Dennis McKenna recounts his early skepticism of the RV Heraclitus’s 1973–2017 ecological research, including Biosphere 2 and his brother Terence’s DMT-induced "teacher" entity at La Terreira, sparking theories like Time Wave Zero. They debate reality’s fluidity—psychedelics as valid experiences despite absurdity—and McKenna’s Peru-based psychedelic therapy hub for PTSD, leveraging indigenous traditions amid Canada’s legalization and U.S. resistance. Rogan and McKenna warn of humanity’s self-destructive technological trajectory, framing psychedelics as tools to curb arrogance and restore ethical symbiosis with nature before irreversible collapse. [Automatically generated summary]
This is about the RV Heraclitus, which was associated with the Institute for Ecotechnics, which is close to your face.
Okay.
There you go.
Further associated with, you know, how do I explain it?
It was actually a theater company called the Theater of All Possibilities.
But the Institute for Ecotechnics was started in the early 70s, and they built a ship, this Chinese junk, essentially, with a feral concrete hull.
And my connection was they have cruised the world, essentially, since 1973, looking into different things relevant to global ecology.
They've done sampling in the Antarctic.
And in 1981, they decided to go to the Amazon.
And I was doing my graduate work in Iquitos at that time.
So that was my connection with the Institute of Ecotechnics.
And, you know, at the time, I thought these people are nuts.
I mean, they were kind of nuts, and they were very naive about what they were doing as far as doing ethnobotanical work.
Not that I wasn't naive about it at the time, but I had a better handle on it than they did.
Anyway, that was the original connection.
And the same group, years after I had more or less, you know, kind of severed, I didn't really sever my relationship, but I kind of distanced myself from them.
But then that same group went on in the 80s to build Biosphere 2, which you probably heard of.
And they had financing for Biosphere 2, so they'd gone to a whole other level of ambition and madness.
Biosphere 2 was the idea of building a terrestrial environment that was completely shut off from everything and that was self-sustaining.
And it was a huge complex.
It was a big, a series of domes, really.
Each dome replicated some earthly biome, like the desert, the rainforest, the ocean, and so on.
And the idea was that it was a dry run for building a Mars colony, you know, or some planetary colony.
And the idea was Mars.
And they put people into this environment for like two years at a time to see if they could make it work, if they could really have a balanced ecosystem.
Well, as it turned out, it didn't work so well.
But they learned a great deal from this.
And they also got a lot of adverse publicity because I think the science establishment, in a way, became kind of jealous.
And, you know, like these people, they don't know anything about what they're doing.
They got $600 million to build this.
What the hell?
So they got a lot of criticism.
But the fact is, a lot of good science came out of this.
And they're still going.
And the interesting thing is they've had their fingers in many pies.
They have a gallery and a hotel in London called the October Gallery.
I always stay there if I'm in London.
They have a publishing company, the Synergetic Press, based in Santa Fe.
That's who published this book, ultimately.
So it's kind of like 30 years later, what goes around comes around.
They've been sampling, looking at global warming in both the Arctic and the Antarctic.
They, of course, in 81, they wanted to do ethnobotany in the Amazon.
And they had Schultes on their board of directors.
And the director of the expedition was Wade Davis.
And I was doing my graduate work at that time.
And we knew they were coming.
So as a result of that, I was able to join the expedition.
And Wade and I, at the time, he was selected by them as the chief science officer.
And by the time I got there, he was getting a little disillusioned with them.
And I guess you could say the personal dynamic was kind of strange.
And like if you read my book, The Brotherhood of the Screaming Abyss, there's a couple of chapters.
There's a chapter on this.
But over time, even Wade changed his mind.
And I now get the larger picture of what they were trying to do.
And, you know, it's a real story.
I mean, these people didn't recognize boundaries.
That's the thing.
And because they were theater people, they actually understood, which I didn't at the time, that what they were doing and their whole effort was really a performance, you know, on a global level.
They did all these things, kind of realizing that this was the theater of all possibilities.
And they had a theater in Austin, Texas by that name.
Well, some of the people that were on that 1981 expedition are now, I mean, they're still associated with it.
So it has some longevity.
Others have passed on.
Others have left in disgust or they had enough.
But I was able to reconnect with people that run, they have this ranch in Santa Fe called the Synergia Ranch.
And one of the things that's based there is this press, the Synergetic Press.
So when I was doing this project with the book, I was casting around for who's going to publish this after we do it.
And they stepped up and they publish a lot of psychedelic stuff.
They have a book called The Mystic Chemist about Albert Hoffman.
They republished the Ayahuasca Reader, which originally Eduardo Luna and Stephen White had published.
Well, they expanded that and they published that as a very beautiful, you know, redo, essentially a second edition.
Very nice work.
Then Don Lattin, who's not that well known, but he's written several books about the history of psychedelics and the people involved.
And he wrote a book that they published called Changing Our Minds, ironically, about the same time Michael Pollan brought his book out.
So Michael Pollan, being who he is, got all the attention.
Don't got very little.
Still a good book, you know.
So they're good people.
I've decided that some of my initial judgments, not knowing the people, and when I just sort of walked into their reality in a ketos when I got there, which they never bothered to explain.
It's like, you know, they never said, oh, well, you know, we're acting funny because we do things differently than you do, you know.
And they learned a lot through this Biosphere to project, which was a real lesson to everybody.
But anyway, so because they still existed and really because of the resurrection of the ayahuasca reader, that had been my recent contact with them.
So when I decided to do this book, I thought they're a good candidate to publish this book.
And they totally got it.
They took it on.
They've done an amazing job.
And this book, or this set, as you know, you know the genesis of it because you had a lot to do with it.
When I was here last year, you know, the backstory is in 1967, the U.S. government, the National Institute of Mental Health of all people, put together a conference in San Francisco in 67 called the Ethnopharmacologic Search for Psychoactive Drugs.
And nobody noticed.
It was a private conference.
It was not open to the public.
The only thing the public ever got out of it was the Symposium Proceedings, which is the first book there.
And I was very heavily influenced by that book because somehow or other it came into my hands at age 17, you know, bored teenager living in Paonia, Colorado, wishing that I was with my brother in Berkeley, where all the action was at the time.
And I'm like, what is this book?
So I totally devoured it.
And about the same time I discovered the teachings of Don Juan, which my brother gave to me for my 18th birthday.
And although much in there is probably fiction, those two books gave me a complementary perspective.
The teachings of Don Juan was the ethnographic lens through which you could look at the use of psychedelics and which I, you know, it kind of filled in those spaces.
Then this book came out and it was like, and I knew who Schultes was.
I knew who a few of these people were at the time.
Schultes and Shulgin and Andrew Weil were actually on the original faculty.
And so when the book fell into my hands at age 17, I was very excited and I read the whole thing.
And this is what really helped me focus my career.
It made me aware that maybe I could make a career out of ethnopharmacology, you know, and in my very naive 17-year-old teenage brain, I thought, wow, man, I can get paid to get stoned.
It was in part that, but, you know, there was more to it.
But that's what led me to pursue that career.
And so this book has always loomed large in my sort of pantheon.
Originally, there were supposed to be follow-up conferences for this, for the government to have every 10 years.
Well, the war on drugs scotched all that.
They became embarrassed that they had anything to do with a conference like this.
Oh, for people to kind of report on their work and sort of mark the state of the art in psychoethnopharmacology at the time.
So the first book was really where things like the snuffs and ayahuasca and, you know, and other things that we don't think of really as psychedelics, like Kava and Amineta Muscaria, all of those.
The 67 book was the first one where, you know, there was a collection of the leading experts at the time, most of whom you've never heard of, but there were iconic people like Schultes, Andrew Weil, Shulgin, another interesting fellow, many interesting people.
One of the most interesting in the first conference was a gentleman named Stephen Zara, a Hungarian chemist and psychiatrist and pharmacologist.
And he originally worked in Budapest, and eventually he moved to the States and became pretty high up in the National Institutes of Health.
He was the director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse in the late 50s.
But the interesting thing is before that, he was just a researcher at a hospital in Budapest.
He applied to Sandoz to get LSD.
He wanted to do research with LSD.
They refused to give it to him because he was behind the iron curtain.
So he synthesized DMT, being a chemist, and he had to determine if it was actually a psychedelic.
So in the grand tradition, he did that by self-injecting himself.
So he's a true pioneer, and I invited him to the conference.
So he's the first person to definitively show that DMT was a psychedelic.
He's now 95.
He's in great shape.
I invited him to the conference, but he said, well, I'm 95.
I don't go anywhere anymore.
But he submitted a very nice video introduction to it.
And the other interesting thing that he did, after the 67 conference, he was thinking, well, what's going on?
And what is it with the hippies and all the psychedelics?
And so his supervisor said, well, Steve, why don't you go over to Haight-Ashbury and hang out for a while?
So he did.
And he submitted a paper called The Scientist Among the Hippies.
And they wouldn't let him publish.
They said, you can't publish this.
So it sat in his drawer for 50 years.
When this book came along, he said, I have something I'll submit here.
I don't care if they, you know, it doesn't matter anymore.
So one of the papers in this second volume is his original 67 paper.
And then, so the second volume is kind of, you know, because the government didn't step up to the plate like they said they would, there was no follow-up conferences.
And I've, for a long time, I wanted to do a follow-up conference.
I wanted to do it on the 30th anniversary, 97.
It never happened.
Time passes.
So 2017 was the 50th anniversary.
It all fell together all of a sudden.
You know, I found a venue in the UK, a beautiful country house that was called Tyringham Hall that was run by one of our friends who shares our perspective.
He made that available.
We put the word out.
We got support to produce the conference.
So we brought about 16 people to Tyringham in England, spent three days presenting.
And those videos are all up on the web.
I'll send you the link.
That's open access.
The other thing that we couldn't do in 67 that we did in 2017, there was no Facebook live streaming.
Well, all our videos were Facebook live streamed.
We had 60,000 people watching these lectures at some points.
So that's amazing.
That's incredible.
And that created excitement.
And then we basically paid for the book by pre-selling, pre-selling it.
And a lot of people stepped up and ordered.
A lot of people were very patient because I thought, oh, this will be out by Christmas, right?
Well, no, it's a big project.
So it took six months longer than I thought.
But now it's out there.
And hopefully it'll be a landmark in the field like the first one was.
And what we wanted to do to honor the first one was reprint the first one along with the second one.
So that's why it's two books.
We did a high-resolution scan of the original book and reprinted that one.
Yeah, we can ask that question about a lot of things.
What if that didn't happen?
Like, the psychedelic research that's happening now, it's taken 40 years to get back to it.
And basically, the psychedelic research is a lot of the same thing was going back, going on back in the even late 50s and 60s.
What's going on now is they're repeating a lot of that, but with more rigorous experimental design, with better controls and all that.
But it's the same stuff, you know, which is wonderful.
I mean, I'm all for it to see this work done.
I also have plenty to say about the limitations of that strictly clinical sort of medical approach.
I mean, I think Organizations like MAPS and Hefter have to work within the constraints of what's possible.
But I think in some ways they, you know, they force themselves to, they're forced to put on blinders in a certain way to what else is possible.
You know, for example, the way that ayahuasca has been sort of marginalized.
And there is research going on about it, but there's nothing improved in the States.
And I think it's important to pursue that work.
But because you can't synthesize ayahuasca like you can psilocybin or MDMA or these things that are under clinical trials, it's much more difficult to study within the constraints of a phase one clinical trial.
But in fact, ayahuasca is touching, I think, far more lives than, say, well, I can't say about mushrooms because mushrooms are a lot out there, but the potential, the impact that it's having on society is much greater because people are rediscovering this.
And people are, I think, reaching out for anything that will work.
As a society, we are spiritually bereft.
And I think there's a pervasive sense of despair and a feeling of, what would you call it, spiritual impoverishment or something as we see that all of our institutions are becoming, you know, we're seeing behind the curtain and realizing that they're empty.
You know, they don't really have anything to offer on the spiritual level, especially religions.
People are rejecting religions as the sort of, you know, shell game that it is, empty promises that don't deliver.
And I think that's a lot of why people are reaching out for these plant medicines, you know, and going to South America to have ayahuasca or finding them in their own community because people crave spiritually meaningful experiences and our culture needs it more than ever.
You know, I mean, I sometimes say psychedelics are the antidote to faith.
You know, you don't need faith to take a psychedelic.
What you need is courage.
You know, religions offer faith, which is basically saying, here's a list of things that you need to believe without question.
And if that's your inclination, fine.
But most of us are more skeptical.
We need something tangible, something more tangible.
So I think faith is, I mean, that's how religions entice you to believe.
But I think that in a way it's deceptive.
Why do you have to believe when you can, in that intensely personal encounter between you and a plant teacher or you and a plant and a molecule, you can experience for yourself?
You don't need faith.
You can say, I know that this exists and the realms that it opens up for you are real because I've experienced it.
And I think faith, I think that we, in a way, at least the Abrahamic religions, Christianity and Judaism and Islam, to a certain extent, have poisoned the Western mind,
and encouraged our separation from nature and basically propagated this idea that we're separated from nature and we own it and we have every right to dominate it and we're seeing the consequences of that.
We have to rediscover this indigenous perspective that we are part of nature.
We're properly framed, we should be symbiotic with nature.
It's all about symbiosis.
It's all about collaborating with the global community of species to advance consciousness, not just of our species, but of the whole community of sentient species.
This is what the psychedelics can do.
And I think this is what the psychedelics are desperately reaching out to our species.
And anybody who watches my podcast or listens to me is, this is my rap.
Wake up, you monkeys.
You're wrecking this place.
It's that simple.
You're wrecking this place.
And that's because you have to re-understand your relationship to nature.
Realize that, number one, you monkeys aren't running things.
The plants are running things, basically, because they're sustaining life on Earth.
Other things are, that's part of it.
And then once you wake up to the fact that, you know, we're in a participatory, collaborative role with the community of species, then we have to change a whole lot of things that we're not doing right now because we're certainly not developing sustainable ways to live on a global scale.
And we're seeing the consequences of this now.
What's dismaying, besides the fact that it's happening, is that there is so much denial, so much refusal to recognize this on the part of the people that supposedly are running the show, and they're willfully ignorant, and this is a problem.
So, you know, I think a lot of people will agree with me.
A lot of people who listen to this show will agree with me when I say I've pretty much given up on politics.
Politics seems to me irrevocably broken.
Many other institutions are dysfunctional, if not broken.
I mean, science is corrupt, government is corrupt, corporate, corporatism is, you know, these are all flawed systems because they're not, they don't have a base of compassion and recognition of the interrelatedness of all things.
And psychedelics are a catalyst for waking up.
And so once people have that experience, then their perspective is changed.
And if they're influential, they can go out and make change on a global scale.
I think it's so important that Michael Pollen put out that book because a guy who's a mainstream, straight-laced guy who's written about architecture and agriculture and all these different things where people really respect his opinions and his work.
This guy has not just written this book, but has also gone out in a limb and had a bunch of different psychedelic experiences in controlled settings and talks about them and the profound impact that it had on his, at one point, skeptical mind.
He was very skeptical about what these things were.
No, I've loved his work for a long time, and I'm really delighted that he's come out and written about this.
There are some things about his book, I have to say, that I'm a little disappointed, but then I also have to say I'm only about a little over halfway through it.
Seriously, I'm not sure why he did that, if that was a conscious decision, but I'm kind of disappointed because I think I have a perspective that, you know, I have some things to say that so far haven't been said in this book.
And things that Michael Pollan would completely relate to.
You know, he's the one that brought up the idea that with respect to plant domestication and our relationship with our food plants, we think we're growing, we're cultivating plants.
Actually, plants are cultivating us.
This is plants' program for world domination.
And the same is true of all these teacher plants.
This is why they're out there on the global stage now.
And he didn't, maybe he will get to it.
I mean, I'm only mildly jealous.
I wish he had talked to me.
On the other hand, what he has written is going to be important.
It's going to be influential.
I mean, this will be influential to a small number of people.
Pollen's book is going to bring it to the attention of millions.
Yeah, it's going to open people's eyes and refresh the way people view this whole subject.
I think when you look at when you're talking about ancient cultures and the use of psychedelics going back thousands and thousands of years and then this dip somewhere around 1970 where it almost seems to have gotten down to a very low hum, but now the drums are beating again.
I don't think it's the answer to everything, but I think it's the glue.
I think it's there's a thing about the psychedelic experience that forces you to recognize that you have these pre-established ideas of what things are and that you've kind of put them in these boxes and you've sort of pushed it away and like, well, I've defined what a city is and I'm just going to put that over there and now I know what that is.
I'm not going to think about that anymore.
I've defined what a road is.
I've defined, I mean, I remember after one of my first DMT experiences, just sitting around looking at roads differently.
Like I was on a road.
I was like, this is the craziest shit ever.
We've decided that it's normal to lay this hard surface down on the ground so we could roll these fire-breathing pieces of metal.
It's so crazy, isn't it?
But it was before that, it was just a road.
It was always a road.
But after that, it became this weird symptom of what we're doing by erecting these massive structures and cities and that we need this ground in order for us to use these vehicles on.
But in the process of doing that, we've sort of marred the landscape with it everywhere.
Well, psychedelics do give us the chance to rethink a lot of things.
I think we've talked before about Simon Powell's work.
He writes about psilocybin, wrote The Psilocybin Solution, and that was his first book.
And I think his latest is The Magic Mushroom Explorer.
But something in his work really struck me, which is he pointed out that you have to look, that psychedelics in some sense are scientific instruments.
They give you an opportunity to look at phenomena in a way that you've never looked at them before because they have this, because they take you out of your reference frame, you know, or they bring the background forward, or there's different ways to describe it.
And Pollen actually describes it well when he talks about this disruption of the default mode network.
It enables you to see patterns in nature that you're programmed not to see.
You know, a lot of what our brain does, this whole reducing valve idea, is it filters many things out.
It lets in just enough of the external world that you can relate it to prior experiences, what you think you know, and you construct this artificial model of reality.
And that's what you inhabit.
And I've said this many times, maybe worse than Pollen, maybe better, but I talk about how we're living in a hallucination, essentially, that's constructed by our brains.
And in order to just deal with all the information that is available, it has to really restrict it.
It has to put a choke on it so that what does get in can make sense.
That's fine for ordinary consciousness, but you are prone to overlook things about reality that are important.
And psychedelics temporarily give you an opportunity to lower those, lower those mechanisms, that default network or sometimes called neural gating.
If you're in a safe place where you don't have to worry about your safety, you know, there is no saber-toothed tiger going to come get you, you know, and so you don't have to worry about your safety.
Then you can just relax into it and you can appreciate things that are always there.
It's not that they're not there.
These are not things you imagine.
They're just things that you never notice because you're programmed not to.
So tremendous learning tools.
And many, many scientists have said, you know, their insights have come from their psychedelic experience, from Steve Jobs to Crick to Kerry Mullis.
Some of these folks admit it and others deny it, but it's true.
So there are many, many things we can learn from psychedelics.
That's only one of them.
But from a scientist's perspective, that's an important one.
One of the things I want to do is create a system, a situation where you can bring specialists together in a discipline, say mathematics or quantum physics or astronomy or even whatever art, and have these collective sessions together and then let people share their insight, essentially creative, problem-solving or creative sessions.
And that's the other thing I think we're looking for.
We need to develop a context in which these things can happen.
And that's one of the restrictions of the strictly clinical approach that I chafe against, because they have to be, you have to have a problem.
It has to be to treat something, depression or PTSD or whatever.
But we really need to use, you know, that's not the only thing psychedelics are good for, sure.
They can help people with mental problems.
And in our society, who doesn't have mental problems, you know, as a society, we're wounded.
But it goes beyond that.
They are learning tools and teaching tools.
And, you know, you begin to see some of this in the work that Roland Griffith is doing.
You know, he's been able to get approval for people to take psilocybin for spiritual development, which is not exactly an illness for actual spiritual insight.
He's got a clinical study going on right now where he's recruiting religious professionals, people who are pastors, priests, rabbis, imams, other types of religious professionals and putting them through his protocol.
And it's having a tremendous impact on the way they view their profession and the way they view religion.
And like Bob Jesse says very eloquently, we need to find contexts in which we can use psychedelics for the betterment of the well, for the improvement of the well.
And you can't do it right now under the current regulatory restrictions.
Now, I think it's improved.
I think it gradually will improve.
But this sort of ties into what I'm trying to do now.
Now that I've got this book off my plate, I mean, this is kind of a bucket list item, something I've wanted to do for a long time.
And now it's done.
Now I have to help sell it, but that won't be too much of a problem.
And the people that contributed to this, to the second volume, I didn't want all the same people that always come to these conferences and always say the same things.
So some of the people in there are not that well known, but they were known to me, and I felt that they had important things to say.
So, you know, some of them are known within the community, and others are pretty obscure.
But there's always this, you know, this like, you know, this passionate amateur type person who maybe they don't have credentials, but they have incredible knowledge up in their head, and they're completely obsessed with this stuff.
And there's a few of those people in there, too.
So it's really, really, really, it was really satisfying to be able to do it and make it worth people's time.
I was able to pay for, well, me and my supporters.
A lot of it came through the Institute of Ecotechnics, actually.
That turned out to be a good non-profit channel through which we could get donations, grants, essentially.
We didn't want it to go through Hefter because it might look like a conflict of interest.
Silly notion.
But, you know, because of that, we were able to pull this off.
We produced the book.
We even gave everybody a modest honorarium.
So that's the way conferences are supposed to be.
But what's happening for me now and actually predates this and has been for a long time is, you know, I've been doing a lot of work in Peru for really I've been hosting retreats for ayahuasca since about 2012.
And that's been very gratifying work.
I've seen transformations in people.
I see what a difference it makes to create the right environment and get people able to come and in a safe place.
And my whole approach and the people I work with, our whole approach is we're not here to tell you what's supposed to happen.
We're here to create an optimum condition and you work it out.
This is a dialogue between you and the plant teacher.
You know, it's not the shaman.
The shaman, if it's a good, he's a good shaman, facilitates that process, but does not try to control it.
He's there for support.
He or she is there for support.
What really happens is the interaction between, I mean, the medicines are the real teachers.
And we're here to facilitate that and also to tell people if they need help integrating it or figuring it out, that's fine.
But that's different than saying, well, this means that and you're supposed to think this about it.
You're supposed to think about whatever you want.
I mean, you're supposed to learn to use your own mind to think for yourself.
So the extension of this is that I'm in the process of, I guess, manifesting this idea.
And what I'm working on now is I want to create an academy in the Sacred Valley, which is an academy of natural philosophy.
And so I have a name for it because a lot of people have told me that your name has got to be in this.
And I'm a kind of a self-effacing guy, but I recognize that I have a certain iconic recognition.
So, okay, if that's what it takes, I'll do it.
So what we're going to call it is the McKenna Academy for Natural Philosophy.
We're going to have, it's going to be much more than a retreat center.
We're going to have retreats.
We're going to have therapeutic programs for people to get treatment and programs for people to learn to use psychedelics, for therapists to learn to use them.
But that is not the whole program.
The idea, we're going to have conferences, global impact conferences, along the model of this.
This conference was what made me realize this is possible.
We're going to have impactful conferences that will really have a global reach.
And through webinars, through the web, we can share this with thousands of people.
And it will be a place for, you know, the second part of the title is, so it's the McKenna Academy of Natural Philosophy.
What's natural philosophy?
Natural philosophy is what science used to be called before it became corrupted, before it became preoccupied with quantitation, before it became reductionist, all of the things that have constricted the scope of science.
This is going to be a more open thing that doesn't depend on corporate funding and that sort of thing, where, first of all, we recognize that scientific knowledge is valuable and we embrace that.
But we also recognize that it has inherent limitations.
Just by the nature of the beast, it has inherent limitations and certain things are difficult to investigate within that rigid framework.
But that doesn't mean they're not worthy of investigation.
paranormal, you know, all of these things that people, you know, stigmatize as woo-woo and crazy, you know, and we're not going to – the idea is to bring rigor to these things, to say, yes, there are a lot of phenomena that we don't understand.
And laws about these sorts of things should never be made by politicians because they always have a different agenda.
And they're not qualified to make these kinds of laws.
And they're largely idiots or the ones that really control power.
They're not informed about psychedelics.
Psychedelics were blanket prohibited all at once, pretty much.
And the focus was all on LSD.
All these other things got swept up into this hysteria, essentially this hysteria, that psychedelics were going to change the youth and change society.
And you know what?
They were right.
They were absolutely right.
They were not stupid in that sense.
It did bring out these changes.
But now we're past that.
So science is again slowly opening up to psychedelics.
I think people are appreciative of it now that we know that we have gone through that dip where it was outlawed and stigmatized and people were never talking about it.
Like, you know, just a few years ago, I mean, I want to say early 2000s, you would talk about mushrooms or any sort of psychedelics and people would look at you like you were crazy.
Well, Joe, I mean, to Terence's credit, he was one who continued to talk about it all through the 70s, the 80s, the 90s.
I mean, and I give him tremendous credit for that because he was dismissed and he was out there.
He was a pioneer.
And I think he really had a lot to do with keeping this conversation alive.
That, along with the fact that, you know, largely through our efforts back in the 70s, but other people contributed like stamina and other people.
But we published this little pamphlet, the psilocybin mushroom magic grower's guide, which put in the hands of, you know, every nerdy 10th grader, essentially, the tools to grow psilocybin mushrooms.
And that's how it got out to the world.
And our motivation when we did that, it was partly mercenaries.
Yeah, we can grow mushrooms, make a lot of money.
Well, we grew mushrooms, we made some money, but the real motivation is we wanted people to be able to verify our own experiences.
The stuff that we experienced at La Terreira was like so nuts that we thought either we're completely deluded or there's something going on here.
So we needed affirmation from a wider community that, hey, there is really weird shit going on here.
And we put it out, and it's now, you know, mushrooms are probably for, I'd say for most people, they're the first psychedelic that they encounter.
You know, maybe LSD, but chances are these days it's mushrooms.
Although occasionally, you know, I can kind of channel him.
But I have stuff to say.
I don't say it as well as he does.
But we were so much on the same wavelength about this.
So he was the bard of psychedelics throughout the 70s, 80s, and 90s and refused to, you know, when no one else was talking about it, he was talking about it.
But sort of the theme of this talk was if you look at the what you might call it the topology, the typology of alien encounters, there are certain patterns that come up again and again.
And if you tick those off, if you say, you know, for the experiment at La Terreira, they're all present in a certain way.
There has to be, you know, the typical alien encounter, it's kind of an oxymoron, what's typical about an alien encounter.
But there are certain characteristics, and one of the characteristics is there has to be a calling.
There has to be a siren call, right?
Something compelled you, like in Spielberg's movie, Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
It was, you know, the table mountain, you know, and somehow this guy was compelled to go there.
Well, there was a siren call in our experience.
It was DMT, you know, and we were just students.
You know, Terrence was at Berkeley.
I was in the University of Colorado, but we were both fascinated by DMT.
And we were compelled to go look for this orally active form of DMT, ukuhe, which when we finally got it, turned out to be not very exciting, but it took us to La Cerrera.
That's why we went to Lacherrera was in quest of this thing, which we called the secret.
When we got to Lacherrera, what was really there were mushrooms everywhere in the pasture.
That quickly reorganized our priorities, right?
And it was though we were in the presence of this intelligence, and it presented itself very much.
We called it the teacher, and it was downloading all of this information to us.
And that was another characteristic of alien encounters.
Generic alien encounters usually involve the transfer of special information.
People are shown a book or they're shown something that is transmitted from the teacher to the recipient.
And we got that in spades.
We got this encounter.
And it had those characteristics.
And then another characteristic is there is, so information is given and gifts are given.
And the information that was transmitted resulted in a couple of things.
Well, the primary thing that came out of that was Terence's idea about the time, about time wave and the I Ching.
The genesis of that idea came out of the experiment at La Cerreira and then over decades became refined and developed.
Now, whether there's any validity to it, I'm not sure.
And I've always been very skeptical about it.
And, you know, it failed its major test, which is, yeah, the space-time continuum did not collapse on December 21st, 2012, as was predicted.
But there are interesting things about the time wave.
It's just an interesting thing considered, you know, in its own context as a strange mathematical construction that in many ways is a reflection of Terence's psyche.
He was the only one that could really understand it and interpret it.
Is this an algorithm essentially that he – Essentially it was an algorithm based on the structure of the I Ching, this oracle of 64 hexagrams.
And he treated it in such a way that he claimed that time had a structure and that this time wave described the structure of time, essentially,
and thus was a predictive tool, among other things, and that it was a way to look at the ingression of novelty into the continuum, the idea that there really are new things under the sun.
New things happen that have never happened before, ever, in the history of the universe, and this map was a way to predict the eruption of those things or the ingression of those things, I think, which is a better term.
And Terrence and I used to have, you know, I wouldn't call them arguments.
I'd call them heated discussions or enthusiastic discussions about how this happened.
I do not disagree with the principle that there is novelty.
I'm not sure the time wave really describes it adequately, but it was an attempt to.
And whatever it was, it was something that was a gift from this teacher, at least the nugget of the idea.
The other thing that came back, the other gift that came back from La Cerraira was nothing supernatural or anything like that.
The gift was the spores of the mushroom.
We took the spores of the mushroom and we took them back with us and then over two or three years we figured out how to grow them and we shared that with the rest of the world.
And that was really the thing that, and look at the impact that that's had on society.
And Terrence was fond of saying, Terence did say, we are in a symbiotic relationship with something that has disguised itself as an alien invasion in order not to alarm us.
And that's what it was.
And before you know it, every nerdy 10-year-old in basements across the country, you know, were growing mushrooms and able to do it because the technique was very simple.
So it's all about, what's Johnny doing down in the basement, honey?
Oh, I don't know.
Some science project, something about growing mushrooms.
So effectively, the alien invasion was a complete success.
And not a shot was fired.
And now here we are, and no one's even realized that it's an alien invasion.
Well, Terence's idea, you know, and the idea of panspermia, I don't necessarily disagree with that.
I think that may well have happened.
You know, that life came from on an asteroid or the building blocks of it.
But mushrooms as such, we know too much about the phylogeny of mushrooms.
We know where they fit into the phylogeny of life on Earth.
And you can't really make the case that they were extraterrestrial because there were mushrooms.
You know, they're mushrooms and they're part of, you know, they have a position in the well-defined phylogeny of fungi, which are some of the most ancient organisms.
I mean, some of the most earliest macro terrestrial organisms that were of a macro scale were fungi.
I mean, there were big fungi in terrestrial environments before there was much of anything else.
But they weren't psilocybin mushrooms, presumably.
But, you know, another interesting, maybe interesting angle on this was I, I think it was 2015, I was invited to another private conference actually at Tyringham.
And the subject of the conference was DMT entities and, you know, the entities you see on DMT.
But the talk that I presented was called, is DMT a messenger molecule from an extraterrestrial civilization?
That was the title of my talk.
And I actually, in the course of preparing the talk, I had to conclude that probably not, you know, because if you're going to postulate that, what you really have to talk about is the origin of tryptophan.
Because tryptophan, the amino acid, which is found in everything, it's one of the 20 that goes into protein.
Tryptophan is the precursor to all these psychedelic tryptamines and also including serotonin.
DMT is kind of the archetypal psychedelic, but you've got psilocybin, psilocybin, 5-methoxy, bufotinine, and even the beta-carbaline.
So if you look back in phylogeny, You know, a billion years, a couple of billion years.
Eventually, you're talking about what they call the trypoparon, which is the cluster of genes that give rise to tryptophan.
So, pretty soon you're not talking about is DMT extraterrestrial in origin.
You have to say, well, obviously, it came from tryptophan.
So, how'd the trypoparon arise in phylogeny?
It was that extraterrestrial.
Even though it's one of the most ancient gene clusters in the evolution of life, you can't really make the case that it's extraterrestrial.
Because you could say, well, it came from rhodopsin.
Actually, the genes that the tryparon originated from originally were the genes that the same genes that code for rhodopsin, which is the pigment in the eye that responds to light.
So I ended up, I couldn't make the case that DMT is extraterrestrial.
You know, eventually I defaulted to say it may not be an extraterrestrial messenger molecule, but it is a messenger molecule, and it is a distinctly terrestrial messenger molecule.
It is the messenger molecule that has been adopted by the community of species to talk to the monkeys, you know, and try to talk to our consciousness and maybe even to trigger consciousness.
So, you know, DMT is only two steps from tryptophan, enzymatically, and cellular metabolism.
Tryptophan is universal.
Not a living thing that we know of that does not contain tryptophan because it's one of the 20 that go into amino acids.
Two steps from tryptophan, decarboxylation and N-methylation, is all it takes to get DMT.
And that's like the prototypal tryptamine psychedelic.
And the enzymes that catalyze those steps, they may not be universal in organisms, but they're pretty darn near universal because they have all sorts of other cellular housekeeping functions.
You know, decarboxylating amino acids is something that goes on in every cell.
Sticking methyl groups on nitrogens is maybe less common, but still very common.
You know, enzymes that will move methyl groups around in cells.
So you can make the case that, and we know this, DMT is extremely common in nature.
DMT is, I say nature is drenched in DMT.
You know, from the animal level to the plant level to the fungal level, you find these things everywhere.
You know, and people say, well, there's about 150 species of plants that contain DMT.
That's only because we've only looked at 150 species of plants.
You know, if you look at these large genera that are that are, you know, famous, known for having tryptamines, like acacias and mimosas and these things, we know of a few species that have DMT, but there's hundreds of species, thousands of species.
It's just that nobody's looked.
Nobody's going to fund this work.
I think you can reasonably say that there are about 1,400 species of acacia in the world.
Probably 75% of them have DMT.
And actually, I would go to the next, I would even claim without evidence, that's never stopped me before, but I think it's reasonable to suppose that because DMT is so close to mainstream metabolism, probably all plants have DMT to some extent.
Most don't have large levels of them.
They don't have useful amounts of DMT.
But if you took, with sufficient instruments, if you just started randomly sampling plants and analyzing for DMT with a mass spec, I'll bet it would turn up in almost everything.
Not just from the MAO inhibition, but they often have other effects that are psychoactive, like harmine.
Harmine is a good example.
You know, we used to think that harmine was basically it's the MAO inhibitor in ayahuasca, and it doesn't do a whole lot beyond that.
Well, it turns out now harmine is getting a second look.
It's interesting that the tarmine was discovered in Paganum Harmala about maybe 10 years before ayahuasca was ever reported to science.
So harmine is one of these hoary old alkaloids, I like to call it.
It's been known forever, and now we're just finding out it has all sorts of interesting pharmacologies.
It's an MAO inhibitor for sure.
More importantly, it appears that it stimulates neurogenesis, and that's relevant to Alzheimer's and brain development and even Down syndrome.
It is an inhibitor of this kinase, this regulatory protein called DYRK1, which has got its fingers in lots of different cellular pies.
You could call it many different regulatory functions, and harmine is a very potent, very selector inhibitor of this kinase.
So that relates to this, it actually stimulates nerve growth in the hippocampus.
So, you know, and we're finding out that there are a number of other receptors that it interacts with, including serotonin, dopamine transporters, even one called the imageline receptors that are, you know, of undefined functions.
So like most natural molecules, it's not a one-trick pony.
You know, harmine has a number of effects, you know, and that's why taking ayahuasca is a different, you know, that's why it's not a pure DMT experience because you've got a whole mixture of alkaloids that are that are contributing to that effect.
Who were the researchers that, when they discovered harmine, they didn't know what it was and they tried to label it telepathine until they realized that it was harmine.
Well, yeah, this is part of the what you may call the sad and sordid history of ayahuasca in a certain way, because in the early days in the 20s, when people are looking at it, a number of independent groups were working on it, and they were isolated molecules.
They weren't aware of other people's work, and so they misnamed these things.
I mean, I can't tell you exactly.
I think initially it was Lewis Lewin who discovered harmine, and he called it banisterine.
And then it turned out, well, another group years before had isolated the same molecule from Paganum Harmala.
And telepathine was one of these misnomers, you know, that came out.
The problem with this was that back in the day, people didn't collect voucher specimens.
So a lot of this chemical work was done without the benefit of herbarium specimens, which now Everybody that wants to do phytochemical work, hopefully, has the good sense to collect specimens of the original plant so that people can go back and look at that.
A lot of this early work was reported, and there was no voucher specimens to document the collection.
So a lot of it had to be dismissed.
You know, the beta-harmaline chemistry of bansteriopsis didn't really get well defined until some Chinese scientists, or at least they had Chinese name, worked on them and discovered harmine, tetrahydroharmine, and harmaline as the main alkaloids.
They could reference that to botanical voucher specimens.
So they really should get the credit for discovering it.
And then once that was done, then it was known.
And, you know, other scientists had to acknowledge that.
Has anybody ever bothered to independently like sequester people, put them into like different rooms, have them do ayahuasca and then have them describe a very similar experience or almost identical experience to prove that these telepathic experiences exist or at least to – As far as I know, that hasn't been done.
I mean, and that sort of points out there is, you know, a realm of experience, a realm of knowing that these things give access to that's normally closed to us.
I mean, it's kind of a trivial statement, of course.
But then you get down to questions of how verifiable is that?
How real is that?
How, you know, and people get, I don't know if the term is hung up, but they can get baffled when you start talking about, you know, the reality of, say, the entities you encounter on DMT.
I mean, this is some people I know are obsessed with trying to verify the reality of the entities that you find on DMT.
And again, it comes down to if you experience them, they're real.
If anything you experience is real because you've experienced it, does it have a corresponding existence in the external world?
Well, you know, what's external?
What's internal?
You know, we throw around these terms, these epistemological, metaphysical terms quite carelessly, you know, without really thinking about it.
What does it mean when you say, I'm in here and you're out there, you know, and then you take a psychedelic and you realize that's an artificial boundary.
But it seems that our normal consciousness is the best state to propagate biological life and to keep whatever we've created in terms of our community structures and relationships and friendships and the ability to build structures and houses and things like that.
All these things are done best when you're here and present.
Whereas when you're in a psychedelic state.
I agree with you.
The way I've always described it is if you had a meeting with God and you went and God gave you all the answers to the world and you experienced undeniable beauty in the most extreme form possible where you couldn't have imagined it and then you came back.
Whether you hallucinated it or not, it's the exact same experience.
Don't worry about whether it's real in the way we would define real.
Is it good information or is it bad or is it not?
That's the thing.
It doesn't matter where it comes from.
But it's such a if it's good information, then it has its own internal validity.
And whether it came from some part of yourself that is normally obscure to you or it came from the plant teacher or the aliens transmitting it through, it doesn't really matter.
But I sort of had to change my opinion somewhat because he and Jeffrey Kreipel, who I do know, is Jeffrey Kreipel is a professor of comparative religion and mythology at Rice University.
And his focus initially is sort of on the superhero as in contemporary mythology as a mythical figure and that sort of thing.
He and I was invited to a workshop that Whitley was going to be at.
This was a couple of years ago in Hawaii.
Well, I'm always interested in a free trip to Hawaii, right?
So I said, you know, I'd like to come to this thing, but this guy is a nutcase.
I'm not sure I want to appear on the same stage with this guy.
unidentified
And if it's me saying that, you know he's a nutcase.
And the guy who was hosting it said, well, did you know that he and Jeffrey Kreipel wrote a book together?
And I said, oh, I don't.
I said, I know Jeffrey Kreipel.
I know that he's not a nutcase, and that's interesting.
And then I found out about the book.
And I said, I told the guy, if you invite Jeffrey and Whitley, then I'll come and we'll participate.
The name of the book is Supernatural, Two Words, Supernatural, A New Vision of the Unexplained.
And it's really very interesting.
The book is basically, you know, alternating chapters, Whitley tells us stories about what happened to him, what has happened to him, what continues to happen to him.
He lives in some kind of alternate reality.
I get that.
I mean, I don't know if I accept it, but I get it.
And then in alternating chapters, Jeffrey comes along and kind of unpacks this and explains where does this fit into sort of the, you know, phenomenology of mythology and reasonable explanations.
And it's a fascinating book.
If you just suspend disbelief for a minute and think about, assume that Whitley is sincere.
I don't think he's lying.
I think that these things really happen to him, or he thinks they do.
And some of the most craziest things, these are not, you know, the media has made, like everything, they dumb it down, you know, and they put it into the box of alien encounters, guys a nutball, you know, and they dismiss it.
But if you take a closer look, one thing to Whitley's credit is he doesn't claim to understand what's happening.
He doesn't call it an alien encounter.
He doesn't claim anything.
He just says, this is happening.
I have no friggin idea what this is.
So that's honest.
You know, that's an honest scientific stance.
I do not understand this phenomenon.
So I give him credit for that.
And then he and Jeffrey wrote this book.
There was a very interesting, you know, later on.
So I read all this.
Later on in the book, there's a chapter where they get to what is the possible physical explanation of what's going on here, if there is a physical explanation.
And one of the headings, I think the chapter, one of the headings in the chapter was labeled the soul as a UFO.
And that kind of blew my mind.
That got my attention because, you know, when I did this workshop with them, I was kind of bringing the flag of psychedelics, right?
And I was saying, if you don't address psychedelics, you've only got part of the picture here.
And they were talking about how the soul, how this could be some sort of a physical plasmoid type of thing.
They were invoking, you know, scientific terminology.
I don't know if it was legitimate or not, but just the idea, the soul of a UFO.
And I was able to respond to that and say, well, you know, the experiment in Lacherro was essentially the blueprints of how to build one of these things that you're talking about, you know, which it was, really, this transformation.
And so that was, that impressed me.
I don't know what to make of it, but I think there is, and they don't really know, nobody knows what to make of it, but I think there are just odd things going on that some people experience.
Yes.
And whether they are actual encounters or dreams or somewhere in between, I'm not sure.
But it would be good.
I mean, yeah, I don't know.
I mean, when you meet Whitley, have you ever met him?
When you talk to him or you hear him, I've never talked to him personally, but when you see him in interviews and conversations, there's something off.
Now, what is that something off?
Is it a psychotic break?
Is it something that drifts in and out?
Is he having problems with normal consciousness?
I mean, I don't know what it is, but I'm really.
See if you can find that video of him talking about the fly.
There's quite a few really bizarre videos of him where he's having a hard time with normal reality.
So which would make sense during the dream state because all these things are happening at night, right?
Right, right.
This is the big thing that I've always, the big problem I've always had about these UFO abduction experiences.
First of all, they all take place when someone is either at night, it's either they're on a dark robe where there's no one around and they're sleepy or they're at home in their bed.
Like the vast majority of them take place at night or while someone's lying in bed, which is exactly when you're dreaming.
Now, we don't totally understand the dream state, but there's a connection, at least, an implied connection between psychedelic chemicals that your brain produces endogenously that could be released during the dream state and in different levels with different humans.
I mean, obviously, some people have problems with producing serotonin and dopamine, and then other people have no problems with it.
So it's not without consideration, or it's not without possibility that there's someone who has a real issue with these chemicals just busting through and flooding their science.
But then does this contradict what we've already said about psychedelic experiences?
Like, why would we diminish his endogenous psychedelic experience if that's what he's having?
I mean, it is entirely possible that you're dealing with someone who maybe perhaps does have some sort of psychotic breaks, but also is experiencing psychedelic experiences due to some endogenous DMT dump or dump of whatever.
And all these things are taking place at the same time in the dream state during heavy REM sleep.
And he's coming back with these uniform stories of alien abduction.
Is it just one man's delusion, or is there really something at the base of it?
And this is kind of the point that we were talking about a while back in this conversation about natural philosophy.
Natural philosophy, you know, it has a wider scope for understanding.
And you can say, well, meaning natural philosophy will accept every cockamame woo-woo idea that ever came along.
Not properly.
I mean, natural philosophy properly approached should be a way to evaluate these things rigorously, not abandon rigorous thought, but not be so dismissive of it as to say, it doesn't fit into our paradigm.
It doesn't fit into what we think we know, so we're not going to talk about it.
That's dishonest.
That's intellectual dishonesty.
And we have too much of that.
Science is a very timid kind of activity sometimes because in its current current incarnation, it's so dependent, it's corrupted in a certain way.
You can't just be the curious monkey who's trying to apply clear thinking, rigorous thought to understanding nature.
We don't have that luxury.
Scientists don't have that luxury.
If they're practicing scientists, you have to be getting grants.
When you look at the DMT experience and you look at its effect on the human mind, how much of you subscribes to the idea that what we're looking at is some sort of a chemical gateway.
Whatever it is, to whatever that DMT experience is, that this is something that your brain has the ability to travel to.
But I mean, since we know that the body does produce this, and we know that it's possible for people to, I mean, I've never done it, but I know that people who do kundalini yoga have apparently reported trip-like experiences that are very similar to a real DMT flash.
So the mind has this ability to do this on its own.
Do you think that that is that something worth considering?
That this is some sort of a pathway to a nearby dimension or to something that's around us all the time, but we just don't have access to with normal neurochemistry.
No, I mean, there's, you know, there's so much in what you said where you have to go back and unpack all of these things.
When we got excited about DMT, Terrence and me, in the late 60s, what led us to go to La Terreira was that it seemed like a completely different order of magnitude than any of the other psychedelics.
And we came to it really from a childhood that was steeped in science fiction.
So we carried with us the idea, this really is another dimension.
And it may be a portal to another dimension.
And as science fiction nuts, we were totally okay with that.
And we thought maybe DMT was, and maybe it is.
Or it somehow pulls the curtain back on something that's around us all the time that we don't see.
But again, in thinking about these things, is it something that is entirely within the brain that it originates?
Or is it something that is it like a lens that, you know, or our eyes are covered with filters and DMT temporarily removes those filters?
I think it's hard to know.
I mean, I think maybe experimentally we could begin to approach this.
Have you, you know, and I think we really know.
I think that's another thing about natural philosophy that's important that science is overlooking.
And natural philosophy always remembers the limits of what is known, you know, and science is a bit arrogant about what they think is known.
You know, science only understands a small fraction of all there is to know.
And ayahuasca, another psychedelic, always remind me of this, you know, when I take it.
Remember the limitations of your knowledge.
Or sometimes it more or less kindly says it.
You don't know shit.
And it's true.
We don't know shit.
And scientists can forget that.
But as far as this DMT thing, this is actually there's controversy about this because a lot of people who have worked in this area say it's pretty well established that endogenous DMT can produce these states, that the pineal can secrete DMT under certain circumstances or under stress.
The lungs can produce large amounts of DMT that are translocated to the brain.
But it's not so clear that that goes on.
I mean, it's clear that it can be produced, but David Nichols, who knows a thing or two about pharmacology, founder of the Hefter Institute, world's most authoritative highest authority when it comes to the chemistry and pharmacology of psychedelics.
He's taken a reductionist argument on this that's kind of hard to knock down, which is that DMT is produced endogenously, but it's chopped up so quickly that it never reaches the site of action and it never reaches the levels at the neuron that it would take to activate the neuron.
It was a talk about that this monk had practiced a city of levitation.
Do you remember this one?
And that the Buddha came to town and he said, for the last 20 years, I've practiced the city of levitation and I can now walk on water.
And the Buddha said, yeah, but the fairy's only a nickel.
Right.
So it's like, do you want to practice kundalini for 10 years and bang your head towards the east or just smoke DMT 30 seconds later in the center of the universe?
He claims it stimulates DMT synthesis in the pineal.
When you lie underneath it, it's just a bunch of – it looks like a floor lamp with a rectangular mount, a bunch of LEDs underneath it, which he programs with an iPad in different patterns.
You lie under it and it stimulates hypnagogic hallucinations that are a lot like – That guy looks like an old school freak.
He didn't attach anything to me from this perspective.
It's a cord going behind her.
So you lie under this thing.
And the first time I lied under it, I thought I got all these colors.
I got all these hypnagogic effects, you know, and nice patterns and all that, like a sub-threshold DMT experience.
And I said, well, you know, the LEDs are all changing color, right?
And that's how I see it.
He says, no, they're white.
The colors are coming from you.
You're supplying the colors.
So, okay.
So it was interesting.
And then we got into the conversation.
How do you know this is stimulating DMT?
How do you know that's the effect?
Turns out it's not so easy to nail that down.
You know, because DMT is so ephemeral in the system, you can't take urine samples or cerebral spinal fluid or anything.
It would be gone by the time you did it.
So the only way, well, maybe not the only way, but one way you could do it is you could do something called, it's essentially, you couldn't do this to a human because you couldn't get a FDA approval for it, but you could put a microcapillary tube right next to the pineal that will absorb things as they are released, and then you could recover that and say, you know, levels of DMT are higher.
That seems like the way to, I'm going to get a hold of Crash from the Float Lab.
Because Crash was trying to put, he's the mad scientist behind the Float Lab, which is the most advanced series.
I mean, you saw that contraption that we have back there.
That is as state-of-the-art as it gets in the world of tanks.
And he had a concept for developing learning films, films where you would lie down and in the absence of any physical input, right, or very minimal, meaning that you're floating in that environment, he was going to suspend an L C D screen at the lowest possible light emission.
So you would not be able to see the edges of the screen.
You would just be able to see the images on the screen.
And they would play instructional videos and things, and you would learn them with the minimal amount of distractions.
And you think you could achieve, his thought was you could achieve accelerated learning.
Yeah, like perhaps you could work on your golf swing or something like that or something that you could get in there or maybe musical instruments that you'd be able to pick up concepts and things with minimal distraction.
But the key is, I think, to get a good baseline of sobriety doing it, doing it sober.
But my favorite is actually edible marijuana.
I think edible marijuana, especially high doses, especially in that complete darkness environment, profound visuals, like really bizarre, strange, strange visuals.
And they kind of dance for you in there.
It's really, really wild.
I think it's the best environment ever for edible marijuana.
Part of the time I was teaching at the University of Minnesota, and then I stepped back from that a couple of years ago because I just didn't have time.
And it was an adjunct professor position, so the equation between the amount of work and the amount of compensation just didn't make sense after a while.
I mean, I enjoyed it a lot, but I've lived in BC a lot.
I'm almost three-quarters.
I mean, you know, I got my PhD at UBC.
My daughter's got dual citizenship, and she's up there now.
And if they were lucky, and then they would exhume them like 48 hours later.
And of course, a lot of them did die, but if they were alive, then they would be zombies.
They'd also give them a mixture of detura and other bad things that would destroy their memory and completely discombobulate them.
And then they would send them off and they would spend their life as, you know, sort of wandering around completely, you know, shells of their former self.
I just want to change my attitude about that and realize that I need to take time out to care for my mind and body.
I don't do enough of that.
But I'm hoping that when I move up to BC, Wade and I can do some work together and maybe even teach, you know, work on this thing in South America, get some courses going down there.
Because with him, you know, as one of the faculty, that will bring a lot of people.
Yeah, well, it's happening faster than I had dared to hope, actually.
I think, I mean, you know, I hate to predict and then not be able to, you know, but my guess is that a year from now, we'll be on the way.
You know, I mean, it is all happening.
This is the formative year.
We know where we want to go.
We're talking to investors who are seriously interested.
They want to get involved and they have money.
And it's not just about money.
They also have, you know, they've listened to the medicine and it's all about the medicine, as we know, changes people's hearts and minds.
So these folks, they have the resources, but they realize there's a larger vision.
And so, you know, and for me personally, what I want to do, part of my problem is I'm running around the world all the time and I'm going to these conferences.
I'm propagating the message and I can't stop myself.
I have yesaholism and it takes a lot out of me.
And it keeps me distracted.
So what I want to do, if possible, is pull my elbows in a little bit and say, rather than go to your conference in Prague or your conference in, you know, wherever, create this place and make that a place where people can come and have really rich experiences, whether or not they involve psychedelics.
They can have rich learning experiences.
I mean, it's a perfect location.
Want to learn about the Incas, Machu Picchu is right there.
It's all there.
And there's just, I've always liked the idea of platforms, you know, and I want to create a platform.
Well, a catalytic nexus for global consciousness transformation.
That's the idea.
And do therapeutic programs, retreats, impactful conferences like Michael Pollen level, Graham Hancock level, Joe Rogan level conferences, if I could ever convince you to come down, which maybe will happen.
Use it as a place where we can try to understand ourselves and our place in nature better, you know, and through plant medicines and clear thinking and creative people and just make it that.
And then I can be like, you know, I can be more in residence there and I don't have to keep running around the world.
I don't want to say I'm the guru in residence because my first thing is I'm no guru.
You know, with John Hopkins doing research, and there's all these different studies that are being made through MAPS in particular and various other organizations are trying to push this idea of, especially in the beginning, working with soldiers, people with PTSD, and showing these massive results.
And that to open up people's minds that there's a bunch of different things, MDMA being one of them, psilocybin being another.
And then hopefully eventually we'll work our way to DMT.
Well, this is one of the attractions of creating this platform in the Sacred Valley because the whole or in Peru, because the whole regulatory framework is different.
Peru has declared ayahuasca national patrimony.
There's no restriction on the use of ayahuasca.
And all these other plant medicines are part of the tradition.
San Pedro called Wachuma, the snuffs, Vilka snuff.
All of these things can be used without restriction.
Now, I don't know about the status of mushrooms, but I think with a little bit of transparency, we could also get permission.
I mean, you could probably use them at this place and nobody would say a word, but if we wanted to, we could get permission to use them.
And that's the idea, is to not restrict it to ayahuasca, be able to look at all of these plant medicines in a very intelligent way and also bring science and shamanism together.
You know, work with smart shamans who also want to work with shaman, with clinicians to develop a really new paradigm that combines the best of both.
And Michael Pollan refers to this a little bit, but he kind of glosses over it.
But I think that's where the therapeutic revolution is going to come when you fuse shamanism and the clinical approach.
And you can do all that there and develop models that can be used other places.
And you don't have to be secretive about it.
You don't have to be ashamed or we're not doing anything illegal or covert.
And so again, we can, you know, rather than being sort of, you know, well, we can shout it from the rooftops there if we want to.
Not that we necessarily would do that, but we can be open about what we're doing.
There are also a lot of good, there are a lot of smart people in Peru, you know, and smart doctors and so on, smart clinicians.
So we want to involve local communities, local people as much as possible, and then expand that to all the other things that this relates to, like sustainable agriculture.
And it's a perfect place to look at new paradigms for food production and so on.
The Sacred Valley is one of the five areas in the world where agriculture originated.
Most of our important food plants came from there originally.
They have 6,000 varieties of potatoes, 4,000 varieties of tomatoes.
I mean, incredible food biodiversity.
And the foods that have gone global, how many varieties of potatoes do you see in the grocery store?
Maybe four or five at most.
So there is an incredible genetic repository of these things that have never really been developed on a global scale.
And a lot of them, that's are part of the solution to the food crisis that we face.
And also what the Incas knew about agriculture was pretty revolutionary.
Not necessarily to impose it on other people, but I think it could benefit from a bit of analytical work.
I'd like to do that.
I'm also interested in the sort of the pharmacopia of other plants that are associated with ayahuasca.
They're not put into ayahuasca all the time, but sometimes they're used for the dietas.
There's a whole pharmacopia of plants not very well investigated that I'd like to look more deeply into and maybe even develop formulations of ayahuasca with some of these other plants that could be used for more specific therapeutic purposes.
So you might have one that's good for, say, PTSD and one that's better for depression.
And, you know, you could actually tailor these things.
Bring a little science into it because, you know, and you don't have to have a lot, you know, you don't have to have gleaming laboratories for this.
You can do it with a very simple setup, a simple natural products laboratory.
Most importantly is the people that you have in there, not the equipment that you have.
And you could do a lot of stuff.
And partly this is what this book is about, too, the ethnopharmacologic search for psychoactive drugs.
You know, I mean, you know, a lot of what's in this book is talking about the ayahuasca and peyote and things that we know about, but talking about it in ways that we've never looked at it before.
And then there is a whole bunch of things out there that really, I mean, there's a great future for discovery of things we've never heard of.
You know, and that's what ethnopharmacology is about.
And specifically, it's the ethnopharmacologic search for psychoactive drugs.
For people who don't know what we're talking about, beyond the chrysanthemum means there's this thing that you see when you break through and you do DMT, this very bizarre geometric pattern that resembles a chrysanthemum.
You know, the Canadians, I mean, for instance, to get approval for these MDMA trials was a lot more straightforward in Canada, you know, and now, and they've done some clinical studies with ayahuasca, and they're on board with that.
They've done some studies with Indigenous people in Canada.
They call them First Nations.
But they have done that, and it's been straightforward to get that work done.
This idea that we could go right across the border to Vancouver and experience the host of the psychedelic experiences would be, I mean, that would be fantastic.
And I just hope it would have a positive effect on our country.
It doesn't make any sense when you think about how many troops come back over from overseas with these traumatic experiences and PTSD and real issues psychologically.
And that the number one tool for handling this, it's not psychotherapy.
The number one tool is psychedelics.
It's the best in terms of efficacy, in terms of proven results.
There's nothing that's even remotely close, whether it's true.
MDMA or psilocybin or any of these psychedelic therapies, they have profound effects.
When it comes to the ability to disconnect from addictive behaviors, particularly drugs, opiates, there's nothing better than these psychedelic experiences, particularly ibogaine.
And, you know, you've got to go to Mexico to use ibogaine.
I think within five years, you're going to see clinics and maybe even centers, you know, along the lines of what we're talking about, you know, doing in the Sacred Valley.
I mean, once you've done something like this, then you can replicate it in different countries where the regulatory environment is friendly.
So you could have, you know, we have the McKenna Academy in Peru, but then we have brand, you know, if they meet the standards, then we can essentially license out that brand or whatever.
Well, the positive benefits are so overwhelming, and the evidence is so clear.
And so many people have these incredibly powerful experiences that they're relaying to other people.
And oftentimes it's people that are like the people with the closed minds.
Maybe their loved ones have had these experiences and maybe their loved ones were really far gone and have come back and they can see these results and recognize that, especially when it comes to, in my opinion, veterans, we have an overwhelming responsibility to take care of those people that we don't meet.
We don't meet it medically.
We don't meet it psychologically.
We don't meet it with therapy.
We just don't give them enough.
We don't meet it financially.
And this could be a way to heal them, to help them reconcile their experience and help them achieve balance back here stateside.
I mean, the other thing that psychedelics do that is kind of a new thing that we're learning is neuroplasticity.
It actually reorganizes connections in the brain.
You know, psilocybin does this, and presumably the others do too.
Some of the phenethylamines do it.
So that's a new thing.
You know, you can actually change the connectivity of these systems.
It's probably not fair to say, I mean, my friend who came with me, he made a point when we were discussing this.
He says, you know, you shouldn't hate Trump.
You know, he's used to that.
You should love Trump.
I said, it's real hard for me to love Trump.
But I think the point that he's making is that he is, Trump is not the cause of it in some way.
He's the symptom of what's happening.
And he's the disruptor.
But the disruption is happening anyway.
And so in some ways, maybe we should be grateful to Trump because he's making, you know, he's making it so in everybody's face that people are questioning everything.
And that's a good thing because this system, it can't last, you know, so there's going to be a transition that's going to be pretty rough.
And Trump is just part of that.
Not in any conscious way.
He's as much the victim of the times as anybody else.
What he is now is he's exploited this vulnerability in the political system that we essentially have popularity contests to choose our rulers.
And the idea of that at first was to pick the best one based on public perception.
But that's not what it is anymore.
Now it's like we are so jaded as to how well this system works and as to what's significant and important about it.
And we just want our guy to win.
Now it's our guy.
And Hillary represented the bureaucrats.
She represented the red tape and the career politicians, the proven liars, the ones who are starting these Clinton foundations and making hundreds of millions of dollars and giving these speeches and making hundreds of thousands of dollars talking to bankers, but won't release any of the transcripts.
And enough, we got to drain the swamp.
And this guy was our guy to drain the swamp for the people that voted for him.
And also, we didn't have the media situation that we have now.
I mean, this is also part of the problem, you know, with the social media and everything.
It's true.
There's tons of fake news out there being produced on both.
You cannot tell.
So you've got the Trump reality distortion field, right?
Which is reinforced by his really no pretense about ignoring what's real, you know, like this whole controversy about the immigration and splitting up families to say, well, we're just enforcing the law.
But in fact, you know, at the stroke of a pen, he could change that.
And then when Trump won, I just was sitting down going, imagine if we one day someone shuts it off and the lights dim and then they turn back on and you realize, well, the game's over.
You know, and you're in a simulation with artificial memories implanted into your mind.
Well, the one day that the idea is that there's going to be an artificial reality or a virtual reality that's so good that it's indistinguishable.
I mean, this is almost inevitable.
If technology increases at the same rate that it's increasing now, whether it's 50 years from now or 100 years from now, we're going to reach some point in time.
So the real question is, when we do reach that, how will we know?
I don't necessarily think it's a good thing for the biological human, but I feel like if you separate yourself from the idea of good and bad and the inevitability of innovation and progress, if human beings continue to make more and more complex electronics with higher and higher capabilities, it's inevitable that we become symbiotic with these things, that we ingrain them into our become a part of your body.
We're going to replace body parts with more efficient body parts.
And we're one day going to create some sort of artificial life.
Now, whether we become a part of that artificial life, we merge with it, or it just assumes the role of the leader of the earth.
One of those things is likely to happen within the next 500 years.
Well, you know, this, I mean, in some ways, this is sort of, you know, this raises the issue about, you know, one of the things that psychedelics put in front of us front and center is the fact that we are getting estranged from nature.
We have to reunderstand our relationship and, you know, become a partner in the symbiosis with nature.
And this projection is the exact opposite of that.
So is that, you know, so maybe, you know, this raises also one issue that we haven't really touched on, but here, but, you know, technology, which is what this virtual reality stuff is, and what any artifact is, psychedelics are technology, molecular biology is technology, cybernetics is technology.
Technology inherently has no moral dimension.
You know, these are not good or bad things.
You know, the way that they are used by humans, the decisions that humans make in the way that they're going to exploit or deploy these technologies, that's where the moral dimension comes in.
Morality comes out of the human heart.
And we are one of our problems, I feel, as a species, we're extremely clever, but we're not wise.
That's what it is.
We're not wise about what we do.
We're not able to step back and say, well, yeah, we can produce, we can, you know, download the brain into cybernetics, or we can produce an artificial body, or we can do all this genetic stuff.
Do we ever stop to think about just because we can do something, should we do something?
And the arrogance of science, this is also a problem.
The scientists will say, well, we are scientists, right?
We can do it, so let's do it.
We can do the Hadron experiment, and maybe it'll collapse the space-time continuum, but the very small probability, so let's do it.
And this is something we have to learn.
I think also that the psychedelics are important in that regard.
They are ways that we can bring our cleverness and our wisdom into sync so that we have the wisdom not to do something, even though we might be able to.
We shouldn't do it just because we can do it.
You know, we really have to, as a species, ask ourselves, is this a good idea?
And I think, again, the psychedelics are teaching tools for learning this and really propagating the message from the community of species.
That's for sure going to be a meme with a photo of your face that we are very clever, but we're not wise.
That's for sure going to be a meme.
Some dude is right or gal is working on that right now.
Well, I've been talking about this for a year, but that sentence is so striking.
My real concern with this stuff is that this is inevitable.
And this is just like the single-celled organism became the multi-celled organism, and that the thinking, curious monkey who strives for material possessions is designed to create artificial life.
And this is just what we're set here.
I've described it as that we are the technological butterfly that will emerge from the cocoon.
And right now we're creating this cocoon, that we are this caterpillar, this technological caterpillar, and we don't know why we're making this cocoon, and that we are going to give birth to this artificial life, this next stage of that may be true too.
I had a bit a few years back in my comedy act about the origins of the universe and that what happens is people get so smart that they develop a big bang machine and that someone's sitting around and some guy who's on the autism spectrum is filled up with SSRIs and antidepressants and drinking Red Bull all day.
He just goes, fuck it, I'll press it.
And he hits the button and boom, we start from scratch.
And then every 14 plus billion years, someone develops the Big Bang Machine and hits it.
And that's the restart of the universe over and over.
I'm not necessarily completely obsessed with the idea that we're living in a simulation, but I am completely obsessed that we are a relic and that we are on our way out.
I really am.
I really do think that maybe that's one of the reasons why we're so crazy and so haywire.
It just shows there's no logical progression for our culture, that it's as advanced as we are, as much access to information as we have.
We're also as crazy as we have ever been, if not crazier.
I wonder how much of a limitation our biology is, too.
I mean, you think about what it took to get to here and all the battles we had to fight and the animals we had to run from and all these human reward systems that are engraved into our DNA and that now here we are in a place where we hardly need them and yet we still have them just blowing up and exploding and vomiting all over the place in these weird ways and we have them sort of manifesting themselves in very strange behaviors that aren't good for anybody and this constant need to acquire material
possessions and conquer and obtain things.
This is not tenable.
This is not something that makes sense in the long haul, but yet we still go down this illogical road.
And that this is really just because this is the best way to fuel innovation.
Our extreme desire for material possessions is the best way to ensure that they're going to keep coming up with newer, better things every year, which will eventually give birth to the electronic butterfly.
And, you know, it may be that this is a necessary step.
I mean, if our destiny is to actually leave the earth at some point, if the earth is an incubator for life and we're just destined to leave it and spread out into the galaxy and beyond, who knows?
I mean, then maybe this is inevitable that we have to do that if that's what's happening.
But the question is, what kind of being will we be when we do that?
That's what I've always wondered about the alien archetype, that big-headed thing with the no genitals and no mouth.
That may be what we think of as being the ultimate form that the human animal takes.
Right.
If we do symbiotically merge with technology and electronics, that that might be the form that we take.
It's just so strange that that one accepted form.
And I've heard the idea that this image is something when young eyes from a newborn baby sees a doctor and see the doctor with the mask and the face.
This is what they see.
And that this is imprinted in our mind, this traumatic experience of the birth and the bright lights and the operating table.
This is why so many of these alien abduction experiences do take place in these very clinical, sterile environments.
And it seems like a medical procedure as if this is a remnant of the birth process.
I've heard that experience.
I've heard that explanation.
But it also just strikes me that these things are, if you go from ancient hominids, you go from Australia Pythecus, and then you go to modern computer programmer who doesn't exercise.
And you look at their body, this sort of like doughy, thin body that doesn't move very well.
And then you go back to this muscular, ape-like creature that's covered in hair.
They've lost all the hair.
They've lost all the muscle.
They've become thin.
And then where is that going?
Well, it's obviously going in that same direction.
People are not going to get more muscular and harder and hairier as time goes on unless something radical changes and we need to adapt.
So that would be the normal, I mean, the path would, that would be the natural progression, that we would eventually have bigger heads because we have bigger heads than Australia Pythagoras and certainly bigger heads than chimps or bonobos and that it just keeps going in that same direction.
But what I'm thinking is like, what is it that's making me cling to these ideas?
Is it that I love emotions?
I love illogical behavior.
Do I love art?
Yeah, I love all those things.
I love music and food and all the things that cooking and all the things that make a person a person, camaraderie.
But what are those things?
Aren't those chemical reactions we have with other beings and natural reward systems that are built in to sort of enhance community and camaraderie so that we can stay together so that the species survives?
Like, what if there's something that supplants that?
What if there's something that far surpasses that in terms of pleasure and connectivity?
And we realize that emotions are just these ancient systems that were put into place when there wasn't a better option.
But these better options, it's much better to get your food from a supermarket than it is to chase down a gazelle for two days until it dies of heat stroke.
These systems improve over time.
This animal that we are now is very different than the animal we used to be.
Do we want to stay in this imperfect state?
That seems even more ridiculous that we'd like to stay humans forever.
Humans are so flawed.
I mean, there's a reason why we have all this nonsense in the world and our society is sick and we are twisted and confused.
But a part of it at least has to be that the human animal itself is very flawed because there's no perfect culture.
You can't just chalk it up to culture.
Because if you did chalk it up to culture, you would say, well, this culture sucks.
But if you go to this culture, it's amazing.
There's no crime.
Everyone loves everyone.
It's completely open.
There's no need to worry about money because everybody's generous and everything gets and they're really brilliant and they get along and they create new architecture and everything's fantastic.
Now we're talking a truly humanistic culture where people, where love is what's happening, where it's driven by love and not by hatred and rivalry and scarcity and fear.
And that's the whole thing.
The psychedelics can be the catalyst that teaches us how to love ourselves, how to love each other, how to love the earth.
I mean, I know that sounds cliché and trivial, but that is in fact.
That is, in fact, what the promise that they hold for us.
That's why they're teachers.
They're teaching learning tools.
They can teach us to be the human beings that we would like to be.
And that's the thing.
That's the alternative to this hyper-technological future.
I'm all for technology.
I'm not against technology.
But again, I think we have to bring wisdom to it.
We have to make a situation where it is not controlling us.
We are controlling it.
And we're thinking clearly about we have this enormous panoply of technologies that can do so many things.
We have to think about how do we deploy those in such a way to maximize human potential or our humanity.
So that's really, I think, what the promise that psychedelics hold out.
And that's what we're hoping to create as a kernel.
And we're not the only ones, obviously.
A lot of people have this idea and it's happening.
But that's the idea is to create a place where people can learn this.