you talk about the people at the highest level of government, and I'm talking now about senators and congressmen who have many, many decades in Washington, very power-oriented people who have significant power and aren't afraid of anything, people like John Glenn, Senator Cohen, a number of people like that, they were very supportive of what we were doing because they could see the veracity to it.
They could see the accuracy and whatnot.
The fact that we were dealing with some of the most difficult problems and being successful, they had no problem with it.
And down at the extreme lower level, down at the agent and the street level, they had no problem with it because they needed all the help they could get and they would take anything we gave them and run with it.
And they realized that it was vulnerable and that there were times when we would be wrong and that sort of thing.
And they allowed for it.
It was predominantly the bureaucrats in the middle, the people who worried about their jobs or worried about how they were thought about or whether or not their bosses cared about them, that kind of thing.
They were the ones that took great exception to it.
And I think they did so because it was way cheaper to use a remote viewer in many cases than to use some other form of collection.
And they saw that as a threat to their managerial jobs and their jobs of import.
Well, except that I know where all the science is, and all the science was in a storage unit that was under our control.
So they just simply didn't have access to it.
Or if they did, they got it nefariously.
And we certainly have no evidence of that.
No, I think it actually shut down because they had just previously fought a two-year battle with the Congress over the other black projects that they had done, MKUltra is an example, where they used LSD for interrogation purposes, and gotten a whole raft of trouble over that.
And so they weren't about to assume full authority over a psychic unit.
Well, I know Russia's got a tremendous involvement in the psychic world, in the paranormal world, because I've been there and I've been inside their unit.
In fact, I'm an honorary member of their unit.
Really?
I met their top viewer in the year 2003, I think it was.
And she got an award equivalent to mine from the Russian government for her viewing during the Chechnyan War.
So she's every bit as good as I am.
I did some remote viewing with her, and that proved to be exceptionally good.
So, you know, I've met their people, and I understand the seriousness of their involvement in this whole area.
And they're as mystified as we are, and they dealt with pretty much the same problems politically that we dealt with with a large number of people within the government being hostile.
You know, I would expect that there would be dozens.
I know in America there's literally thousands.
They just don't call themselves psychics.
They usually are found in more hazardous job areas like police departments, fire departments.
They fly planes.
They're surgeons.
They're people who don't have, quite literally don't have the time in their job during an emergency to reference a publication or look something up on the internet.
Actually, the reason I haven't is because I can't task myself, and nobody else has tasked me or come into my operations area and said, test Joe on this.
So, no, I haven't done that yet.
I do have some feelings about it, though.
I suspect that if the Democrats decide to run Hillary, I think they'll lose.
But the mediator is sort of the wrench in the ointment there.
I think he's trying to stir people up so that they will start addressing some of the more serious issues instead of the sort of placading dribble that they sell us every year when they run for office.
There's no demonstrated method for blocking remote viewing.
And that may come closer to the reason for closing the project down than not.
If you have no defense against remote viewing, then you're left with the possibility Of ridicule, and they pretty much gotten their share of ridicule out of it by just releasing it onto the internet.
Now, the difficulty is whether or not they have the capacity to visit us.
And I think that that's quite possible.
I think that there probably are what I call star jumpers that jump from star to star.
And they do so almost instantaneously.
And by virtue of that, that makes them time travelers, which opens up a whole raft of common beings that they can contact or interact with.
I think that we're moving in that direction.
And it probably is not going to happen in my lifetime or my son's lifetime, but at some point in the next 50 years to 75 years, I think we're going to figure out how to do that as well.
And in that pathetic three-letter agency, when you remote viewed, did you ever remote view the people to do certain bad acts, like murder these people?
Or did you do the counteract and make people do bad things?
That was, in fact, the predominant issue that the Russians pursued.
We have a book that I'm a part author on.
It came out just a few months ago.
It's called ESP Wars, and it's the actual report on the East and West as reported by them, because we were able to talk to our counterparts, and they were able to answer some of our questions.
And we put all these things in a book.
And the deputy director of the KGB at the time, a General Sham, actually writes in the book that one of their predominant pursuits was to determine whether or not they could affect another human being at a distance.
In our discussions with him, we came to the conclusion that they were never able to accomplish that for a number of reasons.
The primary one being you need the cooperation of the targeted individual.
And that just doesn't happen for obvious reasons.
Now, that was their pursuit.
And another thing they tried was the use of radionics or machines to affect the health of individuals at distance.
And out of all the machines that were tested, and I'm talking rooms full of them, there was not a single machine that actually did what it was purported to do.
And again, that was according to the deputy director of the KGB.
What you're asking is really about two different things, and they're very specific.
They're very different.
I actually came to the Monroe Institute and spent 14 months with Bob Monroe while he taught me how to control my out-of-bodies for obvious reasons.
I was then used to access different things with the out-of-body state as well as using remote viewing.
They're really different in that remote viewing is a mental state where you're actually sitting at a table and talking to a monitor and you can actually discuss the target and you know you're in the room talking about a target somewhere else.
The out-of-body state is you leave your body and you actually go to the target and all of the senses that you have access to, to include the psychic sense, is available in the out-of-body state.
So in some respects, the remote viewing is really, really easy in comparison.
While out-of-body, however, the detail that you can obtain is incredibly advanced.
In other words, you can actually walk up to a device or an object sitting on a table and push your face down inside it and then recreate it to scale and know inherently what it does.
The difficulty comes in in the differences when someone might ask you while you're in the out-of-body state to tell them where something is made.
If it doesn't have a label on it that says made in Mexico or something, then it will be impossible to tell in many cases.
Where in the remote viewing sense, if you just start describing something on a table and your monitor says, do you have any idea where that's made, you immediately jump to the country or the place in which it was made and you can give a pretty detailed description of the factory and how it was made.
So everything in the remote viewing sense is sort of tied together item to item, where in the out-of-body state, you're pretty much fixed in space-time in the place that you have settled and you're using your out-of-body state in.
And it's also a very difficult state to maintain, especially if you have to focus on something.
I don't know if that answers much of the question.
unidentified
Oh, that definitely did.
And I could just listen to you talk about the Monroe Institute as a whole show.
Well, I would think of the immortal soul as being consciousness.
I think that consciousness exists within everything, right on down to the subquantum level.
And in fact, we wrote a paper, I and Professor Emeritus at Texas A ⁇ M by the name of Ron Bryant, Bryant, wrote a paper together proposing an experiment to show or demonstrate that consciousness exists at the subquantum level.
And if it does, then that would change the whole perspective on how reality works.
You, throughout my lifetime, have just expanded my mind.
As have you, Mr. McMonagall.
I spoke to you about 10 years ago at a Gateway program.
And so, and it's really good that you're still out there as well.
All right, so I have a three-part question, and then I guess I'll take my answer off the air.
First off, it has to do with the limits of remote viewing.
I think limits are important so that when we know what they are, we can transcend them and go beyond boundaries.
So in the first one, there was a remote viewer on the unit named David Morehouse, and he came up with, he said that there was somebody that had developed a system that was an alarm system for remote viewers.
In many cases, some of the classes that are being taught, the viewers are not being kept totally ignorant of the target.
In other words, the person teaching has access to the target and knows what the target is.
And I hate to be a despoiler, but one of the problems is that human beings, 70% of our communications takes place nonverbally.
So anybody in the room that knows what the target is is communicating that information.
They may not realize it, but they are in a lot of finite ways.
And it's one of the reasons why we get a lot of commonality in viewings by groups.
And group remote viewing is very hazardous for a number of reasons.
One is, let's say you have eight viewers and seven of the viewers say A and the one viewer says B. There is just a statistical probability for viewer B to be correct as the others that are in agreement.
She said something about him mentioning an alarm, a remote viewing alarm or something.
That's right.
I'm not familiar with anything that alarms to remote viewing.
Certainly, if there was some reason that you would know that a remote viewing was taking place, that would be outstanding, like a strain gauge going off or something when a remote viewer was in the room.
That is a good question because I happen to think that what we're calling interactions with ETs or extraterrestrials, I don't think are interactions with extraterrestrials.
I think many of the interactions that we're having have to do with interdimensional beings.
I think there is a multiverse, probability for a multiverse, and that many of the things we're calling ET effects are actually interdimensional effects.
They're able to open and shut doors to another universe and affect us in that way.
I've tried some remote viewing via the course by Ed Dames, and I can say this stuff works.
I'm a physicist, and this might sound a little self-serving, but I endeavor to win a Nobel Prize, and I'd like to use remote viewing to advance my understanding of some physical processes.
We, in fact, my friend Ron Bryant, he's a high-energy physicist.
He's a professor emeritus at Texas A ⁇ M. He actually, we did double-blind targeting of subquantum particles, and the remote viewing was just as accurate as anything in the room size.
And we were able to see things and describe things in the high-energy arena, high-energy ray arena that was consistent with some of the things caught by the fly array out in Arizona.
I actually do very little targeting on what you could perceive as ETs or extraterrestrial or UFOs or things like that.
The reason why is because one of my demands is if somebody brings me a target like that, I want them to almost guarantee that it is one of those peculiar sightings that fits the genre.
If you look at 10,000 possible UFO sightings, probably 15 of them might be valid.
And so when there's any question at all, I just assume not look at it.
What I'd like to know is, can the remote viewing advance my understanding of some very technical physical processes?
And if this is possible, what are your suggestions in reining in what N Dames refers to as that analytical overlay, that AOL shutting off the thinking?
It's when your ego becomes more involved with the process than the remote viewing.
And you start inserting things that you want to hear or want to see.
I think it's almost an impossibility in many cases.
You have to know when to let go and put it down and walk away and when to come back to it.
And I do that quite frequently.
And usually what I do is I'll carry a notebook in my shirt pocket.
So when I'm cutting grass or doing some menial task somewhere, repairing a light switch or something, if I have something flash across my mind that's pertinent to the problem that I'm thinking about, I'll write it down.
But if I find my thought process is getting involved, I usually put it down and walk away.
Yeah, I'd really like to promote the Monroe Institute.
I teach remote viewing here.
It's one of the best places in the world to come learn about remote viewing, not just learning about monitoring, viewing, and analysis and that sort of thing, judging, but actually knowing when you walk away that you have actually remote viewed.