Book Excerpt from the book "Contact Modalities: The Keys to the Universe."
CONTACT MODALITIES: THE KEYS TO THE UNIVERSE - Excerpt 1
INTRODUCTION
In any field, find the strangest thing and then explore it. -John Wheeler
Inhibit the left and engage the right. -Consciousness researcher Tony Wright
|
T |
he idea for a book on contact modalities (CM) comes
from an experience that Rey Hernandez had in 2013.
Hernandez is one of
the founders of the Edgar Mitchell Foundation
for Research into Extraterrestrial and Extraordinary Experiences (FREE), which did a major scientific study on 6,000+
people who believed they had had extraterrestrial or extraordinary contact
experiences.
Hernandez had
an earlier experience that set the way for the idea of contact modalities. In early March 2012, about a week after
I had my first download experience where I got a message with absolute
certainty that the whole UFO phenomena could be understood by studying
consciousness, Hernandez and
his wife had a bizarre paranormal experience with their dog:
My wife and I saw a floating energy being, 2 ft wide by 3 ft in height, who changed appearances, who performed a miraculous healing and controlled my mind during this process. My wife and my paralyzed dog (who we were going to euthanize that same day) disappeared right in front of my eyes, and I was then put to sleep for 45 minutes. I was not in bed but was in the middle of my living room with my wife. Forty-five minutes later, I woke up, and my wife and dog reappeared right in front of me, but our dog was completely cured of her total paralysis and returned with the energy of a teenager.[i]
A few months later his wife, (who believed the dog incident
was religious rather than UFO-related) had a series of sightings of “huge
football stadium-size UFO crafts, less than 200 meters away, for the
next three months.”
Curious as to what was happening, Hernandez decided to ask
for his own sighting of one of these crafts, so while waiting outside one day
for a client to bring some paperwork to his house, Hernandez requested in
his head to see one of the large crafts with the stained glass windows that his
wife had seen.
He waited for 15 minutes, and as he was giving up, suddenly
saw a huge object over the neighbor’s house the size of Wembley Stadium. He
called out to his daughter, and she saw it as well. When the clients arrived,
they too stood and watched the huge object.
Hernandez was hooked. He
knew that there was some consciousness connection to the phenomena, as he had put out a mental message and received an
answer. He headed to the internet and contacted me as I was one of the few
people working on the connection of consciousness to the UFO phenomena.
Hernandez told me his
story, and I agreed that it appeared there was some consciousness connection between Hernandez and what I call
the intelligence behind the phenomenon.
I told Hernandez that I would be
lecturing at Sebring, Florida, near his home in Miami, on Consciousness and UFOs. I invited him to meet me
so we could discuss this concept further.
Hernandez agreed to come
to what would turn out to be his first UFO conference after convincing his wife to go on
what would be a second honeymoon. He arrived, we talked, and the two told their
UFO story for the first time in public.
A couple of days later, Hernandez was stuck in a
traffic jam in Miami. The traffic had come to a standstill. Here is what
happened according to Hernandez:
It happened on May 16, 2013. It was the same week after I returned from my first UFO conference at Sebring, Florida. While driving in the middle of a traffic jam heading to downtown Miami at 8:30 AM, I had what can be described as an Out-of-Body Experience where I was placed in the middle of a huge spinning wheel, and I was given “instructions” by some unknown “ET” (Non-Human Intelligent Being) that I “must complete” a specific project. I want to provide a very brief detail of the “downloaded” message that I received. I had never experienced anything like this, and it freaked me out
First of all, it was not a voice telling me what to do. It was like a direct message was planted in my brain. It was not a thought, but more like a telegram was being read in my brain. Very difficult to describe, but I will try. All of this occurred after I was “taken” Out of Body and placed in some “matrix reality,” where I was placed inside a very large spinning wheel. Let me explain.
I was driving into downtown Miami in the morning rush hour. The time was about 8:30 in the morning. I was listening to a public radio station interview, but towards the end of the interview, I was no longer driving my car in the middle of a traffic jam. Instead, I found myself inside a large spinning wheel the size of a huge Ferris Wheel. I was in the center of this spinning wheel. I felt that I must have gone Out of Body into a “Matrix” reality. I saw myself inside a spinning wheel with many spokes (imagine a huge Ferris wheel), and I was inside the fulcrum (in the center of the spinning wheel) looking outward as it was spinning around me. It had spokes which contained inside each spoke the following topic areas: ET Contact, Near-Death Experiences, Out-of-Body Experiences, Contact via Meditation, Channeling, Contact via Remote Viewing, Contact via Shamanic Journeys, Spirit World/Ghost Contact, etc. I then realized that these were various “Modalities” of having contact with Non-Human Intelligent Beings.
I was in the middle of this wheel, looking out at these spokes spinning around me. The information then came into my head, instructing me that it was “Consciousness,” some advanced physics we do not yet know about, that was holding the Contact Modalities together- I felt that this vision was a very important “Key” to understanding the true nature of our reality.[ii]
Hernandez would later
refer to the wheel and its images as Contact Modalities. The idea was that there are so many ways to contact
the world outside the waking perception of this world, and they were all linked
by consciousness.
All the modalities are different masks over the same face.
Researchers in the UFO and paranormal communities are
parsing them, which is a mistake. This is simply the dominant rational left
brain analyzing, separating, and declaring a winner.
But they are all one. They are all the same.
Later, after Hernandez told me his
story, I wrote a book based on my February 2012 consciousness download experience.
On hearing Hernandez’s story and listening to others, I realized that
there were many people who seemed to be getting material from someplace outside
waking consciousness. These included artists,
musicians, savants, people who had out-of-body experiences or
near-death experiences, victims of brain injuries, and
people doing psychedelic drugs. I wrote a book called Inspired: The Paranormal World of
Creativity.
I came to the same conclusion that Hernandez had arrived at
after his out-of-body experience or OBE wheel vision. All the weird stories in my book
had the same foundation, which was consciousness.
I decided to make a list of all contact modalities with which people claimed they had made
contact with aliens, spirits, dead people, their
higher self, God, and with ultimate reality.
That led to the idea for this book. After making a list, I
realized that I had over 70 contact modalities and not the 20 that I had predicted. More
importantly, it became apparent in looking at the list that every one of the
modalities was connected to non-waking consciousness, and that the
modality was initiated through dissociation.
It is clear that people who have developed a contact modality
(CM) effectively gain privileged access to the greater reality. They have made
contact by shutting things down, rather than turning things on. They have found
a way to get a clear signal in the noise and develop clairvoyance (clear seeking)
or clairaudience (clear
hearing), or clairsentience (clear
sensing).
They are making the same point that
poet William Blake made, “If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything
would appear to man as it is: Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he
sees all things thro' narrow chinks of his cavern.”[iii]
We see people who make contact as unique when they are not.
Everyone can be intuitive and make contact. Everyone has a perfect memory.
Everyone is eternal. The key is access. The trick is to find the password or
the key that will let us hack the infinite, which has all the answers.
Instead of learning the process, we have chosen to believe
that we are victims. We become like the frightened little child who is crying
and peeing in their diaper.
We justify our non-access with victim excuses like genetic
disposition, or luck. We might as well blame Hillary Clinton, brown evil banditos, and
the dog that ate our homework.
The people referenced in this book have just learned to drive
a car while the unlucky still walk. They have just learned to shut off the
noise and rip open the filter that colors our world.
Each of us can gain the same
access. We need to understand the concept that is there for everyone to access,
and then learn one of the many processes to quiet the noise and open the
filter.
The discussion of each modality is not intended to be a
complete study. Within each chapter, we will cite only a few examples and show
how they fit into the overall pattern of dissociation, which allows contact to anomalous cognition. If I were
to make each modality a complete study, the book would be 2,000 pages long.
Each modality could be a book.
My simple definition of a contact modality is that it is a
way of entering a state of consciousness that is not our normal waking awareness.
Everything breaks down to consciousness and awareness, which is the unchanging
ground of being. All consciousness is non-local. Consciousness is a verb.
Our waking consciousness gives us the illusion of self, locality, separation, and levels. Waking consciousness sees consciousness as a noun – a thing. CMs are techniques that pop us out of the illusion of local perception and the acuity of time and space. CMs allow us a glimpse of the true nature of reality
Noetic Clarification
|
T |
hroughout
this book, I will refer to downloads,
inspirations, and enlightenment experiences, although these are more clearly
defined by the concept of noetic experiences.
This revelation of Noetics came
to me late in the game of writing this book. It is the more accurate term to
describe what is going on.
William
James, an American
philosopher and psychologist, and the first educator to offer a psychology course in the United
States defined the term noetic as:
...mystical states that seem to those who experience them to be also states of knowledge. They are states of insight into depths of truth unplumbed by the discursive intellect. They are illuminations, revelations, full of significance, and importance…and as a rule, they carry with them a curious sense of authority for after-time.
The
information in a noetic experience does not come from the rational,
analytical left brain. Noetic ideas are not things that are
figured out. They appear from somewhere else.
More
importantly, noetic ideas come with a strong degree that the
information is not just a good idea, but is some true knowledge. My personal
experience left me with a sense of absolute certainty about the information I
was receiving. This is extremely hard to describe to a person who has not
experienced this certainty.
Noetic
experiences, through various contact modalities, appear to allow the mind to tap into
true knowledge that is stored somewhere. The entry into this storehouse of
knowledge seems to involve quieting the noise in the left brain to
allow the person to pick up a clear signal.
Forty
percent of all UFO experiencers indicate that at one point during their
experience, they knew the answer to everything in the universe. Others, such as
meditators, have reached this same all-knowing state.
It
would indicate that all knowledge is stored in a field somewhere and that
access is the problem to overcome.
THE STRUCTURE OF REALITY
By getting the brain out of the way, whether through meditation, achieving a flow state, or sensory deprivation, we are able to rise above the Supreme illusion of earthly space-time. Former Harvard Neurologist, Dr. Eben Alexande
|
W |
hat, it might be asked, is reality? One answer might be, that which I see around myself.
What I see around myself, however, must go through my brain. There
are no exceptions. We cannot hypothesize a world that is not inside human
experience if we have no way to be outside human experience. That makes all reality
subjective. Perhaps I am having a bad brain day or even a bad brain life. What
I see might be a product of my bad brain.
The only way we can know for sure something happened is to
experience it. Truth is subjective but not definitive.
I can say that last night I had a dream, and when I was
in the dream, I thought that was the real world. When I woke up, I realized
that was just a dream and that the waking reality is “more real” than
the dream. The waking state reality wins.
It is at that point where contact modalities come in, and where the cheese of the old
school idea of reality starts to slide off the cracker.
Almost every person who has had a journey into the field, or non-local consciousness, or anomalous
realms, or whatever you wish to call it, will come back and make a dramatic
statement. They will say the reality they experienced there was “more real”
than the waking state reality. The waking state loses in the comparison. That
is why a discussion of CMs are so important if you want to know what is real.
Some will immediately argue that they do not believe what
people who have escaped waking reality have to report.
They will use the naming theory to proclaim it was all illusion. Give it a name
and make it go away.
That, however, is not a great argument. It is kind of like
someone in your dream arguing with you, claiming that waking reality is an illusion
and that the dream state reality where they reside is the real deal.
In the last 100 years, the understanding of the structure of
reality has changed dramatically.
Our modern-day reality belief system began to change with the
theoretical and experimental trials that surrounded the development of the new
world of quantum physics.
These new experimental findings tie into a proper
understanding of the neuron cells within the human brain. Do the neurons of the
brain create consciousness, or does consciousness
create the cells that make up the brain?
One hint of the answer goes back to the famous dual slit
experiment where the photo will always produce a wave
pattern on the back wall after going through the two slits until there is an
observer. This is what has become
known as the “observer effect,” were observing a situation or phenomenon
changes the outcome. The effect extends, as in the 1998 Weizmann experiment, to
where the "observer" was an electronic detector.
Once there is an observer, the photon will create a
particle pattern on the back wall after going through the slit. When the
observer or measurement tool is removed, the pattern on the back wall turns
back into a wave pattern. The observer is introduced as the wave pattern turns
back into a particle pattern as if the photon wave changes to a photon particle
when an observer/measurement is present. There are no exemptions.
Physicist John Wheeler extended this weirdness in a 1984
“delayed choice experiment,” which showed that our observations in the present
could affect how a photon behaved in the past.
This clearly indicates that particles do not appear until
there is an observer. When there is no observer,
the photon will remain as a quantum wave potential. This led many physicists to
declare that consciousness is primary and that there is no physical
reality without an observer to create it by breaking down the quantum wave.
The results of the dual slit experiment led many physicists to conclude that awareness
and consciousness are primary and that the material world is an epiphenomenon
produced by the observer.
The double-slit experiment also hints at another key
component of reality. The fact that the quantum wave changes to a particle when
there is an observer shows that the wave is aware of whether or not
there is an observer. If there is an observer, it does one thing. If there is
no observer, it does something else.
Therefore, it is aware and conscious. So, everything in the
universe is conscious, as everything would have quantum waves as their source.
Consciousness is primary, and not an epiphenomenon of the
particles on the back wall in the double-slit experiment.
This new world view started to look more like the various
Hindu ideas that the world is an illusion, a play of the supreme consciousness of God.
It also fits well into the Buddhist world view that nothing is fixed or
permanent, and that change is always possible.
There are many statements made by various physicists that conclude that the material world is subordinate:
Max
Planck, Nobel Laureate, and the originator of Quantum theory
-
“I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative
from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk
about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
John
Wheeler, Nobel Laureate who created the concept of wormholes
and creator of the term black holes - “No phenomenon is a
physical phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon,” and “we are
participants in bringing into being not only the near and here, but the far
away and long ago,” and “We are not only observers. We are participators. In
some strange sense, this is a participatory universe.”
Physicist
Andrei Linde of Stanford
University - “The universe and the observer exist as a pair. I cannot imagine a consistent
theory of the universe that ignores consciousness.”
Sir
James Jeans - “I incline to
the idealistic theory that consciousness is fundamental and that the material universe
is derivative from consciousness, not consciousness from the material
universe... In general, the universe seems to me to be nearer to a great
thought than to a great machine. It may well be, it seems to me, that each
consciousness ought to be compared to a brain-cell in a universal mind.”
Sir
Robert Penrose, mathematician - “Consciousness is part of our
universe, so any physical theory which makes no proper place for it falls …
short of providing a genuine description of the world. I would maintain that
there is yet no physical, biological, or computational theory that comes very
close to explaining our consciousness …”
Niels
Bohr, Nobel Laureate - “it still makes no
difference whether the observer is a man, an animal, or a piece of apparatus,
but it is no longer possible to make predictions without reference to the
observer or the means of observation.”
Erwin
Schrödinger, Nobel Laureate - “Consciousness cannot be
accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in
terms of anything else.”
Werner
Heisenberg, Nobel Laureate - “It seems sensible to
discard all hope of observing hitherto unobservable quantities, such as the
position and period of the electron... Instead, it seems more reasonable to try
to establish a theoretical quantum mechanics, analogous to classical mechanics,
but in which only relations between observable quantities occur.”
Eugene
Wigner, Nobel Laureate - “When the province of
physical theory was extended to encompass microscopic phenomena through the
creation of quantum mechanics, the concept of consciousness came to the fore again. It was not possible to
formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without
reference to the consciousness,” and “It will remain remarkable, in whatever
way our future concepts may develop, that the very study of the external world
led to the scientific conclusion that the content of the consciousness is the
ultimate universal reality.”
Sir Arthur Eddington - “It is difficult for the matter-of-fact physicist to accept the view that the substratum of everything is of mental character. But no one can deny that mind is the first and most direct thing in our experience, and all else is remote inference.”
In the last few
years, several key scientists have come forward to assert that materialism is
not the foundation of reality. Matter is not the building block of reality. The group
includes some of the leading thinkers of the day, including such founding
figures as Mario Beauregard, Larry Dossey, Lisa Jane Miller, Alexander Moreira-Almeida, Marilyn Schlitz, Gary Schwartz, Rupert Sheldrake, and Charles Tart. In 2014, they
produced a document called, “A Manifesto for a Post-Materialistic Science.”
Thirty-five other scientists supported the manifesto. They described the group
and mission as follows:
We are a group of internationally known scientists from a variety of scientific fields (biology, neuroscience, psychology, medicine, psychiatry), who participated in an international summit on post-materialist science, spirituality, and society…Our purpose was to discuss the impact of the materialist ideology on science and the emergence of a post-materialist paradigm for science, spirituality, and society. [i]
The manifesto had 18 points. Here,
in part, are some of the points:[ii]
·
The modern scientific worldview is predominantly predicated
on assumptions that are closely associated with classical physics. Materialism—the idea that matter is the only reality—is one of
these assumptions. A related assumption is reductionism, the notion that
complex things can be understood by reducing them to the interactions of their
parts, or simpler or more fundamental things such as tiny material particles.
·
During the 19th century, these assumptions narrowed, turned
into dogmas, and coalesced into an ideological belief system that came to be
known as "scientific materialism." This belief system
implies that the mind is nothing but the physical activity of the brain and
that our thoughts cannot have any effect upon our brains and bodies, our
actions, and the physical world.
·
Scientists started to believe that it was based on
established empirical evidence and represented the only rational view of the
world.
·
Faith in this ideology, as an exclusive explanatory framework
for reality, has compelled scientists to neglect the subjective dimension of
human experience. This has led to a severely distorted and impoverished
understanding of us and our place in nature.
·
Quantum mechanics has questioned the material foundations of
the world by showing that atoms and subatomic particles are not solid
objects—they do not exist with certainty at definite spatial locations and
definite times. Most importantly, QM explicitly introduced the mind into its
basic conceptual structure since it was found that particles being observed and
the observer—the physicist and the
method used for observation—are linked.
·
Studies of the so-called "PSI phenomena"
indicate that we can sometimes receive meaningful information without the use
of ordinary senses…These events are so common that they cannot be viewed as
anomalous nor as exceptions to natural laws, but as indications of the need for
a broader explanatory framework that cannot be predicated exclusively on
materialism.
·
Rejection of post-materialist investigation of nature or
refusal to publish strong, scientific findings supporting a post-materialist
framework is antithetical to the true spirit of scientific inquiry, which is that empirical
data must always be adequately dealt with. Data that do not fit favored
theories and beliefs cannot be dismissed a priori. Such dismissal is the realm
of ideology, not science.
·
Materialist theories fail to elucidate how the brain could
generate the mind, and they are unable to account for the empirical evidence
alluded to in this manifesto. This failure tells us that it is now time to free
ourselves from the shackles and blinders of the old materialist ideology, to
enlarge our concept of the natural world, and to embrace a post-materialist
paradigm.
·
Mind represents an aspect of reality as primordial as the
physical world. The mind is fundamental in the universe, i.e., it cannot be
derived from matter and reduced to anything more basic…There is a deep
interconnectedness between mind and the physical world.
·
Minds are unbounded and may unite in ways suggesting a
unitary, One Mind that includes all individual, single minds.
·
The post-materialist paradigm has far-reaching implications.
It fundamentally alters the vision we have of ourselves, giving us back our
dignity and power, as humans and as scientists.
· The shift from materialist science to post-materialist science may be of vital importance to the evolution of human civilization. It may be even more pivotal than the transition from geocentrism to heliocentrism.
The ultimate question becomes: Is the basic universe made of
little nuts and bolts, or is the primary component consciousness? If it is made of nuts and bolts, then that is
one world with various rules and laws. If it is made of consciousness, then that
is an entirely different world. If what Nobel Laureate John Von Neumann concluded was
true, which was that the quantum wave potential is changed by an “extra-physical”
factor, then everything that we believed before must be revisited. The way in
which we perceive reality is now going to completely change.
Von Neumann was indicating
that changing the wave into the physical world requires mind, not the brain.
Physicist Amit Goswami also tied this
observer effect into the understanding of the brain. He
stated, “Consciousness does matter.
Matter is secondary. Consciousness is primary. The brain does not do consciousness; consciousness
does the brain.”
Looking back at the double-slit experiment, it would appear
that consciousness is primary. The present belief is that somehow
the particles on the back wall were first. Then they all randomly gathered to
create a brain, which then created the epiphenomena called the observer consciousness.
Terence McKenna said, “We are
asked by science to believe that the entire universe sprang from nothingness,
and at a single point and for no discernible reason. This notion is the limit
case for credulity. In other words, if you can believe this, you can believe
anything.”
The observer was first. There is no material world without
the observer.
If Goswami’s ‘consciousness creates the brain’ is correct, then the brain
is simply the idiot in between. As many now assert, it is simply like a phone
or computer that sends and receives signals from outside itself.
The brain is not where consciousness occurs. There is no football game inside the TV, no matter how much we point out the neural correlates lighting up inside the TV’s electronic components. There is no little screen inside the TV with high-end speakers. The brain is involved in the consciousness process, but it does not produce our consciousness, any more than firefighters at the scene of a fire caused the fire.
To overcome these past misconceptions that have been given to
us by the waking consciousness, it is important to follow
the strategies that the CIA gives to its officers to think more
open-mindedly:
1. Identify your own
beliefs and recognize they are biased.
2. Become proficient
in developing alternate points of view.
3. Do not assume the
other person will think or act like you.
4. Imagine that the
belief you are currently holding is wrong, and then develop a scenario to
explain how that could be true. This helps you understand the limits of your
own beliefs.
5. Try out your own
beliefs by actually acting out the role.
6. Play devil’s
advocate by taking the minority point of view. This helps you see how
alternative assumptions make the world look different.
7. Interact with
other people of different backgrounds and beliefs.
The Dog and the Tail
|
D |
oes the dog wag the tail or
does the tail wag the dog?
Consider all the things that can happen in the brain. The
materialistic paradigm says that the whole thing is random noise and that
consciousness is an illusion.
Coming down from that crazy idea,
other less materialistic scientists believe that the neurons do things on their
own, and we think we decided to do it. That is the tail wagging the dog theory.
Less materialistic theories say neurons act in a way they
have been taught through a random evolutionary process to act when we do
something. That is the dog wagging the tail scenario, but it still has
problems.
Consider
the following:
·
When Mingyur Rinpoche was in the lab
at the University of Wisconsin, the minute he started doing a compassion
meditation, his brain activity
increased 700 to 800 % in seconds.
·
fMRI scans of Mindful Awareness meditators
showed that their amygdala response was slower and greatly slower on the right
side.
·
Praying Franciscan nuns and other nuns showed increased
activity in the frontal lobes, just like Buddhist monks. They also showed increased activity in the inferior
parietal lobe.
·
The study of meditating atheists did not show
increased activity in the frontal lobes.
·
Research done by Marcus Raichle at Washington
University in St. Louis showed that the brain regions deactivated during any
mental task such as counting back by thirteen from 1,475. The noisiest state
(found in the prefrontal cortex and the post cingulate cortex) was at rest.
The same quieting occurs during meditation.
·
When asked about their resting minds, most replies came with
the reply that there were random thoughts about “me” and “I.” This seems
to indicate that at rest, or when we lose focus in meditation, the left-brain,
ego-mind gains control and becomes the center of focus
and attention.
·
The action of refocusing during
meditation from wandering ego thoughts
back to the breath, compassion, loving-kindness, awareness, or whatever type of
meditation is being done, activated a connection in the brain between the
prefrontal cortex and the default mode. The
more a person meditates, the stronger the connection and the less the falling
into the wandering ego-mind.[iii]
Now
consider the questions:
How do
the various neurons that are scattered throughout the brain know that the
individual is doing compassion meditation,
mindfulness awareness, praying, or is an atheist meditating or thinking about
self?
Where is the signal coming from to
alert each set of neurons to rest or fire? Who is sending the signal? What is
the signal composed of? Do the neurons have meetings to discuss who does? How
do all the signals going in different directions all arrive at one action?
Most importantly is the question: Is the observer sending messages to the neurons (the dog
wagging the tail) or are the neurons randomly creating signals which end up taking
action? (Tail wagging the dog)
Even more confusing is how do the
neurons or the independent modules of the brain know what the observer is going to say next as
he/she gives a lecture, or is in a conversation? The observer may know in
advance how he will move from topic to topic, but how do the neurons know what
is coming? How do they quickly put in each word in the sentence, check the
grammar, move the hands, the mouth, and the tongue? Who is actually talking?
Are the neurons providing the
British or American accent having a board meeting ever half second with the
neurons picking the words, or checking the grammar? This
will be discussed again in the trance-channel modality chapter.
The IONS Institute has run experiments to test the role
of consciousness in the physical world. One of these
experiments looked at using consciousness to force a collapse of the quantum
wave function through a “psychophysical” interaction. It was determined that
consciousness could produce an effect.
One of the key people who were most able to influence the
optical dual-slit experiment from another room was Swami Veda. Dean Radin asked him if he
had taken his mind into the shielded room next door to observe the photon beam.
Veda said, “No, it’s all inside here,” referring to his belief that the world
and everything in the world is within him.
Here are two more incidents where there appears to demonstrate
clear evidence that consciousness can affect or even change the physical world.
The first story became known as
the Varian Hall of Physics Experiment. It involved psychic Ingo Swann at the Stanford Research Institute in 1972.
Swann’s
task was to “affect the magnetic field in a magnetometer below the floor of the
laboratory.” Evidence of the effect would show up as “a change in the output
sine-wave recording.” The photon detector was embedded in concrete below the
floor of the lab.
Swann tried to influence the detector without
success and then moved just to “look at it” with his mind. As soon as he said,
“I think I can see it quite well,” the pen on the graph paper started to
produce “two wavy-line intervals.” One of the nine witnesses exclaimed, “Jesus
Christ!”
Hal Puthoff asked for Swann to do it again, and he did. That caused two of
the Ph. D.
candidates to become very distressed. They raced to leave the room, and one of
them was so distraught that he failed to see a very visible orange structural
support. He ran into it as he exited.[1]
The second story comes from Dr. William Bengston, the president of the
Society for Scientific Exploration, who is referred to at length in the rapid
image cycling CM chapter.
In his book, The Energy
Cure, Bengston talks about
Bennett Mayrick, who led him to develop the
rapid cycling energy cure. Mayrick had several
different powers, including using his mind to influence matter.
At one point, experimenters had Mayrick attached to a
machine that measured radioactive decay. The technician asked him to make the
radioactive material decay more rapidly, which he did to the dismay of the
technician.
When the technician became
distressed over what was happening, Mayrick said that he would then slow it down, and it
was cut to 50% of its normal rate. When asked how he did it, he said that he
imagined a cloud which he then imagined dissolving. To slow the decay down,
Mayrick imagined a frozen rock.
Consciousness = Awareness
|
I |
f
something is aware, then it is conscious. By this definition, everything is
conscious. This is the theory that makes the most sense when all the contact
modalities are carefully studied.
There are theories that nothing is conscious, and
that consciousness is an illusion. That, however, seems to be
held by neurologists and philosophers who are having a hard time defending a
random, meaningless universe in light of the hard problem of consciousness.
There is a new theory that consciousness is caused by microtubules inside the neurons
and the quantum vibrations in the microtubules. This theory for consciousness
is still wanting, as it will mean that half the biomass on the planet, that
does not have microtubules is not conscious. I very much doubt that will turn
out to be true.
If you go back to the double-slit experiment, you can
see that particles are aware when there is an observer there or not. That is awareness. That is
consciousness.
If the electrons and photons going through the slit are conscious, then so it everything
else.
The more we look at consciousness and awareness and the conviction that, ‘I’m
the only one who is conscious,’ the more we believe that animals are not
conscious. We believe that the world is not conscious.
If I am the only conscious being, then I can use
animals for whatever I want. They are just objects. I can use everything in
this world because it’s just an object and doesn’t have consciousness or a soul. These ideas are starting to fade
away as we gather more evidence. The ‘everything is conscious’ idea is not as
crazy as it once seemed.
BRAIN STRUCTURE
Each person is at each moment capable of remembering all that has ever happened to him and of perceiving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe. The function of the brain and nervous system is to protect us from being overwhelmed and confused by this mass of largely useless and irrelevant knowledge, by shutting out most of what we should otherwise perceive or remember at any moment and leaving only that very small and special selection which is likely to be practically useful. Aldous Huxley
(There is an) increasing recognition that our seamless sense of reality created by input from the five senses only involves less than 3% of the total information processed by our brains. Melvin L Morse MD
My brain is only a receiver, in the universe, there is a core from which we obtain knowledge, strength, and inspiration. I have not penetrated into the secrets of this core, but I know that it exists. Intuitive Kay Randell May
A Note on Neuroparapsychology
|
I |
n the
upcoming chapters, there will be many references to what an individual’s brain
does during a mystical or contact experience with non-human intelligence.
Although the various scans done
in laboratories around the world show that something is changing in the brain
at the moment of the experience, Dr. James Fadiman summed up the whole field of research as,
“that’s nice.”
It is nice, but it doesn’t
explain anything. It is equivalent to describing an older man with a tall staff
at the edge of the Red Sea. He hits the water with his staff and the water
parts. The children of Israel walk through the opening, and when they are on
the other side, the older man hits the water again with his staff and the Red
Sea closes up.
That’s nice too. That is an
accurate description of an event. It’s a nice trick. Now explain how the trick
is done.
Neuroparapsychology faces the same problem. It, like most of the scientific
research, describes things, but it doesn’t explain them. It is not enough to
describe various modules in the brain, lighting up like bulbs on a Christmas
tree. The light bulbs do not explain Christmas, and Neuroparapsychology observations
do not explain parapsychological events. In an fMRI we see increased blood flow the various 300
million modules arranged in hierarchies. It does not mean that the blood is
causing the consciousness any more than the water
caused the Red Sea to part for Moses. The same applies to the neurons,
synapses, or microtubules. They, like Moses’ staff, and the water, are all part
of the miracle but none are the sole cause of the miracle of consciousness.
Brain scans used in Neuroparapsychology provide the greatest support for people
claiming to be contacting non-human intelligence. The
main skepticism of the idea has always been that people, claiming contact with
non-human intelligence, are making it up for profit, or because they are not in
touch with reality.
Brain scans do not lie. Those
individuals who are mentioned in this book are not out to make money, and they
are in touch with reality. The brain scans showing a predictable change proves
this.
Brain Studies
|
T |
here have been many brain
studies done on contact modalities in universities around the world. These
include electroencephalogram (EEG), magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography
(SPECT). These studies are
important because they are validating the fact that the modalities are a real
event, and that the person is not making it up.
Without them, skeptics have always maintained that the person who is claiming
to be a psychic, channeler, healer, or medium, is simply making up a story to
get attention or make money.
The various brain measuring tools have shown conclusively,
that whatever is going on, it is not being made up. There is something unique
going on in these people’s heads that can be measured, recorded, and analyzed.
The concept most widely held in modern neurology is that the brain creates consciousness and that there are individual modules in the
brain that take care of each body and consciousness function. This is a modern
version of phrenology that was popular in the mid-19th century, where bumps and
groves on the skull determined brain functions. We have just replaced skull
structures with the belief of localization of function in discrete brain
networks.
All of the potentially millions of modules in the brain WORK
AS ONE, even though each module seems to have a different specialty. It is the
same rule that applies to cells in the body that all WORK AS ONE. (When a cell
does not work as one, it is called a cancer cell.)
The father of modern cognitive neurology, Dr. Michael
Gazzaniga, described the fact that
the potentially millions of networks in the brain may have jobs to do, but they
work together. “The millions of networks,” he stated, “are a sea of forces, not
a single soldier waiting for the commander to speak.”
The present phrenology belief that certain brain modules do
certain things has been discounted:
Evidence from neuropsychological, electrophysiological, and neuroimaging studies in humans has revealed that interactions between widespread neural regions in the brain underlie fluid, organized behavior… The studies show that network interactions among anatomically discrete brain regions underlie cognitive processing and dispel any phrenological notion that a given innate mental faculty is based solely in just one part of the brain.[ii]
The evidence seems to clearly show that when an action is
taken, all sorts of areas light up, along with different types of brain wave
patterns. The evidence also seems to show that other areas of the brain exhibit
less activity.
The combination of independent modules lighting up and
quieting at the same time indicates that modules are getting instruction from
some overlying authority. Each action probably requires 10,000 or more modules
working together almost instantly to do any one task. This becomes even more
amazing when according to Dr. Fred Travis, Director of the Center for Brain, Consciousness Research, the
brain is a river not a rock.
Seventy percent of all
brain connections change every day.[iii] Yet the brain can consistently perform the
same tasks flawlessly despite an almost completely different brain every time
it performs the task. The connections change so they cannot be the
consciousness, identity, and memory which
do not change.
An example would be asking someone to meditate. When the individual
begins the meditation is will go into one of 20 patterns (of
thousands of module patterns) of 20 different types of meditation. How did the
brain know which modules to light up or to calm to do the necessary meditation?
The higher “I” gave the instruction.
The fMRI patterns also indicate that normally active
areas are being quietened to reduce noise and pick up the signal which appears
paranormal. The signal is there but
just cannot be detected and received in a normal brain state.
These modules of the brain are operating together as a
Oneness function, the same as the cells of the body
have different responsibilities but work as one to keep the body operational
and healthy. When a cell in the body does not work as one but for itself, it is
called a cancer cell.
The cognitive experience that people have is seamless. The
audio, video, smell, touch, and taste all present themselves as one unified
whole. This is something that the neurological community seems to take for
granted.
Chicken or Egg?
|
W |
hen it comes to studying the
brain and consciousness, it is important to
determine which came first - the chicken or the egg? Does the tail wag the dog,
or does the dog wag the tail? What comes first - the worker bee that feeds
royal jelly to a larva to create a queen bee or a queen bee that lays the larva
that becomes the worker bee? And who invented the royal jelly that is needed
for each to exist?
Modern materialistic neurology models still cling to the belief that
consciousness is an epiphenomenon of a three-pound brain.
The theory goes on to assert that the entire process is a total accident, where
random particles bang into each other, becoming more complex until consciousness
suddenly jumps out.
In the early 1960s, research work was done on stem cells by
geneticist Dr. Bruce Lipton. He discovered that genetically identical stem cells
would become bone, muscle, or skin cells depending on the culture medium the
cells were placed in. He did this by changing the culture medium (equivalent to
blood) in three different Petri dishes with genetically identical stem cells.
This experiment indicates that the cell is a read/write
organism that develops based on reading its environment and creating structures
that adapt and support survival. This means that when you change the medium,
the type of cell that forms changes. The culture medium is determining the cell
that forms, and it is not the cell that is changing the medium.
The Bees
|
T |
he same process happens with
bees. Like Dr. Lipton’s stem cells, all the bees are genetically identical.
They could be seen as stem cell bees. Just like the Lipton stem cell
experiment, they will develop according to the food they are fed in their early
life.
In an incredibly complex cycle, the queen lays a single egg,
standing up vertically, in each cell that has been cleaned and prepared by the
workers to raise a new brood. The cell must be spotless, or she will move on.
In another seemingly chicken-egg part of the process, the
bees that build the cells only live a couple of weeks. When they build the cells,
they build big ones that will house male drones. In these, the queen will
deposit a non-fertilized egg. In the
smaller cells that will house female worker bees, she releases a fertilized egg
into the cell.
The number of worker cells to drone cells is 100 to 1, and
the workers keep cells to this ratio almost as if they as a unit can count.
If the queen comes across a standard worker-size cell, she
releases a fertilized egg into the cell. That egg develops into a worker bee
(female). But if she chooses a wider drone-size cell, the queen releases an
unfertilized egg, which becomes a male drone. This is equivalent to a human
mother being able to deliver a male or female on demand.
Now here is the key to the bee story. Like the Lipton stem cells, a
worker bee and a queen bee are genetically identical. The only difference is
the queen is a worker bee that gets an exclusive diet of royal jelly that
workers secret from the glands in their hypopharynx. This diet triggers
“fourteen genes known to be involved in worker-queen differentiation that is upregulated
or increased in expression.”
The other bee larvae are fed royal jelly plus pollen and
honey. That shrivels ovaries and makes them workers. The question then becomes,
how did the workers invent the royal jelly? What came first, the queen, the
worker bee, or the royal jelly? You can't have a queen without the jelly, you
can't give the jelly creating the queen without the worker bee, and you can't
have the worker bee without the queen.
In the same way, the question arises; can you have a physical
brain without a consciousness? This is especially the
case when the ‘brain creates consciousness’ theory cannot come up with a
physical model of consciousness.
Brain Plasticity
|
I |
t is not the external stress
that kills you or makes you stronger. It is how you react internally to the
stress that kills you or makes you stronger.
Another modern scientific discovery that ties into the
consciousness mystery is the discovery of the plasticity of
the human brain. It used to be believed that the brain is an unchanging organ.
In this old model, the structure is created by “good” genes and “bad” genes that
battle for control of the function of consciousness.
The model is almost a modern-day deterministic model version
of angels and demons who battle for control of the
individual. In this model, the person is a victim to outside forces and has no
control over the mind.
The discovery of brain plasticity
changed all of that. Neurology began to show that the brain was not set in
stone. The evidence indicated that exactly the opposite is going on and that
the individual has full control of brain development. Now we can all take
responsibility for our brains.
Neurological research has now
begun to show that the brain can and does change throughout life. The human
brain has the amazing ability to reorganize itself by forming new connections
between brain cells (neurons).
The more experiments that are done, the more it becomes evident that the brain is an ever-changing verb as opposed to a static, unchanging noun. Like the neurons within, it is always reading the outside environment and signals, and writing new programs to adapt, just like the cells in Lipton’s Petri dish reading the culture medium.
It has been established in many labs that the brain can
re-wire itself according to external signals. Two general rules were
established:
1. Use it or lose it. It has been shown that
when a module in the brain is being used extensively, the brain can modify
itself and create a new structure to accommodate the increased demand. The
system is akin to lifting weights, which is met with aware muscle cells that
create more muscle cells. When a module is not being used, the brain prunes the
synapses to make the brain more efficient.
A key example of an addition would be meditation, which adds grey
matter or dampens down brain modules connected to stress, attention, or
depression.
Memorization is another addition that can greatly change the
brain’s memory abilities. Dr. Hartzell, a postdoctoral researcher at Spain’s Basque
Centre on Cognition, Brain, and Language, spoke about training the brain
for memory:
I noticed that the more Sanskrit I studied and translated, the better my verbal memory seemed to become. Fellow students and teachers often remarked on my ability to exactly repeat lecturers’ sentences when asking them questions in class. Other translators of Sanskrit told me of similar cognitive shifts. India’s Vedic Sanskrit pandits train for years to orally memorize and exactly recite 3,000-year-old oral texts ranging from 40,000 to over 100,000 words. We wanted to find out how such intense verbal memory training affects the physical structure of their brains.[iv]
An example of a loss would be sensory
deprivation experiments done by
neurophysiologists David Hubel and Torsten Wiesel with mice where one eye is blindfolded from
birth for several months.
When the blindfold was removed, the eye of
the mouse was blind. The visual cortex structure developed properly only if it
received input from both eyes early in life.
In 2010, neurologists Cris Neill and Michael Stryker, both
at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), performed another
experiment to show the plasticity of the mouse brain to reverse the loss of
vision created by the blindfold.
With the assumption that it was the activity
that stimulated plasticity in the brain, “Mice in one group were shown a
‘noisy’ visual pattern while running on a treadmill for four hours a day for
three weeks. The pattern was chosen to activate nearly all the cells in the
mice’s primary visual cortex… After a week, these mice showed more responsiveness in the part of
the cortex corresponding to the eye that had been closed. After two weeks,
responses were comparable to those of normal mice that had never been visually
deprived.”[v]
The control mice that did not run “had a much slower response in their newly
reopened eye and never reached normal response levels.”
2. Neurons that fire together wire together. This concept is
known as Hebb’s axiom. The idea is that each experience we have eventually becomes
embedded in the brain’s neural network. Each repeated experience further embeds
in the network, making it easier for the neurons to fire (respond to the
experience), and more difficult to unwire or rewire them to respond
differently.
3. The brain is a read and write verb – In the past, most neurologists taught the idea of the unchangeable brain. In the world of nuts and bolts, it was considered an object and a noun, and objects don’t change.
In more recent neurological literature, there has been a
shift from the brain as an unchanging noun to an ever-changing verb. The new
finding on brain plasticity clearly shows that the neuronal cells of the brain
are read and write just like all other cells found in nature. They can read
changes in the signal/environment; then they build the structure to
accommodate. Bruce Lipton described the
process as follows:
The cell is a carbon-based “computer chip” that reads the environment. Its “keyboard” is comprised of receptors. Environmental information is entered via its protein “keys.” The data is transduced into biological behavior by effector proteins. The IMP BITs serve as switches that regulate cell functions and gene expression. The nucleus represents a “hard disk” with DNA-coded software. Recent advances in molecular biology emphasize the read/write nature of this hard drive.[vi]
The whole process becomes one of
personal responsibility as opposed to outside victimization by uncontrollable
events. The idea that the brain is static and unchanging is wrong. The brain
has the ability to change functionally and physiologically by adding neurons.
It can rewire by perceiving the incoming signal, such as the 11% larger corpus
callosum in left-handed and
ambidextrous people than in right-handed people. It has been established that
the brain can be rewired using activities such as meditation or psychedelics.
When it comes to these ‘Use it or Lose it’ rules related to
the brain, it is important to note that each can happen very quickly, and each
has no apparent link to deterministic genes that take generations to affect.
Plasticity Examples
·
When the brain is injured, other parts of the brain take over
the functions of the damaged brain.
·
If you were to wear blindfolds
for two days, your visual cortex would reorganize itself to
process sound and touch. Once you take
the blindfold off, the visual cortex will stop responding to tactile or
auditory signals within twelve or twenty-four hours.[vii]
·
Psychologist Mark Rosenzweig discovered that rats raised in an enriched
environment, such as being held in large cages and provided with varied
stimulus objects, learned better than rats raised in individual cages. Many
differences were seen, such as increased protein, increased thickness of the
cortex, and significantly increased sizes of synaptic junctions. The number of
glial cells per unit volume of cortex increase significantly (by 14%), as did
the dendritic spines. Synaptic function sized increased as well as brain tissue
weights, which were described as “significant”.[viii]
This showed a modification of brain circuits through experience, not genes.
·
Training animals results in similar increases in brain
synapses. They either use it or lose it.
·
A 2013 study on mice, published
in the journal Brain, Structure, and Function, showed that “when the
mice were exposed to two hours of silence per day, they developed new cells in
the hippocampus.”
·
Birds such as the Western Scrub
jay as well as squirrels who store seeds have bigger hippocampal areas than
birds and animals that did not store. Use or lose.
·
London taxi drivers who had to
memorize 25,000 streets and 20,000 landmarks to do their job had, “more gray
matter in their posterior hippocampi than people who were similar in age,
education, and intelligence, but who did not drive taxis.”[ix]
This did not mean that their memory was better on other things. Most
importantly, when drivers retire, many years later, the hippocampus shrinks back down again, which supports the ‘Use
it or lose it’ rule for the brain.
·
MRI scans showed that the
anterior cingulate in the dominant hemisphere
was 50% thicker than the nondominant hemisphere. The anterior cingulate is
correlated with monitoring and controlling processes in the brain.[x] Use
or lose.
·
Muslims who practice daily prayer called Salat had superior dynamic balance. Use
or lose.
·
Dr. James Hartzell’s
research is the first study to examine the brains of Sanskrit scholars. Using
structural Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) at India’s National Brain Research Centre, he scanned the
brains of 21 Sanskrit pandits and 21 control subjects. He discovered that “grey
matter in the brains of the pandits, the right temporal cortex, associated with
speech prosody and voice identity, was also substantially thicker.”[xi]
Mind over matter.
·
Meditation (as will be
described in the meditation chapter) can produce numerous brain changes,
and in as short a period as eight weeks. This is a key finding supporting the
fact that the mind builds the brain, countering the old belief that the brain
causes consciousness, which would have to
include meditation. Mind over matter.
·
Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche, a lifetime meditator, had his brain’s grey matter
compared to the anatomic markers in the brain database at the University of
Wisconsin, and it was found to be in the 99th percentile, the
youngest brain in 100 people of his age. It showed a brain eight years younger
than his 41 chronological age. Mind over matter.
·
A technique like meditation can send the brain into total coherence, which is unlike any ordinary brain pattern. Mind
over matter.
·
There are changing patterns in the
regional cerebral metabolic rate of glucose during Yoga meditative relaxation.[xii]
Mind over matter.
·
Musical training was shown to
increase the plasticity of the corpus callosum during a sensitive period in development,
known as synaptogenesis. The study found
children who had begun musical training before the age of six (minimum 15
months of training) had an increased volume of their corpus callosum and adults
who had begun musical training before the age of 11 also had increased bimanual
coordination,[xiii]
brain reading, input signal, and rewiring.
·
Research shows that musicians have significantly larger front
portions of the human corpus callosum than non-musicians.
·
Studies showed that medical
students have structural brain changes when preparing for an exam. “Magnetic
resonance images were obtained at three
different time points while medical students learned for their medical
examination. During the learning period, the gray matter increased
significantly in the posterior and lateral parietal cortex bilaterally.”[xiv]
The posterior hippocampus…was even more pronounced toward the third time point. (Three months
after exam)
·
Physical exercise promotes neurogenesis,
which is the creation of new neurons in the brain; it also stimulates sensory
and motor cortices and helps the brain’s balance system. One study showed that
“people who worked on an exercise for a few minutes each day experienced
structural brain changes. The participants’ brains were “rewired” and grew in
response to a 10-minute mental task performed for just 15 days over three
weeks.”[xv]
·
The left parietal cortex, an
area of the brain associated with language, is typically larger in those who
are bilingual than in those who are monolingual. Those who learned a second
language before five had even larger parietal cortices. Bilingualism also
affects white matter, a fatty substance that covers axons. The extra white matter allows messages to
travel fast and efficiently across networks of nerves and to the brain.[xvi]
Use or lose.
·
According to research done
partly at Harvard, “sudden and complete visual deprivation in normally sighted
individuals can lead to profound, but rapidly reversible, neuroplastic changes
by which the occipital cortex becomes engaged in processing of non-visual
information.”[xvii] In layman’s terms, wearing a blindfold for
two days causes the visual cortex to reorganize itself to process sound and
touch. Take the blindfolds off, and the
visual cortex will stop responding to tactile or auditory signals within twelve
or twenty-four hours. Use or lose.
·
Education increases the number
of branches among neurons, increasing the volume and thickness of the brain.[xviii]
·
Then there are multiple
examples of the placebo effect. Expert Dr. Fabrizio Benedetti talked about how a person can be given an
injection the first day to increase growth hormone. It increases. The second
day, an injection is given and a rise is witnessed. On day three, a saline
solution is used, but still, the growth hormone rises the same amount. This
same experiment was run using heroin and other drugs.[xix]
Despite all the evidence
that consciousness (the observer) creates and controls brain
matter, modern neurology still clings to the supposition that ‘the brain
creates the mind’ theory. By the way, they have defined evolution, all the
particles appear on the back wall, and eventually, all join together and then
create the observer.
Common sense would say that the observer comes before the particle on the back wall. Therefore,
consciousness creates the physical brain and not the other
way around.
Read and Write
|
T |
he brain is a read and write system.
It operates like any other cell in the human body. It brings in outside
signals from the environment. The brain reads it, and then it writes the
program to accommodate for anything that changes in the environment.
The cell is sensitive to the
environment, and it evolves by this reading and writing of new programs. It is
no different from the development of muscles that you may have heard of.
If a sedentary TV-watching
person suddenly starts lifting weights, the signal comes from
outside to the muscles that say, “Hey! He’s starting to lift weights! We’ve got
to get some more muscle cells built!”
The muscle structures will
read the environment and then will start to make muscle cells. The individual
will get stronger and stronger with increased muscle construction, but it
doesn’t mean the muscles are forcing you to exercise.
You are exercising, and the
muscles are being built because there’s a read/write system that understands that
they must build muscle cells.
The same rule applies as if
you start running. Your lungs and your heart will start to create new cells to
accommodate because you need more cells to provide the energy you need to jog
or run or exercise or whatever; it’s a read/write system. The same thing
happens in the brain when parts of it are being used.
Similarly, with psychic stuff, we can start to learn what areas work
on, how to turn sections off, and how to tap into the system. I’m firmly
convinced now that we can start to teach people how to do this work, but first,
you have to understand how the basic system is working.
The question is, what signal
is causing the caudate-putamen to build an increased structure. It may be
acting as an antenna that needs to accommodate
an increased signal. It may be the same way we now attach a cable to a TV to
handle 500 channels when in the past, a simple set of rabbit ears was all that
was required to get three channels.
The important point is that
we do not need evil aliens to mess with the genes to increase the caudate-putamen structure. All we need is an increased signal
(or some other external change in the environment). As in the case of
meditation, it does not even have to
be physical.
The Good Aliens
|
T |
here is
some recent research by Dr. Garry Nolan and Dr. Kit Green’s
that there may be a connection between an increase of structure in the
caudate-putamen area and the intelligence
behind the UFO phenomenon The initial
reports stated that the subjects were people who had been injured by close
interactions with the phenomenon, thus indirectly implying that the phenomenon
may not be a good thing.
Structural
changes to the caudate-putamen indicate different levels of
use, as the brain increases structure when that module is being used more, and
prunes connections in the brain that are no longer needed. The new brain
structure may be a bad omen, but what if the structural change is coming from
good aliens increasing use with an
“oneness blessing.”
As was
shown in the FREE survey of experiencers over half 54%, when asked what was going on,
thought it had something to do with Oneness –the idea that we are all part of one
undivided thing. That’s where the caudate comes in.
Andrew Newberg, who
did extensive brain research into enlightenment, claims that the brain was
offered a chance to be part of an “Oneness blessing” by motivational speaker Tony
Robbins.
Newberg took up the offer and ended up in the Four
Seasons Hotel in New York with 15 others. Those giving the blessing walked into
the room and placed their hands over their hearts and the hearts of those
receiving the blessing.
Newberg had a weird experience where he sensed a
strong light that shone in his face in the dark. Impressed, he set up an
experiment to test the brains of the senders and the receivers.
The test was blind. Each group was
in a separate room and never came in contact with one another. When it was all
over, here is what he found. As with all other modalities, distinct changes
were seen indicating something was going on outside the normal brain state:
Senders: Decreased activity in the frontal
lobes (when concentrating on others an increase would be expected), similar to
mediums and people speaking in
tongues. This situation is also seen with people reporting a sense of
surrender and ensuing profound mystical or spiritual states. The senders also
had decreased activity in the parietal lobes,
which produces the same oneness experience reported by meditators and intensely-praying
nuns.
Receivers: Activity decreased up to 15%
in the right caudate and was reduced in the hippocampus. The
activity increased in the thalamus (part of the basal ganglia, which holds the
caudate nucleus).
Could it be that the aliens (who described themselves to
experiencer Bret Oldham, as the ‘One with the One who is All’) are sending a
constant signal or sub-conscious signal to experiencers that is causing the added structure reported
by Nolan and Green?
Left Brain Dominance
eurologists like to refer to the brain doing this and the brain doing
that. The reality is that the brain is composed of two distinct hemispheres,
and according to Ray Kurzweil, 300 million modules that all work together as ONE, to do everything
involved in being a conscious human being.
Neurologists like
to refer to the brain doing this and the brain doing that. The reality is that
the brain is composed of two distinct hemispheres, and according to Ray Kurzweil, 300 million modules that all work together as ONE, to do everything
involved in being a conscious human being.
Researchers began to study specific functional localizations
of the two hemispheres in the early 1960s.
The research done established that the left brain oversaw logical things. It is rational and
analytical and is extremely interested in detail. Then it is interested in the
details of the details. It is the home of skepticism (left brain interpreter),
and the center for language. It sees everything as objects with names. It is
the place for science and mathematics. It is fearful and wants to dominate,
plus it risks avoidance.
The right brain, on the other hand, uses feeling. It sees the big
picture rather than the details. It uses symbols and images rather than
language. It cannot even speak. It is the center of intuition. It uses imagination over facts. It is a risk-taker.
Albert Einstein has long been
held up as the epitome of intelligence in the modern world. It is therefore
important that Einstein said in his
book, Out of My Later Years the
following regarding intelligence:
Our age is proud of the progress it has made in man’s intellectual development. The search and striving for truth and knowledge are one of the highest of man’s qualities - though often, pride is most loudly voiced by those who strive the least. And certainly, we should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality. It cannot lead, it can only serve, and it is not fastidious in its choices of a leader. This characteristic is reflected in the qualities of its priests, the intellectuals. The intellect has a sharp eye for methods and tools but is blind to ends and values. So, it is no wonder that this fatal blindness is handed from old to young and today involves a whole generation
Although left vs. right brain research was
not around at the time when Einstein dominated, what
he appears to say speaks to the important left vs. right brain discoveries.
Einstein warns about not
making “the intellect our god… it can only serve, and it is not fastidious in
its choices of a leader.” This is the rational-analytic left brain that is so highly revered in the modern
scientific world with calls for solely rational analytical left brain thinking
to deal with problems.
Einstein, however, spoke about the more valuable right brain. In a disputed quote he reportedly stated: “The
intuitive mind (right brain) is the sacred gift, and the rational mind is a
faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has
forgotten the gift.”
Despite the controversy over the quote, Einstein did talk about
the more valuable left brain, like when he said that,
“The greatest scientists are artists as well.” Art is a feature of the right
brain. Speaking of his discoveries,
and those of others, he talked about the importance of right-brain imagination:
When I examine myself and my methods of thought, I come close to the conclusion that the gift of imagination has meant more to me than any talent for absorbing absolute knowledge." Elaborating, he added, "All great achievements of science must start from intuitive knowledge. I believe in intuition and inspiration... At times I feel certain I am right while not knowing the reason."[xx]
Einstein told Max Wertheimer that he never thought in logical symbols or
mathematical equations (left brain), but
in images, feelings, and even musical architectures (right brain).[xxi]
He expanded on the musical architectures, declaring in another interview that
he attributed his scientific insight and intuition mainly to music. "If I were not a
physicist," he was rumored to have said, "I would probably be a
musician. I often think in music. I live my daydreams in music. I see my life
in terms of music.... I get most joy in life out of music."[xxii]
In one article, Einstein’s
family was quoted saying about how Einstein mixed right-brain music into his work:
His son, Hans, amplified what Einstein meant by recounting that "whenever he felt that he had come to the end of the road or into a difficult situation in his work, he would take refuge in music, and that would usually resolve all his difficulties" (quoted in Clark, 1971, 106). After playing piano, his sister Maja said, he would get up saying, "There, now I've got it" (quoted in Sayen, 1985, 26). Something in the music would guide his thoughts in new and creative directions.[xxiii]
Another example of Einstein illustrating
that the right brain is the source
of inspiration came when he described his dream which led to his theory of relativity:
I was sledding with my friends at night. I started to slide down the
hill, but my sled started going faster and faster. I was going so fast that I
realized I was approaching the speed of light. I looked up at that point, and I
saw the stars. They were being refracted into colors I had never seen before. I
was filled with a sense of awe. I understood in some way that I was looking at
the most important meaning in my life.[xxiv]
Later he told science reporter Edwin
Newman, “I knew I had to understand that dream and you could say, and I
would say that my entire scientific career has been a meditation on my dream.”[xxv]
Einstein was not the
only one who claimed to have received technical or scientific discoveries in a
right-brain sleep state where the rational mind is asleep.
Left Brain Interpreter
Studies have even shown that people prefer stability and coherence over reality. Frida Åström “The left hemisphere interpreter and confabulation – a comparison,” University of Skövde, Sweden
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. ax Planck, speaking about the left brain, skeptical, scientific mind
My next to the worst PK Party was for a group of nine Ph. D. physicists and their families at Los Alamos. All the wives and children bent silverware, but none of the physicists bent. It wasn't that they were physicists because many physicists have been to PK Parties and bent. But these scientists all worked together in a very closed environment and, in a sense, their subconsciousness would not allow them to deviate from the norm. Boeing Engineer Dr. Ed Houck
|
T |
he left-brain interpreter (LBI) is a very important concept
in neurology. When it comes to talking
about the LBI, however, it is like the
Pope talking about his sex life. It is rarely discussed in neurological
research.
The LBI is a
neurophysiological term created by the father of cognitive neurology, Dr. Michael
Gazzaniga. He performed experiments
in the 1970s with Roger Sperry, and Sperry went on to win
the Nobel Prize for split-brain research (see
also Memory and Hypnosis chapters)
I believe that the LBI is the basis of the skeptical mind that is so highly
prized in science. Hypnotherapist Dolores Cannon, more accurately calls this ‘interpreter’, found in
the left brain, Mr. Stupid.
The LBI is a key to understanding
contact modalities because the LBI plays a large role in creating noise and false
information in the rational-analytic left-brain processor, which is trying to
tune into the signal.
The LBI, and the skeptical role it plays, also stops any
study of contact modalities in the scientific community.
Here’s how it works. Say you were to have a UFO sighting. The next morning you wake up and
remember what you saw the night before.
At some point, you start to think, ‘Maybe it didn’t happen.
Maybe I just saw a bird or a plane. Maybe I was dreaming.’
This is the left-brain interpreter talking. It is a real function of our left
brains that tries to explain everything and anything you experience, in a way
that keeps our present world view intact.
When something different happens in the world view that is held
in the waking consciousness, suddenly everything
becomes inconsistent. Suddenly nothing makes sense.
An example would be if someone were to tell you about a UFO abduction, ghost story, or a claim about some
psychic who can do all manner of paranormal things. For the
person who is hearing the story, they are now suddenly forced to consider these
concepts, possibly for the first time in their life.
Suddenly, their world view becomes inconsistent. The ego’s
intelligence is challenged. Things are not the way they have always believed.
There is suddenly a hole in their world view.
The role of the left-brain interpreter is actually to fill in this hole. Its job is
to make the story consistent with the old-world view. It does this by simply
making something up. That is why some neurologists call it the Storyteller.
I call the LBI the
pathological liar. It is active all the time. The interpreter jumps in and
makes excuses for things that are happening that don’t make any sense and tries
rationally and logically to explain it.
After Gazzaniga had taken over the lab that won the Nobel
Prize for split-brain research, he
began to work with patients who had split brains. These patients became
available when it became known that epilepsy could be
controlled or stopped by severing the corpus callosum, a band of nerve fibers, that connects the left and
right brain.
The corpus callosum consists of
200-300 million axonal filers that moderate and send signals from one cerebral
hemisphere of the brain to the other. Once the corpus callosum is cut, the two hemispheres
of the brain of the patient could no longer communicate. This stopped the
epileptic seizures but also created two different brains.
Research showed that the two brains were so different that
they would fight with each other. There are stories about one hand lighting up
a cigarette, and the other hand pulling the cigarette out of the mouth and
throwing it away. Another story is about the two hands fighting to open a car
door. There are stories of one hand putting on a shirt and the other hand
trying to take it off at the same time.
When you see an image with your right eye, your left brain receives this signal and interprets the image.
When your left eye sees an image, the right hemisphere of your brain receives
and interprets the image.
With the severing of the corpus callosum, the two sides of the brain cannot communicate with
each other, but now it is possible to talk to each side of the brain without
the other side knowing about it.
Here is one of the stories that led to the discovery of the
interpreter:
The right eye (left brain) is shown a
picture of a chicken claw. The left eye (right brain) is shown a picture of a snowed-in area. Neither
hemisphere knows what the other side saw.
Then experimenters give the patient a bunch of photos, and
they are asked to pick the one that connects to their picture. The left brain uses the right hand to pick up the photo of
the chicken. It connects to the chicken claw it saw. So far, so good.
Then they ask the right brain to do the same,
and the left hand, which it controls, picks up the snow shovel which lines up
with the snowy scene it saw.
At that point, the experimenter asks the patient, “why did
your left hand pick the snow shovel. In speaking, the experimenter is
talking to the left brain as the right
brain cannot speak.
The reality is that
the left brain has no idea why the body’s left hand picked up
the snow shovel as there is no corpus callosum to send signals
back and forth.
The obvious reply would be, “I don’t know.”
Instead, the left brain makes up an answer. In the case of the snow
shovel, it replied that you need a shovel to clean up the chicken shed.
This experiment was run over and over, and, in every case,
instead of saying, “I don’t know,” something inside the left brain made up something. In every case, it was
wrong. It would do it immediately, and once it made up the story, it would
defend the confabulation, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.
In another experiment, a can of Coca-Cola was shown to the
left eye, which was received by the right brain. The experimenters would send a signal to the right
brain, “Drink the Coke.” It did this by picking up the coke with the left hand.
Nothing was said as the right brain cannot talk. (Language is located inside
the left brain)
The person is asked, “why did you drink the Coke?” Now you
are speaking to the left brain because that is where the language is. (The
right brain can hear but is mute).
The left brain has no idea why its left hand picked up the Coke
because it isn’t receiving signals anymore from the right brain, which saw the Coke.
So, what the left-brain interpreter does is, it finds the most logical reason for
why you picked up the coke (even though this may not be true) and says, “I
picked it up because I was thirsty.”
Many, many studies were done in this manner, sending
different images and instructions to these people who had their corpus callosum cut, and this
was always the outcome.
The moral of the experiment is, do not trust what your
conscious mind is telling you. Part of the story is made up, or as some neurologists
actually point out - confabulation and the LBI may be the same thing:
The left hemisphere interpreter refers to a function in the left
hemisphere of the brain that searches for and produces causal explanations for
events, behaviors, and feelings, even though no such apparent pattern exists
between them. Confabulation is said to occur when a person presents or acts on
obviously false information, despite being aware that they are false. People
who confabulate also tend to defend their confabulations even when they are
presented with counterevidence. Research related to these two areas seems to
deal with the same phenomenon, namely the human tendency to infer explanations
for events, even if the explanations have no actual bearing in reality.[xxvi]
Left Brain Interpreter and Memory
|
T |
here is
strong evidence that the LBI may be the cause of faulty memory. As I will
point out in the hypnosis modality chapter, everyone has a perfect
memory.
Some savants, people
with an eidetic memory, and people with very superior autobiographical memory, exhibit
almost perfect memory connected to their life, what they have read in books, or
bizarre obsessional memories such as sporting events, entire city bus
schedules, or court rulings appearing in the news. The problem is not memory,
but retrieving a signal without noise to read the memory.
The LBI is a major cause of the noise in the signal. It does
this by placing things it made up into the memory stream. That’s why
researchers often like to point out the fallibility of memory. Here is one example by Gazzaniga of how the LBI messes with waking consciousness memory:
Our recent investigations have looked further at the properties of the Interpreter and how it influences mental skills. For example, there are hemisphere-specific changes in the accuracy of memory processes. Specifically, the predilection of the left hemisphere to interpret events has an impact on the accuracy of memory. When subjects are presented with pictures representing common events (e.g., getting up in the morning or making cookies) and several hours later asked to say if pictures in another series appeared in the first, both hemispheres are equally accurate in recognizing the previously viewed pictures and rejecting the unrelated ones. Only the right hemisphere, however, correctly rejects pictures in the second set that were not previously viewed but were related to pictures previously viewed. The left hemisphere incorrectly “recalls” significantly more of these related pictures as having occurred in the first set, presumably because they fit into the schema it has constructed. This finding is consistent with the hypothesis that a left-hemisphere “Interpreter” constructs theories to assimilate perceived information into a comprehensible whole. In doing so, however, the process of elaborating (story making) has a deleterious effect on the accuracy of perceptual recognition. This result has been shown with verbal as well as visual material.[xxvii
Another thing the LBI interpreter does is like making sandwiches. It
takes two pieces of data and guesses what goes in between. The data from the split-brain research is
that this guess is always wrong, and once it is proposed, the LBI will defend the story it put forward until its
death.
Lastly, according to Gazzaniga, the LBI “actively constructs a mental portrait of
experience, even though that experience did not directly occur in that
hemisphere.” That is pretty damaging if we are going back to the person’s
memory.
These failings of the LBI are why contact modalities are so important. They gather their data from
non-waking states and memories. The information is more accurate, and the
farther you get from the conscious mind, the more accurate the data will be.
Therefore, a light trance channeler will reliably
channel waking consciousness data, a relay channeler will be even more
accurate, and a trance-channeler (where there is complete dissociation from waking
consciousness) should be the most accurate information we can obtain.
Contact modalities are accessed by dissociation from the left
brain and its pathological liar LBI function. Shut down the left brain and then
you can access the information that is stored in the field.
The material gained by accessing the right hemisphere should
be much more accurate than the made-up stories in the left brain. Frida Åström, in her paper “The left hemisphere interpreter and
confabulation – a comparison,” at the University of Skövde wrote:
A series of experiments (Metcalfe et al., 1995) investigated probable memory differences for categorically associated events in the two hemispheres of a split-brain patient. These studies showed that the right hemisphere stores more exact memory traces than the left hemisphere. It was therefore concluded that the right hemisphere possesses more veridical memory. A proposed explanation for the left hemisphere tendency was that it encodes and stores not only the real events...[xxviii]
The conclusion seems to be if you have a choice of memory
from the waking consciousness of the left brain, or the
veridical memory of the right brain that can be
accessed through dissociation, bet on the right side every time.
Coherence
|
B |
rain coherence is a condition
where all your brain waves from all sections of the brain all go into a uniform,
coherent pattern. The brainwaves tend to become rhythmic and orderly. They move
into “phase”—and move synchronously over large areas in the frontal regions of
the brain, extending eventually toward the posterior regions as well. This is
called EEG coherence.
This is the equivalent to billions of neurons and trillions
of synapses all suddenly marching in place in complete unison.
The high state of the organization
is linked to many of the contact modalities such as Sahaja Yoga meditation[xxix],
trance- channeling, psychic abilities, and rapid image
cycling. It brings with it “greater intelligence, creativity, learning
ability, emotional stability, ethical and moral reasoning, self-confidence, and
reduced anxiety.”[xxx]
The coherence pattern is
completely opposed to the notion that everything in the universe is random,
meaningless, and simply worthless background noise. The coherence illustrates a
state where the brain is created and maintained by a self-organizing
intelligence that provides direction and instruction to every single one of the
100 billion neurons.
The effect can be produced by meditation, people who
manage a large number of people, and athletes who “are in the flow.”
It is a state of oneness, where all the pieces support the
one to make it as efficient as possible; it becomes like the beehive where
every bee within operates like a player in a giant symphony orchestra. Like
brain coherence, it produces perfect music,
as opposed to everyone playing their tune.
Brain synchronicity becomes like the cells of the human body where each cell does what it must do to maintain perfect health for the body, which is the One. It is like the beehive, where every bee builds cells, gathers pollen, or feeds the larvae. It is like the Oneness is all aspects of nature where things do what has to be done, and for the good of the unit.
Intuition, Insight, and Creativity
A new idea comes suddenly and in a rather intuitive way. Albert Einstein
Creative writers and physicists reported that about twenty percent of their ideas happened when they were not at work and not actively thinking about the challenge. Jonathan Schooler UC Santa Barbara
Something happens when you have the answer – before you are able to put it into words. It is all done subconsciously. This has happened too many times to me, and I know when to take it seriously. I am so absolutely sure. I don’t talk about it, and I don’t tell anyone about it. I’m just sure this is it. Barbara McClintock 1983 Nobel Prize for Medicine
They did no 'work it out', but just 'saw' it, in a flash.
-Neurologist Oliver Sacks getting an explanation from
the autistic Sacks twins as to how they
could both instantly count 111 matchsticks as they hit the floor after falling
from a table
We compared the brain activity for both insightful and
analytic solutions. We found that right at the point where the problem is
solved with a flash of insight, there’s a burst of gamma wave activity
in the right temporal lobe just above the ear, specifically the right anterior
superior temporal gyrus. People who solved the problem analytically didn’t have
that same activity.
-Neuroscientist John Kounios, a professor of psychology at Drexel University
|
T |
here are three ways that new
information enters the world:
1. Through
observation or experience.
2. Through the left-brain
interpreter.
3.
Through intuition and/or insight -noetic experiences.
The subject of intuition, insight, and creativity
is important to any CM discussion. I believe the evidence indicates they all
come from the same place and use the same process. These processes can be
taught, and this will lead to more intuitive actions and creative discoveries.
All these complex issues are now being studied in a field called complexity theory. It is one of the three big theories in the 21st century. The first is quantum physics about all things small. The second is relativity which deals with all things big. The third is complexity theory concerning all things alive. How does life gain life? How does one stem cell have all the information to build a body or a living universe? How does the stem cell know how to become one of 200 different cells in the body or 5,000 different cells in the brain. We are like Leonardo DeVinci holding a cell phone.
Right now the only thing we know how to do is describe how things grow and duplicate. We have no explnation at all. We just stand in awe and wonder and try to duplicate what life is doing. Nothing is more complex in the entire universe.
[1] “Ingo Swann Describes the Varian Hall of Physics
Experiment in his Own Words,” https://rviewer.com/Remote_Viewing_Blog/ingo-swann-describes-the-varian-hall-of-physics-experiment-in-his-own-words/
[ii] Robert T.
Knight, “Neural Networks Debunk Phrenology,” https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Neural-Networks-Debunk-Phrenology-Knight/e27e77d0f1a58f1d1bc82b459d425b9217b13db6
[iii] Dr Fred Travis, “Your Brain is a River, Not a Rock,” https://tmhome.com/books-videos/your-brain-is-a-river-not-a-rock-fred-travis/
[iv] Azriel
ReShel, “Neuroscience and the ‘Sanskrit Effect’,” https://upliftconnect.com/neuroscience-and-the-sanskrit-effect/
[v] Simon
Makin, Nature Magazine, “Blind Mice Cured by Running,” https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/blind-mice-cured-by-running/
[vi] Bruce
Lipton, “Insight
into Cellular Consciousness,”
https://www.brucelipton.com/resource/article/insight-cellular-consciousness
[vii] LB
Merabet, “Rapid and Reversible Recruitment of Early Visual Cortex for Touch, “ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2516172/
[viii] Mark R.
Rosenzweig,
“Modification of Brain Circuits through Experience,” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK3915/
[ix] Ferris
Jabr, “Cache Cab: Taxi Drivers' Brains Grow to Navigate London's Streets,” https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/london-taxi-memory/
[x] John
Kounios and Mark Beeman, “The
Eureka Factor,” Page 257.
[xi] James Hartzell, “A Neuroscientist Explores the "Sanskrit Effect" https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/a-neuroscientist-explores-the-sanskrit-effect/
[xiii] Barbara
H. Helmrich , “Window of Opportunity? Adolescence, Music, and Algebra,” https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0743558410366594
[xiv] “Temporal
and Spatial Dynamics of Brain Structure Changes during Extensive Learning,” http://www.jneurosci.org/content/26/23/6314
[xv] “Anyone
Can Learn to High Levels,” https://www.youcubed.org/evidence/anyone-can-learn-high-levels/
[xvi] Ramin
Skibba, “How a second language can boost the brain,” https://www.knowablemagazine.org/article/mind/2018/how-second-language-can-boost-brain
[xvii] “Rapid
and Reversible Recruitment of Early Visual Cortex for Touch,”
[xviii]
Experience-driven brain plasticity: beyond the synapse,
[xix] Ginger Campbell, Barin Science Podcast “Neurology of Placebos,” http://brainsciencepodcast.com/bsp/2015/bsp-122
[xx] Michele
and Robert Root-Bernstein, “Einstein On Creative Thinking: Music and the Intuitive
Art of Scientific Imagination,” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/imagine/201003/einstein-creative-thinking-music-and-the-intuitive-art-scientific-imagination
[xxi]
Wertheimer, Max.
(1959). Productive Thinking. Enlarged edition. New York: Harper and Brothers,
1959, pages 213-228.
[xxii] Michele
and Robert Root-Bernstein, “Einstein On Creative Thinking: Music and the Intuitive
Art of Scientific Imagination,” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/imagine/201003/einstein-creative-thinking-music-and-the-intuitive-art-scientific-imagination
[xxiii]
Ibid.
[xxiv] Einstein:” My
entire scientific career has been a meditation on my dream.”
http://jungcurrents.com/einstein-dream
[xxv]
Understanding Dreams: The Gateway to Dreams Without Dream Interpretation, Page
143.
[xxvi] Frida
Åström, “The left hemisphere interpreter and confabulation – a comparison,” http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:431851/FULLTEXT01.pdf
[xxvii]
Michael Gazzaniga, “The Interpreter Within: The Glue of Conscious Experience,” http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/Default.aspx?id=39343
[xxviii]
Frida Åström, “The
left hemisphere interpreter and confabulation – a comparison,” http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:431851/FULLTEXT01.pdf
[xxix] L.I.
Aftanas, S.A. Golocheikine, Human anterior and frontal midline theta and lower alpha reflect emotionally positive state and
internalized attention: high resolution EEG investigation of meditation,
Neurosci. Lett. 310 (2001) 57–60.
[xxx] “Brainwave Coherence During the Transcendental Meditation technique,” http://meditationasheville.blogspot.com/2009/12/brainwave-coherence-during.html
[i] Open
sciences, “Manifesto for a Post-Materialist Science,” http://opensciences.org/about/manifesto-for-a-post-materialist-science
[iii] Daniel
Goleman and Richard Davidson, “Altered
Traits, “Penguin Random House, 2017, Page 152.
[i] Rey
Hernandez, “A
History of FREE,” https://www.experiencer.org/history-of-free/
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Blake,
William (1790) The Marriage of Heaven and Hell Plate 14.
Comments
Post a Comment