Clif High - 20130504 – Clif High Audio #34

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 4, 2013 - Clif High

01:41:50

20130504 – Clif High Audio #34

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good morning.
	It's uh 5.07 a.m.
	May 4th, 2013, uh here in the Pacific Northwest of North America, Planet Terra.
	Uh, we're supposed to be hot for the next week or so.
	They've kind of slacked off on the chemtrails, and that's what always happens.
	We get clear skies and entirely different weather.
	So that'll be a nice change.
	Uh maybe.
	We'll see.
	Uh the people up here in the Pacific Northwest are referred to as moss bags because the it's rainy and moist up here in uh Washington that um moss grows on your back, and uh so you know, if it gets too hot, the moss dries out and you feel a little uncomfortable.
	Anyway, so today's Wujo is all about uh the global coastal event.
	But before we get into that, I needed to stop and um talk for a second about fear.
	Um let me go way back.
	I like to think about things really deeply, and I used to have a lot of time to do that when these corporations were shoving me into these aluminum cans and shipping me all over the planet uh to do work upon arrival.
	And so in the transit time, I would sit there and think about things.
	And I thought about emotions for a long time and uh applied that um thinking to our work by going through uh basically um stripped down version of the Oxford English language dictionary to start and applying emotional numeric quantifiers to each and every one of the words that made sense.
	Didn't do articles and some of the prepositions and such.
	Anyway, um and so I uh the nature of the thinking about emotions uh led me to discover that uh fear is entirely based in the in fact the entire complex of fear emotions are entirely based in the solar plexus area in your around your abdomen.
	Turns out you've got this uh second neural mass that uh uh very much like the same exactly the same kind of neural mass that you have in your brain, only this surrounds your intestines and connects to the brain by this um uh vagus nerve at the back that runs up along the spine.
	And uh that's how you get fear impulses.
	So um uh there's other other emotions that come from the gut, um, and we get some real intelligence from there, but we also can get overwhelmed by the fear emotions.
	Uh fear emotions do not live in your brain.
	Uh you can get all kinds of um fixations or complexes and that are associated with fear, but the fear itself comes from your gut.
	So a couple of things uh before we get into the data here.
	Anytime one finds oneself in a situation where you recognize that you're being trapped by fear, you will note that your stomach area knots up.
	Your breathing becomes shallow because your stomach area is knotting up, it's preventing the diaphragm from really extending down.
	And so you're breathing in the upper uh part of your lungs.
	That's a uh very key clue that you're getting into a fear mode.
	And so one thing you can do to get out of that is to deliberately explicitly breathe very deeply by inhaling in such a way that the diaphragm goes down and the abdomen fills up.
	So you're not trying to fill up your uh the top part of your lungs, you're trying to fill up the very deep part of your lungs.
	And if you'll actually do that, you can break this uh fear grip that is on you because it will force your body to relax around the abdomen, and the body is really weird.
	The mind can control it, or uh it or the body can control the mind, the pathway goes either direction.
	And so these parasympathetic uh nervous system things like the uh ability to control your breathing or to allow it to be automatic, allow one to get at these emotional complexes such as fear.
	So all you have to do is just breathe in deeply all the way into the abdomen, and it causes the muscles around your stomach to relax, and if you do that a couple of times, you will notice the fear going away.
	Um it gets to the point with uh people that are in uh you know um uh combat situations, um, not not and also people that are I'm sure um artists and performers who have performance anxiety, you'll frequently see that they do breathing exercises.
	Or more commonly, if you have uh public speaking anxiety and so forth, you may find yourself vomiting.
	Well, that's the ultimate expression of the fear.
	It's got such a good control over your your uh internal um organs and everything that's squeezing and pumping in all those hormones, and you've just got to get everything out because it just is extremely uncomfortable under there.
	And so another thing you can do if unless it's you know absolute nausea, if it's fear-induced nausea, you can uh usually get rid of it by plugging up one nostril with your finger, just push on the outside of your nose.
	Doesn't matter which one really, and uh breathe in with the other one very deeply, and then alternate.
	In doing this alternating breathing for two or three breaths in each nostril, you'll find that you will have calmed down your internal organs and may indeed have removed any kind of a um threat to fear-induced vomiting.
	So, now that having been said, the reason I bring it up is because there's a whole lot of people that are very afraid of the um uh future and the potential for uh what our narrative has called the global coastal event.
	Now bear in mind that's my narrative.
	I chose those words.
	The reason I chose those words will be explained as we go forward here, but what I want to caution everybody is these are uh words that were highlighted by my intelligence, which is warped by my experience,
	and so my narrative need not be a defining one for your experience of the future, should we go through um and I'm quite sure we will uh any level of uh nastiness uh uh in these next uh few months and years.
	And so you get to define your own narrative, you get to define uh those events that you go through, and you need not be bound by mine, and thus the words that I choose should not be used as a source for your fear of these upcoming events.
	Uh you know, I have a tendency towards choosing specific words that are um uh more on the extreme side, especially when it comes to the uh negative extreme, simply because of the way in which language presents itself in our work, and because of the juxtaposition of that with my own twisted mental state, in which I prefer certain levels of drama.
	I mean, I used to read Edground Poe and this kind of thing.
	So there are certain word sets that are attractive to me, and they will naturally appear and be uh extracted should they appear.
	And this is one of the things that is indeed caused uh a potential issue with what I have called the global coastal event.
	Uh first off, it's not a single event, it's a series of earth changes, uh solar system changes, actually, that we're gonna live through or not.
	Many of us will not live through them.
	And in fact, uh everybody alive should note one thing.
	At some point in the future, you won't be.
	And so you need to get reconciled to the idea that your death, your mortality, um, is something that you live with, and you need to adjust your reality such that it's just part of what you do.
	And now, it may be that we all are um precipitously uh propelled into uh confrontation with our mortality by upcoming events, and again the discussion on fear.
	Remember, breathe deeply, bust up that fear grip on your abdomen, and then you can think a little better.
	Okay, so our fear knots and and uh nausea and so forth are gone.
	And so we think for a minute about uh the narrative that um uh cliff at Half Past Human has come up with that he's labeled the global coastal event and how it occurred.
	And uh that began in 2003 with this particular data set that uh started arriving, uh mainly filled with longer and and shorter term value sets.
	And um uh these uh data sets uh were interpreted, and it and we had a bunch of strange kind of data in there.
	We had uh sets that seemed to indicate that fishes would be swimming over the steps of a capital, as in um you know, a capital of a country or a city or something like that, or a state or something.
	And we had data sets that showed the water retreating from the coast and causing problems with um ports.
	And then we had data sets with the water coming back in and flooding out the ports, uh including refineries and such.
	Uh we actually had both sets.
	It wasn't as though there was a um a connection such that it was a description of action as opposed it was a separate set of descriptors.
	So we had a one set of descriptors that said that some ports would have water retreat.
	And we had other sets that said water would inundate.
	And we would get into flooding.
	These are not mutually exclusive, or would only be so if applied to the same port.
	And there was nothing in our geographic data that seemed to suggest that was the case.
	So I don't know that the water is going to slosh out and come back in tsunami style.
	Just that we had some data sets saying, here is the situation.
	Then we move our model space a little bit forward.
	By a day or so.
	And we see that there's a generalized retreat from the coastal area.
	That much of the coastal infrastructure is damaged to the point of not being usable at the moment.
	And needing vast levels of repair.
	We saw data that said electricity would be lost.
	That nuclear power plants would be damaged.
	Coast-based power plants would be damaged.
	That ports would be gone.
	That bridges would collapse.
	That in some regions, we would have issues with inland flooding overtopping things like levees.
	And it couldn't get out.
	And so there'd be like new inland seas.
	There'd be oceanic intrusion into low-lying inland basins.
	And so on.
	Your basic, what I ended up calling the global coastal event.
	Showing pretty much a generalized destruction and devastation of the coast all over the planet.
	Now our global coastal event was never simultaneous.
	We actually had some clear indications that the water issues for Finland would be a lot less, much more mild, and a lot later than the water issues for Los Angeles.
	And this naturally follows because it takes a long time for energy to move all around the planet in the oceans.
	So our global coastal event was not simultaneous.
	Not all coasts are going to be involved simultaneously.
	Now, in our 2003 data set, as with all of our data sets, we don't really get a date.
	Rarely would there be any bespoke date in the in the data pop-up where it says, you know, uh March 16th, uh, you know, 2013 or anything.
	We just don't get that.
	Uh we do have indicators of time, and uh we basically sort of count days and see uh get an estimate of time from the appearance of the data to the uh the period in which the data seems to be forecasting uh some manifestation.
	And so our approach to time, uh global coastal event and all other things included, is um not fixed.
	We don't have a calendar date, it's not in any way uh calendar-based.
	It's it's uh fundamentally a oh, we started the picking up these data sets here on this day, and these data sets seem to be affecting us in 16 days, so we count out 16 days from the day we got the data set.
	Now, in some cases we were counting out years, decades even.
	And so uh in 2003, we first started getting uh these data sets for what later I termed the global coastal event, because of course the data came on slowly, sporadically, and was collected and stored and then eventually looked at.
	It didn't come in as whole cloth.
	The data sets uh uh began in 2003, and the largest mass of them were acquired over the next four years up through 2007.
	And we got a very large um picture view of what was termed the global coastal event by then.
	And uh it's global and it's coastal around all the coasts of the planet, we'll feel some effect of it the real misnomer I think is event I should probably have uh chosen some better phrase but we're stuck with it now uh the chain of events within our global coastal event we had no initiating time for uh initially in 2003 I thought it might be 20 years out because it was at the very far edge of our long-term data and
	And then other elements that were within that set started showing up in other sets as basically setups or precursors to this overall thing.
	This overall series of phenomena that basically we could call a round of earth changes or whatever that I had labeled a global coastal event.
	Now, some of these precursors, even as early as 2003 and 2004, had happened because within that global coastal event data set set were the early sets for a bunch of earthquakes including the Banda Achi earthquake and sad to say it was the accuracy that we had with the data for the Banda Achi earthquake and tsunami that leads us to believe that the global coastal event data is accurate.
	So I'll have to explain that we had numbers which were very rare show up with the Banda Achi earthquake where uh two particular sets were headed by the phrase 3000 um dead and then the other phrase was a nation kicked back to a previous age and it was Stone Age.
	And in both cases we were uh surprisingly accurate in those numbers about eight months before the event and uh and accurate about the effect of the um tsunami in terms of uh turning Banda Achi basically back to the Stone Age, washing everything away.
	And so those were within the same set of data that brought out the um other elements that we came to call the global coastal event here and discuss it under those terms.
	So it's not just a random data set it's a dataset that has a track record.
	As we've gone forward over time a number of the elements within this data set have indeed shown up so far there have been very few that have not and those that have not are associated with basically the onset of the global coastal event.
	All the others that were precursors if you will within that same data set have indeed manifested so that gives us a great deal of confidence sad to say that some element of the global coastal event descriptors will indeed manifest.
	Does that make sense?
	It's basically a data set that um is so large that we can track some of the elements and if they appear and we get a very high level of those things appearing relative to the others then we're more confident of the others showing up sooner or later.
	It's kind of like well if you started down a trail in the woods and you found a breadcrumb and then another breadcrumb and another bread crumb you'd start to get to expect more breadcrumbs would show up and and the odds are that you might be right in a sense if you're following a trail of them.
	Again I need to note that our global coastal event had no data um explicitly pointing to a year.
	We had a number of sets that seem to indicate that the initial onset of the data was at least 10 years away from the onset of these series of changes that we had lumped together under the term global coastal event and so that would have placed it in 2013 from the point of appearance in the year 2003 and we now find ourselves in the year 2013 and we're contemplating this situation.
	The data has over this period of time shown that that data set was very prescient indeed we've mined it for all that was worth and it was very very productive.
	So we are at this stage and now we end up having to basically ascertain how much anticipation do we put in on the remaining parts of the words that go towards this global coastal event.
	And you have to understand like I say that I had no other than accounting that seemed to indicate at least 10 years out I had no date assigned to our global coastal event.
	So I was just you know basically fat young and happy well actually I was um uh old thin and uh miserable but but happily collecting data um without any really um anticipation of any kind of a terminus or a finite um uh line in the sand sort of thing.
	And um the data sets that I had showed certain um context would exist at the time of the global coastal event.
	There would be all these things going on that we could say were uh part of the background in which this uh coastal event would appear.
	Some of these things would be the Israeli attention Israeli tension with their neighbors.
	Some of these things would be Middle Eastern war, people actually on a battlefield somewhere shooting at each other.
	Didn't have to be Middle Eastern, it was more desert described, could be anywhere on the planet that was desert-like.
	And you know, we've got people in Mali, we've got uh wars all over Africa and so on.
	So this part of it is actually uh manifesting as well.
	We had uh economic distress described, we had social unrest described, uh we had um uh governments gone batshit described, uh we had banks gone crazy, uh basically a lot of the context in which we are currently living had ten years back, over the course of this past ten years been described very accurately by the data sets about this particular point in time.
	Now, we also had one real good clue uh that that um was buried within the data itself about the global coastal event, and that was this thing that I called the data gap.
	Now, the data gap uh was actually a series that was forecast as a series of data holes that would form uh tunnels in the data, if you will, uh the way holes are formed in Swiss cheese.
	Uh and ultimately all of the holes would um uh join together to become one big long large data gap.
	And uh this data gap would be a um uh project killer for us in the sense that we wouldn't be able to work after that because our input data streams would not be um accessible, and so we would be out of business.
	And so this was like, oh, well, okay, I see this forecast here.
	It's interesting that the data gap was uh forecast in the same set as the um uh main part of the global coastal event, because we now find ourselves actually in a period of time when these data holes have formed.
	Initially, the data holes started in 2011 as a forecast with the Arab Spring, where the governments tried to shut off parts of the internet, and then uh there was a quiet quiescent period, which was forecast as well, and then the growth of the uh holes again,
	and then another slightly smaller um quiescent period, and then an on rush of the uh growth of the holes in a very large Swiss cheese fashion until it becomes um uh just a big giant data gap for us.
	And what we ran into was indeed uh manifest.
	We had the Arab Spring, we've had since then we've had other issues with the internet, and now we find ourselves in a situation where our spiders are collecting software, are running into uh the background warfare that's going on in the internet, and this is causing uh the spiders all kinds of fits, and they're just simply not able to work, and it's created this Swiss cheese holes effect.
	And we're spending a lot of time trying to recover um data from the spiders or through the spiders or re re load things and are simply not able to function, and it has grown very rapidly over these last 45 or 50 days, as was forecast.
	Now, initially, when the data holes were forecast way back when in 2003 and 2004, uh I used to fight with a fellow by the name of George Ur because he was quite convinced that it would be the physical destruction of the internet.
	I thought it would be something weird and and uh quite strange, you know, uh space aliens um playing tunes across our internet and we would all be entranced or something, who knew?
	Uh never ever had I figured it would just be something as mundane as corporations and governments attacking each other across the um uh platform of the internet and thus causing problems with the very rapidly cycling uh data acquisition spiders.
	Uh so um plus all the DDOS attacks on our own routers uh have just caused us fits as well.
	And so that's that's kind of where we were.
	We had a uh situation where, as uh as a part of the context of the background of the global coastal event, there was this data gap.
	And the data gap has indeed formed.
	Now I had no indication if there was a time lag between the full formation of the data gap and the global coastal event.
	It seemed to occur almost simultaneously from our viewpoint in 2003, but of course it would, because basically the data was coming back and saying you'll go blind, oh, and you'll get hit by this global coastal event.
	They may or may not be happening at the same time, but from your perspective, you can't tell now uh what's gonna what's going to go on.
	It'll it'll look like it's happening from the same perspective or the same time period.
	And our perspective in 2003, all the way through to this particular point has indeed held true that if the what we'd called the global coastal event series of um things was going to occur, it would occur after the data holes had manifest and they have manifested.
	And that's kind of where I was.
	Like I said, I was, you know, uh old bald and miserable, uh, but happily collecting my data up through 2007 and into 2008.
	And um then we got more confirmation that the data sets were correct as we started getting into the real uh degradation of the economic structure, which again was forecast within that data set.
	And um just kept bundling right along until in 2010 I encountered the Farsight.org uh quote climate study.
	Uh so in 2010, we encountered the Farsight.org um uh climate study, and their uh descriptor sets within the way in which remote viewing works were rather just disturbing.
	And the element that was uh disturbing was that they had in the little pictures, you have to go to Farsight.org, you choose the uh 2012 um tab, and you go and you look at their quote climate study, and you'll see that it's done in this RV fashion, remote viewing fashion, in which there's all these little squares of uh pictures and uh uh word collections.
	The word collections are quite similar to some of the stuff we do, in that uh it presents the words in a similar fashion.
	And a lot of the words that they're using are at the high end of the emotional uh numeric values that we assigned for duration um uh intensity, impact, uh carry values, etc.
	And so I was able to interpret the far site.org study in a way that perhaps others had not, leaving aside the drawings and just concentrating on the text, I found it to be somewhat disturbing because much of the text in there replicated what we had had for our global coastal event.
	Now, the really cool part about the farsight.org study was that we have a definitive date, June 1, 2013.
	The way in which the study was designed, um let me state I've talked about this in a previous WuJo, probably a couple of them.
	I do not think that that study um uh uh uh confirms the goals that they think it does.
	I don't believe in multiple timelines.
	I believe that that's a misinterpretation.
	I believe that universe provided us with a set of um uh surprising clues in that study, and that we need to look at those in and of themselves, uh, absent the uh framework that the designers put around the study.
	Now, it was brilliantly designed, and then it took the humans totally out of the loop in terms of the connection of the remote viewer to the actual targets, etc.
	And in this, and in so doing, it was running in what I call serendipitous mode, where universe was able to intrude and bring us some information.
	And this is why I think it's valuable, is because it was run in a serendipitous mode, not deterministic, not trying to discover something specifically about the time, but uh rather examining these places relative to June 1, 2013.
	Now, this is rather key because here we had a juxtaposition of the same data sets that we had, or same linguistic sets being expressed in this far sight.org study, only the far site.org study brought in something that we did not, which was this definitive um will have happened by date of June 1, 2013.
	And so I was able to then plot, this was um a couple of years back, start plotting the far sight.org study material against ours, and sure enough, it looked like 2013 was a good fit.
	And we had always had 2013 as being filled with some of these other elements, but as I say, we had no real clue if there was a gap distance between the data gap appearing, uh distance in time between the appearance of the data gap and the actual appearance of these other things that we'd called the global coastal event, or I had called the global coastal event.
	Could have been a year, could have been two days or five minutes or 20 years.
	There was just no way of telling from our data sets.
	The Farsight.org study provided us with something that we had not had, which was this definitive date.
	Now, if you go and look at the Farsight.org study, you can draw your own conclusions from their results.
	I've drawn a number of them, I've discussed it.
	There's a whole lot of people at various different remote viewing forums that are discussing and have discussed the Farsight 2012 study.
	So we needn't spend any time on that here.
	It does replicate and show uh damage to Africa, Australia, Hawaii, uh, and parts of continental United States as a result of what I had termed the global coastal event.
	It brings in some elements that I had not had and leaves out vast quantities that I do have.
	Um because it's divergent, it is looking at things from a different viewpoint.
	And so, but anyway, so we here we had this um uh June 1 uh date.
	Now, last year um when the uh study was unveiled and everything, uh, and we had the June 1, excuse me, 2012, in uh when we had the June 1 2013 date definitively, at that point I was presented with a um opportunity to uh engage with uh remote viewers, uh, some of whom had indeed participated in the 2012 study with far sight.org.
	And um I I took advantage of that and I uh designed with them very rapidly this thing that I called a validation study.
	I wanted to validate the linguistic sets that I had for my uh global coastal event and the linguistic sets and drawings that had shown up in the far sight.org.
	And so here's something that's really key.
	I did also not I did not run this deterministically.
	I did not state in our um uh validation study uh to the uh controller here show me uh the impact of the global coastal event um on my local area.
	I did not say uh define for me the global coastal event in any way, shape, or form.
	I used a uh context matrix that is linguistically similar to what I'm going to tell you now.
	It's so linguistically similar because I went through and took the trouble to match the tone all the way through.
	I don't want to reveal too much about the validation study because it brings in elements that are purely personal.
	But I'll tell you that basically what I did was in my validation study with the Hawaii Remote Viewers Guild, which were the people that were involved in the Farsight.org study, I asked uh for the answer to the following question.
	Now, this is a paraphrase, this is a different question, but it has the same emotional tonality as to the one I asked.
	So it's fundamentally the same.
	What I did was I asked, will I have dirty laundry to do in my house on May 26th?
	And let it go at that.
	The reason that I did so was to see if universe serendipitously would provide me with any information.
	If it came back and said, Yeah, you've got to have a bunch of dirty laundry to do, and no big deal.
	Well, hey, then we knew that uh then we could say that well, the far site.org study may have a lot of stuff going on in it, but it's not our global coastal event.
	Because within our global coastal event, there were some very specific uh indicators for activities here in the Pacific Northwest, which should be picked up, and some of those linguistics should show up if the validation study was looking at the same period of time and assuming that the remote viewers were uh Good and so on.
	Now I have to state the remote viewers scare the crap out of me.
	These people are extremely good.
	They can, you know, remote view and count the hairs on the on a gnat's ass from 5,000 miles away while the gnat's sleeping.
	So you know, they're there it's staggering.
	I had no idea of the technology and the capability of it.
	Uh it's is truly uh engaging.
	Uh so that aside, um uh we I can say that the remote viewers do know what they're doing.
	Now, so this validation study that I did was about my dirty laundry on May 26th.
	Sad to say, it brought back all kinds of information saying you won't be doing dirty laundry on May 26th because there won't be electricity, there's going to be a big bloody earthquake in your area, people will be isolated, and this kind of thing, and there'll be all kinds of um disruptions in your life personally.
	And the disruptions as they're described are uh include a lot of the same um uh top-level descriptors as we had in our original 2003 data set for what would happen in my local area, which is in the Pacific Northwest of North America.
	Uh so there we go.
	So my validation study with the Hawaiian Remote Viewers Guild was based around the idea of my dirty laundry, and serendipitously, universe said, uh don't worry about the laundry, you know, you're gonna get hit uh with this giant earthquake, and there's gonna be all kinds of other problems, and you just won't care about the dirty laundry for some time, nor will you have any electricity or running water to deal with it.
	Uh, which pretty much validates the the global coastal event.
	Now it did so with some other details, and and we learned a great deal.
	Now, I also did a validation study with a group of people from Europe, and the uh that that validation study was designed differently.
	I had more time, I constructed a little bit more elaborate matrix, it brought back a little bit more information, but I have to say that I think that the Hawaiian Remote Viewers Guild has a superior protocol and superior uh remote viewers and superior accuracy demonstrated so far.
	Now the the uh European or Belgian study, as I call it, uh, is not uh worthless.
	It has some good information, it is just not as um uh accurate or detailed due to the protocol being used, and so it just is not quite as meaningful as some of the things that came back from the um uh Hawaiian uh remote viewers guild.
	Another element is the gender issue.
	All of the uh participants in the Belgian study are male.
	Uh we have female um participants in the Hawaiian Remote Viewers Guild, the gender makes a big difference because the minds work differently, and women bring back different information than men that I find to be very much more meaningful given the circumstances.
	Um the the information that men bring back is is useful and interesting and um uh descriptive uh but uh it actually is not as um contexturally meaningful as what was provided by provided by the uh female remote viewers simply and I think this I know this is gender-based,
	but I think it has to do with the issue of um uh women being able to key in on relationships in a far more uh subtle and nuanced way, and they may indeed even be able to bring in information about relationships at levels that men are totally incapable of even sensing,
	and so the uh texture of the information that they brought back was a lot richer in terms of some of the uh nuances uh with it about the context in which I would be living, and those context nuances are appearing, they are manifesting.
	So I know that the remote viewers uh uh both Hawaii and Belgium were prescient in the sense that a year ago they saw things occurring, and these things are occurring as we speak.
	We're going through some of the things being manifested.
	I was really stupid.
	If you ever get a chance to do this, don't use your own life as an anchor.
	It really screws your mind over because you know too much, and you try and monkey about with time and you waste a lot of energy.
	So just a bit of advice.
	Now, let's get on with the global coastal event stuff.
	So let me do a quick rundown.
	We had data, data had no data associated with it.
	In 2012, we got a date, which was the uh earlier than 2012.
	We we had a date which was came in through the far site.org validation study or um uh climate study, they called it.
	The validation studies that I had also used a definitive date slightly ahead of the um far sight.org study.
	And um my validation studies were done in serendipitous mode, just allowing universe to provide whatever it wanted basically off of an innocuous question.
	It provided information that said you're screwed, a global coastal event coming on in.
	Get ready.
	It didn't say the get ready part, that's my paranoia speaking.
	Anyway, though, so the validation studies in my uh conclusion, in my estimation, uh were extremely uh worthwhile doing, and we must uh all of us give great thanks to the Hawaii Remote Viewers Guild, uh,
	which I won't get into anybody's name other than uh Dick Algyre, he's the um uh my contact there, and they've done just huge amount of work in um uh validating this, which allowed me to get really um fierce about it and keep hammering on people, and maybe indeed lives have been altered and saved as a result of um the Hawaii Remote Viewers Guild's work.
	I think so.
	I know they've altered my life, and I've done things to alter those of uh others.
	So um thank them very much.
	If you ever get a chance to shake their hands, you go you guys go and do so.
	Anyway, um so we now have a definitive date, June 1, it will have occurred by then, but get this, guys.
	My global coastal event was the initiation, insofar as certain events were concerned relative to uh the mainstream media, but it's the initiation of a series of events, a period of time.
	It is not a single event.
	So there we need to discuss what it is and what it is not in terms of the global coastal event.
	What it is, as I say, is a series of events, a group of earth changes that I just lumped together into a single narrative that were that is initiated by what I call the global coastal event.
	In our descriptor set, we did not have the same kind of uh location descriptors that were within the far site.org.
	So I saw it uh much more vague because I didn't know that that it would necessarily start in a particular area, although we did indeed key in on the same uh South Pacific uh region as the point in which it would start.
	Um they were much more specific, uh being able to nail the time and the date and so on, as well as uh also direction of um uh some of the action.
	Uh you know, that so insofar as um uh some of the various places.
	If you go and look at the far sight.org study, you'll see that you can ascertain what direction the waves come from in various different places.
	Um and so that gives you some ideas to where the point of origination is, insofar as those specific points.
	Um Fort Mombasa, Sydney, etc.
	And so um uh what our global coastal event was was a multiple year series of events that I actually thought uh began with energies from space, and later on, as we went through this process,
	my knowledge and uh thinking on this um uh matured, and I uh came to the conclusion that this is a result of an expansion event, that the Earth is actually expanding outward, uh growing larger, and there's gonna be all these cracks and sinkholes and so forth that are going to form, and then one day there's going to be a big crack in the Pacific plate, which was going to cause all of our what I had called our global coastal event.
	Uh the global coastal event can be described as a whole series of earthquakes that occur relatively close to each other at a very large level.
	Now, those indeed are uh planet wide and um uh close to each other uh simultaneous in many cases.
	And the um uh uh earthquakes cause all kinds of damage, they are their own set of problems, they continue for a number of years as they wind down uh in smaller and smaller and smaller levels of aftershocks and everything sort of settles out.
	Uh that number of years might be 25 or 30 or 40 before you could get to a point where you could consider it to be uh uh over in terms of this earthquake initiator.
	During the period of time of the earthquakes, the the crack, we also get giant um waves, uh displacement waves, not on the order of five and six and eight hundred feet high.
	Such things are not possible under our gravity Unless very specific things occur.
	And we don't have the conditions for those very specific things.
	Rather, what we were seeing was a series of waves that in some cases would resemble tsunamis in that water would leave coastlines.
	In some of those, the sets said that the coastline rises up, and so the water is further away, and this is a permanent condition.
	And so what may be a waterfront and a port right now might rise up dozens of feet or higher and be landlocked here in the future.
	Other ports were described as having the water retreat from them, essentially making them useless.
	There again, there's no indication as to is this for five minutes, is it for five days?
	We just don't know.
	But in some of these ports, the water would eventually slosh back.
	We also had uh data sets, as I I've said, where we would get water with uh such that fishes would be swimming over the steps of the capital.
	And I'm sure hoping it's not the capital Washington State, because that's up a couple hundred feet.
	Um it just a very interesting data set.
	The global coastal event had indicators of volcanoes going off that shut down air traffic.
	Uh there was so much crud in the air.
	The uh descriptor set had um water being put up into the air in uh huge amounts that we called atmospheric rivers.
	Uh we had water going up into the air such that it would collect over regions where these atmospheric rivers would sort of stall out, creating an atmospheric lake, and it would just dump water uh inland uh in vast quantities in a very short period of time.
	We had indicators of um uh uh damage to infrastructure in the sense of the earthquakes cause bridges to go, roads to crack, um electrical lines to fall, dams to break, um, all different kinds of stuff, such that electricity and electronics are basically gone in wide regions for a long period of time, as are other basic infrastructure services.
	Water mains uh rupture, uh sewage treatment plants break open, gas lines are shut down, and so on and so on and so on.
	All of these sorts of uh reasonably predictable effects from something like the crack of a uh large plate, which was in this case the crack of the Pacific plate.
	This was to be uh effective of the Pacific Rim area first, but gradually work its way around the whole planet, absent the issue of the earthquakes, those were pretty much simultaneous.
	Uh so the big earthquake that in which the plate ruptures also causes earthquakes in uh on the other side of the planet, and then it starts bouncing around and so on.
	So we all get lots of earthquakes as a as a part and parcel of the global coastal event.
	Our descriptor sets for the global coastal event included um really uh uh a plethora of problems, and also pointed to some of the human responses, what we had called SOCs or self-organizing collectives would form as people um attempted to cope with all of this.
	Uh, we in our uh data sets had a curious absence of government.
	There was no indication in our data sets in uh North America, for instance, that uh FEMA or government or military rescue of people was in any way involved uh uh at all from the point of the global coastal event onward.
	We'd had a number of data sets that referenced government prior to the onset of the global coastal event, and so uh it was our supposition that government was basically non-functioning after that.
	And another thing we had as part of the global coastal event, and one of those uh data sets was descriptors of during the events period itself, not necessarily in North America, but in battlefields, uh soldiers would basically see what was going on, observe strange effects in the sky, have gone through giant series of earthquakes and so on, and would lay all their weapons down and just go home, saying, you know, uh something big is going on, enough of these petty human concerns.
	So it was going to be a rather interesting time relative to how the species would cope with the events and come out of it on the other side.
	Now, some of the uh within our data sets of the uh what we term the global coastal event, some of the trigger um linguistics, the the some of the linguistic sets around the uh soldiers uh basically throwing down their weapons and saying, eh, screw this, I'm going home, included a number of described visual effects that would be in the sky.
	And so over time, with the building of various different elements within the set, I came to understand that there was going to be an atmospheric component to this, other than mere smoke from volcanoes or rain from whatever source.
	So my original supposition for the rain, by the way, was that the plate would crack, magma would be exposed, and a giant steam engine, if you will, would be created as the new lands are upthrust.
	Now the steam would come up in a giant steam geyser, it would evaporate huge, vast quantities of ocean water putting it into the atmosphere and causing these atmospheric rivers and lakes.
	The effect of the water coming down would be felt within hours, but also over the course of months.
	The steam geyser effect from the rising lands as a separate issue was also in our data, not the geyser per se, but elements of that because we had bespoke sets that were for rising land at specific areas that seemed to indicate there was going to be some rising land in the Indian Ocean,
	and there would be other rising land areas between Australia and South America, and that these would be ultimately become new continents as part of our data sets.
	Now, these were from the data that originally started growing in 2003, and in fact in 2003 we had a set that spoke about the rising lands, and this was even before we I had named the um totality, the global coastal event, we had elements of rising lands, and they are within some of our very early work and continued for a number of years, even coming to the point of spoke uh focusing specifically on 90 east latitude.
	And so that makes sense within the broader context.
	Now the solar component is there within our data sets because of this thing called the sun disease.
	I really hate to go through what's basically 15 years of reported and uh available work, but we have uh a number of elements for the sun disease as a as a form of a dual set.
	Uh the set had dual applications.
	Not only was the sun going to be in a diseased state from our viewpoint, but the activity of the sun would cause a sun disease, a solal lunus here within uh humans and other species.
	In other words, the sun disease would be catching here on Earth, and we would all suffer from a sun disease at a local level, as well as from this larger um solar system-wide level of the sun disease as the sun changed.
	And you can go back and read uh a lot of our old uh work and and separate this stuff out.
	And so we see it all comes together within the um various different elements uh now uh 20 plus years into the process, uh we have a nice picture that shows us all um getting ready to ride the planet as it goes through a series of changes, that again that my narrative had called the global coastal event.
	You can name it whatever you want in your own narrative because it will affect you differently, and my viewpoint was from within the data sets of a planet-wide viewpoint.
	Now, um so we know from our data sets, uh we get a description of what the global coastal event is from our data sets.
	Then uh we can now fold in some of the information from the far site.org, and you can look and see how your area might be affected relative to uh their descriptions of what's going to occur by June 1.
	And then I have some further descriptions that have come to us through the validation studies of our particular area.
	So, for instance, here in the Pacific Northwest, I know that our immediate Problem is going to be a very large earthquake, and that there will be a lag, some uh temporal distance between the appearance of this earthquake and the damage it causes, and the appearance later on of water problems uh within um Hood Canal Puget Sound and the new uh structure of what will be uh created at that point.
	It will be enlarged in some way.
	I actually think that maybe Hood Canal is gonna end up overtopping and connecting into the southern end of Puget Sound uh through subsidence, not through water rise.
	I think you know, earthquakes may cause things to shift to the point where there's um the big bend actually connects into Pickering or Hammersley, one of those inlets there, I can't remember which one it would be.
	Um it's been a while since I've been up in that area.
	And so uh we're we're looking at water alterations of our local environment.
	The distance between the earthquake appearance, um, which is before May 26th, and uh uh due to the validation study, and the water intrusion is not known.
	Uh at some point the remote viewers do not have they're like I uh our work, they don't have a calendar or a watch when they're doing this, and they absent any kind of a temporal peg uh in the study itself, as was done by Courtney Brown by stating that June 1, 2013 would be the end date.
	Um, and as I did by stating that my end date would be May 26th, the absent those, the remote viewers don't have a time um clue.
	So they could uh clue in, for instance, on May 26th and back out, so to speak, to get a larger view, but in doing so, they would present maybe all kinds of accurate information, but they wouldn't say, oh well, I'm out a week, I'm a week ahead of that, or I'm a week behind that.
	They just know there is some distance ahead of it or some distance behind it, uh, in that kind of a thing, in the same way we do.
	They're not uh uh temporal clues on a tick-by-tick uh basis for clocks because clocks are and calendars to a huge extent are an abstraction on upon uh an artificiality.
	And so to get at the reality of time, it does not really work that way, so to speak.
	So uh what do we know?
	Well, we know that um uh from the RV studies that the major impact here in the Pacific Northwest, and this goes from say uh uh mid-Oregon, maybe even into uh upper California all the way up into southern Alaska, is going to be a very large earthquake, and even uh further into Alaska and the Bering Sea is going to be impacted by uh the tsunami that results from this earthquake.
	We're gonna get a tsunami here.
	I think other areas of the planet are going to get displacement waves.
	There's a difference.
	A displacement wave can rise up very much higher than tsunami.
	A tsunami is a straight-line force that travels through the water that impels the water to try and climb up the shore.
	If the the saving grace for us here in Puget Sound is that it's a twist debugger, that this bastard and even Hood Canal has got so many hooks and twists in it, and every time you have a hook and a twist, a tsunami loses energy because it's a straight line force that wants to travel through water.
	It can't compel the water really to make a hard right angle.
	Uh it loses so much force in doing so that it dissipates very rapidly.
	That's a tsunami.
	Uh this is something that everybody really ought to look up and go and read about the difference between tsunami and displacement waves, because you may be in the issue of facing one or the other if you're on a coastline.
	Tsunamis usually cannot, I mean, it's almost impossible for a tsunami on any of our coastlines around here to climb have the water climb up the coast in a wave that's taller than 120 feet.
	Uh so you're looking at something that's about 40 meters maximum height.
	The reason that this is is is entirely due to the coastline, and again, this straight line force that dissipates when it runs into non-water material.
	It travels very well through water.
	Uh tsunami is not individual water atoms moving very rapidly.
	It is a force that moves through water at tremendous speeds, um, near supersonic, in the sense that you can get five and six and seven hundred mile per hour uh movements out of uh the forest through the water.
	But then when it encounters the shoreline, the water is by uh forced up that shoreline by this uh energy, and it rapidly loses its energy as it tries to move this heavy mass and against gravity.
	And so a tsunami will never get much, usually much higher than 30 or 40 feet.
	Some coastlines would accommodate 80 feet.
	The very rare coastline would give you 120 feet.
	Also, coastlines have a tendency to degrade tsunamis very rapidly.
	They don't run inland hundreds of miles as a rule.
	Now, excuse me, there.
	If you'll note in the Farsite.org study, the African site of Fort Jesus Mombasa, they have a wave that runs in some 72 miles.
	I think it's 72 miles, I suppose 72 kilometers, but in either case, a huge distance, crossed over to the base of a mountain.
	This is due to it being a long expanse of a flat coastal plain that's slightly in the middle of that the coastal plain is slightly lower in elevation than the surrounding coastline.
	So it has a natural downward dip.
	And that's what causes this large acceleration to go that far, in my opinion.
	There's also indications that uh, but uh but now let me state that I think that this is not a tsunami per se.
	I think there's some element of a displacement wave that hits both Sydney and uh Fort Mimbasa.
	I don't know that that's the case with Hawaii from the descriptions that I've seen in the Farsight.org study and in studying the coastline of Hawaii, I think that's actually a tsunami and may result from the same uh earthquake origination that uh or another earthquake, because there's gonna be lots of them that uh strike the Pacific Northwest up here in the um Puget Sound, because also because of the direction from which it it hits Hawaii.
	In uh looking at the Farsight.org work and comparing the coastline, and by the way, I've taken an I'm self-educated in uh oceanography and uh physical oceanography and hydrology and hydronics and all of this kind of stuff.
	So uh, you know, I have some uh acumen with this work.
	I've been building boats for years and uh been on the water for years and years and years, lived on coastlines all over and seen some weird stuff.
	And uh this accumulated uh experience has allowed me to do some level of analysis.
	Doesn't mean it's definitive.
	I'm just out here trying to figure all this stuff out myself.
	If you're an oceanographer and you have physical oceanography um skills and you know about coastlines and wave development and so on, then please by all means get out and analyze the potential here and uh give us your best guess as to where and when or where and to what extent the um issues might be given these circumstances.
	But if you go to the far sight.org uh study and you look at the sites for Washington, DC and for Florida, you see that it is not a situation of their being struck by a displacement wave that originates in the Pacific.
	They may indeed be dis uh struck by a displacement wave.
	There's a lot of indications that that is the case.
	Although in Florida, you couldn't tell really, a tsunami would just overtop Florida because it's so low very easily would cause huge levels of damage just at the same level as a displacement wave.
	That's not necessarily true in Washington, DC.
	The level of damage there does look as though a big mass of water has been moved inland, uh, which would say displacement wave and not a tsunami.
	Given the characteristics of the Chesapeake Bay and how it's been built up and the land has been terraformed, I don't think you'd have a big uh run-up in a tsunami.
	It would probably die out within 10 or 15 miles maximum of the actual um mean high tide water line.
	However, a displacement wave in that area could carry a great distance because again, it's also a lot of low-lying coastal plains.
	In any event, in both cases, uh Florida and uh Washington, DC in the Farsite.org, there's significant water damage.
	Uh, this appears to be their first uh real significant damage.
	Uh in the sense that up here we get an earthquake.
	We know this is from we know this from our own data, where we had uh are the descriptor for the earthquake that was going to hit the Pacific Northwest as being isolating to the point that it uh took down power from our region out.
	So it destroys the big power lines that um go down the west coast from the dams up here.
	It also destroys bridges for a thousand miles around, was the actual textural description.
	In Washington, DC, the other Washington, the uh destruction there appears to come from uh water, given the Farsite.org study.
	Uh our uh data up here was validated by the um uh validation study showing the earthquake first and then part of the validation study showed water intrusion later on.
	Uh the Belgian uh input to that uh study was focused more on the water and some of the other issues that were involved there.
	But there is a clear temporal gap between the earthquakes, the tsunami that hits us, and then the tsunami is a local event, it's uh short-lived, it's related to the earthquake up here, but then we also have some level of water intrusion that occurs on a long-term permanent basis as a result of the larger global coastal event.
	So this is a quite complex situation.
	Uh now our validation studies uh have been followed by validation studies uh done for other regions.
	Some of the details I am aware of some of these studies.
	The details for a study in the Ontario region included the uh precursor to the global coastal event of a large scale amount of flooding, um, and that that flooding would continue and get worse as a result of a uh inland lake dumping on them.
	This is pretty much true of the situation in uh Arkansas.
	There was a validation study there that described uh lots and lots of water uh inundation there as a result of the global coastal event.
	However, uh in the one in Arkansas, by June 1, they're drying out.
	So the rain had stopped, and the event, insofar as they were concerned from that viewpoint, uh had ceased.
	Uh let me make a note here.
	Uh probably should have presented the information better, but uh from my viewpoint, uh our descriptor set of what I'd called the global coastal event was as I say a long-term process, and I would say that by 2041, you'll probably be able to say that oh, okay, now we're into whatever is the new normal.
	It'll all have been settled out by then, so it takes that long to settle down.
	Um the validation studies that I've seen, or that I've become aware of for the various different parts of the planet, are usually uh temporally specifically focused.
	So the validation studies I've seen were basically people saying, What the hell's gonna happen to me by June 1?
	And getting a view of their local environment.
	And a bunch of those collected gives us a larger view of what's going on.
	However, we don't really have any studies that show uh the longer term progression and and some of the issues that would develop over time.
	Now, as you may imagine, some things uh uh are quite horrific in this whole scenario.
	If there is a global coastal event, um, although it's not mentioned in the far site.org, and it's not mentioned in the um validation studies we've done, there uh was a lot of stuff in our data about uh nuclear plants uh causing all kinds of problems around the planet, and we ended up with a bespoke number very similar to the um Banda Achi uh situation.
	And in the Banda Achi situation, we had uh the number 300,000 written out in textual form, showing up uh ahead of time as a precursor, and it was 300,000 would be killed.
	The number was close enough to that, and it was also quoted at that within uh mainstream media, so we we took that as being an accurate forecast.
	Now, in our current data set, we have the number 1.2, 89 billion people dying.
	1.2, 89 billion, baba B with a billion.
	Um this is a staggering thing.
	Um it makes sense under a lot of different circumstances, but especially if you factor in the nuclear plants and the heavy population in the northern hemisphere, because nuclear plants all over will be damaged.
	Some of our data sets from 2003, for instance, showed uh waves, which we couldn't anticipate, or we didn't at the time, and I actually think it was data that uh came up in 2004, not 2003, but because that set grew over a number of years.
	But there were data sets that described um waves on the um coast of California that would lift up, literally actually lift up um nuclear plants off the coast, um uh uh shake them into their various constituents and scatter them along a 20 or 30 mile range of the uh coast of California,
	washing up quite literally plutonium rods and that kind of thing on the beaches where people were now uh cavorting and you know having um uh picnics and that kind of thing.
	We Saw that there would be a uh the way in which the data sets were laid out was that these um current playgrounds would become uh plutonium hell holes.
	Um, and so this was a result of these waves that would occur.
	So some of our descriptor sets included a lot of the nuclear damage.
	We don't see that in either the validation studies or the uh far sight.org, but bear in mind they're focused with a narrow focus, uh time specific and so on.
	Which brings us up to the other thing, the issue of uh uh uh evidence of absence.
	Uh so because of the um North American specific nature of some of the information here.
	I'm specifically focused on the government of um the United States, the federal government of the United States at this moment.
	When I go into the following description here.
	In our data sets from 2003, as well as the far site.org uh descriptions of uh this particular year by June 1, 2013, as well as the validation studies that I've seen and been involved with.
	In none of those do we show uh government response to this global coastal event intermixed with the populace.
	This is uh evidence of absence, but it's not evidence of destruction of government.
	Uh we know, for instance, that they're slow, and in the case of the far site.org study, it does not extend out beyond June 1.
	Uh the events have happened by June 1 such that in the sparsite.org study, the events have happened such that by June 1, people are trying to pull themselves together.
	So it's not a day before, it's not two days before, I would imagine it's a number of days before, just because I've been through natural disasters and there's the shell shock period.
	And these people are definitely within that shell shock period, as described by the um uh far sight.org study, but conditions have started to change at a material level.
	And uh one of the val two of the validation studies we've um uh become aware of, that's also the case.
	By June 1, they also set pegs at June 1.
	And by June 1, the uh rains had um decreased in Arkansas and the flooding was starting to dissipate uh in Ontario.
	And in fact, in Ontario there was a um uh sudden um burst into a very hot uh summer, and we know that there's uh an absence of chemtrails.
	The same can be said here in the Pacific Northwest.
	Our validation studies of uh both kinds show that the uh earthquake strikes us, we have a uh great number of issues.
	There are volcanic ash issues here, but not from rainier.
	So we don't have any indication that Mount Rainier blows.
	Um, but that there is ash that is coming to us from the um uh east.
	So it could be Kamchutka or or other areas to the far east of us that are causing um this.
	But we also know that that dissipates and that there are no chemtrails here as well.
	Um, and that the uh environment is um uh sudden burst into an extremely hot um uh summer period of time.
	Now, this causes us a great deal of problems here in North America, uh, which we need to note that after the uh onset of these global coastal event issues, they're in our data sets, so it doesn't exist in the remote viewing that I'm aware of, but in our data sets, we get into a period, and I shouldn't diverge here because it's a whole nother subject, but we get into a period where a great deal of the forests in um Canada and across northern uh United States burn.
	We have a huge horrific uh forest fire that lasts for a couple of years, and there's all kinds of problems from that.
	But that doesn't appear to in our data sets, it didn't appear until a number of years after the global coastal event.
	So that might be two years out.
	We had some indication that it was at least one year, but uh you know, time being what it is within our data sets, I'm not even really sanguine that it's it's a full year.
	Uh so won't impact us initially.
	Um we have the issues of the displacement waves, we have the issues of the tsunamis, um you have to decide uh what your local coastline would support, whether you're at risk for displacement waves.
	The displacement waves are in the southern hemisphere, we think.
	Uh I think the displacement waves come from uh an expansion event in which the Pacific plate cracks and causes uh other um plate uh shifts and cracks around the planet, which cause other uh displacement waves and tsunamis of a smaller proportion.
	So, for instance, a plate crack in the Pacific might well initiate the La Palma uh El Hero uh destruction that causes a displacement wave to hit the East Coast.
	Um also bear in mind that the Florida to Washington, DC, um, those two sites have to be viewed as a range, not individual locations when you're looking at uh the far site.org information, because whatever's happening to Florida that is also simultaneously happening to Washington, D.C. is going to happen to that entire coastline in between, and likely extends even further north.
	There is a lack of information from both our viewpoints uh from the remote viewing studies as well as from our data of what happens uh north of Washington, DC, uh, all the way up to Nova Scotia.
	I don't know why there's this lack of geographic references within our data set from that 2003 period.
	It could have been an artifact of our our software uh programming, so I don't take it too seriously.
	But there just was a um not quite as many geographic references there as there were in other areas.
	Now, the um global coastal event from our narrative is not the end of humanity.
	True, lots of humans live around the coast, and one uh our data shows that 1.289 billion people are going to die as a result of this, but that's not the end of the species as a whole.
	Uh it is the initiation of a period of time in which it is quite clear that we're living on a whole new world.
	It's not your father's world anymore.
	And you're gonna have to um learn new skills and adapt to an to a changing environment for decades that will then settle out, and your children's children will finally learn a set of skills that will allow them to live in whatever that world ends up as.
	We are truly in a transition period here.
	Uh, this is assuming all this shit happens.
	You know, we don't know that it will.
	We do know that Dick Algyre is really one hell of a good remote viewer and had nailed um in his drawings both the meteorites coming into Russia this year, as well as the recent um uh street theater in Boston with their explosions and stuff.
	And so he's very good at it.
	Um we also know that our data sets, when they're accurate, are surprisingly staggeringly scarily so.
	Uh, we're wrong frequently, there's no question about that, but we're right more times than we are wrong, um, to some statistical degree that it makes it worthwhile uh for people to keep reading our crap.
	So, and for me to keep uh altering my life based on uh what I see within the data sets.
	Uh so far it has not let me down.
	So there are some indicators that our forecasts are accurate, or or could be, as well as the forecast from the remote viewers.
	There are also a number of remote viewers out there working their butts off, and you can find them on various different remote viewing forums, uh, for uh, which is really the plural of that, um, including uh those over at Ed Dames.
	Now I've been contacted by uh some of these guys, and they have their own set of concerns that also materialize around um Memorial Day, which is the end of May here in the these United States, and their concerns have to do with media rights and so on.
	I've also received uh weird ass phone calls from people claiming to be connected to um government uh United States at various different levels, including the uh what I term the breakaway civilization, and these guys are also expressing all kinds of fear language about this period of time relative to Earth changes and what I described in our narrative as the global coastal event.
	Your narrative is gonna be different of it, believe me.
	Uh if it exists, it will be entirely different.
	So uh those are our timing clues.
	Now, we're living in a lot of those timing clues.
	They're manifesting now.
	Uh some of the stuff we'd forecast is actually coming uh and manifesting.
	It's like, well, damn, I really wish it wouldn't.
	You know, if it were up to me, I'd call it off.
	If I could just say, okay, global coastal event is off, uh, you know, uh everybody laugh at Cliff for a couple of years, and and uh he'll go off and um uh tinker with his boat.
	That'd be great.
	That'd be just tremendous.
	I'd love to retire and have such a life and have the planet uh hold up and and you know, even in the screwy condition, not do a whole lot of change.
	Uh it's not up to me.
	And you know, people say, well, is the global coastal event still on?
	I get all these weird emails.
	And think about it, guys, it's not up to me.
	The data sets uh in no way have altered.
	The data sets are from 2003 that really describe this.
	2003, 4, 5, 6, and 7 is when we really got the description of the global coastal event.
	Those data sets uh have been growing, but anything that's likely to come in now won't alter the mass of that data set in any significant way, especially since we're now trapped in what is known as immediacy language.
	Let me divert and give you a little metaphor of what it's like to be an immediacy language.
	From our viewpoint, we are let's say we're floating on a river on a boat on a river of time, and we're looking into the river.
	Immediacy language is the crud that floats by our boat that's going at either the same speed we are or slightly faster, and so it catches up with us, or it's floating next to us, or it's slower and we catch up with it.
	But it's the stuff that's right next to our boat that we happen to run into, this shallow uh broad area in the river we're on, we can't even see the shores here.
	All we can see is the water that we're on in our little boat and the crap that happens to float up along the side, the the Dutras, the flotsum, and the jetsum.
	Maybe somebody's thrown some stuff over.
	And uh we get a lot of that uh memorically.
	And so that's what immediacy data is like.
	Short term data would be like being able to drop a hook uh or a net into the water and collect um the information about the currents that are supporting the surface activity.
	And so we would know why there's an upwelling at this point.
	We'd be able to see it occurring ahead of the upwelling actually occurring.
	That's shorter term data.
	Longer term data would be like using one of those um uh bottom scanning radar to be able to see what the topography is of the underlying river that we're on and why it's influencing the currents that are then in turn influencing the eddies around our boat.
	And so we don't have the ability to put a net in anymore, and we don't have operating uh topography uh uh scattering radar.
	Uh all we've got, because of the nature of the language changing, which we can go into some other time, uh on the internet is this short-term stuff, the the or excuse me, the immediacy data stuff.
	And the immediacy data stuff is so so uh immediately focused and so shallow that we don't get a lot of context with it.
	And so any data sets that are likely to occur now are not going to be significant relative to our global coastal event.
	So it's not like I'm standing or changing or altering or supporting this.
	I'm just saying that back in 2003 we got this data, it grew from 2003 to about 2007, actually into early 2008.
	Uh, and then we got into all this uh financial crap.
	Um anyway, um, and that data set pretty much is is manifesting.
	A lot of the stuff that's in it is still showing up.
	We have a lot of stuff yet to manifest, and if it does manifest, we're gonna end up in this global coastal event, which now we know is also sort of supported in a in an oblique way by the far site.org stuff, and uh very explicitly supported by the uh validation studies that I've done.
	And other people's remote viewing also seems to support a series of catastrophic events in this month of May, or at least in their view, uh by summer.
	Now, uh it's true, I think the Ed Dames thinks it's all going to happen by uh summer of 2014, and that we're off a year, so to speak.
	We'll find out, you know, uh from my viewpoint.
	I think the earthquake's gonna happen here uh on or around May 20th, maybe May 21, 22, 23, I don't know, maybe our data, by the way, is always off by about three days if it's gonna be off.
	If it's gonna be accurate but off in the immediacy level, it'll be um within a three-day range because of the range in which the emotional quantifiers were attached to those words that are in the immediacy data way back when.
	And so um, you know, we might, as early as May 17th, but for a lot of reasons I just thought May 20th, and that's just been the date I've been pegging to.
	I don't know for sure it's gonna happen then.
	I'm not um uh a seer, you know, God hasn't uh hit me with a lightning bolt and told me all this stuff.
	It's just that the data sets and all of the analysis I've done seem to suggest this.
	Now, uh one could ask, are there manifestations in reality that are showing up that would tend to support the idea of cliffs narrative of the global coastal event?
	And unfortunately that is the case.
	There are indeed manifestations.
	Some of them are these weird oscillations and strange external weather or extra seasonal weather.
	They were part of the um matrix in which the global coastal event uh was described.
	Uh some of them include the degradation of the economic uh structure, because those were that was described way back in 2004 and five as being part of the background, if you will, in which the global coastal event narrative unfolded.
	We also have all kinds of manifestations in the Earth itself, independent of these more human abstraction based kind of things.
	These manifestations in the Earth and the Sun are indeed showing up.
	We've got a sun that's exhibiting from our viewpoint a sun disease.
	It's not behaving in a quote normal fashion from human viewpoint.
	We have weird things like mountains bulging, and we have volcanoes going off in Europe.
	We now hear that Fuji's sun is bulging and may decide he's gonna blow.
	We've got volcanoes uh in uh volcanic activity everywhere, we've got all kinds of undersea activity going on, under sea volcanoes, and now we have some very disturbing information out of the South uh East Pacific, in which some of the tsunami buoys are undergoing huge levels of uh shifts in terms of uh displacement that can't be accounted for with current drift.
	Uh so in other words, there may be a uh crack uh starting to occur down there because these buoys, which are anchored, are um and are transmitting uh telemetry all the time uh about their position relative to their altitude, so to speak, over the ocean floor, are saying, whoops, now I'm up, now I'm down, and so on, as though there's a heaving going on.
	Uh so uh and then since that was the site for our crack, this is very disturbing information.
	And we've got the sinkholes appearing everywhere.
	This is also one of the things that was forecast for a number of years.
	Uh we've got cracks forming in the planet.
	These also go along with the idea of the expansion event.
	Um let's see.
	Uh we've got all kinds of uh manifestations local and uh uh regional and uh planet wide, indicating that the uh weather uh is atypical to say the least.
	These were also part of the uh uh context in which our global coastal event would occur.
	And again, we've also got, as I say, the sun disease, and I think personally, uh, you know, and I can be wrong about this, could be meteors.
	There's all the remote viewer guys, a lot of them think it's gonna be meteors if you slam into the uh Southeast Pacific or Pacific Ocean somewhere and initiate this series of events.
	Uh I actually have always thought it would be an expansion event coming from the sun, and that a lot of the stuff that we would think of as meteors in terms of their impact on the sky could also be uh from a plasma event uh uh causing an interaction with our upper atmosphere.
	We'd create a lot of the same visual kind of attractions, uh tractors.
	And uh the descriptor sets that we had were a lot more detailed and seemed to indicate a plasma event, which would go along with an expansion uh of the planet.
	And so, in any event, uh basically here we are.
	We're uh today is the fourth, my pig is some 16 days out, I can be off by uh three days either way.
	I had set a final uh peg of May 26th on my uh validation study, and I will not feel calm until June 1.
	If we get through June 1 without any of these events occurring, then it's like okay, we were off temporally, all everything is off the table, we can start all over again and say a big and then uh look at what's going on and decide just how close we are, if it's temporarily um off by any kind of distance, or if we sort of like had minor manifestations of it, and that's all we're gonna get.
	Again, if that's the case, phew, uh you know, dodged a bullet, uh jumped the ravine, got out of the car before it crashed, uh any kind of uh narrow escape sort of thing that you want, because we are actually having physical manifestations of all of these sorts of issues.
	Now from our viewpoint, um uh if this occurs, we're not out of the water by June 1.
	We're not in real recovery by June 1.
	From the viewpoint of farsight.org, that's ambiguous.
	From the viewpoint of our validation studies, we get some hints because one of our validation studies looked forward from uh the events, not backward to what would cause it or timing, but what happens afterwards.
	In um In our data sets, the period of time after the initiation of the global coastal event was a period of time of uh transformation.
	As we all have to scrabble, and um uh no sooner are you starting to think that you're you're good, you've got you know, scrounged up a tent, you got a little bit of um food and so forth, and all of a sudden you see that the tide's coming in a whole lot faster and further than you thought, and you better grab all this stuff and run like hell.
	And it keeps coming in uh that day after day after day, not enough to wash over you, but enough to keep forcing you inland.
	These kind of issues, such that you're and then you know, you no sooner get into that than all of a sudden there's this extra seasonal storm, even though it's the middle of summer you get hit by hail and snow and stuff, and that causes you to freak out because you've just decided that you were gonna start planting lettuce.
	You know, that that sort of a deal.
	So it's uh gonna be a very unsettling period of time, even during the um quote recovery after the uh initiation of the event.
	And bear in mind this is by June 1, from my viewpoint, is just the initiation of the event.
	It's not the end of anything.
	In fact, it unless it's the end of the beginning, if you want to think of it that way, and the um certainty that, you know, uh we are into Terra Nova, new world, new planet, and it's new rules.
	Uh, and you'd better sort of adapt and so on.
	Uh hopefully, none of this occurs.
	Hopefully, I'm just totally wrong with the data sets I've had, and hopefully all the uh remote viewers have been tricked by a giant uh space goat fart that got involved into the matrix and um caused them all to hallucinate.
	Um I don't think so.
	That's the real problem.
	You know, I look out there and I see these guys with their chemtrails daily trying to alter the weather.
	Uh I see the uh strange ass uh gus, you know, government US running around acting like a bunch of batshit uh Nazis.
	I see uh the powers that be building um huge seed vaults up in the uh far north and the ice country, um, you know, and then there's all the the strange aspects of what's going on on the planet, and you gotta say, hmm, I think something's up.
	Now, uh the thing is we don't have to be fearful about it, right?
	If you're one of the one point or if I am, it doesn't matter.
	If anybody here is uh one of the one point two eight nine billion people that die, well, all of us are gonna die.
	So it's like, okay, you just gotta check out a little bit earlier.
	That's all.
	You get to experience the next stage of the grand adventure a little bit earlier, uh, than some of the other people that are here.
	Uh, you know, it is not a reason to be fearful.
	Uh uh the global coastal event is as I think of it as gonna be a challenge.
	It's gonna be a pain in the ass if you're used to comfort.
	But universe provides us what with uh with what we need, not what we desire or want.
	And it frequently gets really upset with us when we get lazy and too complacent, and it figures it's gotta come along and kick our asses to improve us as a species.
	And uh, if you all notice there's a whole lot of uh couch potato humans around, and I think universe doesn't like that.
	And unfortunately the weight of all the couch potato humans is thrown some kind of universal trigger, in my opinion, and it you know, it's gonna come along and kick our butts and we have to adapt and uh get tough.
	So uh if I'm correct, we've got you know, sixteen days, there's no no point in freaking out.
	From my viewpoint, I'm not going to do anything different.
	I'm not gonna run around and try and, you know, buy extra rope or get another shovel or something, uh, you know, figuring earthquake, dig your way out, that kind of thing.
	I I'm about as prepared as I can be.
	And then there's this other issue.
	You can buy all this uh stuff and have it all nicely um uh sorted, labeled all ready to go, and universe can come along and decide you're not gonna have any of that stuff to use, and it's gonna accommodate this by picking your ass up with a water spout or a tornado and planting you down 30 miles away uh with amnesia uh uh in your underwear in a mud hole, um uh among a bunch of strangers.
	And that's what it wants you to experience.
	So I'm not of the opinion that uh last minute surge in purchasing or any of that kind of stuff is worthwhile.
	What I do think is worthwhile is a last minute surge in calmness and in peace, and in uh centering yourself and deciding, okay, you know, this is it.
	It's kind of the um uh before you get onto the mat and you know you're gonna have a contest, and you have a partner on the mat, and um uh in our martial art, it's uh it's a partner, uh, the aikido.
	Uh one person is the person who's gonna do the throw, and the other person who's gonna be the person that throws and learns to roll and experience and uh demonstrate their skills that way.
	Now, uh before you get on the mat, your test or or everything, there's a calming period that you go through so that you're good at your art, so that you can express yourself very well with that.
	Uh You don't want to be jittery, you want to leave behind all the cares of the day.
	You don't want to injure your partner, you want to execute your your um moves as as well as you can under the circumstances with as much skill as you can demonstrate.
	And that's that, in my opinion, that's what we've got coming up.
	Is a chance for all of us adults to be able to act in a heroic fashion.
	And that's extremely rare.
	In our world, it is very rare for adults to get to act in heroic fashion and to experience that whole range of emotions that come from that.
	Um it fades with childhood, and it's uh it's a real gift in uh in a way that all of us will appreciate later.
	One of those things, you know, you'll thank me for this later.
	So bear that in mind.
	I usually when people say say that, you want to get them to say, lean closer, lean closer, and then pow.
	Anyway, um, so uh, but we need to be calm about all this.
	We need to have a sort of um a light-hearted attitude, uh, not be bogged down in the gravitas of it all.
	Uh the planet's changing, a universe is doing as it will.
	There's nothing we can do about it other than to have a good attitude and react well when it occurs.
	Um if it occurs.
	Uh, I keep saying if because I don't know.
	Uh, you know, and if it's up to me, you know, if universe is less listening, hey, you know, hit the stop button, we're done.
	We got it.
	We don't have to do this.
	Um, but unfortunately, you know, none of this shit's up to me.
	So as I say, uh, we got some 16 days, we can uh enhance our calm, uh, relax about it all, uh, review our progress, sit back, um, examine uh make notes, and uh, you know, consider uh uh what kind of a mindset one would like to have at this time and attempt to achieve that mindset.
	I again I want to caution everybody about you know some kind of last-minute panic freakout.
	It is just not gonna help, it's just not gonna do you any good.
	Time is too short.
	In the in our viewpoint, you know, the last few seconds before a challenge, you want to calm yourself and center yourself and get rid of the anxiety.
	You want to take that deep breath that and expand the abdomen, and then you want to exhale in what's known as the cleansing breath, where you curve the tongue up against the roof of the mouth so that you get this ha sound where it's like.
	Sigh
	If you can, one thing to do would be to maybe find other people, go into meditation and breathing exercises.
	It's really cool.
	Uh meditation is a technique, it's a tool.
	Uh, a lot of people are foolish if they uh learn of it and don't use it.
	Uh, it's available to all humans and provides a level of um body control and emotional control that's gonna be uh very worthwhile.
	Now, 16 days isn't a lot of time to learn to meditate, but hey, in this uh with meditation, 16 days you could accomplish uh miracles, and it uh never hurts to begin even at the last minute with that.
	It's a very unique skill, it's like uh willpower.
	You don't have any willpower whatsoever until you exercise it, and then from that minute on, you own it, and you've got it forever.
	Uh so you've always had it, you just didn't recognize it.
	Same thing is true uh in this case.
	There's a whole lot of questions to be asked about the global coastal event from our viewpoint.
	Uh we don't have a whole lot of answers.
	Uh we have suppositions, we have speculations, uh, we have some forecasts that are based on our weird ass technology.
	We don't have a whole lot of facts in that sense.
	We have manifestations we can point to, and if you want to draw connections between uh the manifestations and our forecasts to find supporting evidence, as we do, then you can end up with the same kind of conclusions.
	But that doesn't mean that I'm right here.
	You're just gonna have to make up your own mind and decide how you're gonna react here.
	Um over these next uh, you know, if you figure to June 1, we have until uh have the rest of the month here, approximately three weeks.
	So uh that's not long.
	It's like hey, finally.
	Um, and you know, uh good, bad, or indifferent, right or wrong, by June 1, I will be in a different world, and I will no longer have to deal with these set of circumstances.
	Um again, right or wrong, uh, the situation will have changed as a result of uh having shifted past this particular temporal boundary.
	Now, right or wrong about the global coastal event, I'm quite right about the data holes.
	A lot of people are experiencing these now where you have to have you go to YouTube and it gives you an error after it starts to load.
	Or you have to load your email three or four times to get it to come down to you.
	Or issue a number of commands across the internet repeatedly to get this the activity to occur.
	This is a result of all this background activity warfare going on, and it's driving our computer processes nuts because they operate at a much faster rate than humans do, and so they're bombing out through all these these timeouts because our timeouts are measured in milliseconds, not um not actual human level seconds.
	And so it's truly affected our ability to operate.
	So, right or wrong about the global coastal event, I was quite right about the data holes and the data gap, and we face a severe technical challenges should we all make it to June 1.
	In fact, we're trying to overcome these technical challenges with these weekly reports we're doing and running into huge amounts of work that we had not anticipated, even as little as three months ago.
	Um so uh it's very distressing to find some of these level of forecasts appearing, and especially the fact that they're manifesting in a way we had not anticipated because the universe loves to surprise us.
	Uh the more we uh there's um a saying we've got here at half past human that um uh every time you look at the future, it changes because you looked at it, because universe wants its surprise.
	It'll still deliver what it wants, but it just will do it in a way you had not anticipated.
	So if you can figure it out, that's not how universe is going to lay it out for you.
	Uh, you know, it'll change some level of detail or subtlety that will uh provide its level of surprise.
	Just our uh conclusion here.
	And so the surprise for us was that the data holes and the data gap appeared as a result of uh complex uh cyber warfare.
	I had never ever anticipated any of that.
	Shows you what dummies we are.
	Anyway, though, um, and that's kind of where we're at.
	Uh, this has been a long Wujo.
	Uh the time is warranted because the um uh nature of the subject is um uh has so much weight, it has so much uh gravitas, it reaches into people so deeply.
	Um, you know, they listen to me, they think my narrative is um uh prophetic in some way, which it is not.
	We're just a technology company that has had some uh decent level of success and a track record that has reached certain conclusions.
	Uh I hope that I'm just like some batshit um uh um evangelical uh Christian or new ager with a rapture date here, and that kind of thing, and that uh you know, by June 1 we'll blow all this off, and everybody can have a good laugh, and we can go about uh you know, altering our planet and growing and maturing as a species.
	That is truly the best thing that could out uh come from this.
	The worst thing that could happen is that we would be in any way correct.
	That would be the absolute uh most terrible thing uh that I can think of.
	Um and that's kind of where we're at, guys.
	It won't do any good to send me email asking me if it's on, off, if it's delayed, or you know, what are the details?
	Uh they're written about.
	I can't give you anything other than what the data has, and at this point the mediacy data is not providing us anything that is uh meaningful in that sense.
	It doesn't add much to the overall narrative of what we think may or may not occur, or what we think may occur, whether it does or not is is um immaterial to the to our to our data gathering process.
	So I'm saying basically the data gathering process at this point in no way really impacts the longer narrative of our global coastal event.
	We're just sort of waiting these last few days to see what's going to happen.
	And uh so basically, you know, uh uh it's not up to me.
	I've already tried to call it off, guys.
	It didn't work.
	You know, universe doesn't pay a damn bit of attention to Cliff.
	Uh but Cliff pays attention to universe.
	So there's there's basically the um the the dichotomy of our situation.
	Uh we've got a lot of absence of chemtrails up here, which is allowed a lot of strong solar stuff.
	I'm getting weird ass phone calls from uh people claiming to be part of the breakaway civilization Saying, you know, basically we're breaking away and you all are doomed, that sort of thing.
	Um that's you know, basically the end of the Wujo.
	I sure hope we survive.
	I'm very optimistic.
	I've got all kinds of things I want to do.
	I've discovered a whole new methodology for uh creation of inventions in a non-systematic but really cool way, and uh some other stuff that would just be fascinating to get into.
	Uh so you know, I'm hoping that uh as with uh let me let me state something too about our work, okay, and humans in general.
	You may notice this or not, but as a linguist, I'm very keyed in on it.
	Humans have a tendency to express negative emotions much easier than they do positive emotions because of the nature of universe and our cultural conditioning.
	I found this to be true across all cultures to some degree.
	Some cultures are less inhibited in good emotions, um and have uh differing viewpoints as a result of that.
	So, for instance, in linguistically, you'll find that uh people that whose primary language is Arabic are much more prone to express uh positive, um optimistic and um uh forward-looking uh good uh uh language than are people who have English or any of the romance languages as their uh primary language, although there is an exception for both Italian and to a certain degree Spanish.
	Those are much more uh positive language, they their culture and the people are uh uh report uh and use uh language that's more positive than English guys more frequently.
	But in general, even with those exceptions, language as a rule, humans have a tendency to express more negative language and to express things in a in uh more extreme fashion towards the negative than they do towards the positive, and that provides the bias in our work.
	I've been really depressed over these last years, and uh for a number of different reasons that don't relate to the work, and then the work didn't help, but the linguistic structures themselves form as they do and are not influenced by my depression or not, my mental state in no way alters how the data comes in.
	Although one may argue that I'd originally written the code and therefore, but no, I didn't put any kind of an emotional bias on the intake of the data.
	And so the data shows up as it wants to, and we have a tendency to concentrate on negative language.
	So there is a small chance of some unknown level that our collective species-wide uh preponderance of negative language expression is influencing the narrative that we get from our global coastal event, and it won't be as bad as we think it could be, or or seemingly could be um, or or would uh seemingly is formed in our minds.
	And I'll give you a discrete example of this.
	If one goes and looks at the far sight.org study, and you look at the part that was done by Dick Algyre showing the meteors and stuff, and we look at the meteors showing up in Russia, we see a lot of the same imagery, and we know the totality of the damage and the extent of that meteor damage within Russia,
	and so we can now say, aha, here is a clear indicator of the actual um level of damage, and here is a picture from which we'd originally formed an impression, and we can see that our impression was probably wrong, because our impression would have a tendency to concentrate on a larger negative view that really did not manifest.
	Yes, it was very negative for the people in Russia that were impacted by the meteor.
	Uh, but the extent and the um uh broadness of the negativity is much less than we could have anticipated from the than our minds would have drawn from the picture itself.
	Long way of saying that, you know, our minds have a tendency to hype the uh potential for doom until it actually appears.
	And we need to be aware of this, because uh we're actually facing a fairly large challenge, especially with such validation as you know, Dick Algeyer's viewing of the um meteorites and the details matching so accurately.
	And so, in that in that regard, we need to look very dispassionately at the work that I've provided and that uh farsight.org has provided, drill down on those actual words, and then eliminate our emotional bias as much as we can and look towards some actual manifestation in a descriptive fashion of what these words are going to show us.
	And they show that we have a whole lot of challenges coming up, but it's not the end of the world.
	It's not the end of civilization, uh, Even though it all albeit is going to be extremely challenging with all the stupid ass nuke plants all around the planet that are going to be imploding and all these other issues.
	You know, chemical uh plants and pipelines and these sort of things.
	We have a big cleanup to do.
	Um but hey, at least we'll all have some work.
	So anyway, guys, uh that's it, uh, you know, on the global coastal event.
	Uh I don't want to be facetious about it.
	Um even if every bit is even if it uh appears and it's every bit as bad as our language suggests, I'm not gonna take this shit seriously.
	Uh there's no point.
	Gotta look at it in uh you know as positive a light as we can, and you know, hey, uh at least it's gonna keep us busy and keep us off the streets.
	So uh I don't think there's gonna be any more Wu-Joes between now and the uh end of the month.
	Uh if we make it through to June 1, then I'll have a hooray, hooray, hooray.
	I was wrong Wujo, and then I'll probably go off and work on my boat for a number of months while we decide what the hell we're gonna do.
	Uh if we have the global coastal event, you're not probably not gonna hear from me because we'll be isolated.
	And I'm not one to get involved with ham radios or any of that.
	There's no point.
	I'll have uh just a ton of work to do here in this major planetary cleanup.
	So either way, um it looks like we've got uh you know our challenges cut out for us and and a good bit of work ahead.
	Um one way I've got to finish my boat and I get to retire and go sailing and that kind of stuff.
	And the other way I gotta finish my boat because we're gonna be needing it to do transportation back and forth.
	Because there aren't any bridges.
	And so, like I say, either way, we're gonna get a shitload of work here and we've got to get some stuff done.
	And um, and there's no point to me really being fearful about it or you know, uh spending a lot of money now needlessly.
	Uh if it happens, the infrastructure you can imagine is not gonna be too existent in terms of you know, there won't be satellites to run the just-in-time delivery system, stores won't open, uh, electronic doors won't open, there'll still be stuff in buildings though, and a lot of people will need to just you know get into those buildings and get the stuff, and I'm pretty sure that they will.
	And then we'll have to figure out how to make new stuff.
	Um, and that's a whole series of thinking on its own.
	Uh so somebody else needs to do that.
	And I guess that's really it.
	Um we're just waiting.
	Uh 16 days from my viewpoint, and then I'll start breathing a little easier from the 20th onward.
	Uh might be a little tense until the twenty sixth, and then it'll be like, oh.
	I'll start fading into June 1 and say, okay, there we go.
	Um and we'll see.
	Not too long to wait.
	Uh thank you very much for listening.

▲