All Episodes
Previous Next
March 18, 2024 - Jim Fetzer
01:56:45
The Raw Deal (18 March 2024) with Terry Rankin
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Not just anybody.
You know I need someone.
When I was younger, so much younger than today.
I never needed anybody's help in any way.
But now these days are gone, I'm not so self-assure.
And now I find the genuine, I'll open up the doors.
Help me if you can, I'm feeling down.
And I do appreciate you being around.
Help me get my feet back on the ground.
Won't you please, please help me?
Well, this is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Raw Deal, right here on Revolution Radio Live.
This is 18th a.m. March, 2024.
I hope you enjoyed St.
Patrick's Day yesterday.
One of my brothers was born on St.
Patrick's Day.
Easy to remember his birthday.
I'll be joined at the bottom of the hour by Former graduate student of mine by the name of Terry Rankin who got into IBM doing a lot of work on software hardware is in a keen interest in philosophical issues related to artificial intelligence.
And I'll be talking about the difference between the way in which human minds function and these artificial machines.
But you're making such a difference to the world today in terms of AI replacing human beings with robots in some cases highly successfully in others not.
We'll turn to those issues after I review the latest news.
We had an election in Russia.
Vladimir Putin secured a landslide victory.
No surprise if only the United States had a leader.
Of the competence, the knowledge, the intelligence, the wisdom of Vladimir Putin.
Anyone who observed his conversation with Tucker Carlson had to be enormously impressed with the first 30 minutes.
He gave a very detailed, explicit history of the development of Ukraine through the centuries.
It was a masterful presentation.
We have no president of recent times who could match that account.
And I believe the mainstream were so upset about the whole conversation because it showed his virtues as a leader by striking contrast.
I mean, Biden may have been up on the guy playing Biden, you know, wearing a latex mask or whatever, because we know for a certainty it's not Joe Biden.
He's got a completely different shape and size of skull.
He's got different color eyes.
He has a different manner of speaking.
He has a different signature.
The mainstream, of course, isn't reporting this, even though every politician in Washington has to know this guy's a complete fraud.
He even needs such a giant teleprompter.
They created a phony Oval Office in the West Wing, which has a big, you know, auditorium chairs for all the reporters.
They know what they're looking at is fraudulent, but they are reporting it to the American people.
How disgusting is that?
Meanwhile, we have someone who claims to have been Stalin's great grandson and claims that Putin is actually dead.
And that mystery Kremlin insiders have been using body doubles for years?
Well, count me a scabdag.
I've long touted this man as the only true statesman to stride the world stage.
I have not seen support for this.
That Putin might have a body double would not be surprising, because for security purposes, for example, Donald Trump has a body double.
It's not deceptive, however, in the way in which the Democrats are doing this by putting out this guy we know nothing about his identity, who the hell he could be, where even a Biden granddaughter has said, yeah, yeah, her grandpa died in 2017, but the family liked to keep his hand in on politics.
So I've been using body doubles ever since.
I was calling this out since the first debate with Donald Trump.
But body doubles have become ubiquitous in the Democrat Party.
Hillary Clinton used multiple.
You may recall when he had that collapse at a 9-11 memorial not long before the election for 2016, which, of course, she lost to Donald Trump, even though it had been rigged in her favor.
She collapsed.
Thrown rather unceremoniously into an ambulance masquerading as an SUV and taken back to Chelsea's new apartment, which Chelsea did not need.
She already had a wonderful apartment in Manhattan.
But this one had the distinct benefit of having an attached hospital, which they then closed.
So it had only one patient, Hillary Clinton.
But when they became concerned that The public was getting alarmed about the status of her health.
They sent out a body double, younger, thinner, healthier looking, far more pleasant.
I call her the Meg Ryan body double because she looks so much like the actress whom I adore.
A few days later on a flight to Charleston, North Carolina, they had yet another body double, a different with a more sloped forehead.
I call her the Meryl Streep Double, because she looked a whole lot more like Meryl Streep than when she actually did the bait with Donald Trump.
They had a third body double.
I mean, it's just outrageous.
Younger, healthier.
She was the best of the batch.
But even Trump didn't call her out.
She had the voice of Hillary Clinton.
They have these voice boxes that can enable you to imitate anyone's voice exactly.
But it was very clear.
I've done a lot about this.
Expose several places if you go online to my bitch you channel jim petzer take out issues of identity.
Or more recently if you go to my blog and go to events on the menu at the top of the menu bar you'll find presentations from the four fall strike and conspiracy conferences i've organized in two thousand twenty twenty one twenty two and twenty three.
And if you go all the way down to 2020, download Deception Galore, where I show you how they fake the hate crimes involving Jussie Smollett and George Floyd and Bubba Wallace.
Totally fraudulent.
But also how Hillary has been using doubles, Biden using doubles, and most of all, you might find stunning an exposé of Michelle Obama.
If you've been listening to my show long enough, you know we got Big Mike in the offing, Warren Michael, LaVaughn Robinson even registered as a male to vote until 2008 when Barack began to run for president.
So I think that we have all this absurdity about transsexualism, teaching kids, you know, gay sex, masturbation, anal sex in the fifth grade and stuff like that, which is horrific and outrageous.
Deprived them of their innocence.
Because Brock's gay I mean look at the interview talker did with Larry Sinclair absolutely convincing on two different occasion Larry service Barack and where.
You know, he had this longstanding affair with Michael.
On many occasions, he referred to him in public as Michael, even to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, surprisingly enough.
There's a wonderful little ditty, amusing little ditty, only runs about, oh, I don't know, four minutes, called Michelle Obama is a man.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
There's another by a satirist who actually wanted to refute the claims.
That Michelle Obama is a man and winds up confirming them.
It's sensational.
And we have a film in production about to be released entitled Big Mike.
I mean, I even use comparisons of the back of Michelle Obama with Mike Tyson, one of the most ferocious heavyweights ever to step into the ring.
Michelle Obama's back is even broader and more muscular than that of Mike Tyson.
Give me a break.
We also have all kinds of photographs of Barack with Michael before Michael got a boob job.
And yes, it's astonishing.
What we have here is a man with breast implants and a huge shaving bill.
Is this going to come out?
If Michelle is running for president, mind you, I'm convinced Biden can't cut it.
The situation with Biden is ridiculous, completely atrocious.
Meanwhile, we have the president of France, Emmanuel Macron, who has his own issues because Candace Owens has been going after him, hammering tongs over having married a man He claims that Brigette Macron, who was 40 years old when she began dating Macron when he was 15 years old.
I mean, that's pretty disgusting all by itself.
She became his nanny when he was 14.
And it turns out in France, 14 is the age of sexual consent.
I find that astonishing.
Matt Grun has been trying to deny all this, claiming it's just silly, but if you take a look, Candace says she'll stake a reputation on the fact that Bridget Matt Grun is a man.
I will stake mine on the fact that Michelle Obama is a man.
Believe me, neither she nor I would be going out on such a limb if we weren't convinced, hadn't done the research to tell you about it.
Macron keeps talking about NATO being ready if Russia wins in Ukraine.
Well, I got news for you.
Maybe he missed the memo.
Russia has already won in Ukraine.
I mean, it's all over but for their shouting.
How many times can you lose 500,000 soldiers and remain in the field?
I mean, it's absurd.
They've been recruiting little kids, elderly men.
They've been rushing up the front lines without any training where they're pulverized by the Russians.
There's some kind of activity going on in Poland.
It turns out, as Putin explained, modern-day Ukraine is really a fabricated entity.
It took portions of Romania, of Hungary and Poland in order to constitute the geography of modern-day Ukraine.
And I suspect that Putin is forced to go all the way, take all of Ukraine, Which I think is now highly improbable.
He may very well give back portions to Hungary and to Romania, though there is a doubt he might do so with Poland, which has been proven to be incredibly obnoxious and Russia-phobic.
In any case, Russia can never give back the Crimea, the Donbass, its access The, you know, freshwater ports there.
I mean, this is a done deal.
Putin actually put all of the Russian missiles, their nuclear wars, on combat ready status.
In case NATO is so foolhardy as to launch some kind of attack.
He's also moved forces into Belarus, putting about 500 kilometers closer to European capitals that would be attacked if NATO were to make a move against Russia.
I would say this is such an incredibly bad idea that you would imagine no one is foolish enough to undertake it.
But the leaders of NATO and of the United States are so incompetent.
Nothing is off the table.
We have a very unusual situation.
Netanyahu has approved plans for the Rafah ground invasion, UNICEF reporting he's killed over 13,000 children in Gaza, even Kamala Harris.
It's pushing for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Now, Kamala is obviously a useless tool.
She's about as brainless as anyone ever encountered in the public stage in the United States, and that's going some, since we've had a lot of really stupid high-ranking officials.
Dan Quayle comes to mind.
Well, Kamala Harris makes Quayle look like an Einstein.
Pushing for a ceasefire, what the hell is going on here?
It appears domestic politics has caught up with foreign policy, and there's so much defection from the Democrats, especially among the young, that they're feeling they've got to do something about it.
So as a PR stunt, you not only have Kamala going for a ceasefire, but you have Schumer, Chuck Schumer, The Jewish Zionist head of the Democrats in the Senate saying Netanyahu is an obstacle to peace and calling for new elections.
Unbelievable!
It's because they are suffering massively.
Even if they want to steal the election again, as they did in 2020, they have to have a plausible candidate.
They cannot do it with a guy whose poll numbers are in the pits and who is universally despised, not only for his cognitive incompetence, but because of his reckless foreign policy.
Indeed, it's rather fascinating that the arms, all the arms we've been sending to Ukraine aren't being tracked.
No one knows where the hell they're going.
All the money, all the weaponry being sent to Israel.
Who the hell knows where it goes?
Mossad likes to retail, to run retail.
They're all in for the shackles, like to make big bucks out of foreign weapons being provided by the United States.
The real reason they want to ban TikTok, of course, has nothing to do with China, is because TikTok has become a very free speech center and there's a lot of criticism of Israel.
That's where Kristi Noem, in my opinion, dealt herself out of the mix with regard to a prospective VP choice.
Trump is already too Zionist for my taste.
I mean, I'm having to Bite the bullet, swallow a bitter pill, given his endorsement of finishing the job in Israel, completing the slaughter of Palestinians.
That's enough to make me wretch!
I can't believe he done it!
He actually said it!
Disgusting!
Kristi Noem signed the strongest anti-hate bill in the United States for South Dakota.
So if you even mention Israel in an unfavorable way, especially if you're critical of genocide, mind you, genocide, which Israel is creating, then you can be punished sent to jail, what, 10 years?
I mean, read the bill.
You're going to be shocked.
It's enough to make your hair curl.
Meanwhile, the party I think Trump is actually going to pick, Yeah, has been interviewed and gave a six word answer about if this were the best way she could serve her country, she'd be willing to do it.
And of course, it's Tulsi Gabbard.
And while, you know, there's some who think Tulsi wasn't strong enough on the Second Amendment, she has military background.
I'm convinced she's going to come around when she becomes educated and it's not that tough.
To learn that the more guns, the less homicide.
We hear nothing but the opposite from the Democrats.
Well, it's phony baloney.
Worldwide, countries that have the highest gun ownership have the lowest homicide rate.
In the past, the U.S.
and Canada have had the highest gun ownership in the world and the lowest homicide rate.
Dr. Doe has taken guns away from Canadians and their homicide rate, no doubt, is going up.
But a perfect illustration in Brazil Well, they had an anti-gun president that elected a gun-friendly.
And when he weakened the gun restriction, the homicide rate in Brazil went down.
Now he's been given a boot and they got a new anti-gun guy and the homicide rate is going back up.
This is just like with vaccines and autism.
The more you vaccinate kids, the higher the autism rate.
The less you vaccinate, the lower the autism rate.
It's a perfect correlation.
Similarly, the statistics support precisely the inclusion I'm offering.
Indeed, worldwide, it turns out.
And if you subtract all the gun deaths that take place in five Democrat cities—Cleveland, Philadelphia, Chicago, among them—if you subtract the gun death because of the Democrat policies creating free fire zones for criminals, you know, at the very least, they're not going to be confronted by A law-abiding citizen with a gun because the Democrats have passed laws that turn them into criminals.
So yeah, free fire zones.
If you subtract those five cities that have 194 nations in terms of gun violence, the United States would rank 189th.
Can you believe 189th?
We have very low gun violence except for creating all these free fire zones and killing blacks, of course.
Occurs like 10 times more frequently than any other category.
Blacks even killing whites.
Whites killing blacks only occurs about a tenth of the amount of time that blacks kill whites.
Virtually almost never.
I mean, it's very rare, but it gets all the publicity because of the fallacy practiced by the press.
It's called special pleading.
Cite only the evidence favorable to your case and eliminate the rest.
That's real simple.
It's like used car dealer.
Remember, Bibi Netanyahu used to be a used car dealer, focusing on the leather upholstery and the terrific stereo and not mentioning that the rings are shot and the transmission needs to be replaced.
That's what they do.
This is a practice of politicians, editorial writers, used car salesmen.
We got the worst of the worst from the mainstream press here, because they're all completely dominated by Zionists.
How many times have I reported that I have a panel of 100 officials from CNN, every one of whom is a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen?
I have 100 officials from NBC.
Everyone is a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen.
I have 100 officials from The New York Times.
Every one of whom is a dual US Israeli citizen.
How bad is that?
You want to know why the American people are the most brainwashed in the world?
There is the answer.
Meanwhile, the whole case with Fannie Willis and her lover down in Fulton, Georgia, has been completely falling apart.
One CNN guest actually jammed my tube and said, Manny Willis' case is going nowhere fast.
The trial will be conducted during the presidency of Malia Obama, one of the fake Obama kids, you know.
In other words, it's that far off.
By the way, did you miss a video from the Hunter Biden laptop where you have these two nubile young girls comporting in bed with Hunter?
Well, there's a little white puppy there along with him that Brock gave to his erstwhile daughters, and there they are converting with Hunter.
How bad is that?
Meanwhile, the Trump classified documents case is also in major trouble in Florida because the judge there, who seems to me to be the one truly responsible judge involved in all of these cases, Cannon, By name, Aline Cannon thinks it's selective prosecution to be going after Trump for classified docs, and she's putting it mildly.
Remember this guy Robert Herr, H-U-R?
Chose not to prosecute by why because he was he described as a sincere elderly man with a poor memory and he thought he couldn't affect the conviction before a jury for having intentionally done all this stuff leaving classified documents all over the place and cardboard boxes and the like.
But that was ridiculous.
Her not prosecuting Biden for the abuse of the classified documents was ridiculous.
Consider the fundamental differences in the two cases.
Donald Trump, as President of the United States, had ultimate declassification authority.
Trump could declassify anything.
Some have complained he didn't do enough with the JFK records, but he was being held up because it was so awful and implicating the American government in the assassination of our 35th president that he was dissuaded from releasing.
However, he was keeping the classified documents that he had in Mar-a-Lago in a secure safe that had been approved by both the FBI and the National Archives.
He also had a standing order that any document he took with him home was automatically declassified.
Biden, none of the above.
He was only the vice president.
He didn't have declassification authority.
He didn't have the authority to have any of those classified documents.
Not only that, he didn't have an approved secure location, as I've already said.
They were scattered all over the place, including cardboard boxes, some of which were in the garage with his beloved Corvette.
It was a slam dunk against Biden.
Should have gone to a jury.
But I'm telling you, the United States is making a practice of keeping cases away from juries.
We got a new absurd film called The Truth vs. JFK coming from Amos Pictures.
Amos came and even interviewed me, then left me on the cutting room floor.
Why?
Because they're making out the case that Alex Jones had betrayed the poor, suffering families of Sandy Hook.
When my book Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, published in 2015, Well, I brought together 13 experts, including six PhDs established.
The school had been closed by 2008.
There were no students or teachers there.
That had been a FEMA drill for which I even had the manual, the manual for the Sandy Hook event, which I included as an appendix A.
So this is all ridiculous.
They're claiming that Alex Jones was offending the poor parents who lost their children when nobody lost their children there.
In fact, over the last two years, I've been in contact with participants in the event.
One who was cast as Emily Parker, a little blonde haired girl.
Another cast is Victoria Soto, the teacher who heroically gave her life for her students.
They're both doing very well.
Thank you.
I have learned from then through a third party with whom I've been in regular contact that actually the school was closed in 2006.
It wasn't even an elementary school.
It was a special needs school.
Eric Holder, then Attorney General, had come to Newtown and offered the community $114 million to participate in this scam, which was supposed to illustrate what could happen.
If we don't take guns away from the American people, and where they even had auditions, they had special benefits, they don't pay any taxes, they get free college, I mean, it's quite a gravy train.
And if you look at the amount of money the American people were defrauded into contributing, donating, Between $27 and $130 million divided by the 26 families, that's $1 to $5 million for pretending to have lost a child at Sandy Hook.
None of these lawsuits, whether it's against Remington, against Alex Jones, or against me, ever went to trial.
All of them were decided on procedural grounds, with Alex Jones even And alleged failure to satisfy discovery, though no one, even Robert Barnes, can figure out what discovery is supposed to have failed to satisfy.
In my case, bizarre.
I had all this evidence.
I wanted to get into the public domain through the judicial process.
The judge was allowed to simply set all my evidence aside as unreasonable.
Can you believe that?
No jury had the opportunity to hear whether or not what I had to say, the evidence I had accumulated, was reasonable or not.
And it was massive, extensive, detailed, and compelling.
So we have this absurd abuse of the legal system, also exemplified with Donald Trump and all the phony lawsuits that are now falling apart on the right and on the left.
We have to understand what's going on. .
You're listening to Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
We'll be right back after this message.
Management would like to take a moment to thank the listeners and hosts for all their support that has made Revolution Radio one of the biggest platforms for free speech in an ever-growing dark world of censorship.
Unfortunately, this platform for free speech has never been free.
We need the support of the people.
It is the people like you, yes, you, that keeps the station in the front lines of the battle against tyranny and oppression.
Please help support Revolution Radio so free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light in a dark world.
Revolution Radio.
Freedom Substance dot com.
The number one listener supported radio station on the planet.
Revolution Radio.
Hey, everyone.
It's Barbara Jean Lindsay, The Cosmic Oracle.
If you have questions about your past lives or future plans, need answers from the cosmos about your love life or career, or just want to keep your finger on the pulse of the planet, check out my show, The Cosmic Oracle, here on Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
Thank you.
Join Revolution Radio every Wednesday, 8 p.m. Eastern. 8 p.m. Eastern.
Eastern Time on Studio B for Momentary Zen with host Zen Roussia at FreedomSuch.com, The People Station.
The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com.
100% listener-supported radio.
And now we return you to your host.
Thank you.
Well, welcome back to the second segment here where I have former student Terry Rankin, and who's developed a keen interest in AI and related issues where we wanna talk about the differences between human beings as thinking things and artificial intelligence as automated machines.
Terry, it's a real pleasure to have you here, my friend.
Oh, it's great to be having a conversation with you again, Jim.
It's been too long.
It has been a while.
Yes, yes, yes.
How did you first get interested in AI, Terry?
Well, that dates back to when I was in Chicago working at one of the first, if not the first, Remote Technical Support Center for IBM.
It's where it first helped desk for computer support remotely.
And that was, I think, that you and I were working.
We put some stuff in AI Magazine, certainly through the editors.
Letters.
I was thinking about these things when I was in between calls at the Center, and it occurred to me that I was reading Artificial Intelligence Magazine, in fact, at the time, and it occurred to me that it was applied epistemology, and I ran that idea by you, and you agreed, and that's kind of where the seed got planted.
Well the fact is what we have is a very sophisticated utilization of computer programs, which ultimately really are machines processing code that has to do with sequences of zeros and ones or high and low voltage, that are then in combination used to represent symbols such as letters of the alphabet, though it could be images or virtually anything you want.
When it comes to artificial intelligence, the idea here is to create programs that are so sophisticated and that can be connected to causal devices to perform actions that in the past would have required a mind to perform, such as on assembly lines.
When you have human beings having to perform repetitive motions that are mechanical-like, they can be highly successfully replaced by machines that are completely mechanical-like, because nothing is more mechanical-like than a mechanical thing.
And thus you have robot assembly lines for automobiles.
That seems to be an area in which you could have success with robotization.
And the fact that these are not thinking things doesn't make a difference.
But when it comes to something like, for example, RoboCop.
You may have seen Terry and we're getting reports now about slaughter bots developing robots that are designed to kill as to replace soldiers in combat.
We, of course, already have drones taking place, which are remotely controlled.
Turns out we have a terrific Abundant stockpile of individuals who are used to computer games, who turned out to be very good at controlling drones remotely, because it's very much like what they've grown up with is computer games.
You and I didn't grow up with computer games, but the new generations have.
The problem being with, say, Robocop or Slaughterbots, they cannot make subtle judgments of perception.
They can't tell a difference where there is a deserving target to be hit and an undeserving target to be hit.
One of the illustrations of which I like so much is from Total Recall, a film starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, where he goes to Mars, and he's gone to Total Recall where they implant memories or dreams as though you'd really been there.
And when he's actually on Mars, he's creating problems for the operation there of exploiting the resources of Mars by basically slave labor.
And they send a guy who's a technician from Recall to convince him that he's just having an hallucination that he's back on Earth in the Recall office.
And Arnold is looking at him, you know, contemplating whether or not to pull that trigger and blow him away when a bead of sweat appears on his forehead.
And of course, we're all an imaginary illusory.
There wouldn't be any beads of sweat.
So he blows him away very appropriately.
I don't think any programmer could anticipate, you know, the breaking out of little beads of sweat, which enable one to tell a difference if you're a thinking thing between a living being and an inanimate machine.
So I think this is ultimately destined for failure.
And of course, we have this Global depopulation program taking place, Terry, an attempt to eliminate 90% of the world's population.
I mean, it's simply stunning.
I wouldn't believe it if it weren't actually taking place, if it hadn't been announced, if it weren't being endorsed by, for example, the World Economic Forum, part of the Great Reset.
All this is vastly troubling.
I'd like your thoughts on any of the above, Terry.
Take it where you like.
Okay.
I always, it's one of the perspectives you took when I came to Florida years ago and we taped, spent a couple of days in a classroom, I was with IBM, at the AI Support Center in Palo Alto.
And we met for a couple of days and talked about these things and I marvel at how far they've come.
But one of the criteria that you put forth back in that day was that proof of intelligence, Turing test notwithstanding, was the capacity or the tendency, the predisposition to make a mistake.
Well, there's a difference between making a mistake and knowing you've made one.
And I don't think a machine can know it's made a mistake.
Well, these machines can't even make mistakes, Terry, because to make a mistake, you have to take something to be something wrongly.
As you know, my research on the nature of mind developed on the basis of Charles S. Peirce's theory of signs, the concept of minds as sign-using or semiotic systems.
Or signs are things that stand for other things in some respect or other for somebody, really for something if you want to encompass the possibility that non-humans or even non-biological entities could have minds.
Because a perfect illustration turns out to be a spider in front of a cathode ray tube or a TV screen seeing the image of a spider jumping on it because it thinks it's a real spider.
It's made a mistake.
I'm taking the image of a spider for a real spider, but in the process it's demonstrated that it is the possessor of a mind.
So that in my research on evolution and mentality, I've explained how the lower species have simpler forms of mentality, the higher species higher, none higher than human beings, with a basic distinction between iconic mentality, namely Things standing for other things by virtue of relations of resemblance, like photograph, paintings, drawings, map that resemble what they stand for.
Indexical cause and effect relation just as, you know, heat and flames can be effects of fire, smoke too.
Then you have smoke, you can make an inference to fire because of the causal connection.
The second level of mentality, the third being symbolic.
Well, things are merely habitually associated with other things.
H-O-R-S-E doesn't look like a horse.
It doesn't run races and occasionally win them.
So once you get to the level of symbolic mentality, you can start talking about things that are no longer in your immediate causal environment.
You can imagine transport other scenarios.
So it's very huge, huge development in terms of mental capacity.
And then I said two higher forms.
What is logical reasoning?
Because if you can use logic, inductive, deductive, abductive to draw inferences from premises to conclusion, that's a yet higher level of mentality that symbolic.
And then finally, the highest meta mentality.
The ability to use signs to talk about other signs and how to correct or improve them.
That's, you know, we have critics of movies, which are largely iconic because you're saying, but there's also symbolic because they're using language.
There's also all kinds of causal connections.
But using words as a critic, I have a nephew who's the head of the Chicago Film Critics.
He writes wonderful reviews.
Well, the reviews are in English, symbolic, and they're talking about other uses of signs in films, exemplifying that highest level of mentality.
But, but Terry, just think tables, chairs, rocks, you know, none of these things can make a mistake.
They're obviously not the possessors of mentality.
So what we have here is a way of segregating, separating out thinking things from non.
Right, right.
It's fascinating to me, Jim, how over the years I've seen the idea of semiosis, the processing of signs, as cognition, and thought about it in terms of those five types of mentality that you invented.
And the bigger picture, if I may kind of put this in context that I focus on these days, the biggest picture, bigger picture, I think, can be characterized using an acronym I use called GRAIN.
G-R-A-I-N.
And as an acronym, it stands for Genetics, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, and Nanotechnology.
And when you, and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists did a great job of this in 2018 when they came out with their existential threat nexus.
One of the three, it's like a classic three circle Venn diagram.
Climate is one, nuclear is another, and what I think of as grain is the third, disruptive tech.
Now let's go back to 1971-72 and conduct a thought experiment.
A landmark milestone tipping point publication came out in 72 called Limits to Growth.
And the Club of Rome, kind of like the World Economic Forum of its time, both of those date back three quarters of a century or longer.
But anyway, the Club of Rome commissioned this project with MIT where they projected into the future as best they could what it would be like, and they were mainly focused on population explosion and what the impact that would have on resources.
And their forecast, the modeling that the computer used, gave the Club of Rome inner circle a picture of 21st century reality that is remarkably accurate in terms of what you mentioned earlier, the extermination of the human species to extinction.
And having done that, now here's the thought experiment.
Put yourself At the table, at the Club of Rome, before that book comes out, and you're looking at the forecast, and it gives you a pretty clear picture that there will be peak oil, we'll run out of oil, we'll run out of energy, we'll run out of arable land, we'll run out of breathable air, we'll run out of drinkable water.
What's the dilemma on the table?
Well, the classic, not Peirce's pragmaticism, but the classic pragmatism that Dewey and James corrupted Peirce with, Come up with the dilemma sitting at the table.
Now, imagine you're an elite, hyper-wealthy, hyper-powerful, hyper-rich, hyper-controlling, hyper-ruling elite individual on the planet, and your peers are sitting there with you, let's call them the dirty dozen for no other phrase, and you're facing the dilemma of pragmatism, which says, or utilitarian pragmatism, which says, greatest good for the greatest number, so we got to do the best we can to rescue as many humans as possible.
If I may, I'll try not to be use profanity here, but if the other side of that coin is to help with all them, let's just get out of town.
What would they do?
They would throw every nickel and dime they had into grain.
Because with those five technologies, you don't need humans.
So, but you also have the tech to keep that select elite few humans alive and breathing and well, and if you buy up all the arable land and you lock down all the potable water, etc., etc., you kind of can do a new terraforming, if you will, of the planet Earth, and there's nobody left but the elites.
Yeah, and I don't think the elites want to change the diapers, dig the ditches, you Flush the toilets, blah, blah, blah, blah.
I think this is a self-defeating project.
In other words, that if they were to be successful, it would lead not just to the extinction of most human life on Earth, but virtually all human life, including the elites who brought it about.
I agree wholeheartedly.
I mean, I think that's a grand delusion to think that they would survive in the luxury they're accustomed to.
And that's exactly the kind of grand delusion that that kind of elitism, that Well, it's just elitism, pure and simple, with a horrifically evil vengeance.
So, yeah, I think you're absolutely right.
They're just in the crosshairs.
They're pointing the same pistol at themselves.
They're pointing at us.
Well, worries me that it's parallel to, you know, Macron thinking that NATO could enter the war.
I mean, NATO's already there.
- Yeah, Yeah, we've had the president of one of those Eastern countries saying that he was already president.
And we've had the French forces have been detected there, German forces have been detected there, American mercenaries have been detected there.
I've even speculated that Lloyd Austin, our secretary of defense, was actually killed there In a Russian missile attack when he was at a deep underground bunker in Kiev with the head of the Ukrainian Armed Forces who has been replaced since he's dead.
They had to replace him where?
It looks as though the present guy going around and being promoted as Lloyd Austin is either a body double or a severely wounded with an artificial leg.
One of my colleagues in JFK Research, Ralph Zinkai, is a chiropractor.
As noticed, how he's walking with a limp and appears to have an artificial leg.
At the very least, he appears to have had his leg blown off.
I've asked to get expert comparison about the faces to determine whether it's another body double, which, as I've been explaining, has become ubiquitous in American politics.
Just stunning stuff, Terry.
We're being lied to all the time.
And of course, if we do not know the truth, We cannot take actions that are appropriate to our situation because we don't know the situation we're in and may actually undertake measures that are counterproductive and self-defeating, as I would suggest is the case here, even with the elite being deluded about how long they could survive when they've, you know, eliminated most of humanity.
They like the vision of themselves in their castles.
Columngated communities surrounded by boats with the rest of us toiling as serfs and slaves in the field.
But Terry, I don't think it's actually sustainable.
I think they might get away with it for 50 years, maybe 100 max, and it's going to collapse, my prediction.
Well, one question that kind of nags at my speculations and conjectures and imagination about this, to mention a few of your epistemic resources, is How many of us would they have to keep around as breeding stock in order to perpetuate it longer?
Rhetorical question, but it's one that kind of nags at me in this scenario.
Limits to growth, by the way, didn't actually specify what would be the max population.
It depends on the quality of life.
You know, the Earth has so much resources, so it's a question of population, quality of life in relation to resources.
I mean, we got, what, around 8 billion worldwide now, and it hasn't seemed to me that Earth is unable to sustain the 8 billion, where I'm suspicious and have conjectured as many as a billion have died because of the Vax.
I mean, there is the most ambitious undertaking ever to kill off a large segment of humanity, just outrageous, contemptible in every possible way.
And incidentally, you mentioned the utilitarian standard of the greatest good for the greatest number.
In my view, you know, that mentality would justify Taking actions that satisfy or make happy the largest number, even if they're abusive of individuals and their rights, like the lynch mob.
You know, you got somebody accused of heinous crime and the lynch mob drags them out of jail, strings them up and kills them.
It might turn out subsequently that, in fact, they were innocent of the crime.
How many crimes has Donald Trump been accused with of which he appears to be completely 100% innocent and are now falling apart?
Where I believe the superior moral standard is the categorical imperative of a manual can't always treat others as ends and never merely as means, which can be translated into Aretha's R-E-S-P-E-C-T, always treat other persons with respect.
Well, you can see treating other people merely as means is the ultimate immorality.
Merely as means is the ultimate immorality.
Because in that case, like murder, robbery, kidnapping, rape, you're just treating other people merely as means to promote your own ends and goals.
And that exemplifies immorality to a T. Your thoughts?
I totally agree.
I mean, I've been comfortable and abiding in the categorical imperative, Kant's categorical imperative, since I was with you at the University of Kentucky.
Speaking of which, I, of course, studied that under Ken Henley.
You remember him, right?
Yeah, of course.
Ken would go to Florida Atlantic.
Wonderful guy.
He was the best man at my wedding.
Yeah, he passed away not all that long ago, early 2000s, I think.
But anyway, There's so many interesting questions that are just percolating around all of these topics, but kind of zeroing back in on the AI questions.
How might it be possible to program mechanical action to be able to do this?
Without intelligence, because I think I told you in the stuff I sent you, in my view, CHAT-GPT and Gemini and the other language modeling AI systems that are at the top of the pile right now, I think of them as philosophical zombies, if you've looked into what those are.
In the philosophy of mind, there's a lot of discussion around philosophical zombies.
And as an abstract idea, they're just things that are indistinguishable from human beings, In terms of their behaviors, their, let's say, dispositions, but their dispositions are not human, but they're indistinguishable by humans from being human.
But they have no consciousness, they have no sensory awareness, they have no sapient capabilities, they don't have any of those cognitive dispositions that humans innately possess.
And that's what I think is the best metaphor, at least, if not an actual empirical description, Well, let's elaborate on that.
with these language models, language-based, deep data mining systems.
I think they've proven that you can actually build.
It's not just abstract.
You can actually build a philosophical zombie and turn it loose with a machine gun like they're doing in Gaza.
Well, let's elaborate on that.
You can simulate human behavior up to a degree at the very least, depending on the sophistication of the programming of the equipment.
We've all seen the models of little walking dogs, Bob, Bob, Bob.
We've all seen the film Robocop.
We've all heard about, we know about the use of drones in combat.
Tell us more.
You're philosophical zombies, I take it.
Terry are things that act a whole lot like human beings but lack mentality literally they don't have consciousness or the ability to think but they're very well programmed.
My argument is always been there three fundamental differences between human beings and thinking thing the first is that what motivates the behavior of the sequences of marks that constitute programs.
That are causally connected to their behavior do not mean anything for the machine.
They could have a string of digits.
They don't know what it's supposed to be.
It might be the contents of a warehouse.
It might be accounting of a small business, you know, records of earnings and profits and so forth.
None of that means anything to the machine.
Second of all, that transitions Between thoughts which are affected in human beings by their past history, for example, you know, the fact that you've had different experiences in the past, my son who resides in Seattle,
For example, I looked at a postcard that was nothing but fog and it said on it Seattle and that made me realize there you got an iconic relationship between the fog and Seattle being so foggy and rainy.
You had the symbolic association of the word, the name of Seattle for that foggy, rainy place.
Make me think causally about my son who is present there in seattle how he graduated from reading i was very for his senior thesis was a play and where i had my.
Brother who's birthday was yesterday saint patrick's day was in the first class to graduate from university california at santa cruz majoring in psychology and literature.
Read the play.
We read the script and we couldn't make heads or tails whether it was a comedy or a tragedy.
My wife's sister, Terry, read it and said it was the most depressing things he'd ever seen.
Well, I and my former wife, his mother, were there to watch the production read and it was an hilarious comedy.
I mean, he knew so much about what I'm saying.
Here's a natural transition involving iconic Indexical symbolic associates that is very typical of human thought processes with the computers.
They are non-existent.
They don't exist.
The only transitions that are made from one form of behavior to another are by virtue of the programs that are meaningless to the machine, but meaningful For those who program the machines, and that although my third contention, and although you can make these machines increasingly more sophisticated in simulating human behavior, you can never bridge the gap between thinking things and inanimate machines, going back to the you can never bridge the gap between thinking things and inanimate machines, going back to
Terry?
Well, I think the motivation here for GRAIN, genetics, robotics, artificial intelligence, and nanotech, among others, but those in particular as disruptive technologies, I think the money… Terry, take a deep breath.
We got a break.
We'll return with Terry Rankin right after.
Stand by.
You're listening to Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
We'll be right back after this message.
Was it a conspiracy?
Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting This is a Drill, This is a Drill on Bull Hordes during the marathon?
That the Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities.
And that one would be set off in one minute in front of a library, which happened as the Globe had announced.
Peering through the smoke, you could see bodies with missing arms and legs.
But there was no blood.
The blood only showed up later and came out of a tube.
They used amputee actors and a studio-quality smoke machine.
Don't let yourself be played.
Check out And Nobody Died in Boston, either.
Available at moonrockbooks.com.
That's moonrockbooks.com.
If you think for one second that the Capitol will ever treat us fairly, you are lying to yourself. - Come on.
Because we know who they are and what they do.
This is what they do!
and we must fight back.
You can torture us and bomb us.
Fire is catching.
And if we burn, You burn with us!
Good evening.
Are you awake yet?
I hope.
We've tried and we've tried for years and years to use passive resistance and loud voices to make a change.
But time is over.
Your governments around the world have no other goal than to decimate your entire existence at the hands of the bankers and the elites.
The war is coming and it's your choice to decide if you want to be a warrior or a victim.
Denial is not a choice anymore.
Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, the number one listener-supported radio station on the planet.
Not giving up.
Revolution Radio. Radio. Radio. Radio. Radio. Radio. Radio.
It is no secret that the so-called mainstream media is best described as controlled propaganda.
Countless news stories are either totally ignored or spun with half-truths.
And because of this, essential facts and vital information are often compromised.
Join Dr. Ot every Friday night on Studio B at 10 p.m.
Eastern and learn why the story behind the story was nominated for a Peabody Award in its second year of producing unparalleled broadcasting excellence in 1997.
That is, if you really care about learning the truth.
The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listener-supported radio, and now we return you to your host.
Terry, go right ahead.
Give us your further thoughts.
Okay, going back to the notion of grain, genetics, robotics, artificial intelligence, and nanotech as a kind of cluster of disruptive technologies that are posing existential threats to humanity and nature.
One of the things that just automatically drew me to your work when you were, I think you were at the time, and we were UK, you were actually working on the proof for scientific knowledge at that time, right?
And you were handing it out in our seminars.
But anyway, what drew me to it was it awakened me to logical positivism and empirical positivism or logical empiricism.
And what a threat that was to intellectual authenticity.
For Popper, of course.
And I subsequently started tracking what's going on with that.
And it took me until just this century to kind of nail down the roots.
I don't know if you probably know this, but I don't know if many of your listeners do, but the Viennese Circle brief history came into existence when German and Swiss, especially in Vienna, a particular circle of philosophers and scientists known as the Vienna Circle, is seeing World War I coming, or yeah, in the wake of World War I and seeing World War II on the horizon, or fascism on the horizon.
They basically fled from Western Europe, right?
And they settled in England and they settled in the United States and became kind of the model for scientific thinking in the Western world.
And that persisted from their manifesto that was published in 1939, if I recall correctly, the Scientific World Conception.
That's just a bit of the history.
And then through World War II, They were just operating in the academic circles, and you didn't hear much about them, and the Ernst Mach Society kind of faded in Europe, and by the time World War II ended, you didn't hear about them anymore.
They had pretty much disbanded and disappeared from history.
Did you know, Jim, that they are back and alive and well since the mid-90s?
The Vienna Circle exists and is alive and thriving in Vienna at the University.
And most people in my own doctoral program, my lead mentor, had no clue about that.
But anyway, all of that to say, positivism is not dead.
And I would say it still is the reigning paradigm in Western scientism, be that as it may.
What I want to focus on is the cultural lag, which is a sociology concept, where what we know as a culture is Factually, historically, empirically and scientifically divorced from where things are really happening and what is really happening.
And that's been a concept that's been operative for me for a long time.
There's a public frontier of what's going on with disruptive technology especially, but the real bleeding edge frontier is a whole other story.
And right now the frontier in AI is with quantum computing in the hardware side and with automated self-programming on the part of these artifacts where they program themselves, and we just turn them loose to do so.
Now, when we cross that threshold, going back to scientific knowledge, your book, your magnum opus, a book I have about half a dozen copies of and regularly look into.
If I were on a desert island, it'd be one of the three books I'd want with me.
But anyway, the attack you mounted there on Bayesian probability as being, in a word, it's a farce as a model of thinking and a model of reality.
But what qubits or quantum bits are going to do is allow computers to not have a binary world to operate in, but a probabilistic distribution world to operate in.
And it will be Bayesian to the core, at least initially.
And then when that's in the firmware and the hardware of the machine.
The firmware connects the hardware to the software and when that Bayesian probability quantum bit architecture is implemented and the algorithms that the programmers.
Put into the memory.
And the machine is allowed to reprogram and program itself.
We now have an automaton.
And So what that raises now, looking back to that limits to growth agenda, what that does is it takes the wealth, power, vicious cycle, well, more wealth, more power, more power, more wealth, etc.
It just loops.
Vicious circle.
It affords the wealth, the wealth and power affords the rule and control of the tyrannous elite.
Another word for fascists.
And the agenda, since the 70s at least, if not much longer, going back through much of Western history, is to centralize rule and control and make it as absolute as possible.
And by turning these robots loose, to carry out the mass extermination by extinction agenda, we are going to be pretty much helpless, as far as I can see.
At least the great vast majority of it.
And here's where the heartbreak comes in for me.
I have three grandchildren.
I have a 13-year-old granddaughter, I have an 11-year-old grandson, and a 5-year-old grandson.
And when I close my eyes and take that model of grain run by the rest of an anonymous fascist elite to whom those grandkids are nothing but livestock for slaughter, it really does not sit well with me.
And it makes me think, if we don't foment a mass revolutionary uprising in the West and join it to a same kind of movement in the East, then we're fucked.
I'm sorry, we're done.
And I think that's kind of the trajectory, the history of humanity on this planet is on the downslope of.
And I think we've got decades left, but by the end of the century, this agenda is going to be pretty much fulfilled.
Now, I'm not a prophet.
I'm no prognosticator of any repute, but I've been looking at this since the 1970s and especially since 2015.
That's when I did my most, the only doctoral program I've successfully completed.
And I looked at, this was the question I looked at.
What's going on and what's the agenda?
And this is pretty much the conclusion I'm at today.
Fascinating, very fascinating.
How do you think it'll come about in terms of steps?
What are the steps that will be implemented to affect that outcome?
I'm sorry, what was the S word?
The steps that will be effectuated to bring about the outcome you foresee.
Well, we're still in the, did we ever lift the national emergency that was surrounded COVID?
No, I think not.
Yeah.
All right.
So that's a step.
There are many.
One step is always what's visible to us.
But there's a whole armament, a whole army marching toward that future.
And so the symptoms are looking at the army and the steps are things like the national emergency around COVID.
Next step, police state.
Absolute suspension of constitutional rights, suspension of freedom, liberty, all of the constitutional and Declaration of Independence mythology.
It's already a myth.
It's been a myth for who knows how long?
Civil War?
But it's a mythology.
Manifest destiny in the West, especially that being the United States version, has nothing to do with truth or reality.
It's the mythology that's used To delude, semiotically engineer is the best phrase.
It's the mythology that's used to semiotically engineer the mass population.
And so next step will be a police state.
After that, it'll just be encampment and sheeple led to slaughter.
I mean, soiled green comes to mind.
We'll be eating each other and not knowing it.
Yes.
Yes.
Now, I try to have these conversations with colleagues and friends, and they just, you know, they just kind of shake their head and look away.
And, you know, even in my own family, I'm just kind of the old man rattling on about the impossible future, the fantasies, dark fantasies of my own.
But I worked very hard in that doctoral dissertation in 2019 To cobble together the most rational and yet the most non-rational, and I want to come back to that, yet it's both the rational and the most non-rational.
I don't want to be irrational, but I acknowledge, and you'll remember this, I think, from one of the earliest papers I ever wrote for you.
Remember Arthur Bink?
The rational, our mentality is made up of the rational and the non-rational.
That's where your conjectures and imagination come into play is in non-rational dispositions.
That's where creativity and intuition and all of that comes into play.
So anyway, in my dissertation in 2019, I relied on both everything I had learned from you in philosophy of science and then some based on what I learned from you.
I went deeper into Perse and I leaned heavily on the other side of my Date of mind, which is intuition and creative and imagination.
And what I came up with was.
The only word for it was a cosmology that made sense.
Both non rationally, it felt right.
Resonated with me emotionally and settled into my thinking at the same level that your philosophy of science has.
And on the on the other side of my thinking left brain, if you will, if you like McGilchrist work.
On the left side, your philosophy of science became the firmament of how I looked at things scientifically.
And with those two together, this cosmology that I put together, looking forward, this is where I think we're headed.
And I see we're in a state of emergency now.
We'll be in a police state soon.
We'll go from that to effectively a 21st century version of being in Auschwitz.
How can we How can we forestall this outcome, Terry?
Revolution from the ground up.
I mean, it is taking Kuhn out of the scientific context and placing his needs for revolution in the cultural context.
Our cultural paradigms are killing us because they're rooted in mythologies like the Manifest Destiny and not rooted in things like Kant's categorical imperative.
And that paradigm has to be obliterated.
Now, that begs the question of what kind of power do we have?
And the answer is a long shot at best.
A very, very long shot, because we are not outmanned, but we're damn sure outgunned.
And that long shot is a mass uprising revolution where political differences between, say, you and me.
I doubt our political differences align except at the most broad stroke level.
We get down into the nitty gritty of just how broad is the concept of a false flag, for instance, and how likely are Manchurian candidates, for instance.
We get down into the logistics detail of it, we probably have some differences.
But they aren't differences, to borrow another of your phrases, they aren't differences that make a difference.
in the broad scope of things.
The broad scope of things is setting those differences aside as our only hope and acting in spite of those differences with one thing in mind, which is to bring down the fucking fascist tyranny that's running the world and move forward in whatever way we can.
This is why I work with Roger Hallam, because he has the best model, I think, for how to move forward.
And that's it.
Roger Hallam, by the way, is Extinction Rebellion.
And just stop oil, you know, some activist movements, pretty large scale, well into six figures worldwide.
And he's calling for revolution.
And so to answer your question, that's, that's, it's a billion to one shot, but it's the only shot left because it's a crossroads.
Either we do that collectively in mass, at least with half a billion people worldwide.
And that might kind of Turn the curve of this arc toward a better outcome.
Survival's off the table for the vast majority of people on the planet, but the remnant that's left, if we can turn the arc, they can come into a world with a different perspective, a different model that has more of the Kantian imperative in it, morally and ethically, and that has more love and peace and joy.
I mean, it goes back to the values we tried to promote in the 60s.
Which failed miserably, thanks to the Powell Memorandum, among other things.
I'm kind of rambling here, but I hope I've answered your question.
Yeah, so you see no viability in the contemporary two-party system here in the United States.
Yeah, elaborate.
Yeah, give us more.
Jim, I've only voted three times.
One was in 1968, when they killed RFK.
And by then, by when I was 14 in November of 1963, I knew that most of what I believed was a lie.
And that was a shock event for the world, obviously, but for me personally, realizing that most of what I believed was a lie, well, virtually everything that mattered that I believed was a lie, I started at 14 thinking about, okay, what am I going to do?
By the time I'm 18, RFK's running for president, and then they kill him in Los Angeles, and then they kill MLK, and then they killed Malcolm X. I mean, I'm just watching these assassinations drop like flies.
And so I voted in 68.
I watched the Democratic Convention on TV in Chicago, later went to live there.
It's now, I forget the name of it now, Lincoln Park, I think is the name of it now, but Memorial Park, Millennium Park is what it's called.
But anyway, watching all of that happen in the late 60s, I voted, but I didn't vote again until 2020, or 2016.
I voted in 2016, and I did not vote on the presidential ballot because the way I understand what I do when I go and cast a vote is I'm entrusting A fiduciary, socio-political, economic trust into the hands of the standing government or the changes made in it as a result of this election.
I'm turning over stewardship of my freedom, my rights, my liberties, all it goes with being a citizen into the hands of the government.
And in principle, that's what it's supposed to be.
But it's a trust that I'm exercising.
And what that trust has come down to today, I believe, is a Hobson's choice.
And they're both fatal.
So metaphorically, you walk in to cast that vote, or you take your absentee ballot and fill it out and mail it in, you're choosing between shooting yourself in the right temple with a 38 or the left temple with a 45.
That's what the two parties— That doesn't sound like a lot of fun, Terry.
No, it doesn't, does it?
A lot of fun.
So that was my second vote, was in 2016, because Hillary Clinton was a disaster.
And I know you're a little more inclined toward Trump than I am or was, but I didn't really see him as being a better, Kantian-motivated, for instance, alternative.
So I just didn't vote the presidential ballot.
I did other things.
In 2016.
2020, in the Biden-Trump runoff, here's how I voted.
I got an absentee ballot.
As soon as I got it, I burned it.
I put the ashes in a baggie, put the baggie in the return envelope, sealed it, signed it, and mailed it in.
I did the same thing with the draft card in 1970.
And to me, it felt every bit as good as burning that draft card.
Nothing ever came of it.
I expected I got on an FBI list or something, but I haven't been aware of any harassment for my views, and they're pretty much out there for the world to see.
Nobody looks, other than the people who know me real well.
But That's kind of where I think we stand with the legacy.
Now I just call it Circus.
Circus 2024 is ahead.
Circus 2020 is behind us.
It's a circus.
And the Carnival Midway is where we indulge our fantasies that we'll have, you know, a good outcome, a good leader, one who stands for our rights and our liberties and our privileges.
It's just that's the Manifest Destiny permanent lie.
To me, false flags are one kind of permanent lie, because once they're done, they become a permanent lie woven into the fabric of our culture.
Is that consistent with what you mean when you're calling out these false flags?
I'm doing everything I can to expose what's really going on here, and now the government is deceiving and misleading the public by staging these phony events, and then using the media to reinforce it, and then the legal system to punish anyone who takes exception and calls it out.
I mean, Alex Jones being a spectacular example thereof, mine less familiar, but perhaps Even more ominous case, because I had the evidence.
I mean, it's very strange with Alex.
I sought to intervene with an amicus brief in his cases in both Connecticut and in Texas.
And his team wasn't interested in having evidence that nobody died at Sandy Hook, nor were the Remington attorneys, Terry, even more strikingly.
And I think on reflection, that's because they believe The shootings are going to lead to gun registration and insurance, so the insurance companies were willing to shell out, what, 70 billion bucks in the expectation of making 70 billion.
You know, it's something like that.
They made some kind of cost-benefit judgment.
Financially, it was to their advantage to support the lie, even though they knew it was a lie.
I mean, here I had this book.
Over 400 pages of proof after proof after proof that this had been a scam at Sandy Hook, and yet they were willing to go down with a ship in spite of my efforts to intervene and lay out facts of the matter based on the research of the experts I'd brought together.
That is stunning to me.
But that in Wisconsin, You could have a judge just setting aside a massive, very detailed, relevant evidence.
Get this, Terry, he even set aside the reports of two forensic documentary experts.
I was being sued over my assertion that a death certificate, the only one that had at that point been made available on a blog, By Leonard Posner, a person identifying himself as Leonard Posner, supposed to be the father of Noah, the youngest member of the first great class who died, was a fake when it had no file number, no town or state certification.
It was an incomplete death certificate.
It turns out in Connecticut, not even parents are allowed to have possession of incomplete death certificates.
And attach to the complaint was a complete death certificate, file number, town and state certification.
I mean, it was bizarre because I was being sued over a death certificate I'd never even seen before, much less published or commented upon.
And yet the courts upheld it.
That went not only all the way through the Wisconsin appellate and Supreme Court, it went all the way to the U.S.
Supreme Court.
And even they declined to hear it.
Just Terry, Terry just I can't begin to tell you how distressing, because it turns out, this is quite ironic, that among the first 10 amendments, only the seventh, right to a trial by jury, has not been affirmed for all 50 states by the court.
It was Posner's attorney who made that argument at the level of appeal here in Wisconsin.
And when I did research, I discovered they were correct.
So what I was doing was teeing up the case so that the Supreme Court could affirm the 7th Amendment applying to all 50 states.
And it had 14th Amendment significance because in Texas, for example, which I use as a contrast case, this lawsuit would have been thrown out immediately.
It had no basis, no warrant, no substance.
And I'm just outraged because, you know, the Supreme Court had a perfect opportunity to To make an historic decision affirming the centrality of the Seventh Amendment and they let it pass and I have no doubt they let it pass because it was involving a controversial book.
Nobody died at Sandy Hook and the government.
Does not want to admit that it was a FEMA drill, even though I have even more evidence now, because the participants in the drill pointed out where I could find the event scheduled on the Connecticut FEMA schedule.
So they got like five, six drills, and one of them that's scheduled there is at Sandy Hook, where they even sent out a map to show how to get from Bridgeport, Connecticut, where they're located down to Dickinson Drive, where the school, as I say, Special needs, not even elementary.
Many people have seen that sign that says San Diego School and not recognized.
It doesn't have the keyword elementary.
They added the word elementary to the building and let it age, but it wasn't there originally because it wasn't even an elementary school.
That's how far the government goes in scamming the American people, Terry.
Just stunning.
Well, the fact that you, it's kind of like a JFK case.
The fact that you were able, well, you kind of set yourself up for it, but the fact that you were able to get a case in court about it or dragged into court about it, it's kind of like, who's the attorney in New Orleans that got a case before the court? who's the attorney in New Orleans that got a case Jim Garrison.
Jim Garrison, right.
You kind of are in a similar role to Garrison here.
He chased it like a bulldog and you kind of went in with teeth gnashing, but from a different perspective.
But that's kind of beside the point.
The fact is, Jim, you know, You're targeted precisely because you threatened that agenda that I talked about earlier.
I mean, the government is a meat puppet.
That's all it is.
It's a meat puppet for the ruling imperial modernity elite.
That dates back to the Enlightenment, for God's sake.
It was brought over here from Europe.
Anyway, that's my view on the historical grounds of this stuff.
But that vicious circle of wealth and power that affords that ruling elite the rule and control, you threaten that openly and publicly with the following.
And that's why you're targeted.
And they have the privilege of being able to do whatever they want.
Legalism, legal or illegal, is a distinction that doesn't apply for them.
But they can damn sure pick it up and beat you to death with it.
And that's the tragedy of our times, is the people who have the right handle and grasp on the truth and try to make it known walk into the crosshairs of that villainy.
Yes.
Well, Terry, it's a delight having you here.
I'm going to open the lines for callers.
The number is 608-957-8727.
608-957-8727.
Please call.
We're going to hit the hard break, of course, here momentarily.
But afterwards, I'll be glad to take your calls.
608-957-8727.
Speak with Terry Rankin and me about any of the issues we've been discussing here today.
Obviously, including AI, human intelligence, robotic behavior, the nature of morality, utilitarian versus deontological ethics, what it is to have a mind, what it is to be a moral creature.
Even Sandy Hook and JFK, you all are open for discussion.
So take advantage of the opportunity.
Call in.
9-5-7-8-7-2-7 right after the break.
And I'm surprised we're not hearing the break, Terry.
I don't know what to say about that.
Maybe they like what we're saying, so they want to let us know.
No, that's all automated.
No thinking thing out there.
We do have a call from 816.
Join the conversation.
Your thoughts, please.
Well, can I give you my take on what they're doing with AI?
Well, anyway, as you know, Jim, the first thing they did was take away our third eyes and our telepathy.
That was the first thing they did.
We used to all have our third eyes working, your pineal gland, and we all had telepathy.
And I managed to get mine working again, and it just opens up a totally different world.
But anyway, I'll have to explain something.
I had this girl I know that her sister, who's married and had a couple of kids, young, late 20s, whatever, got the COVID shot, okay?
And she called and she said, look, she's really acting weird.
She's disconnected from reality.
And it triggered a memory of when they did the The genome or the DNA code of mankind back in the early 2000s, they mapped our genetics or whatever and they found the God gene.
And Bill Gates said, Oh, that's of interest to me.
I know what to do with that.
So I called her in telepathically and I talked to her and she was just freaked out.
She said, I'm disconnected.
I'm no longer with source.
And so I had to get my friend we got our staff and we got our crystals and we got her connected back and she said.
I could get another shot.
And this could happen again.
I can't have this.
This is what she's telling me telepathically.
She said, I have to die.
Well, she's dead now.
She did die, but it was not from COVID.
She just ended up, you know, in a flood and killed her.
And she died that way.
But anyway, so what I think they're doing is they're using that meta cloud and they're getting consciousness stuck in that.
They disconnect from source and they get it stuck there.
And then they're trying to get this AI thing going so that they can eventually have like a Borg body that's not, you know, a normal body.
And then download their consciousness that they've put there from taking the shot or whatever.
That's probably like a big experiment.
And then they can just live forever because they're like a Borg.
And that way they avoid Judgment Day, because every 26,000 years we jump up to a higher level of consciousness.
It was supposed to happen December 21st of 2012.
That's why the Mayan calendar ends on that day, because we get all of our timelines For 26,000 years and then we jump up and when that happens, they're very vulnerable and they could meet Judgment Day and everything they're doing is to avoid this.
And I know Jim, your take on time, if your take on time was correct, You wouldn't have people like Edgar Cayce predicting that one day the Soviet Union would become like America.
America would become like the Soviet Union.
Or in my own case, when my mother died, I had dreams two weeks before it happened that it was going to happen.
And, you know, and then it happens.
So you wouldn't have things like that if time, the time you, you're with is illusion time.
We live in illusion, and they're making it even a bigger illusion.
And that's how they're able to do the things they do.
I mean, think about it.
You're politicians.
You're money.
You're religion.
It's fake spirituality.
You know, it's so bad that they get you circumcised so you've got a fake dick and you make fake children.
Okay?
So everything here, your water, your air, your fake third eye, your TV screen, your fake Astral travel, astral traveling ability, remote viewing your car, everything here is fake, and it enables them to do what they do.
Even their gods are fake.
They're egregores that they create with their mental consciousness, and then they use that against us, and abortion's part of that.
Abortion, I've told you before, it's just awful.
Anyway, that's what I have to say.
May I ask your name?
Brian, Brian, right?
Can I take some of that Jim?
Sure.
Brian, it's it's amazing how strongly I'm resonating with much of what most of what you're saying.
The phrase I use for the the way I named that weapon as a weapon of mass destruction.
I use the idea that Jim introduced me to about semiotics sign processing.
And the weapon that they're using to do this is what I call semiotic engineering.
They're engineering the way we process science, which is they're engineering our consciousness.
They're engineering our whole cognitive frame.
And I'll tell you about my closest encounter with that.
I sat in on a, I think it was Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Zoom session that dealt with The Machine-Human Interface, which is a coming frontier, where you're going to have implants, you're going to have devices that you wear, like, well, I don't have visibility, but I'm wearing a Fitbit on my wrist, and it tells me some basic biometric data, but that's just the beginning.
If they start implanting, and these guys, these were physicians and physicists and chemists on this panel, And they were talking about the benefits, in quotes, scare quotes, of having direct brain implants on the surface of your skull, electronically connected to your brain, so that they are integrated into your states of mind.
And I think you're absolutely right, Brian.
The hidden agenda there is to blind our third eye and to completely mute any telepathic abilities we may have.
And so I think you're dead on with that, spot on.
And I don't have any real differences.
We're into a realm here of the mystical, the mysterious, the metaphysics of the unknown and unknowable, which I believe is as real, if not an even more real realm than the one that I've so benefited from by exploring with Jim, the empirical realm, of the physical and the tangible.
And this is why, again, I go back to the positivism, Jim, this is why positivism remains a paradigm because radical positivism just says there's no metaphysics beyond what's necessary for physical law.
And they didn't even do that initially.
They had to confess that to get the empiricism they wanted.
And you, Jim, have done the most French and job of putting that probabilistic problem together with the metaphysics necessary and sufficient for it to be rational science.
Just by the way.
But, Brian, I so resonate with what you're saying, because I feel that semiotic engineering every time I look into my electronic third eye, because if I'm not careful.
And it's hard to be careful.
It does disrupt.
That's just wavelength of telepathic connection.
And at the same time, science is telling us the universe is conscious.
Oh, but it's a primitive consciousness.
It's nothing like our own.
You know, so the permanent lies just keep getting.
Where was the line from Apocalypse Now?
The bullshit piled up so fast you had to have wings to stay above it.
What would it even mean to say the universe is conscious?
I mean, consciousness entails the ability to use signs that is not incapacitated by virtue of, for example, a woman driving up to a stop sign.
If her toddler in the backseat put her hands over her eyes, she couldn't see the stop sign to apply the brakes and come to a complete halt, which she otherwise would do.
She's conscious.
What would it mean for the universe to be conscious?
What signs would it be processing?
It's an incoherent concept, it seems to me.
Now, Brian, with regard to your Comments on the nature of time, what I've explained is by the causal theory of time, time is measured in terms of periodic processes, such as the rotation of Earth around its axis, 24 hours defining a day of the moon around Earth, roughly speaking a month of Earth's orbit around the sun year.
There's nothing about the causal theory of time that precludes imagination, conjecture, speculation, people based on their experience sorting out.
What they think is going to happen, and when you have such a vast array of projections about what's going to happen, some of them are going to turn out to be correct, and you may even have identified someone who's good at prediction, but that has nothing to do with contradicting the causal theory of time, because that's an exercise of mental ability that is consistent with the causal theory of time.
Brian, yeah, go ahead.
I'd like to respond on that, then you can explain, and this is real.
I've been there.
This is going to sound crazy.
I went to Marshall, Missouri, and the town square is a big statue of a dog.
Okay?
He's Jim the Wonder Dog.
He was on planet Earth in the 1930s, and he had the ability to predict all this stuff.
There was a book out on him.
And I read the book, and he was a Llewellyn setter, and he could predict all this stuff.
Every year, they would have him predict the Kentucky Derby.
They'd get the names of the horses in the Kentucky Derby, put them out in the town square on a little piece of paper, and he would go to that name under a teacup or whatever and put his paw on it.
And every year, he would predict the winner of the Kentucky Derby.
He was invited to Hollywood, but the owner said, I don't want any publicity for him.
He wouldn't go.
He was supposed to go meet President Roosevelt, and he had all these other predictions, okay?
So you can't explain things like that unless the time that's in reality is different from the time we have in this illusion.
The time you're referring to is an illusion.
Reality's in a different, you know, dimension or whatever, and it's different there.
Things there run in like a hundred year cycles.
So that's what I have to say.
How can a dog make a prediction about a Kentucky Derby?
I mean, is it just lunar earthquakes?
You believe it, count me a skeptic, okay?
Even if some story like that were true, which I highly doubt, it wouldn't mean that time isn't real or measured by regular periodic causal processes.
You're talking about the content of events.
You're not talking about the causal process of time.
You're talking about anticipating the future of him.
Please let me weigh in here.
Okay, sorry.
There's an important distinction that dates back to the ancient Greeks in two different modes of time, if you will, which I believe, like you, Jim, that they would have to be cause of law governed.
No question.
But they drew a distinction between Kronos and Kairos as two different kinds of time.
Kronos is the one we count our time by.
It's a quantitative, linear progression of time bisected by atomic decay on the atomic clock or ticking of seconds or digital countdown based on the atomic clock.
But that's just the tick tock, tick tock, tick tock, tick tock of chronological time.
It's quantitative.
Kairos, K-A-I-R-O-S time is how we experience And this is an ancient Greek distinction that I agree has to be necessarily is bound up in the causal fabric of reality.
Objectively so, but our experience of it is both chronos, because we just for practical purposes need to be able to make schedules, so we gotta have a chronos, but The difference, Einstein pointed to the difference.
Hold your hand over a candle.
That feels a hell of a lot different than hugging your daughter.
And five seconds in one is a joy.
Five seconds in the other is agony.
Those kinds of qualitative differences don't have anything to do with chronos.
They have to do with experiential quality of experience.
And the mysteries are more, the causal mysteries, if you will, are more in that Kairos conception of time and things like, just as a kind of sidebar, things like quantum entanglement.
You can't really explain that causally.
It's still more mystery than scientific empirical fact or evidence, but they're making computer bits.
Now, Quantum bits, they're able to get entanglement down at a very microscopic level in a mechanical device.
And that's the bit that they're going to use to handle probability distributions in the Bayesian model in artificial intelligence to come.
But it's very helpful for me, at least, to keep those two different modes of times passing in mind.
I mean, I'm looking at my clock.
We're 15 minutes away, I assume, from finishing up.
And that in no way Comes close to conveying the delight that I've experienced in the hour and 45 minutes so far, if you see what I mean.
Brian, I'm not in any way denying, you know, the subjective experience of time is totally different or can be arbitrarily deviant from the objective.
Occurrence at time i'm telling you that objectively time is measured in terms of periodic causal processes where the cesium atom undergoing decay appears to be the most reliable thus we have what's known as the atomic clock.
None of that contradicts the claims you're making about imaginative anticipation of events in the future.
You can have all kinds of conjectures and speculation about the future that is completely independent of the way in which time is measured or generated by causal processes, especially periodic.
I mean, that's a point I'm making that I don't know seems to be lost.
Well, I don't think it's a lost point, Jim.
Terry, I mean by Brian.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
I just go with what I get, and then I avoid all that stuff because what I get is much more enriching to me.
It's like, you know, they show me that Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy are the same soul, and if you look, everything happens in In 100 year increments in my time, you know, Lincoln was elected president in 1860, Kennedy 1960, Lincoln was assassinated in 1865, Kennedy in 1963, it usually runs 100, 102 years.
Lincoln was assassinated in 1865.
Kennedy in 1963.
It usually runs 100, 102 years.
They showed me that Joseph Smith and Hitler, same soul, different timelines.
And Joseph Smith came to power with what he was doing in 1833 and Hitler in 1934.
They killed Joseph Smith in June of 1844, and they almost got Hitler in July of 1944.
I could go on and on and on how these things show up to me.
And I kind of understand what they are.
I like the idea because of the Kairos and Kronos, because to me that's yet another iconic connection between the two strands of DNA.
The Kairos and the Kronos are two strands of genetic time, if you will, that we live in.
And it's been An illuminating way to think about how I experience my life as opposed to what I think about my life.
The empirical side is one strand of the DNA and the.
Let's say subjective if you will, or less analytic side of experience where it's more qualitative than quantitative is the other strand of the DNA and the bonds between those two strands are just the events of our lives.
That's a very, very helpful metaphor for me.
Brian, go ahead, give us further thoughts of yours.
The Dark are trying to screw with our DNA by having black guys with white girls.
It's why all the commercials are this way.
It's why when the Indian tribes, when a baby was born, the medicine man would look at the Energy signature of that baby, and when he determined his level of consciousness as a newborn, he would announce to the tribe, this is our chief in the future, okay?
So, our leaders come down through our DNA, and the dark know that, and they're trying to upset it.
It's divine and natural for you to be racially prejudiced.
Because you're protecting the DNA of your bloodline, and that doesn't mean you hate black people or Asians or anything else.
You love them too, but you want them to have the same ability to protect their DNA.
You're one of my favorite authors, Tom Wolfe.
We wrote a good book about Chomsky and a guy named Daniel Dennett, philosopher of language and a Persian philosopher, Jim, who's done a brilliant job on rethinking the whole Chomsky model of language from a Persian perspective.
Are you familiar with his work, Daniel Dennett?
Yeah, sure.
Dennett was inspired by A commentary of mine in a book to write about Diverton's dangerous idea, where I'd observed that the laws of nature are nature's algorithms, and he took the idea and ran with it.
I'm sorry.
I'm misnamed.
It's not Dennett.
It's Daniel Everett.
No, I don't know him.
Tell me.
Tell me more.
He's a Persian scholar of the first order, and he was actually a missionary.
That's how I came across him, was through my missionary connections during my tenure with Wycliffe, and turns out he spent, I don't know, at least almost two decades working with an Amazonian tribe called the Piraha, translating scripture.
But he basically, in his tenure, living in the Amazon jungle with that remote tribe that basically no one had ever been in contact with before he showed up, and he was embedded with them for years and years.
But he abandoned his faith, became an apostate, became an atheist, and gave up translating the scripture for him.
He may have finished the work, I don't know.
But he took on their perspective about the nature of nature, and is still an academic and a scholar.
And I forget the name of the university he's affiliated with now, but he wrote How Language Began.
It's one of his best books, and he just takes it right out of The Percy and Hen book from the start.
What year were these books published, Terry?
They're current.
They were published in the last decade.
I'll send you the links to them separately.
Well, you know, my evolution of intelligence is about the emergence of mind from its primitive animal precursors up to modern and where I lay out the five different levels of mentality and so forth.
Does he, does he discuss my work, Terry?
I did not see anything in there, but I got, I got to say, what's the, what's the?
Send me some links.
I'm very curious about this.
There are three.
One's kind of a fun read.
One is kind of a fun read.
It's called Don't Sleep, There Are Snakes.
How's the last name spelled, Terry?
E-V-E-R-E-T-T.
E-V-E-R-E-T-T.
I'm pretty sure that's right, yeah.
Okay.
Brian, give us some final thoughts of yours before we conclude our conversation today.
Well, when you study those tribes like that, or the Inuit, the Eskimos up north, or you study the tribes, the Plains Indian tribes, what you find is they weren't Corrupted by what was put in the Bible.
The Bible was corrupted by the dark.
And their sex lives, they were just so completely different.
They would be doing all these so-called sins.
And to me, the dark got in the good book.
That's why it's black, the color of hate.
And they took out the seven attributes of a divine being are power, glory, perseverance, Peace, joy, and universal love.
They practice universal love.
When you study how their societies are set up, it's so different from us, and it protects their DNA.
It protects their bloodlines.
And what we do, because we're doing this Bible thing, it actually degenerates us.
It degenerates our DNA because we don't have the genetic diversity.
And all those tribes that haven't been corrupted do it the right way.
And I know that from all the Indians I see around here from the 16 66 timeline and I telepathically talk to him and it's completely different than the way we live.
So that's it.
Completely different than the way we live.
Absolutely.
Their sex lives are a lot better.
I'll say that.
Well, of course, I mean, from an evolutionary perspective, I mean, the laws of evolution are at work here producing the different species and they continue to operate where intervention by man the laws of evolution are at work here producing the different species and they continue to operate where intervention
That was an intervention to introduce artificial selection by bringing in factors with which most human beings were unadapted to, could not survive.
And thus we're having massive loss alive.
Another form of intervention, of course, is the mass flooding of our border, trying to change our demographics by deliberately introducing a new population to overwhelm the older, the original, because the newer population is going to be reproducing at a faster rate than the original.
And the idea is to make America no longer a A white Christian nation, but something far more heterogeneous and less significant on the world stage.
I mean, it's all in accordance with the laws of evolution.
Brian, I would really like it if you were to track down and get a used copy of my book, The Evolution of Intelligence, and to take a read and for us to come back and discuss some of these things again, because there are four different causal mechanisms that generate genetic diversity.
Which include genetic mutation, but sexual reproduction, genetic drift, and genetic engineering.
And similarly, there are four causal mechanisms to determine which genes are perpetuated in future gene pools, which include natural selection, sexual selection, group selection, and artificial selection.
And I think we could have a far more sophisticated discussion of these matters if we had a common framework here, so I'm inviting you to track down and copy the book.
It shouldn't be expensive.
Go to Amazon.com, The Evolution of Intelligence.
Might you give that a try, Brian?
I just don't read books.
I get my information.
I download.
That's just how I am, Jim.
I just do what I'm told.
Thanks for being here, Terry.
Thank you.
Excellent.
Lots of good stuff.
Everyone, thank Brian for calling in.
Everyone, spend as much time as you can with your family, your friends and people you love and care about because we do not know how much time we have left.
Thanks for being here.
Thank you, Jim.
▲
Export Selection