Interview with Pan Society talking to the Flipside

I was contacted by Laura of the Pan Society about appearing on her blog broadcast.  She was casually familiar with posts I've made about accessing the flipside.  When we finally connected, she suggested that we do a show about "evil and pain in the afterlife."

Laura Giles Pan Society

I jokingly said "Well, that interview would be me saying one sentence, and then we'd have the rest of the hour to discuss."  As I mentioned in my note to her this morning:

"Thanks for recording it. I will send you a transcript as soon as I can... it's worth looking over to see what else you may have recalled or remembered.  That is why I try to emphasize "learning new information."  The idea that you have had guides around you, that can communicate with you (including the fabulous "Pearl") is something you already know.  

But in this interview you got to learn more new information about them - including sort of what they present themselves as, the qualities of you that they represent, and how they can help guide you if need be.  (And guided you into my world).  

Just fabulous to meet them and you, and thanks for allowing us to take that adventure.  

As I said, if we had done a show about "evil and pain," I would have said "Well, based on the research, both of those are relative to this planet, that they don't exist per se, but are a produce of an ideation or mental construct of trying to navigate this lifetime."  

And then we would have spent an hour discussing how that may or may not be reflected in both our research.  

But instead - we got to explore a whole world - and wow! I forgot! We spoke to a pool of water.  I just got a chill recalling that.  

I can tell you that in doing the same kinds of explorations, I had a scientist with a PhD have a conversation with a "rock" that she held up out of a riverbed in her "place of healing" - I've had numerous conversations with trees - each one different, each one the person saw the tree, went up to the tree, I asked them to hug the three - and then to describe if they "felt anything about the tree that was unusual" and they all said "There's an entity here."  

Some described their lifetime on the planet (I remember one said they lived 640 years on earth, and considered humans no different than the insects that crawled over her - perhaps a bit more dangerous but no less or more important) - and like I said, the one who dropped the "plant a trillion trees" idea on me.  I later discovered they estimate there are 3 trillion trees on the planet - so that's not an insignificant amount, but obviously would make a dent in climate change. 

I've also asked about the "cleaning salt water" process in the past (from scientists like Hawking, Einstein, Sagan or Tesla) and all gave variations of the SAME things you mentioned. I don't know how much science you have in your background - but you mentioned (or the water mentioned) the same things that these sage physicists offered... so... WOW.

Like I say - I'm glad Pearl reminded me to take you there. I really was about to wrap it up, and had this thought "Pearl is telling you to take her to a place of healing."  I know what a place of healing refers to - it was short hand, I often ask a person at the end of our discussion to go there - but I wasn't about to, and it did pop into my head as if Pearl put it there.  

I try not to judge whatever I hear, sense or see during these sessions... it's easy to do afterwards, but while its occurring I've found I've had many unusual questions pop up.

I don't know about you, but I was exhausted yesterday after our hour - I mean as if "holding focus" for that long was exhausting. And I wasn't doing any of the work!  I was just holding on to what you were saying... and allowing questions to "bubble forth" to see what we might learn.

So - obviously you have an open channel to these folks. And if you have a hypnotherapist you "trade" with - meaning someone you trust to take you back there, you should pursue this on some level. I know Scott De Tamble (lightbetweenlives.com) my pal who was trained by Michael Newton and has let me film a number of sessions with him, has hypnotherapist friends and they do sessions "over the phone" like we did, skipping ahead to ask questions or get answers for things they're working on.  Something you have the obvious capacity to do!

Will send over the transcript as soon as I can."

Here's the interview:


As I posted on Facebook today:

Unusual podcast yesterday with Laura Giles of the Pan Society. A demonstration that a person doesn't have to use hypnosis to access the flipside. In her field, she was aware of her guides, but not with the kind of detail we explored. (A deep hypnosis session is preferable, as that can assist in long term healing.) 

This is a simple demonstration that shows a person always has assistance from the flipside. (Her guides say the same things others do). 

Warning: once you listen to this podcast you will never see water with the same eyes. If you don't want your consciousness filter altered I recommend NOT listening to the entire conversation. 

If you do then I suggest it's because your guides want you to open yourself up to the possibility. (For other examples with same results see Martinizone.com)

Enjoy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Hug Heard Around the World

Today my wife was telling me that she reached out to that judge in Texas who hugged the brother of the murdered victim in Dallas.

Honorable Judge Tammy Kemp

She saw that people were "going after her" for "hugging the brother of the victim" because law strictly prohibits it.  Further, they went after her for "giving a bible" to the police officer found guilty of the crime.  Apparently the atheists of America are suing the judge.



Hang on a cotton picking minute.  (Even that term is rife with prejudice.)  

People acting like humans being castigated for acting like humans.

From what I understand, the brother asked twice to hug the police woman who killed his brother (by accident.)  The first time she didn't respond, and the second time she allowed it.  So it's not unprecedented in the annals of justice to allow a victim's kin to address the perpetrator - but in this case a police woman.

She allowed the hug.

Then the police officer was crying and the Judge said to her, "I hope you can learn from this, find the way to understand how this happened." And reportedly the police officer said "But I don't have a bible, I have nothing to take with me. Do you have one you could give me?" And the Judge went to look for the Bible - not because she wanted her to read it - because the police officer asked for it.

Hug heard around the world

The camera captures moments in time - and if the camera wasn't allowed in the courtroom, we never would have known about this - or it would not have had the impact.  But it did - and the two moments captured are the brother hugging the police officer, and then the Judge hugging the police officer.

Moments of shared humanity captured by a camera.  If the police officer had asked for a copy of the Qur'an it would have been news; but take up the request for reading material with the officer who asked for it.

If you want to thank Judge Tammy Kemp, here's her contact info:

But I'm writing to show how these are moments that have a deeper meaning.

Today, a skeptic was castigating me online for my research into consciousness, saying "There is no physical evidence that consciousness exists outside the brain." 

I replied (there is) "Interesting research done by Mario Beauregard PhD ("Brain Wars") using MRI while subject is in a consciousness altered state. (Carmelite nuns having an epiphany, people under hypnosis examining an NDE or past life memory.)
As noted in "Its a Wonderful Afterlife", he found the locations in the brain normally functioning, giving signals were not operating at all during these events. So someone seeing a memory, accessing visions of other worlds registered the opposite during MRI. No activity associated with senses.

By demonstrating no activity during dramatic recall he showed the brain is not creating these events. Further i suggest looking for new information during a consciousness altered event.

If a person learns new information during an NDE, OBE, LSD, under hypnosis- that cant be ascribed to cryptomnesia- then it indicates the information is coming from outside the brain.

There are many things we've yet to measure; dogs smell cancer, bees see UV light, trees communicate through roots. There are frequencies we've yet to understand. The latest research (see Dr Greyson's "Is Consciousness Produced by the Brain?" On YouTube) indicates the brain has filters that prevent our accessing these frequencies. (He cites medical cases where Alzheimer's patients recover just prior to passing)

It appears the brain functions like a receiver. In the 50 cases I've filmed of people under deep hypnosis (and recently without any hypnosis) recalling forensically provable previous lifetimes, encountering new information on the flipside that can't be cryptomnesia, comparing those reports to the 2000 cases of Dr. Helen Wambach and 7000 of Michael Newton, it appears that consciousness functions in a way we have yet to comprehend.

These people claim consistently that we bring "about a third of our conscious energy to a life" and two thirds is always back "home" (their term for afterlife). People who lose or alter the filters on their brain via some consciousness altered event gain acess to the natural state of things.

If they "recover" they return to the illusion of our shared reality. My two cents.


To which the skeptic replied:

"It appears the brain functions like a receiver...".....how is a physical brain able to 'receive' whatever it is.....while scientific apparatus cannot detect whatever is being 'received' ?

My reply:

"Ask Dr. Greyson. He's the scientist at UVA who brought it to my attention. 100 years ago people were worried about electricity moving through walls. A scientist detected a pulsar's signal and the planet had a panic about messages from outer space.
If you view humans through energy detection its not the brain that appears as the heat source - it's the heart. The frequencies of the heart throw more energy than the brain.

Lets put it this way; I don't think you are asking a question. If you really wanted to understand consciousness or how consciousness functions; it's as simple as asking "does love exist?"

There are no instruments that can measure love. We have no scientific explanation for its existence. Can't measure it, detect it, quantify it. No definition of it exists.

But we know it exists. (And I would suggest that it is literally consciousness.) 

Just because there's no mechanism to detect love doesn't mean it doesn't exist. 

It's what makes the world go round after all.

Or what allows a Judge in Dallas to allow a fellow human's request to hug a person who desperately needed one.

And finally here's a recent video that explains in detail what I've been talking about. Enjoy.

Perfect pitch, driverless cars and a cure for Parkinsons

Was listening to Harry Shearer's Sunday show this morning interviewing Gary Marcus.  ("Interview with NYU Professor of Psychology and Neural Science, Gary Marcus on artificial intelligence." March 4th, 2018)

From Richard Davidson's work on Meditation
how it can "cure or alleviate depression."

Harry was talking to NYU professor Gary Marcus about brain functions, about "preprogrammed" information that occurs in certain animals (the author used the octopus as an example of a creature that is born with a vast amount of apriori knowledge) and how artificial intelligence advocates and creators debate whether or not artificial intelligence machines (driverless cars) should be built with a certain amount of "baggage" or prior knowledge, and if they should be a clean slate to learn "new information."  He referred to his article in the New Yorker "Moral Machines."

He spoke of how the simple worm was dissected decades ago, and yet science has not been able to duplicate its functions in a machine. (Gary's article on "Deep Learning" is here)

Further, there was an article in nature.com about how light waves (and sound waves) may be a cure for a variety of brain disorders, including Alzheimer's and Parkinsons. A recent study showed promising long term benefits for people who spent an hour a day looking at pulsating lights or listening to sounds.

But let's start with perfect pitch, shall we?

Gary Marcus Ph.D said "There are more cases of perfect pitch in China which may be a genetic or a cultural phenomenon."  Harry pointed out that he was "born with perfect pitch" and it wasn't a skill he acquired.  They discussed where "talent comes from" - and the author pointed out that some bands can play for "a thousand hours" and never attain the musical abilities of the Beatles for example. But Harry wanted to know "How is it that I was born with perfect pitch?"

(I've met Harry a couple of times over the years. We did a Laverne and Shirley with Harry Dean Stanton (! I was the pizza delivery guy) and we met in New Orleans during the Jazz fest, and I reviewed his wife's music when I wrote for Variety)

I can tell you Harry.

With Jennifer Shaffer Medium and George Noory
Coast to Coast radio

But you have to get a cup of coffee, sit back in your chair, and go down this rabbit hole with me.  I can show you how to cure Parkinsons, help people with Alzheimers, define where perfect pitch comes from, and explain how driverless cars will never become morality machines.  I can explain all of that to you, but first you have to set something aside.

Ego. Vanity.  (Not yours, just the concepts.) They are two words that come to mind when we judge what we are about to hear or contemplate.  "Consider the source."  If one was to look at my background, look for my Ph.D for example, or check where my sources are, there going to resist coming into the hole with me. 

A life well lived! Or remembered well.
or well... remembered.

For the past ten years I have been filming people under deep hypnosis talking about the afterlife.  If there was a Ph.D in "Filming what people say about the afterlife while under deep hypnosis" I'd have that moniker.  I did graduate magna cum laude, I have written or directed 8 theatrical feature films, and written four best selling tomes on the topic (kindle best sellers) but none of that really matters.

Some scientists will (and have) argued that "hypnosis is not a valid tool of science" but they're wrong. Inaccurate. Mistaken. 

If we look at medical cases, for example, drugs are given in a test environment, and then answers are asked and those results become data.  The results must be consistent and reproducible.  That's a hallmark of science.  

Hallmark.  My grandfather Edward A Hayes French Legion of Honor
medal.  It exists somewhere, as it was stolen from my folks home.
But it's still a hallmark.

So what I'm about to tell you is both consistent and reproducible.  It doesn't matter who is telling this information to you, it matters what these people consistently say.  If they say the same things consistently, then one has to rule out how that could possibly be.  If they say the same things no matter who is asking the questions, or who is offering the answers; again, we'd have to rule out how that could possibly be. 

How could thousands of humans say the same things under hypnosis no matter who asks the questions or what the protocol is?

With medium Jennifer Shaffer and Newton trained
hypnotherapist Scott de Tamble (Lightbetweenlives.com)

I've examined the thousands of cases of Dr. Helen Wambach (Life Before Lives) and Michael Newton (Journey of Souls.)  I've filmed 45 people that I chose for their skepticism to do a "between life session" which lasts up to 6 hours.  I've done five of them myself. And the results are the essentially the same.  I expanded this research into near death experiencers.  I have transcribed sessions of people who've had a near death event and then used hypnosis to reaccess that information.  Further, I've interviewed these people while fully conscious and had them revisit the same information and gotten the same results as people who've never heard of "hypnotherapy."

How could that be?

It's because consciousness is both a medium and a mechanism.  Like light is both particle and wave, consciousness functions in the same manner.  It doesn't "spontaneously generate" the way that people used to think "water in the desert created fish."  Consciousness functions the same way that water does - in the sense that one can't kill a drop of water - they can change it, it can travel somewhere else, but every single drop of water that has ever been on the planet is still here. No drop of water has ever been destroyed, killed, or even harmed. It functions, is changed, then travels back "home" and then "reincarnates" again in our coffee.


Just like humans.

What the research shows is this: we come to the planet with about a third of our "conscious energy" (soul for lack of a better term) and two thirds of that energy is always "back home" where we "came from." (I use quotes because that's what people consistently say.  When asked "where do you want to go?" after remembering a previous lifetime, they inevitably say "home."  Not heaven, or hell, or planet Xenu, or Kolab or any of the other "places" that we associate with some "other place." They use the same word CONSISTENTLY.  We can argue what home is -no two people have the same idea of home - but the words they associate with home are consistent; "A place of non judgment" a "place of unconditional love" a place of "safety" "comfort" or "where our loved ones are."

Harry Dean Stanton
Whom I interviewed on the Flipside in
a previous post here.

Say hello to my little friends.

Unconditional love is the key.  They use that term consistently - but it's not a term we use on the planet consistently. It's not in beer ads, in literature, in entertainment, in stories... but we instantly know what it means.  It's a love that is not conditional.  We live in state of "conditional love" while we are here on the planet (for the most part) and only experience is between parents and children (sometimes) or between humans and animals (sometimes.)  But it's an experience we all know - and yet, everyone claims that's what we return to "after our life" or "before our life."

Further, when we talk about a third of our consciousness being here, that works out to two thirds of our consciousness being "back home" all the time.

What has this to do with perfect pitch?

If you've have a lot of lifetimes that are related to music, if your sense of frequency translation is honed over many lifetimes, or if you're consciousness just has an easier time of understanding frequency,  you're going to have "perfect pitch" (or be able to see, sense or hear other frequencies.  Perfect pitch can relate to a medium seeing or hearing things that aren't here, the same way a bee can see the ultraviolet light we can't see.  They have different frequency tuning built in.)

So Harry's brain has the ability to "hear" the frequency from notes (sound waves) that when they reach his ear and are translated into information in his brain, he knows what note is being played.  Not something he learned, but something he was "born with."

What Harry doesn't know is that he chose this lifetime.  Prior to even "coming to the planet" or incarnating, Harry got together with his pals (likely member of Spinal Tap) and discussed what kind of a lifetime he wanted to experience.  I've filmed a number of these "life planning sessions" (including my own) and reported them in "Flipside" "It's a Wonderful Afterlife" and "Hacking the Afterlife.")

His ability to understand frequency without having to learn it is related to his consciousness.  He chose a body and brain that could work with frequencies on a different level than other folks.

A musician or scientist?  Both it appears.

Now, what about artificial intelligence?  

It's not enough for me to say "there will never be a sentient machine until someone on the flipside decides that they want to have an existence on the planet as a sentient machine."  In other words, someone would have to "choose" a lifetime as a machine, and would be stuck doing all the boring things that machines do.  Since there's a myriad of experience we have here as humans, I can't imagine why anyone would ever want to do that.

But that's not to say that artificial intelligence is amoral - it's just to say that the "race to sentience" is a waste of time.  Can't exist. Sorry.  But again, it's not enough to say it - what people are looking for is how to make machines, or AI more "moral" - meaning being able to make the choice of "running into a tree" or "running into a bus full of children."  Humans make that choice - but what is it based on?  Is that choice based on the amount of engrams in a brain? Or social engineering?  Neither. (Again, sorry, it's just not in the data.)

What is in the data (and again, eyewitness reports that are consistent and reproducible are data) is that we choose to incarnate as animals that are called human.  That the human animal itself has a limited capacity for higher thinking, and its a tacit agreement between ourselves a conscious entities and the human animal.  We don't incarnate as other animals, because they have their own forms of the process - they too have realms and levels with regard to their incarnations, whether its as a flying animal, swimming animal, or one walking the earth.  It's technically possible for us to incarnate in such a manner - it's just relatively really really rare for us to do so, and we would have a compelling reason to do so that all our loved ones and guides would have to agree to.

I'm not arguing this point here; I'm reporting it.  This is not my theory, belief or philosophy - I'm just reporting what people consistently say about the process either while under deep hypnosis, or consciously about these events.

So how to make artificial intelligence more human?  Ask someone who is no longer on the planet for how to do that.  (It's what I've been doing the past two years, interviewing people (different people, different mediums) and comparing the answers to complex questions about the nature of reality. Sounds odd, and it is, but it's what I've focusing on.  Ask people no longer on the planet about how to make your machine function better.  I'm not kidding.  I can help you do that.

Finally; what's the cure for Parkinsons and Alzheimers?  Well, it's in this research as well. In Nature magazine they have an article showing how pulsing light (or sound) allows brain waves to function better, helps focus and memory, and in some cases, stops the shaking of Parkinsons.  




I've shown the same results in "It's a Wonderful Afterlife" where a person with severe Parkinsons did a between life hypnosis session and stopped shaking for the entire six hour session. (And I filmed it.  She's a private person, so she doesn't want the footage out there, but the transcription of the session, anonymous, is in the book).

Why did her Parkinsons stop during the session?  Because deep hypnosis (not the surface kind, or the quack like a duck kind) works with Theta waves.  It's the same waves that are being affected by the light or the low sounds used in this study.



"Nevertheless, there is clearly a growing excitement around treating neurological diseases using neuromodulation, rather than pharma-ceuticals. “There’s pretty good evidence that by changing neural-circuit activity we can get improvements in Parkinson’s, chronic pain, obsessive–compulsive disorder and depression,” says Insel. This is important, he says, because so far, pharmaceutical treatments for neurological disease have suffered from a lack of specificity. Koroshetz adds that funding institutes are eager for treatments that are innovative, non-invasive and quickly translatable to people.

Since publishing their mouse paper, Boyden says, he has had a deluge of requests from researchers wanting to use the same technique to treat other conditions. But there are a lot of details to work out. “We need to figure out what is the most effective, non-invasive way of manipulating oscillations in different parts of the brain,” he says. “Perhaps it is using light, but maybe it’s a smart pillow or a headband that could target these oscillations using electricity or sound.” One of the simplest methods that scientists have found is neurofeedback, which has shown some success in treating a range of conditions, including anxiety, depression and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. People who use this technique are taught to control their brainwaves by measuring them with an EEG and getting feedback in the form of visual or audio cues."

Helen Thompson, Nature Magazine

Did you get that?

Non pharma therapy for Alzheimers and Parkinsons.  Using lights and sounds to help the brain to focus better, to get rid of plaque, to show that the brain functions like a receiver...

The brain is a receiver of information, and it sends it to the right pathways.  It receives sensations, but also receives information from the "other two thirds of our conscious energy that is always back home."

For a science cite that the brain is not the sole creator of consciousness, please view Dr. Greyson's talk "Is Consciousness Produced by the Brain?".  It's 90 minutes and cites numerous medical cases where non functioning brains were still conscious, or that after an autopsy showed they should not have been functioning but did function.  Greyson is interviewed in "It's a Wonderful Afterlife" but the video can be seen here.

This is just my way of saying, "Hey, you brain scientists out there.  You're looking in the wrong direction."

Why is it important for me to stand on the stage, turn on the lights and shout "IT'S ONLY A PLAY!!"  Because these scientists are directing policy, influencing medical care, and they have not yet understood or begun to explore how it can be that our consciousness exists prior to coming here, it exists after we are here, and it exists WHILE WE ARE HERE.  In other words, if you "want to be in touch with the other two thirds of your consciousness" you can.



My two cents.

Not mine. Curtis Hanson's

Einstein's Brain

Einstein's Brain.

There was a recent issue of National Geographic about genius.  What is it?  What creates the environment for it? (May 2017) "Genius" by Claudia Kalb, "Some minds are so exceptional that they change the world. We don't know what exactly makes these extraordinary people soar above the rest of us, but science offers us clues."

Michelangelo's David. Photo by Paolo Woods (NG) May 17

The article talks about the creation of the IQ test, and how it was conceived as a way of understanding genius.  People who had high IQs were followed for years, and it turned out - they had the same outcomes as most people.  Out of their control group, 2 had gone on to some fame in their field, but the rest struggled like... well, the rest of us. So high IQ doesn't mean that a person will achieve great success, but it arguably "sets the table" for someone to achieve that label.

The article talked about Michelangelo's genius, and compared how some famous geniuses had a "circle of genius friends" who were also very talented, and they had charts and maps of how by charting "social networks" of genius, there might be clues as to how and why they accomplished so much.  

They repeated the myth that Michelangelo took a "discarded piece of marble" and crafted the David from it. Actually, as I learned while researching "the Demedicis" for HBO, Mick won the marble in a contest.  His father had notified him in Rome this monster piece was being offered in a contest, and convinced the 25 year old to enter. Mick found a flaw in the marble, which would have made it worthless - but he followed the fault with his chisel to start the knee of this statue.  

For those familiar with his technique, he "let the person emerge" from the marble - honing small details first, knowing precisely how they would work in the overall piece. In other words he "saw the statue inside the marble" before he began.

Most sculptors work "outside in" - shaping as they go along, chipping away what wasn't necessary, but in Mick's case, he did the opposite.  Revealed the statue within. 

They also miss out on the point that Lorenzo De Medici, 20 at the time, met Michelangelo when he was 11 and a student of the Academy.  Lorenzo saw his genius, brought him into his home, and allowed him to flourish amid their "Platonic Academy" where they would read Plato (many for the first time) in Italian (Lorenzo's father Piero had them transcribed from Latin to the local language so anyone could read Plato and Socrates) - and not just those books okay'd by the Vatican. This is why the Pope sent an assassin to kill Lorenzo and his brother Giuliano (the model in Botticelli's "Primavera") but that's another story...)

Mick's patron, a poet turned ruler Lorenzo

The article points to this ability in geniuses.  

Seeing things from a different perspective.  Being able to "see a building" in 3 dimensions - or as Nick Tesla revealed that he "saw his inventions as fully functioning objects in his mind" before he went to a prototype. 

Beethoven credited his genius not with the other artists he knew, or his circle of friends, or his "social network."  He firmly credited it with coming from "the outer spheres" - E. T. A. Hoffmann, the author and music critic: "Beethoven is the "sublimest" of composers: his music "opens the realm of the colossal and immeasurable," and "leads the listener away into the wonderful spiritual realm of the infinite."

Beethoven said as much about his inspiration.  It came from the outer realms - he was not a religious man in the Age of Reason, but claimed that the source of his inspiration came from "beyond our realm." 

He was accessing the Flipside in order to download his music.

But the point of this Martini Shot essay is to open up a new avenue to understanding "genius."

If what thousands have said in this research is accurate: that we use consciousness the way a computer uses hard drives, that a portion of our consciousness is "always back home" while we are here - if it's true that we "only bring about a third of our conscious energy to a lifetime" and that "roughly two thirds is always "back home" while we are on the planet" - then we have to redefine what genius actually is.

Because science is married to the concept that consciousness is dependent upon genetics and sociological factors, and the brain is like a computer that is filled with information, and then "for some inexplicable reason" uses that information to make us believe we are conscious. (In a Martini nutshell)

That's an unfortunate way to view life on earth - but it's pretty much what science thinks is the case.

That "the brain is the sole creator of thought."  That If we slice up the brain we'll find out how the brain works.

There's a photograph in the article of the slices of Einstein's brain that they carved up, put on slides, and is on display at the National Museum of Health and Medicine in Maryland. 

Slices of Einstein's Brain 

So what the heck are slices of Einstein's brain doing in a museum?

It's like taking apart a stereo receiver to figure out why Beethoven's Ninth is playing inside of it.  Or taking apart a speaker to examine why music is coming from inside.  Or looking for the tiny man in the operator suit who is hiding inside the machine.

Oh look. A slice of Einstein's actual brain.

Post materialist scientists (like Dr. Greyson at UVA) claim the brain functions like a stereo or television receiver. That is uses limiters and filters to parse information into where it is needed or can be used.

They claim the brain functions like a receiver of consciousness, that it is not the only source of consciousness, since people have yet to wrap their brain around this research - And until we do, we will forever be slicing up brains thinking that's the source of consciousness.  Or that's the only place to find it.

As the research shows, the brain is not the only source of consciousness. By "research" I'm citing clinical psychologist Dr. Helen Wambach's 2000 cases of people under hypnosis claiming that we "plan our lifetime" that we are consciously aware of what or who we are going to be prior to coming to the planet, or a decade later psychologist Michael Newton's 7000 cases (a decade later) where people consistently claim that we come to the planet "around the 4th month of inception" and that we exist prior to coming here, that the majority of our conscious energy ("soul") remains behind or "back home" while we are here, and is accessible in "outside consciousness events" (NDEs, OBEs, LBLs, etc)....

Or by citing Dr. Bruce Greyson's youtube talk "Is Consciousness Produced by the Brain?" which I reproduce in "It's a Wonderful Afterlife."  He argues with medical cases that consciousness is "not only produced by the brain." (Go ahead, click the link, it's only 90 minutes; I'll wait.)

I'm also including the 45 hypnosis sessions I've filmed (4-6 hours each) and the 5 that I've done myself.

"Consciousness is NOT confined to the brain."  

It's funny. This sentence upsets some people.  They argue "the reason people "believe in the afterlife" is because they "fear death, they fear annihilation." I would argue the opposite. The "belief" that life ends is the issue. That the word "believe" is the culprit. If you've experienced something (NDE, OBE, LBL) "belief" becomes "experience." Either one experiences it or does not.  

In terms of NDEs, thousands claim they "know" that life goes on, in LBL (between life hypnosis) sessions, people "experience" "returning home" after this lifetime. ("Home" is their word).  

By "home" they don't mean here.

The point is; eyewitness reports should not engender fear or disbelief, but rather a desire to understand where they come from and if evidence shows they could not have made it up or learned it elsewhere to examine the consistency in those reports. 

If we can prove there is "new information" during the event, (as I do in my books) then it can't be coming from the brain.  New information can't be cryptomnesia, synesthesia or hypoxia.  If the information turns out to be accurate, then the experience therefore cannot be created by the brain.

The brain functions like a stereo receiver, with limiters, filters and ways of parsing that information where it should go.

Oh look, here's  how I parse information I get from the Flipside.

We can access our "higher consciousness" through hypnosis, meditation, out of body experiences, near death events. When we do so we get a glimpse of the amount of information that we have access to.

People claim that we have "portable hard drives" that follow us around in the shape of geometric fractals that "contain all the information from our previous lifetimes."  ("Flipside") 

It's not my theory that occurs, or my belief that's the case, but is what people consistently report.  Not all the time - but enough times that I can argue what these geometric shapes supposedly contain.

"Access codes."



The Beethoven's Ninth is hiding an Access Code. Listen to it in its entirety and you'll see what I mean. (I'm kidding but kind of not kidding.)

Not literally, figuratively. 

Access to our "higher consciousness" which does not float around the universe like a Carl Jungian pool of consciousness - it would be cool if that was the case, but that's in none of the reports.  What is in the reports is the consistent claim that we are unique - we have our own consciousness that is ours, but by the nature of how consciousness works - we can shift our perspective, experience other people's experiences, or tap into the vast feelings of love that connect us all.

So genius - isn't confined to the brain.

It does have a "social network" in the sense that we seek out, in a quantum entanglement fashion, the people and loved ones that we normally incarnate with.  That we've already made a plan with to reconnect with again in this lifetime. That we find ourselves running into and feeling "as if we've known them forever."

Because, in a sense, we have.  We've known them "before" and continue work and hang out with them again.

Another fellow who seemed to have access to multiple lives

When we come here we choose a lifetime that we think we can handle.  When we are here, there are environmental aspects that are conducive to helping us achieve our goals. (In the article they cite how rappers and other musicians are able to "supress pathways" or "open pathways" that allow them to access spatial information we aren't normally aware of.)

So - it is possible for a person to "open up those pathways" to access more information?

Meditation allows the brain to "work out" like an athlete would to get certain muscles to function better.  

Meditation can open the mind up to other possibilities.

Reading about anothers journey or path can open our mind up to these possibilities.  I know when I first began reading Michael Newton's work, I avoided his conclusions about what was happening and focused just on the first hand reports.  Later, after I confirmed beyond my ability to deny what they were saying was accurate, I went back and read his comments about what people were telling him.

Hmm. Space. The first frontier.

Finding a Newton Institute trained therapist and doing a between life session will grant access to that "higher information." (I recommend them because they are familiar with the architecture of the flipside, and know what questions to ask. They have a searchable database on their site.)

Indeed, doing a between life session led me to the other research, to interviewing people who've had near death events, or people who've had contact with loved ones either through dreams or a medium or some other fashion - to see if the portrait or the architecture of the "afterlife" was the same.

Indeed, to my chagrin, it was.

Flipside. It's a Wonderful Afterlife. Hacking the Afterlife.

   
The architecture of the afterlife is a knowable entity.  Reportedly we don't bring "all of our consciousness" to a lifetime because it would "blow the circuits of the brain" with "too much energy."  (And we do see people walking around the planet with blown circuits as it is.)

But we can access this information in such a way as to not harm our path and journey, and in such a way that we can gain insight into why and how we came to the planet, and what happens to us when we depart it.  (In a spiritual sense.)

But in the future, we won't be slicing up people's brains to understand why they worked. It's like taking apart a tennis shoe  to understand why a runner is so fast. Or taking apart a car to understand how it can win so many races. Certainly the construction of the tool is important, and the ability to use it with ease is important.  

But equally important is the pilot, the person running the race or driving the car, who brings their skill and ability to that particular task, and further, they're bringing the ability to access "all their other lifetimes" or to think in a spatial way that is "open to the answer no matter where it comes from."

E equals what again?

Hence why Einstein used to play his violin in order to think.

It wasn't because it was a casual thing to do. It's because he was using music as a way of linking up with the flipside and downloading the answers.

You're welcome.

Wanda Syke's Ghost and Dolphin Consciousness

Here's a fun "person no longer on the planet" story. 

Wanda Sykes Sees Ghost   from The Blaze.com

Comedian Wanda Sykes appeared on “The Ellen DeGeneres Show” on Wednesday, where she revealed an apparent encounter that she claims to have had with a ghost while staying at a historic hotel in Virginia.

“I don’t want people to think I’m crazy, but it happened,” she told host Ellen DeGeneres.

Sykes said that she returned to her room at the Jefferson Hotel in Richmond, Virginia, after a show one night, and suddenly felt that something wasn’t quite right.

“I just had a sense that somebody else is in this room and I was like looking around,” she said, admitting that she had a few drinks. “I just had to make sure that it wasn’t the alcohol, but I was like, ‘No, something is in the room,’ and I kind of looked out of the corner of my eye and it was this woman — it was an old black woman, right, and she just was looking at me.”

Sykes added, “I’m pretty sure she was a slave, because don’t nobody wear stuff like that anymore.”

Wanda Sykes attends the 2015 NBCUniversal Summer Press Day at the Langham Hotel on April 2, 2015 in Pasadena, California. (Jason Kempin/Getty Images)

The comedian said she didn’t feel like the ghost would hurt her, and said that it seemed as though she was more surprised than anything else to see Sykes inside of such a nice hotel room.

The comedian joked that she told the ghost that “things turned out pretty good,” with DeGeneres and the audience erupting in laughter.

“And I know you’re really probably just blown away to see me — this black woman — in this big hotel room,” Sykes apparently told the ghost, going on to quip about what she did next. ”I got the remote control. ‘If this is good, wait until you see who the president is. This is going to scare the hell out of you.’”

She said the woman stayed and watched her for a little while before disappearing.

“And I said, ‘Why don’t you go scare white people. That’s what I would do if I were you,’” Sykes joked.

Wanda saw a Civil War era ghost in a hotel room.  She said the woman was "dressed like a slave."  So that means she saw her clearly enough, long enough to form an opinion about how she was dressed.  She said the ghost didn't seem upset, or emotional, but had a look on her face as if to say "well, look at you."  Wanda then riffs into a hilarious take on that - thanking the ghost for suffering as a slave, and then offering to turn on CNN so the ghost can see the President.

Couple of observations.  Wanda couldn't know what the ghost was thinking when she looked at her.  The ghost of course, is outside of time - in fact calling her a ghost does her a disservice - let's just call her "a person no longer on the planet."  This person no longer on the planet may have had any number of things on her mind.  One could be: "Oh, look, it's you Wanda, don't you remember when you used to live back in these days and we were friends?  Or you were someone that I knew back then?"  That's one possibility.  Or, "Wanda! I can't believe you don't recognize me.  I'm your great great great grandmother - in your family tree!"  Or just "What the heck are you doing in my room dressed like that?"

As noted here in other posts, there are many accounts from people who remember previous lifetimes where they weren't of the same race, color, creed or gender that they are now.  And they don't just remember a "day" in that lifetime - in some cases people remember the entire life, including the death, and remember the experience of leaving the body and "going home" back to their "soul group" where they hang out with their loved ones and plot their return to the planet. (For more info on that topic, click on "Flipside" or "It's a Wonderful Afterlife" for plenty of those accounts - or even "Flipside the Documentary" available as a DVD or on Gaiam TV.

Book, DVD, Audio

But what's also amazing about this clip is how "normal" it is.  Wanda saw a ghost, it didn't frighten her, she wasn't "spooked." In fact she gave the person who used to be on the planet respect and acknowledged her presence.  

And then Ellen told a story about seeing a man in a house she used to live in, and then tossed it over to her mother who also saw the same man at a different time in that house.

So we have a verification of a "person who used to be on the planet" right in this clip.  Ellen saw the man, and then later her mother saw the same man.  

So the question is - instead of running screaming into the night - how can we show compassion for this man or "people who used to be on the planet?"  Would it be to do what Wanda did, and acknowledge their presence and perhaps suggest "look around yourself person who used to be on the planet, there's a light in the distance.  If you go towards that light, go through that light, all your friends and loved ones are waiting for you to return so that you can figure out a way to get back here, or go and do whatever it is that you're supposed to do.  Don't be afraid - you've done a great job of hanging around the planet, so why not go and have some fun back home?"  

It's the fastest, easiest way to talk a person who is not longer on the planet into leaving your residence - and if they really insist that they've got to stick around, then just say "I appreciate that you want to stick around here, and that's fine by me, but please don't wake up, scare, or otherwise intimidate my guests or me.  You're welcome, but you have a choice to stay or go."  Worse thing that can happen is they take you up on the suggestion and head home.  

Meanwhile....

This month's National Geographic article on "Dolphin Intelligence" by J Foer caught my eye:

Photographs by Brian Skerry

"Bolton presses her palms together over her head, the signal to innovate, and then puts her fists together, the sign for “tandem.” With those two gestures, she has instructed the dolphins to show her a behavior she hasn’t seen during this session and to do it in unison.

Hector and Han disappear beneath the surface. With them is a comparative psychologist named Stan Kuczaj, wearing a wet suit and snorkel gear and carrying a large underwater video camera with hydrophones. He records several seconds of audible chirping between Hector and Han, then his camera captures them both slowly rolling over in unison and flapping their tails three times simultaneously.

Above the surface Bolton presses her thumbs and middle fingers together, telling the dolphins to keep up this cooperative innovation. And they do. The 400-pound animals sink down, exchange a few more high-pitched whistles, and then simultaneously blow bubbles together. Then they pirouette side by side. Then they tail walk. After eight nearly perfectly synchronized sequences, the session ends.

There are two possible explanations of this remarkable behavior. Either one dolphin is mimicking the other so quickly and precisely that the apparent coordination is only an illusion. Or it’s not an illusion at all: When they whistle back and forth beneath the surface, they’re literally discussing a plan."

and then later in the article:

"The last common ancestor of humans and chimps lived some six million years ago. By comparison cetaceans such as dolphins split off from the rest of the mammal lineage about 55 million years ago, and they and primates haven’t shared an ancestor for 95 million years."

So dolphin have been on their own evolutionary track for 55 million years... while humans have been on their own track for about 6 million.  So logic tells us that evolution would probably have done some nifty tricks in terms of these denizens of the deep over all those years.

But what the article above says, is that an instructor used sign language to ask these dolphin to do a series of tricks in unison - but the choice of the tricks and what they would do was up to them.  And then they performed those stunts in the order that they devised.

In other words, they consciously chose what tricks to perform for this human.  

They communicated with each other - in some fashion - on what those tricks would be.  

Hello. Why so crabby?

Let's not get caught up for the moment in how they communicated.  It could have been a series of clicks and whistles.  That's likely. But it's equally possible they have another form of communication that is faster than what we can measure.  I'm not saying they do. I'm not asking for pyramid hats.  I just want us all to consider this possibility; these dolphin just proved they're consciousness.

Now by logic, extend that to the planet.  All animals, all creatures are sentient.  They have their own way of communication, as we have ours.  Ours in by no means superior to theirs - in fact in this case it's proven that theirs is far superior to ours.

There's plenty of folklore of dolphin coming to the aid of humans.  Just search youtube for videos of dolphin approaching humans and trying to communicate with them, steering their boats to safety, or asking humans for help. 

In my own experience, I saw a school of dolphin surface on the Santa Monica beach, about 20 yards off shore, jumping and swimming.  As a joke I yelled "Hey, Dan Marino! (former Miami Dolphin). Over here!"  And one of their group turned and started swimming towards me.  I mean jumping out of the water, flying through the air in my direction, aiming at me as if to say "What? You called? You need help? You were speaking to me?"  I was afraid that I somehow had influenced them to screw up their path and shouted "No, sorry, I was just kidding!" and the Dolphin turned and rejoined his group.  It was funny, but startling.

Not far from here.  "Hey! Dan Marino!"

So.  This National Geographic story proves that dolphin are conscious. They speak to each other and can process complex information faster and better than humans can.  Does that mean all animals are sentient?  I would have to argue that it does. I'm sorry if that's disturbing to those who aren't vegetarians (myself included), but there's not much wiggle room in this explanation.  (Other than to say that no scientist is saying it, they're just more interested in whether they can talk to the dolphin rather than listening to what dolphin might have to tell them.)  And if they're sentient, then it behooves us to do something to protect them, including protecting Orcas (the largest dolphin) from being held in captivity. (Hello Sea World)

So what do these two stories have in common?  We experience life in a 5 dimensional world.  Well, 2 to be sure, 3 for entertainment, and the rest are about our senses.  But other animals on this planet don't experience this world the way we do.  Bees, for example, see ultraviolet light.  Dolphin obviously can communicate in ways we don't understand.  Birds, cats, dogs... cows. 

And we can't experience the world the way a person who is no longer on the planet experiences it.  But we can appreciate it.  We can honor it. We can talk about it without fear of being dunked, hanged or burnt at the stake.

So let's talk about it, shall we?