Mayim Bialik's Breakdown - Gregg Braden: Are We the Last Generation of Pure Humans? How To Maintain Our Unique Potential

Episode Date: July 22, 2025

What if everything we’ve been told about humanity’s future is a lie? Gregg Braden, bestselling author of Pure Human, scientist, and leading voice bridging science and spirituality, exposes the dark truth behind the transhumanist agenda and what he considers the urgent fight to preserve our human potential. In this eye-opening conversation, Braden warns we may be the last generation of pure humans as artificial intelligence and digital surveillance race ahead, threatening to sever us from our consciousness, our DNA, and even our souls. He unpacks the manipulation of media algorithms, emotional programming, and disinformation campaigns designed to divide humanity and dull our innate heart-brain coherence. From simulation theory and the Mandela Effect to his groundbreaking fractal time calculator that forecasts future global patterns, Braden dives deep into the spiritual and scientific underpinnings of this global shift. He also shares profound personal insights, including his near-death experience, interdimensional encounters, and his understanding of the spiritual meaning behind dementia. As society stands at a tipping point, Gregg Braden invites us to awaken our inner technology, reclaim ancient wisdom, and remember that love, not AI, is the most powerful force in the universe. Gregg Braden's latest book, Pure Human: The Hidden Truth of Our Divinity, Power, and Destiny: ⁠https://greggbraden.com/product/pure-human/⁠ Fractal Time Calculator: ⁠https://greggbraden.com/fractal-time-calculator/⁠ Follow us on Substack for Exclusive Bonus Content: ⁠⁠⁠https://bialikbreakdown.substack.com/⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠BialikBreakdown.com⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠YouTube.com/mayimbialik⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

There's a concerted effort to replace our humanness with technology. From AI in our lives to computer chips in the brain, chemicals in the blood, RFID chips under the skin, nanobots, the transhuman movement ultimately is to replace the entire body with synthetics. You're talking about things that are actually happening. Unless we change the trajectory, we are the last generation of what will be called pure humans. Shortly after the year 2030, we will be speaking to some four of a human hybrid.

Wow. When I was five years old, I almost died. I don't talk about it a lot. I took an electrical cable in our house. I walked over to a wall plug and held on for dear life. I was lying in my bed, waiting for the doctor. I could see a being behind me that had my head in his cradled hands. There was a communication that happened that has been constant.

The proposals by organizations like World Exchequist like World Economic Forum. Working through the United Nations, they are talking about technology being introduced to all humans at the time of birth by the year 2030. Computer chips in the brain to give the newborn children the edge they need to compete. We follow this path of evolution.

We lose aspects of our humanness. The human heart is coupled to a field of energy that is not limited by the laws of physics. That means there's a part of us that is designed to transcend the lives. limits of time and space. The move to replace us with technology veils our divinity. Divinity is loving without fear, unconditional forgiveness, the ability to heal our own bodies. We're only beginning to understand the full potential of our humanness and we're about to give it away the technology.

Hi, I'm Miami Amiolik. I'm Jonathan Cohen. And welcome to our breakdown. For the first time, Miami is speechless. Speechless. Here's the thing I'm going to say about this episode. It is incumbent upon you to listen to this episode, especially if you think you know about the person that is on this episode. He shares things that he says he doesn't talk about. Well, he absolutely shares things that he doesn't talk about. And we're talking to someone who says a lot of controversial things, a lot of things that you and I may not agree with, a lot of things that many of you out there may not agree with. But guess what? There's so much interesting and important information to be had. And there's so many different ways to learn from people that you also may not agree with. Where are the similarities in the

human experience? That's what we're going to talk about today. We're speaking to someone who is known in many, many realms as being a person who talks about concepts of good and evil, talks about the codes written into our DNA and into the Bible. And it's like, where do all these things fit together. So we're going to be talking with Greg Braden. He's a New York Times bestselling author. He's a scientist with training in geology and computer science. And he's a real pioneer in this emerging paradigm, bridging science, social policy, and human potential. He's got an incredible history. He's also a musician. He's presented his research and his findings in 34 countries on six continents. He's been invited to speak to the United Nations, Fortune 500 companies, and

U.S. military. The message that Greg Braden's going to talk about today and what we're going to kind of push him on is what are the universal things about the human experience that coalesce with everything that we know to be true about science, about the mystical experience, about the transcendental experience, what is it that makes us human? What is it that allows us to reach beyond our humanness and what are the dangers of a world in which we think we can perfect the human experience, which Greg will argue, is a denial of our unique connection to something divine. We talk specifically that most people don't really understand or know how to access the potential of being human, that we can control brain states, we can increase our ability to heal,

We can find love. We can really expand the realm of what we perceive as possible here in the physical form. We also get metaphysical and talk about simulation theory and what it even means to explore energies outside of our bodies, including the access to the field and infinite possibilities of information. We'll touch on the human brain versus AI. We'll talk about the energy that exists. all around us. We'll talk about the intersection between theoretical physics and conversations about divinity and consciousness. We're also going to talk about the tactics that are used to make us believe information that in many cases doesn't really serve us. And it keeps us divided.

And it keeps us divided. Greg describes that humanity is standing out of precipice. There is a major inflection point coming as soon as 2030 where there are measures happening. Organizations, organizing to implant technology and change the very fabric of what it means to be human and have a human experience here on Earth. We're especially excited that Greg is here in person. Break it down. I think a good place for us to start. And I want to get to specifics of the book.

But I think it would be helpful for people to hear what's your mission? Like what is your perspective that you sort of enter? all of the work that you do from. You know, my mission and my perspective is to love this world, love this world and the people this world into peace, into the peace that I know is possible. I have, it's more than just an interest, I think probably because of my heritage. I'm Cherokee blood and Hebrew blood. Both traditions have known a lot of war and a lot of suffering.

I think a lot of my viewers know that I was working in the corpora in the defense industry during the Cold War years. And it was a really frightening time in the history of our world when the superpowers came like this close to doing the unthinkable. And there's no space there because they actually pushed the button twice to release nuclear weapons on civilian populations and twice the tech failed for mysterious reasons. It's a whole conversation around that. But I always felt if we know where to look into the past and if we know how to look into the past

and if we know how to look at what those who have come before us have left for us, that we would find a way to perhaps end the hurt, in the suffering, in the atrocities, in our lifetime that we all have seen in the 20th, and now it's repeating again in the 21st century. And my passion has been to view our past, and not simply as an ancient and obsolete way of thinking of things, which is what I was taught as a scientist. I was taught, you know, that's back then.

We're modern people now. And what I tend to see is a continuity. Is the stuff old, yes. Are the text and the traditions old, yes. Are the obsolete? Absolutely not. And if we can begin to view that continuity, we give ourselves a framework to build the kind of peace.

And honestly, I think the only way it's going to happen is we've got to think differently about our, ourselves. And the better we know ourselves, I think, the better choices we make unless we fear one another, unless we fear change in the world. So, yes, it's about the world and really it all comes down to us. It's beautiful. That's a beautiful framework. And I think one that most of our viewers would absolutely support and get behind. I guess I'd love for you to start, I think we should just like dive right in. Where does love? fit into the philosophy that you sort of approach all aspects of science, history, the future.

What is love? For me to talk about that, let's talk about this book. And I think it will come out pretty clearly. Okay. I can start where I was going to start. All right. The book goes through 70 truths. And they're woven into different aspects of this story.

I think we'll go chronologically. So the first one I want to talk about, by the year 2030, we will either have awakened to the truth of our untapped human potential, or we will be locked into a society of hybrid humans that has engineered away our powers of creativity, emotion, empathy, and intuition. This is just in the introduction. I just want everybody to know. This is, you know, kind of the framework that you're setting.

Tell us what you understand, based on the current trend, of thinking, what are we headed towards? Well, I want to say, first of all, this book, I wrote this book before I gave it to the publisher, because we have had issues in the past of publishers pushing back on the content. And I felt that what we're going to talk about here is so vital. It's more than interesting. Yeah, it's fascinating, but it's vital to our existence. And it begins with two parallel themes in the books.

Let me address that, and then we'll go to this story. There's two parallel themes in the book. One is that there's a concerted effort in our world right now to replace our humanness with technology. And that's no surprise. I mean, we all see that. From AI in our lives to computer chips in the brain, chemicals in the blood, RFID chips under the skin, nanobots moving through the circulatory and the respiratory systems and on and on. The irony is that the technology that we're being asked to accept into our bodies, what the best science in the modern world is now showing us, is that our own natural biology not only meets, but in many cases it exceeds the capacity of the very technology we're being asked to replace ourselves with. And a lot of people don't know that. And that's the second theme of the book, awakening to the potential of who we are. The catalyst for that awakening is what we would call love. Love means different things to different people. And in the book, the theme of the book, and let me, this is a long answer to a short

question, but I want to lay this out, and then we can tie into everything that you're going to go through with those questions. There's a theme in the book that a lot of people are uncomfortable with, and the word is divinity, because for many people, they link divinity with religion. And, you know, I can see where that would happen. There are schools of divinity that do just that, and they're good schools. The contemporary, temporary definition of divinity, and this is fascinating me. It simply says divinity is our ability to transcend perceived limitations. So transcend means become more than perceived. Most of us are living limits in our lives. They're not even real. We are indoctrinated to accept those limits through

academia, through our family, our friends, our community, our heritage, our religion, obsolete science, I mean, all kinds of places, but they're not even real. So divinity, in its truest sense, is our ability to be the best version of ourselves. And that's where this book is so fascinating to me, because there is a concerted effort to keep us from doing that. To veil our divinity. Let me just give a couple of examples of when we think of divinity, many people think it's a peripheral experience. It's actually foundational. A divinity is our ability to imagine. That is an expression of human divinity. Creativity, innovation,

empathy, sympathy, compassion, the ability to love. I was going to say love. Without fear. Many of us love and we've been hurt in our love. And so when we do love, what we do is we love just enough and we always hold something back because we're afraid of being vulnerable. and having that hurt again. Forgiveness. Many people forgive, and then they look around and see who saw them do the forgiving because they want something to come back. Divinity is loving without fear.

Forgiveness, unconditional, forgiveness, the ability to heal our own bodies. That is an expression of divinity. So what we find is divinity is actually foundational in our lives. It's not this peripheral thing. It's us being the best version of ourselves. The move to replace us with technology veils our ability to be the best version of ourselves. It actually veils our divinity. And we can talk about the science that shows us how that works.

So love, the question is, do we love ourselves enough to be the best version of ourselves? Do we love ourselves enough to allow our divinity, which I personally believe is our destiny as individuals? and as a species. It's our destiny to unlock these extraordinary potentials that we're only beginning to understand. My Ambialx Breakdown is supported by Superpower. We all know the feeling of leaving a doctor's office and kind of feeling like we didn't get anything out of the experience that was useful.

Maybe they're like, you're fine, drink more water. There's no real data. There's no game plan. This has happened to me many, many times, especially on the perimenopause journey. That's why we're fascinated. by what Superpower is doing. They send a licensed professional to your home

or you can visit a nearby lab. One simple blood draw with over 100 biomarkers. That's way more than you usually get. It unlocks a true understanding of your body. Their app has detailed information on heart, liver, thyroid hormones, metabolism, vitamin and mineral levels, even environmental toxins.

From disease prevention to treating that annoying brain fog or simply optimizing your gym game, superpower is the most comprehensive and advanced system out there. I've been super tired of, constantly guessing or just trying to read articles online about what to do for health. Superpower gives you an actionable health plan based on personal results. It's a real game changer.

Plus, they have an on-demand clinician team to answer questions. Supplement or prescription suggestions can be directly bought through Superpower, so you don't have to go anywhere else. They also have nutritional guidance, tips for lifestyle and behavioral adjustments. You even get your true biological age that you can track over time. Superpower used to cost $499. Right now, it's $199 for the full experience. which is much more affordable than anything else out there.

Make this the year you stop guessing about your health with superpower. Superpower. Not only did Superpower reduce their price to just $199, but for a limited time, our listeners get an additional $20 off with the code break. Head to superpower.com. Use the code break at checkout for $20 off your membership. And after you sign up, they'll ask how you heard about them. Make sure to mention My Ambiotics Breakdown to help support the show.

Your prediction is pretty specific that within a relatively short period of time, there's kind of a tipping point that we're at. Talk about that tipping point. Well, the best minds of our time now are telling us that unless we change the trajectory of where we are right now, the thinking and the actions that shortly after the year 2030, when we speak to someone on the street or in the grocery store, we will be speaking to some form of a human hybrid species to some degree, maybe less for some and more to others. But what they're saying to us is unless something changes very probably, we are the last generation of what will be called pure humans that this world will know and presumably we're not living anywhere else.

So we are the last generation of pure humans. And this is where the title of the book comes from. Can you talk a little bit about, I don't want people to think that you're going off into like a science fiction conversation. You're talking about things that are, but things that are actually happening, right? Meaning, you're not saying that in five years, everyone's going to be like a robot. You're talking about some of the subtle things that we see now as subtle intrusions into our humanness. There are many ways to approach this conversation. I was in a conference recently.

I was on panel, and I had a very well-known scientist. He said to me, well, Greg, isn't this the next step in human evolution? aren't we meant to merge our biology with technology, to merge our carbon with silica? And I said, no, we're not. He said, isn't that the next step in evolution? I said, it's a false evolution. It's a forced evolution.

And we have to say that because if we follow this path of evolution, we lose aspects of our humanness. Just give it a perfect example. When I was in school back in 1950s, 60s, early 70s, and many people when they were in school, we were taught that when we come into this world, we have a fixed number of brain cells. And that was a leverage in college. Every beer you drank, you're going to lose some brain cells or anything else you imbibeen.

You're going to lose some brain cells. So now what we know is there's a part of the brains, the hippocampus, that is producing new brain cells until the last breath we take on this planet. And that's not the reason to go and drink like a fish, but it tells us that our thinking was wrong. But there's a catch. And that catch is the reason I'm sharing this with you. The catch is that while we produce those new cells, if we don't engage them in a meaningful way within about seven to ten days, the body believes those cells are not necessary and the cells will atrophy and die. That principle applies the entire human body. We are essentially a use it or lose it species.

We've all heard this before. So when we begin replacing facets of the human body with tech, for example, chemicals that mimic the immune system. Or we begin replacing other, and I'm not talking about an occasional titanium hip, you know, or... He's got one. Yeah, it's not that. The proposals that are being put forward by organizations like World Economic Forum,

working through the United Nations, for example, they are talking about technology being introduced to all human, at the time of birth by the year 2030. Computer chips in the brain, for example, to, they say, to give the newborn children the edge they need to compete in the world. What we're not being told is the downside. What do we lose? What is the price that we pay for giving away our humanness?

And I just shared why this is important. Because when a chip begins doing what we do naturally, we lose those cognitive abilities. They begin to atrophy. and die. In one generation, and through epigenetics and next generation, pretty soon, we are no longer functioning the way we have in the past. It's fascinating me because a lot of people think it's like this little dial. You can say, well, let's just try, you know, we'll turn on transhumanism, which is the word we haven't introduced yet, but transhumanism, trans means beyond. So the transhuman movement is the movement to replace much of our,

either augment or replace much of our biology with synthetics and with technology. And that movement is what we're talking about here. They're pushing very quickly to introduce so much of this by the year 2030, this magic year 2030 for a lot of reasons in mass. So computer chips in the brains of young children, RFID chips under the skin. They'll say, I know this is happening, and I'm still in awe at how slick and sexy the marketing is.

They make it look really, really good. They say your life will be easier. You will be safer. You've got an RFID chip in your body. Everybody knows where you are. You know, you'll be safer. Nobody's talking about the drawbacks and the downside. And the psychology, this has been around long enough now.

We can see where, when we don't use facets of our brain. And if we have a technology doing it for us, we stop. then we lose cognitive abilities. We lose the ability to solve problems, socialization skills, the ability to communicate emotions and things like that. I want to slow down here for a second because someone who hears...

Sorry, in the bingo card of things Jonathan says. It's true. He always says he wants to slow down. Nine times under ten, I'm like, okay, we've covered a lot. Let's slow down here for a second. I agree. I agree. If someone hears that there are computer chips planned to be implanted in children's brains, they may be like, what are you talking about?

What you referenced was that the World Economic Forum is exploring this. And there are organizations all over the world who are evaluating what technology exists right now and how it could be scaled and utilized and deployed across the world. And so often these conversations are, are not public, but the economist has published a paper. Our brain implants the future of computing. And what happens is when you talk about the marketing, it's slowly introduced as, isn't it more convenient if?

Neurrelink is an example for people, obviously, who have more extreme limitations. And so, you know, because it's a spectrum, right? It's like on one hand, the technology is available for people who have severe limitation and it can bring back the ability to use their arms or the ability to communicate if you haven't. But what we're talking about is when it's deployed in otherwise healthy people.

And we start to lose our natural abilities because we're relying on devices. So I want to slow down a little bit and talk like, can you explain to people that this isn't sci-fi, that these plans are available and are being discussed? Yeah, I think it's important to break these ideas down. So let's go back to the beginning. Where are these ideas?

Where are they coming from? There's an organization that's been around since 1970. one, World Economic Forum. We've all heard of the Davos meetings, and that's the WEF, and they meet usually once, sometimes twice a year, which they have every right to do and talk about their view of what the world should be, and they have every right to do that. What has happened is that they have found that they had very little traction in getting their ideas across, because, in my opinion, they're just bad ideas, and we're talking about some of those. So let's put that into a box. There's another box, United Nations.

I'm just going to say when I was a kid, the United Nations was the great hope of this planet. And the UN we have now, there are good people there, they do good things, and there are some good programs. It's not the same UN. It's been hijacked in many respects. And one of the places where it's been hijacked, we have, most of us have heard about something called the UN Sustainable Development Goals for the year 2030. This year comes up a lot. UNSDG 2030. 17 beautiful goals.

You look at them on the website. Who wouldn't want them? The end of poverty. Who doesn't want that? Food security. Who doesn't want that? The end of disease for children. Who doesn't want that?

Now you look at the fine print of how they hope to achieve those goals. And this is where it becomes very problematic because the way to achieve those goals is for us to surrender much of our humanness. all right, they're not getting much traction, and they have been concerned about that. It's for this reason these two organizations signed a formal agreement in the year 2019 that the WEF would implement its ideas through the sustainable development goals of the UN, and that's concerning because we are legally bound as a nation to follow some of the principles, the World Health Organization, is a function of the UN. for example. And we saw this a few years ago of how much control they attempted to exert on

global populations. So it starts to sound, you know, crazy science fiction and things like that. It is public knowledge. It simply is not shared in the mainstream. It's almost too complex. It's like there's too many moving parts. It's not immediate enough. It's like too hard. It's too hard to cover. So at the end of every Davos meeting, they sum it up in a few sentences. And Klaus Schwab is the head of, was the head. He stepped down, and I understand he's being reinstated. I'm not sure if that's true. But in a single sentence, he summed up the goal of where they hope to move in these next four and a half years.

And a single sentence, and I'll give you the video clip, and you can share that if you'd like. in a single sentence, he says, the way to achieve these goals is to merge our natural world with our digital world. And then there's a long pause because he knows the implications of what he's about to say. And he says, with our biological identities. So in other words, to merge all the resources of the world, which have pretty much been done, all the animals and the fish and the trees, they are all tokenized. We know that.

the digital world is already the digital world. What has yet to happen is we are not part of this digital equation yet, that they hope to have done by the year 2030 with massive artificial intelligence regulating the way we live our lives, they say, for the betterment of the planet, regulating where we travel, what we eat, how we take care of health issues that come up. I'm hesitated because I want to go too deep on that right now, but you get the idea. So the only way that can happen is for humans to embrace the technology, not just into their lives, but into their bodies. America is not wired for that. We're not set up for that.

We don't think that way. Some countries do. And they're European countries that are all in on this tech right now. I want to, again, just continue to sort of explain how this is not science fiction. because in 2002, I had got to see Ray Kurzweil speak. This was before I had a cell phone. And he talked about how every single person was going to have a device more powerful than the most powerful NASA computers in the palm of their hand.

They were going to have accessed. And he starts to lay out what the version of, you know, the 2015 smartphone is. And in 2002, you're like, this sounds crazy. This guy's off the rails. How is this possibly going to happen? I'm still like using dial up in some most cases. I have a landline. Like it's...

Yeah, I'm with you. And so when we start to stretch, it's like it can... And I'm really trying to speak to the people who are like having a hard time imagining. The plans are large, but the movements become incremental. It's like, oh, just... Let's just track this. And there are a lot of potential positives that are positioned. without thinking about the consequences, AI is going to be able to scan images and health conditions

way faster. That's a good. AI is going to help us allocate resources so that we will have less food waste. Right now, 40% of food is wasted. Well, everyone wants that, right? So it's like almost the road to hell is paved with good intentions in a way. I don't know if we go that far, but, you know, we can definitely talk about the consequences, But I think that's sort of the stage is that these changes could happen incrementally without us really realizing what we're giving up.

This is why I've written this book. The science. I'm a scientist. I'm a trained scientist, Earth science by degree with strong background, math, physics, computer science. So multidisciplinary science. And one of the things I've found is the technology is never right, wrong, good or bad. It simply is tech. It's the thinking underlying the tech and how it's applied in our lives.

And we've certainly seen that. I mean, the splitting of the atom. could have been used for a whole lot of things. It was perfected during wartime. So, of course, it was applied to a wartime application as the atom bomb. The tech, any of this tech, is simply a technology. And yes, we can benefit from all of it outside of our bodies. It's the thinking underlying this.

And that's why in the book I am talking, and we're kind of skipping around here a little bit, and I'm going to acknowledge that. But none of this is happening in a vacuum. There is a context to everything that we're talking about. And this is where it gets a little uncomfortable for people sometimes. I've lost friends. I've lost business having this conversation. Regarding divinity and a fundamental struggle.

We were born in this world into a fundamental struggle between forces that we call good and evil. For a lot of people, that sounds like a fairy tale. I mean, I was a kid growing up in the Midwest, in Missouri, and good and evil were two little angels on your shoulder. You know, a little devil here and, well, devil over there and an angel there, and they were always going back and forth. These are very real forces that are playing out. And the goal, you have to say, what is the goal of evil in the world? And this is why I wanted to mention the word divinity. The goal of evil in the world is to deny human divinity.

The goal of evil is to keep us from being the best version of ourselves, from healing our bodies, from loving without fear, empathy, sympathy, compassion, imagination, all of these things. That is the goal of evil. So now that we have that, I think this is a really important benchmark. We now have a solid goal for what evil plays in our lives. the ability of the attempt to deny our humanness, to deny us from being the best version of ourselves. So now we've got a context and we've got a framework. Where does everything we're talking about fit in to that framework?

Does it help us to be the best version of ourselves? Or in some way, does it deny our humanness? To what degree is this subjective, meaning for some people, and I don't mean to say like, oh, everybody's got a different, but a little bit, everybody's got a different perspective on this. And some people might say, people that maybe I don't agree with, but some people might say the best version of myself is the self that incorporates everything that humans have evolved to create,

even in digital, synthetic, silica realms. And the best version of myself is the version that will live forever, right? the best version of myself is one that has biohacked every aspect of my physiology, right? So, I mean, for me and, you know, just kind of also from a theological perspective, the notions of good and evil, for many people are somewhat outdated. Sure, right? And when we talk about, you know, good and evil, you know, in many cases, their aspects or elements that people do get to determine, which in theory are subjective. So I think, for example, I happen to be a person

that supports a woman's right to have an abortion if she wants to, even if I wouldn't have one or even if I wish she wouldn't, like whatever. That's something I believe in, right? And there might be some people who say that's evil and they would believe that it is in this woman's highest good to be stopped from making that decision. And I know this is an exciting concept.

Everything you're saying is precise the reason why we need the benchmark. Got it. So if you go back to the benchmark, the ability, what you've just described, we have the abilities to do. This is where the new science, the exciting new science is coming in. The science is showing us that all of this technology that we built in the world around us, the principles of that technology, we mirror in our own biology. And that's a mindblower for most people because we are taught from a very early age that we are a flawed form of life, that we are a flawed form of life, that we are a flawed. carbon-based form of life by virtue of our existence, and we need something outside of ourselves

to be the best version of ourselves. That makes us victims. And if you're a victim, you need a savior, and the savior is being touted as technology. Now what we know, that's the setup right there. Young people, when they come to our live events, they worship AI. They worship the computer chips. Nobody's ever told them. First of all, how rare and precious human biology really is, and we can talk about that, and why I believe that is true, and why I believe we're worth preserving as a species. Nobody's ever taught them that we not only meet, but we exceed the capacity of many of those technologies.

For example, I just did this with some young people. Let's look at a silicon chip and a human neuron, all right? Silicon ship, are they fast? Yes. Are they efficient? Yes. Are they scalable? You can only scale a computer chip as far as the physics of the stuff it's made of allow you to scale.

So the atoms that define the silicon will only allow information to move so quickly, so the scalability is finite. Now, look at a human neuron. What is our potential? The answer is we don't know. Because every time, this is the beauty, every time we push our human biology, every time we push a brain and a neuron to the very edge of what we, believes it's limits. We do what humans do. We morph and we adapt to open a new vista of potential.

A perfect example of this is brain states. I was in school 40 Hertz, 40 cycles per second, was the top end of brain, I mean, the textbooks, medical books, everybody said, we can't do any more in that. And the Tibetan monks came along and they said, wow, if we do a certain kind of meditation, and they did it actually right here at UCLA in the scanner. in the MRIs. And they exceeded that 40 cycles per second. And the scientist said, oh, well, okay, maybe we were off a little bit.

Made a mistake. But the human brain can't possibly do any more than that. And the monks said, well, you know, if we do a little bit different, and you know where I'm going with this. Because they doubled that 40 hertz to 80 hertz, then they push it to 100 hertz. We had to have a new brain state called the gamma brain state.

Then they doubled that to the hypergama brain state. Here's on the other end, a lot of people don't know this. On the other end, they took the brain state down to less than one cycle per second. One hurts. And medically, many people think you're in big trouble. If your brain state is less than a cycle per second, these monks, they were very awake. They were in an altered state of consciousness, very much alive, at will on demand,

were able to self-regulate their brain states. And the point of that is that our neurons will morph and adapt as our body does. And the other side of this at the Salk Institute did some amazing studies where they compared an entire human brain to a microprocessor. When I first saw this, and I said, how can you make that comparison? And what they did was they equated the synapse between the neurons to the transistors on the chip. And interestingly, there's about the same number on our high-end chips, the same number of transistors as there are. our synapses in the average human brain. And what they found is that the human brain is about a hundredfold more efficient than those computer chips. And you show that to these young kids.

This is the reason I'm saying it. And they said, well, how come we don't know that? You know, nobody tells us that. We're only beginning with the very tip of this precipice. We're only beginning to understand the full potential of our humanness. And we're about to give it away the technology in one generation before we ever even know completely what it means. to be human. And the way it's happening are the things that we're talking about now. These organizations believe that through marketing, and it is really good marketing, Northern Europe, for example, Sweden is leading the world with RFID chips in the skin. So here's the commercial. You go on YouTube and you see the commercial. Here's a guy walking down the street, blue skies, birds are singing,

music's playing. He says, I've never felt freer in my life. He goes to work, opens his security door with, you know, with his fingertip because he's got a chip there. Goes his computer, turns it on with a chip, a different chip, goes the ATM. He's got 15 chips in his body, 15 chips. And he says he's never been freer in his life. That is a perspective. I mean, the country that brought you Pippi Longstock is doing that? That's a perspective.

So when we talk about some people are very familiar with this now and some art. Elon Musk created a company called NERLink, which is an amazing company with amazing technology. It is a computer chip in the brain that allows the person with that chip to communicate with a computer without using a keyboard and no wires. It's essentially Bluetooth-like technology. And you say that to a young kid, and they'll say, sweet. You mean, I can play Grand Theft Auto 3 and never use a keyboard. And you say, yeah, and they'll say, okay, bring it on. because no one's telling them the flip side.

The functions of the brain that that chip is mimicking, now those functions begin to atrophy. And over time, we lose those functions because we are a lose it, use it, use it or lose it. So, but the other side of this, and this is what you mentioned, a young man or woman who gives their life and serves their country on a battlefield, a dirty, dusty, sandy, windblown battlefield

on the other side of the planet that comes home missing, one or two arms or one or two legs, if that chip in the brain can speak to a prosthetic and allow them to hold their babies in their arms and feed themselves and brush their own teeth, man, what a beautiful thing, what a beautiful thing. I'm all about that. It's not the one-off applications. It is the desire to bring our populations under a form of control by having technology that can be managed by artificial intelligence. And this is what Klaus Schwab is saying.

The goal, he just have to come back to that. The goal is to merge our natural world, our digital world, and our biological world. When you speak about the monks, what strikes me is how much this information is missing now across the population, even if you took technology away. Technology is a symptom. It's like, you know, drug addiction is a symptom of other things going on in someone's life. Our technology use is actually a symptom that we're not engaged in our creative process,

that we don't know how to regulate our brain states, that we don't have all these practices. By design. By design. And this is the point. That's the point of what I'm writing about here. There's a concerted effort to deny our humanness, to deny our divinity. And if you don't like that word, to deny us from being. best version of ourselves.

You could also say that deny basically understanding how to operate the mechanism of the human body that we've been given. Like we're all dropped in and we all have these human bodies. We don't know what the potential is. We don't know how to operate them. Exactly. And that's not an accident. That is, I say, it's a multi-generational project, if you want to look at it that way.

That has led us to believe that we are powerless victims. One of the reasons I wrote this book. people ask, you know, what do you hope the reader walks away from this book with? And at the very least, I would hope they would have a deeper appreciation for their humanness and what it means to be human and maybe even a step further, a sense of pride. That worked for me. I got that. I did. I got that from, I got that from the book. There was a lot that, there was a lot that I, that I hadn't considered with enough weight. And, you know, you have this, it's Human Truth 47.

Oh, Truth 47. So 47 says to live our divinity is to heal the deceptive belief that we are flawed, frail, and powerless beings who need something outside of ourselves to succeed in the world and thrive in life. The reason I liked Human Truth 47

is because this resonates pretty deeply with a lot of the work that we do, a lot of the specialists we talk to, a lot of the mystics, a lot of the philosophers and a lot of the theoretical physicists. And most of these people have something in common,

and that is a connection with something greater than themselves. Right? And as you said, that doesn't have to be religious, it doesn't have to be patriarchal, it doesn't have to be any of those things. But, you know, as we talk about,

you know, religion is the human attempt to encapsulate, and formulate something divine, which, yes, can be used as an opiate for the masses. It can be used for war. It can be used for hatred.

It can be used for evil. But at its source, this notion, which I really, you know, as a scientist who is a believer, I love that connection that you make. And I think that's something

that really does kind of, it speaks to addiction, right? Oh, yeah. We keep seeking outside of ourselves that to fill that the god-shaped hole is what 12-step programs will call it right we keep seeking outside of ourselves and guess what self-love right loving kindness what Sharon Salzberg and Joseph Goldstein like brought over it unlocks an entire potential that we're

accessing correct there's a whole world waiting when and that's why I first asked you about love because love is this sort of higher vibrational frequency, right, that we have the biological ability to resonate at. And the other connection I made, which I did not realize you were going to make, has to do with coherence. And this is not an advertisement for heart math, but I started using heart math. And I learned that the feeling that you get when you not force yourself, but when you encourage yourself to experience loving kindness, compassion, patience. I mean, I usually think of my hairless cat because he was my favorite. And my coherence starts to rise.

My body wants to feel a sense of coherence. So it's like everything got linked in when you think of. We keep looking outside of ourselves, whether it's tech, whether it's drugs, whether it's religion, right, whatever guru you want to follow, it all really does come back to this notion of like, what was I born as a human with consciousness sitting at this table right now? What was I born naturally able to tap into? Right. And that is healing.

And for me as a scientist, the question then once I understood that from, and I want to talk about some of the experiments, then the question was, how come I don't know this? and why don't we, it goes back to what Jonathan's saying, why don't we know about what those monks have done? The highest states of human consciousness ever attained with no technology, no chemicals, no drugs, not plant medicine, anything, breath and focus are attained.

I used to lead groups in the Tibet, and we would spend 12 monasteries, two nunneries over 26 days, and we'd sit with these monks and these nuns. And we would experience with them, and to the degree we were able to learn, they would teach us. And it's not hard. It's just a very, very different way of thinking.

I just want to step back about a half a step. I want to acknowledge everything we're talking about. This is a very different way of thinking for a lot of people. I think it's important now because it gives context to what's happening in the world around us. You cannot separate the events of the world out there from what's happening in here. And I'd like to talk about that before we finish this conversation as well. But let me go back to science. I think that might, I had to leave, I wrote the book and then had to leave a lot of the book out to meet the parameters of the publisher.

So they wanted a certain size, certain number of pages. There was an experiment that was done in 2022. And this is kind of a mind blower. And for people that weren't alive in 1972, this may not mean a lot. But there was one of the first computer games ever created was a game called Pong. I had Pong. Pong was such a simple game. You would think the Messiah landed in my living room.

It was. Well, I was working. I was in the university at the time, working in the remote sensing lab, Colorado State University. And we had computers that were tied to, we had a monitor tied to a mainframe. You know, we didn't have desktop computers in. And this thing came out, and it was just a very rudimentary. It's like a badminton game, a tennis game. If that.

But it's pervasive. It came out in 1972. Okay, so here's the experiment. I remember the smell of the machine. It's not like burning plastic. Were you burning up your pong machines? No, it was just like it would get hot, you know, like it's anyway, go ahead. You remember people used to come away from the lab or working long hours and their face was red because of the radiation coming off that screen.

Delicious. Yeah, before they changed the way the screens were set up. I remember that. So here's the experiment. So, 2022, scientists took some human neurons and they put them into a petri dish, not attached to a human. All right. And they had a special chip that had little ports where they could put the dendrites from the neurons into the chips. So now you've got a chip, a neuron interface.

And they put it into a computer loaded with Pong. All right? Here's what happened. They fired up Pong. Those neurons began playing Pong. and the longer they played, the better they got. They learned from their mistakes. And so now here's the scientists.

They're up against a little bit of a quandary here. Where do the instructions for Pong live? And so now they're looking, are they in the neurons? Just like, I remember when I was a kid, Einstein had died just before I was born. And I got to see part of his brain. The thin sectioned in the University of Kansas to see what made his brain different from everybody else. The answer is it looked pretty much like everybody else is except, with one exception,

he had a lot more folds for more surface area. So sinus, they're looking in his brain, where's equals MCSquiry, you know? I think it was all the chicken soup his mother was making him. Maybe, maybe, I don't know. So they were doing the same thing with these neurons. How the neurons know how to play pawn,

this is where science will either have to embrace, allow their discoveries to lead to the story they tell, or what they're doing now is they're trying to force those discoveries to fit into pre-existing ideas that now are obsolete. What the science, traditional science, is trying to say is that we're it. They're saying that consciousness is in the cells, consciousness is in the brain. What this experiment showed was that those neurons are literally biological antenna. They're tuned to something that is not inside the neuron. They're tuned to a place in the field.

And we now know July 4th, 2012, this superconducting supercollider in CERN announced that there is a field underlying all existence called the Higgs field. Peter Higgs predicted he got to see his prediction come true. There is a field. And it's no longer a question. The question is, what is our relationship to that field? What does it mean? That field has many names. We know energy is information.

So that neuron literally is a biological antenna tuned to the place in the field where Pong is pervasive from all of the years. So in all the years that it was there, there's a... Pong has always existed. Here's needed to draw it from the universe. Here's the shift. Scientists began right off the Cold War. The Russians were way ahead of us on this.

And I remember we were reading Russian research papers during the Cold War, like, what are these guys doing? They began to look at the human body less from a sticky, gooey, mushy, wet cellular perspective and more from an IT perspective, information technology. Now, that's a way different way of thinking about the human body. They're looking at the components of the human body as transistors and resistors and capacitors and batteries and circuits. One of the things they found is that human DNA, and there's the proceedings from the journal of soft computing, actually published this, and this is a quote from them, that human DNA functions as a fractal biological antenna, a 3D antenna. Well, the antenna is tuned to a signal. fractal antenna is picking up a lot of signals across a broad bandwidth of information. And it suggests that we are in communication with something.

And I think this is how science is going to find the common ground with spirituality, two very different perspectives. But they're saying the same thing. The same thing. Contemporary languages. Science is a contemporary language of a lot of the mystical traditions. So if that DNA is an antenna picking up something, the DNA in those neurons is tuned to a place in the field where Pong lives. Our DNA, our cells, in our neurons and throughout our bodies.

We have neurons in the heart. We have neurons in the brain. The Journal of Complementary Alternative in Medicine. And I love this quote. I didn't know we'd do this, but I'm going to do it from memory. It said there's compelling evidence to suggest that the human heart is coupled to a field of energy that is not limited by the laws of physics. That means there's a part of us that is designed to transcend the limits of time and space.

That's deep intuition. That's how a mother in Australia, I'm talking about this in the book, she knows when her son in Afghanistan is in trouble before his commanding officer does, because she intuitively picked this up. There has to be a communication. Now, you know, we talk about it anecdotally. But what is that information flowing through? It's throwing through that field.

Right. And these, yeah. Yeah, we had Thomas Campbell on and he's a, you know, physicist who explained the whole thing very plainly. Yeah. Very clear to him. Oh, it's a field and there's a field of consciousness. And we said, what about the Akashic records? He's like, sure, call it that.

Well, there's, call it the field, the plonk field, the zero point field, the matrix, the divine matrix. The point is. that it's only through this biological mechanism that we attune to a part of ourselves that doesn't live in this physical body. And when we begin to replace our physical body with synthetics, we lose the ability to connect with that part of ourselves. The goal of the transhuman movement ultimately is to replace the entire body with synthetics. And you named it. You said for immortality, when the science is showing, number one, every organ in the human body has the ability to stop the damage, to heal what's been done, and to repair itself. Even the organs we were told could not.

Brain tissue, spinal cord tissue, heart tissue. There's a catch. They have to be given the right environment to do that. Well, and I think also, you know, one of the other concepts that sort of needs to be exploded out is. you know, when you talk about this, when you think like this, I mean, I'll use longevity as an example. What's my favorite recent quote that I saw written on a chalkboard outside of that restaurant that we like? Death is only the end if you think the story's about you. So I was already thinking that the notion of longevity, the reason that many ancient people, indigenous communities, don't have the same fear.

and obsession with death is because death was seen as another part of life and it was part of the vernacular, right? And when I think about, you know, the way that my tradition, the tradition I was raised in and what I believe was encoded in me,

you know, there's this notion that there's always a language that divinity is speaking. Always. And for some people, they find it in the sky or the stars, for some people they find it in love or in work that they do, that language is constantly being spoken, the thing that changes is our ability to hear it, right?

So the notion that like, oh, you know, if you read the Old Testament, and I'm much more versed in the Old Testament than the New, if you read the Old Testament, like God's always talking to people and God's talking from mountains and you're like seeing colors while God is speaking. Like, what is that? And what, you know, my rabbis taught me was that that voice is constantly being spoken. We can't hear it anymore. We can't hear it because the first thing we do when we wake up is take out our phone, scroll through Instagram, look at the news, you know, like whatever we're doing.

Our attention is bombarded. Our attention is bombarded. We're not living in a natural world. And as much as this is the evolution of our species, we've not lived like this for 99.9% of the time that humans have existed. This is all very new. And I say this all the time. I'm like, buildings? What?

We're in cars? There's a thing, like, I'm talking to you, like I have consciousness. That's crazy. For most of the existence of human beings, we've not been living like this. This is an adaptation that we're trying to adjust to. Absolutely. And the bigger context is I think we all sense we're barreling down the road towards some kind of convergence point. I think everyone feels it.

It's like a rubber band has been stretched so far. Something's got to give. I mean, people say it. different ways. You know, I go to my little food co-op in a rural area in northern New Mexico and really good salt of the earth people don't really have time to sit around and do what we're doing right now because they're trying to make ends meet and take care of their kids. But when I see them there, you know, what they'll say is, Greg, something's wrong. We know something's wrong. And the way they identify it, they say things are moving too fast. The changes

are happening to us, not from us, we need to go back to basics. But are we just being Luddites? Are people who say that just like, oh, we don't, we can't take all this technology? Everything's, I want to go back to the good old days. What's your response to that? My response, and again, I'm a systems thinker. None of this is happening in a vacuum. That's why I'm going to go back.

There is a fundamental struggle we were born into between the forces that we call good and evil. These aren't metaphors. I'm just giving an example. I was in London in a hotel room October 7th of 2023, about to go on a stage. And the events began happening in Israel. And I was watching live TV feeds from Eastern Europe and Asia. America was asleep because of the time difference. And I had to go on that stage acting like everything was okay. And I was just in tears. I came back to my room that night to see CNN. America was never allowed to see what happened in Israel on that day for different reasons. YouTube says it violates community guidelines. There's a narrative that those events did not fit. The horrors that unfolded on that day are nothing less than pure evil. It's not a metaphor. And it wasn't incited by the rage of pent-up people. This was

by design. And America, most America doesn't know that. And because of that, it's divided us by design. Because now there are people that say it never happened. If it did, I would see the pictures, prove it to me. And I want to say we're probably blessed not to see those pictures because you don't want those indelibly stamped into your mind. You don't want to see what evil can do to someone else. There's a fundamental force and it ebbs and flows. And we're living at a time, a convergence point where the technology is being used to veil our potential. That is an expression of evil, to make us vulnerable and susceptible to an agenda that is not good for us and it's not good for this planet. This isn't a conversation that could be happening at any time in history.

There's a reason. There's a process that's unfolding. There's a beginning. There's an end. There's a timeline and we're in it and the only way out of this to go through it in my opinion love is the answer do we love ourselves enough to embrace the deep truth of what it means to be human and to preserve our divinity or will we succumb to the shiny objects in front of us and the dangling carrot of giving our humanness away in exchange for the speed of a computer ship or the the safety that we feel when we give away our sovereignty. And I don't know the answer to that, but we aren't going to have to wait long to find out.

It will be decided within this lifetime. We're making that choice in this lifetime right now. And I'm advocating. I believe we're worth preserving. I'm advocating strongly for our humanness. You talk about three indoctrination tactics. Yeah. And you just mentioned one.

So I kind of want to go into that. Does it make sense what I just said? Oh, yeah. Do you have other guests that talk? I don't know. I listen a lot to Sam Harris. I like Sam very much, and we were colleagues together at UCLA. He speaks of this in, you know, from a political perspective and from a historical perspective,

which is, yeah, it's, it is a very similar conversation. But I think what's interesting is the notion of, especially social media and the way information is being presented to us. And that's what led me to sort of connect it to the tactics that are being used. So you talk about these three tactics. What are the ways that this kind of information is either being misrepresented or not represented? This is where that benchmark came in that we did early on. This is why I wanted to do it early on. Anything that denies our divinity is an expression of evil. Even things we may not think they are. Do those events bring out the best in us or do they deny the best within us?

So there are many forms of evil. There's kinetic evil playing out in the battlefield. That's obvious. There's psychological evil. It's less obvious. There's technological evil. the devices being placed into our bodies that replace our natural abilities in mass, if we're all going to put computer chips in our brains, and we lose those cognitive abilities, that's not good for us. So in the media right now, in the algorithms, and I know all of our listeners are experiencing it, so here's an example of what happens. Kids will go to their YouTube channel and they'll find out what's going on in the world.

and the parents are going to their YouTube channel, well, the way the algorithms are set up is they will feed you the kind of information that you've just searched and create what is called an information silo. So you are inundated with so much information, and you think it's so pervasive. Everybody must be seeing, you know, what you're saying.

Meanwhile, the kids are seeing the same thing, which is completely different than what you are. Now you sit down at the family dinner table and you try to have a conversation about climate change. All right? and you are now a polarized family. There is a concerted effort to break the social bonds that hold our civilization together.

And it's not an accident. It began right around 2011. It was the Occupy movement, the rich against the poor. That's an important conversation. We need to have that. However, it could be done in a kind way that brings us together in a society, and it was not.

It was weaponized to divide us. Then we saw the same thing happen, men against women. Then we saw blacks against whites, Christians against Muslims, Jews against Muslims. And now it's adults against children, male against female, gender against gender. Every one of those is important. And we need to have the conversation. Everyone is being weaponized to break the social bonds that hold us together. And a lot of it's coming through the media, the way that we see it that come up.

Another example, I'm going to use climate change. As a geologist, I'm very passionate about this. You believe in it? Climate change is a fact. I've been talking about since... Just a decade. No, I've been talking about since 1979. It's also a fact that humans are not causing it.

Humans are not causing it. And the real scientists know this. The cow parts. It's not the cows. I'll just, I'll tell you, I mean, NASA knows this. NASA knows that over 90% of the CO2. There is an increase in CO2. Okay, it's just, I made a statement, and I just want to justify this.

is there more CO2 in the atmosphere now than there was 10 years, 20, 50, 100 years ago? The answer is absolutely yes. Is it a bad thing? The answer is no. Is it the most we've ever had? We're right about 440 parts per million right now. In geologic history, we're looking Cretaceous over 1,000,000 parts for million, Triassic, 2,000 parts per million.

The earth was lush, the earth was green, life was abundant during that time. And what we see in geologic history, and this is fascinating me, there are times when CO2 levels are high and the temperatures are low. And times when just the opposite is happening, it's not necessarily a one-to-one correlation. Where's the CO2 coming from? NASA knows, I've got a bunch of videos on this. Over 90% of the CO2 is coming from the oceans, warming. Warm water holds less gas. Here's the kicker.

the oceans are warming from underneath, not from the top. It was from the CO2 on the top. You know, the warming of the air, it would be coming from the top. It's warming. The glaciers are melting from underneath. The CO2 is coming. The oceans are warming from underneath from tectonic processes that happen about every 12,500 years that people just don't want to talk about.

It is a tectonic process. It begins in the core. translates perturbations into the mantle, into the crust, the weak areas of the crust. You see more tectonic activity, more volcanic activity was exactly what we're seeing. Do we need to go clean green? Yes, we need to stop burning fossil fuels because the oil is actually a very precious resource that cannot be replaced. And if we were serious about doing it, we've had the technology for over 70 years.

We've had technology that will produce clean, green, sustainable energy, no CO2, it's abundant in the earth's crust. The waste can be recycled into the energy again. If we were serious about it, if the powers that be were serious, I know that they would go after this tech that is not being used. I'm talking about thorium. Manhattan Project, they discovered a number of elements that could run those reactors. They chose uranium because they need the plutonium for the weapons. Thorium, Element number 90, though, if you wiki this, they'll tell you it's theoretical, it's not. China, Russia, America had thorium reactors, and one of them was in Colorado, the Indian River

facility up until the 80s when they shut it down. So we know it's a proven technology. We go on and on with that, but all to say that we are not the cause, it's been politicized, and it has been hijacked. The idea has been hijacked. So how does that work out? in terms of media. We've had leaders come on and say,

the science is settled. And the minute somebody says the science is settled, that's a red flag. Because science is a living body of information. It's designed to be constantly upgraded when new discoveries come to light. They'll use the urgency of a situation and say the science is settled

to force us to accept their idea of a solution. We all saw this during the pandemic as well. The science is settled. You must do these things. When the science continues and reveals very different kinds of information. So when someone uses the urgency of a situation and says there is no discussion, that is a tactic that is used. What do we do to remedy that? We research. That's the beauty of having the opportunity. A lot of people don't have the time. And I totally get that. But the information is out there. Go to multiple sources, independent. sources and look at Harvard, look at MIT, look at where the research is coming from, and you will find it counters what many of our leaders are saying to us. Then we're faced with a choice. And that's a very personal choice, and we have to make a choice in terms of, you know, where we go with this. But that's one example. Right. So the first indoctrination tactic being present the doctrine as reality, which I completely see. The second tactic is manipulation through fear and guilt. And the

Third is ensure there's no way out. Can you talk about those tactics as well? Sure. Well, the climate change is a perfect example because what they'll do is they'll start a news cycle with forest fires in California and flooding in my state, New Mexico, just 48 hours ago or in Texas. And of course, that's horrible. Nobody wants that. Our hearts go out to our brothers and sisters. And then they will link that to climate change. And the science doesn't support that. The science simply does not support that. It goes even deeper. I mean, the cycle, we know what's driving this cycle. And we have the technology now that we could actually alleviate many of the issues with climate change that are happening right now. But, yeah,

climate change is one where the urgency, certainly the pandemic is a perfect example of the urgency. the threat of war and annihilation we've seen used recently to take really extreme steps. And it's all being done through media. In your media silo, your silo will tell you that's the only way to go. But if you're able to break out that silo, you'll see way different perspectives based on really good information. And you said the other one, what was the third one?

The third indoctrination tactic is ensure there's no way out. Well, yeah. And that is part of what we see. We just keep coming back. Climate change was a perfect example of that. Right. And the pandemic as well. The pandemic. And the pandemic was, this was the United Nations. Meaning like, if you don't do this, you're going to die. Like, that was literally. However, the Harvard MIT studies showed very clearly. I'm a scientist. As soon as I saw, well, I didn't know if we could talk about this on your program. And I think is a way to talk about it responsibly. I knew in March of 20, my scientific colleagues had sent me copies of the genome. And you can see very clearly where the genome was, there were cleavage

sites where that don't happen in nature, where the information had been spliced and information had been put into there, which told me it did not come from a natural. It didn't come from a wet market, you know, in somewhere and some far, far. You remember how I determined that it came from a lab? Your experience of it. When I had COVID, the first time I had it, I was very sick. I was one of the people, like, I wasn't like the, oh, it was like a little cold. Like, I was very sick. I was, at that time, I was vaccinated.

And the symptoms changed about every 10 hours. Wow. And what I said is it felt like everything I studied from genetics, the way programming works. Yep. When proteins are turned over and things are, and I said, it literally felt like I was, things were clicking on every 10 hours. I was like, oh, new symptom. Oh, now I have a completely different.

And I was like, this feels so inorganic. Like usually when you have a cold, it's like, oh, it moves from your nose down to your chest. Like, then you cough and then it's over. But this was like every day it was a new virus. That's what it felt like. And I literally said, and everybody, well, certain people in my life were like, you're crazy. You're a conspiracy theorist. I was like, no, I'm still a progressive liberal, but this does not seem like an organic virus.

Well, it made perfect sense that would come from a lab leak and humans make mistakes. Just tell us. Just be honest and tell us. There's a reason that the government doesn't tell us certain things. Yes. And part of it is that, and you know, I'm giving the government in general a very generous interpretation here. Okay. When you have a global pandemic, this is really scary.

We didn't know a lot of things, meaning there was legitimate things that we didn't know. So remember it was like, oh, it can't be passed through the air. And it's like, it is passed through the air. Sure. So what happened is we had a government that had to felt that it had to take very serious conservative measures to protect as, quote, best that they could. The people, of course, who were not protected were people of a lower socioeconomic status, which ended up being reflected as many people of color not being taken care of. And that's why many of us don't like that. like the government for a lot of reasons, but there was a conservative attempt to try and be like,

oh, my gosh, everybody just like stay in your houses. We don't know what the F is happening, right? And I think in many cases, some people knew, but many people didn't. And every time something comes out from the CDC, I shove it in the face of everyone who told me that I was a conspiracy theorist. Like, oh, guess what? I was right. The information was out there. I was power of attorney over my mom, who I was. lost through COVID. And her facility, she was also late stage dementia. And the facility that she was in said, we need your permission to use this vaccine on

your mom. And I said, well, send me the paperwork. And Pfizer, it was a Pfizer vaccine they were going to use. And Pfizer was very honest in their paperwork. They said, this vaccine will not keep your mom from getting COVID. It will not keep her from transmitting it. It may lessen the impact. Oh, the information was all there.

Well, that was Pfizer. But meanwhile, my local news is telling me that just the opposite. They're saying if you take this, if you don't take it, you're going to get it. If you don't take it, you won't. And I said, that's not true. And this is, you know, COVID politics aside, the thing that bothers me most, not just about COVID, not just about this vaccine, about wellness in general. I don't appreciate being lied to. That's the thing.

I don't want to be lied to. If you don't know, say you don't know. But this is where, and you and I may differ on a lot of things, and I also don't know enough about climate change to even, like, say, like, I don't know what you're saying sounds right. Could be right. Could be, I don't know. But with this, this made sense to me.

This notion of we're going to hold over you that if you don't do what everybody else is doing, you're going to die. Do you want to die? Which is the same thing with the HPV vaccine, which used to be like, oh, some people are taking it. And now the commercials are like, do you want your 12-year-old to die? If not, take this vaccine. And I'm like, what kind of marketing is happening, right? Well, that's where the information, these are the algorithms that are being used to skew these, skew these perspectives.

My mom passed before I had to make that decision. And so from COVID. And I sometimes think she spared me the pain of wondering if I'd make the wrong decision if I had given it to her. Sure. But it was an eye opener for me because the fact sheet from. the pharmaceutical company stated what the compound was capable of, and it was not what was being taught, was being told them on my local radio stations and local media. I mean, there's no center of truth. You'll still speak to a lot of people who, and a lot of

physicians have said this was 100% needed. It absolutely reduced mortality. It reduced suffering. it was what was needed to have across the population. And there's a danger in saying, you know, I'm aware of the danger of saying the local news and the mainstream media, because that opens the door when that can't be trusted, it opens the door to even more fringe. And, you know, when we say, well, look, some of the sounds conspiratorial, but here are the, it opens a door to some. But it opens the door to people who may have real conspiratorial. And also, I want to say, like, I don't know, I literally don't know enough. I know the things that don't make sense to me. I know the things that I don't appreciate. I don't have the level of certainty that you do. And I don't have a level of certainty in many cases that you do. I'm just saying

that, like, I try and call it when I see it. And we weren't being told and we're not told in many cases what's happening. And part of the problem, I think, is we do have a current administration, which this is not a political statement. But by definitely. The definition, the current administration, has said, do not trust the media, do not trust the news. We will tell you what you need to know. And that's just dangerous whether you're a Democrat, a Republican, a socialist. You don't want the Republicans to do it. You don't want the Democrats to do it.

I don't want anybody doing that. This is why the remedy is to search independent media. And it's out there. You can go to the peer-reviewed scientific journals, and they can be skewed. They can be. Sure. And I've seen them publish things and take them back. But more often than not, you're going to get a pretty straight answer.

It's usually, we're not sure. Well, the problem is sometimes papers are hard to read. And a lot of people aren't accustomed to reading those. It's not easy access. It's much easier just to listen to your local. It's time consuming. Yeah, and all those things. So the information is out there.

But you're asking, this is one of the ways that we are driven to make choices in our lives. and sometimes those choices aren't good for us. Why would that happen? That's where you've got to go back to that bigger. It's not happening in a vacuum. There's a concerted movement to move populations and to lead us to think in very, very specific ways. In my opinion, they're not good for us.

And these are all examples of how that happens. We're going to take a pause here because there is so much more to talk about with Greg Braden, which you will get in part two of this episode. In part two, we will go deep into simulation theory. We'll talk about fractal time. We'll talk about aging. We'll talk about even aspects of dementia that might indicate different aspects of our understanding of consciousness. And we're going to go really, really personal and talk with Greg about some of the experiences

from his childhood, which he believes helped wire him to be open to an understanding of the world that has really sent him on his entire life's journey and how it relates to the journeys that we're all on. You do not want to miss part two of our conversation with Greg Braden. If you are not already subscribed, make sure to subscribe to the podcast. You can also follow us on Substact, where we are going to have expanded conversations about this episode and so many of the themes that come up here.

MyN B. Alex breakdown on Substack and... From our breakdown to the one we hope you never have. We'll see you next time. It's My Ambiolex Breakdown. She's going to break it down for you. a neuroscience PhD or two one fiction was a now she's gonna break down it's a breakdown and