Paused at 45:30.
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] One. Okay, and we're live with Georgie Dinkov and Raymond Peat and we're just catching up with Ray about Mexico and things but, you know, last time we talked, Ray, I don't think the CDC had come out and said that masks were basically useless. I don't think they had come out and said that the PCR test was useless, and then this whole Russia-Ukraine thing
is there any way to synthesize this into something that makes sense, like, from your point of view? Oh, there are so many undeniable things now that the CDC just has to recognize some of them just to not seem totally crazy and crooked, but still, they're basically crazy and crooked and the government policy on Ukraine is some weird combination of very crazy and very stupid because they're alienating so much of the world which can perceive what is going on with Russia being the peacemaker and the US being just aggressive to an insane degree.
Is that just a complete diversion? Like, it can't be a coincidence that they ended kind of the COVID-trod stuff and then that started up immediately. Yeah, I think it's connected. But like, as a diversion to like, I mean, is there a purpose to it or is it a complete phony story? Like, I have been reading that people in Russia, or maybe it was the Ukraine, were like completely unworried by the whole situation. It was just people in America that were getting all riled up.
Yeah, even the president of Ukraine in a phone conversation with Biden told him to calm down. You can't tell a person with dementia to calm down. They're agitated all the time. Okay, and then the ending of the masks, like the ending of the gaslighting of the people that have been saying this for two years. Do you think that's to give way for a future – like, we talked last time about Marburg or something else. Like, it's actually scary that they're ending this stuff because that means something worse this way comes maybe?
Yeah, I think they're hoping to create enough fear and excitement around the Ukraine, provoking Russia into occupying the eastern part of the country, for example, so they have something more permanent to focus on. So what do you – The president of Croatia and the governments of Germany and France are questioning the rightness of the NATO policies. Croatia says they won't join in if the US goes to war. Does this fit in with the Great Reset stuff, or is this just an anomaly?
I just don't understand how this fits into any kind of greater picture other than it just being a diversion. I think just being crazed people stirring up excitement, recognizing that war presidents always are powerful, the people who get in line behind a war president. Interesting. And do you think he'll be re-elected or something because of this? Does that make his image better or something? I would suppose that's what he has in mind. Interesting, interesting. And then what do you make of Putin being a part of that World Economic Forum program for students that Klaus had?
Does that worry you at all about Putin's ability to be a good leader? No, I don't know about that program. I should have grabbed the name of it. Okay, move on. Have you seen some of the – well, they may be fake news, but the Western media has made a big deal out of how Russia is also making the vaccine mandatory for many of its citizens. Do you think there is any truth to that, or it's just trying to present Putin as being a good boy and part of the team?
I hadn't heard anything about the mandatory. I had heard only 30% or so were vaccinated there, and that there wasn't a big push to go farther. Yeah, I don't think there's a big push. It's just the way Eastern Europe operates. Basically, nobody trusts the government. Me being originally from Bulgaria, the vaccination rate there is even lower than 30%. And several of the governors of Putin's – of the Russian – of the republics that make up the Russian Federation have made the vaccine certificate mandatory for "participating in public life."
Unfortunately, there's – the only thing that we know of what is actually going on in Russia is through Western media, and I cannot assert on whether that's really true or not. I've heard people that I know in Russia saying, "Yeah, there may exist something on the books, but nobody's really enforcing it." That would be my suspicion, that everything I've read or heard Putin saying seems like he's a perfectly conscious person. Just to finish that thought, it was the hidden alliance of former WF Young Global leaders working in lockstep to enforce the Great Reset.
Macron, Trudeau, Arden, Boris Johnson. Does that ring any bells? And where is the organization? It's like run by Klaus, and he's like – a bunch of people study under him, and then they go off to be – I don't know, do their thing over their countries. It doesn't matter. We can – I would assume a lot of them are going to be arrested.
So moving on a little bit, do you think this thing that's going on in Canada with the 50,000 trucks going to Ottawa, it has maybe a non-significant chance of toppling the government and maybe like, I don't know, having some of these people brought to justice, at least in Canada? I saw Trudeau's nasty little video bit on people with impermissible beliefs. Something has to be done about it. Right, something has to be done, and he's self-quarantining despite being fully vaccinated because he doesn't want to meet the 50,000 truckers.
It's a very popular word, but like mass formation psychosis, do you want to comment on that? Do you have any specific view that's really penetrated the consciousness of the internet recently since it was on a popular podcast? Did you hear about that, and do you have any thoughts on it? I think it's mostly just a phrase that catches attention. The culture is a mass psychosis. Already nothing dramatic has changed. It's a chronic manipulation of the mass psychosis.
I feel like that term doesn't include the trauma, the traumatic part about it. You only get to that point after being traumatized so many times. Yeah, but our society specializes in trauma and threat. If this continues for much longer, I would say a majority of the population will get to a point where they're basically certifiable. Even if the great reset comes to fruition, even that will become hard to sell on those people. They will lose their grip on reality.
Even if you present finally the solution that they've been waiting for, there's a good chance that they may not go for it simply because they're completely… Yeah, that's a matter of degree. I've considered the public to be a very high percentage of complete insanity now for 60 or 70 or 80 years. So do you think there's a critical percentage of the public that while manipulated has to obtain some sanity in order for any sort of a social organization to exist?
Or do you think the elite is perfectly fine with 99.9% complete berserk lunatics running around even if that means basically they have to roll out the big guns? Yeah, they've got their people like Noam Chomsky saying that the unvaccinated have to separate themselves and getting food is going to be their problem. Well, I'm not worried about them. They will be able to get the food. What about the people living in the big cities, let's say in the States or in Canada? Who's going to feed them? They depend entirely on supplies from the countryside.
Yeah. It would be advantageous if a higher percentage of the people thought like individual intelligent animals. There's a sort of lemming consciousness that has been, it was really developed powerfully after the First World War. It started in with the government propaganda ministry and that faded out for a while but was restored after the Second World War and really became a powerful shaper of society.
Do you think some of those supply chains and the shortage that we're seeing, a lot of that was actually unforeseen by the elite? They didn't actually plan for that because if the city population starts to starve, then all bets are off, including the elite. They may very easily get on the chopping block if a significant amount of the population of New York City revolts and starts literally eating each other. Eric Schmidt's speeches and committee work for the Pentagon and such indicated as early as early 2019 that their intention, primary intention was to wreck the economy.
You can't make a new digital alternative reality until you've created desperation and wrecked the old economy thoroughly. Right, but for as long as humans are organic, they depend on food, including the elite and including actually having a great reset. All of that is based on a reality that's still based on food and analog perceptions. So if they wreck the food supply to the big cities, then all bets truly are off. Basically, why would people go for any reset, great or minor or whatnot, if they have nothing to eat?
I think it's to be graded carefully enough that they can weaker and sicker without outright starvation of masses of them. Like the evidence coming out that five percent of the vaccines according to their lot number were coded to be either lethal or non-lethal. And according to the lot numbers, you can see a very concentrated mortality from those of the five percent early in each lot sequence. So they weren't intending to cause massive sickness and die off, but only five percent per period of time.
I think I read somebody, maybe it was Michael Yedon, that said that those were concentrated towards red states. Is that true? That would probably be the preference of a lot of the people controlling the distribution. But I think they have to make it look even-handed to some extent, blue state deaths, just to make it look fair. Do you think the inoculant protein would eventually accelerate some of the disease? Maybe they couldn't have anticipated that the adjuvant was so harmful, or do you think they knew it was that bad?
That was probably a consideration, but I think some of the people are in a bigger hurry than others. Have you read about Dr. Bakhti's pathology studies in which 93 percent of the deaths that were autopsied following the vaccine were caused by the vaccine, the typical clotting inflammatory evidence? Not extensively, but I've seen his name around many places. I think in some countries they actually ban doing autopsies specifically on the vaccinated in order to prevent these discoveries.
They just write it off, they sign a death certificate, and they ship the body off, but they don't do autopsies. At least in Europe, I think in most of the countries, that's the rule. The policy of don't treat the sickness other than by vaccines or oxygen, and don't do autopsies, highly organized, don't publicize the actual cause any more than necessary. Do you know how prevalent carbogen, the actual product, is in hospitals? Is it fairly exotic, so in other words, it has to be ordered? Yeah, still very rare in hospitals. I've had people check around them.
I think there were only two or three hospitals that had it on hand out of thousands of hospitals. Are you aware of anything in the medical curriculum that even discusses potentially mixing carbon dioxide with oxygen in order to improve its uptake? No, I think it's all the phony way of calculating pH and bicarbonate base excess and so on, rather than focusing on carbon dioxide and the availability of oxygen.
The reason I'm asking is I asked several of friends, well, I guess we're no longer friends, but people that I used to associate with their doctors, and I asked them, "Well, do you know that if it actually provides a little bit of carbon dioxide, you'll increase the tissue oxygenation because that's the signal, the carbon dioxide levels are the signal where the oxygen needs to get released?"
And they just gave me a blank stare and said, "There is no foreseeable medical condition under which we would ever administer carbon dioxide to a patient. If anything, we will do everything possible to decrease the carbon dioxide in the body, not increase it." Yeah, that's following the UK committee, 1955, that just declared that it was irrational to be concerned with keeping some CO2 in the blood. Absolutely no evidence in their support, but for some reason, sounds right to them.
So things like the Bohr effect, even though they're studied in medical school, I guess they're just mentioned as an exotic, mediocincrency, not something that's clinically relevant? Yeah, but the way they teach acid-base regulation, it becomes so hard to conceive and calculate that doctors seem to be boggled by the effort, and so they get things exactly backwards. I looked at some of the studies that were published on people that ended up in the hospital with COVID-19, and vaccinated or not, doesn't matter, but every single one of them had something called the high anion gap.
In other words, they were basically in various stages of lactic acidosis. Isn't that something that's basically so basic and so obvious that needs to be treated, yet I haven't heard any study or even doctor discuss the fact that most of these people are dying basically from metabolic acidosis, namely low carbon dioxide and high lactic acid? Yeah, there are two or three studies that show you can turn off lactic acidosis just by giving some carbon dioxide. It just goes right to the source and turns off lactate production.
Ray, can you comment more on the starvation, the third world country thing? I feel like people are generally incredulous to thinking that's a possibility. With the store shelves actually going bare now, maybe it struck some people. Also, on top of that, possible weaponized mess immigration and things like that, maybe people will take it more seriously from you, but in the next few years, there's not going to be a walk in the park. Can you maybe explain what you think might happen?
The Indian experiment in digital currency starved basically everyone that didn't have a bank account when they outlawed currency. That I think was sort of a trial of how to do it and do it under more control. Gradually, they'll tighten up the availability of real currency, get people more dependent on their banks, and then gradually squeeze the money supply to the point that the poorest people die at the highest rate.
So they'll create this problem of the starvation and things, and you think that obviously a lot of this is leading to the digital identification and the central bank digital currencies and things like that? It has been created deliberately going back to the green revolution. That whole thing was a fraud intended to centralize the control of food, giving Monsanto and the fertilizer companies absolute control over food production in the world.
Not to increase the food supply for the world in general, but to make it cheaper for the industrialized countries and out of reach of more and more of the farmers who are producing it. I find it quite ironic that Monsanto and Bayer and other large chemical companies that the green movement used to be their arch nemesis and they were protesting against them and even bombing them in the 70s and the 80s and the 60s.
Now they're actually on the same team because they're part of this agenda of sustainable development, and for some reason, the irony is lost on the people that are protesting that their arch enemies are being put in charge of creating their food for the foreseeable future. Yeah.
Wait, were you able to identify precisely when the CIA, etc., started to use the progressive liberal stuff to their advantage? I know there's a clip of Gloria Steinem, and she says she met with the CIA and she was expecting them to be a bunch of right wingers, and she was shocked that they were very much – I know these words make basically no sense these days, but they were more liberal. So was there some conscious decision to shift towards that, you think? Oh, definitely.
The Congress for Cultural Freedom supported the right wing socialists throughout the European and other cultures, and the Students for a Democratic Society and the New Left, so-called. Those were all CIA progressive movements. And you think maybe 50 years in the future, if any of us are still alive, we'll find out about MKWoke or something? Something similar? Find out what? MKUltra or MKWoke or something like that, about some project that they were funding all these bizarre weirdo people to influence the culture? I didn't recognize the MKWoke.
I was making a bad joke about MKUltra, like a project name or something like that. Oh, oh. I don't think there needs to be a coordinate. All they have to do is pump them full of SSRIs and unleash them on society, and they'll take care of the rest. Great stuff. Okay, Godre. There's a novelist lawyer, I think he's probably still alive, named Cummings, who wrote about the progressive politics of the CIA and how they probably even were responsible for keeping Mandela from being shot fairly early,
because that would have turned the people who could claim to be progressive, would have forced them to come out against apartheid. They were manipulating the progressive world by not letting Mandela get killed. Mandela gave an interview in the early 2000s. Somebody from the audience challenged him, said, "You're a CIA asset." And he said, "In order to survive in the apartheid prisons in the 1950s in South Africa, you had to be CIA, or you had to play both teams, otherwise you stood no chance."
Okay, moving on, and please interrupt me if there's more to say. I just had some random questions here, and then we can get on to the questions from people that watch this show. But Ray, I think something you bring to the table is that you bring this kind of artistic aspect to science, and I feel like what we're living through is the ultimate expression of science without any art to it.
In your estimation, how important is that if an abutting scientist or something, how do you merge two worlds together of art and science, something that you represent that's sorely lacking these days? If you try to investigate the nature of the epistemology behind or supporting science, you run into absolute junk. The most trivial sort of arguments and beliefs are behind the reductionist type of so-called science.
If you try to follow up the cultural influences between, for example, the acceptable kind of science that's taught in medical schools and is in medical journals and supported by the government and industry, it is just essentially flaky kinds of gossipy arguments, absolutely no attempt to have a sound basis of knowledge. Anyone with contact with reality, that's called an artistic orientation.
If you examine your experience and the causes of your experience, you're doing the fundamentals that should be behind science, but it's considered subjective and artistic rather than the foundation for any kind of a true objective science. When you look through J.C. Bose or Albert St. Georgie or Hans Selye or Otto Warburg or all those people that you know that maybe you aggregate and you express in your own work, do you find a through line of artistic expression in their work as well? Yeah, and humor is something that is lacking in ordinary science.
They can't afford the amount of truth that's needed to experience humor. I think Albert St. Georgie said he wasn't shocked that people were alive at all given how harmful the environment was. No, he wasn't surprised that they were sick. He was surprised that they were alive at all given how bad the situation was. But yeah, you can clearly see that in his writing that he's like a renaissance man. He has lots of different interests and things like that.
I hate to pick on him, but Trevor Marshall, wasn't he like a computer analyst or something like that? He kind of expressed the opposite. An electrician, electrical engineer. The most practical but the least intellectual of the engineering specialties. And then when – not to beat the dead horse here – but when you're reading their work, can you sense those things relatively quickly of how somebody is presenting something, whether they're an artist or kind of an analytical type?
Yeah, that's what spending a few years studying literature and linguistics does. You can detect hot air after the first two or three sentences. I think assertiveness is a very dead giveaway when they're telling you something that's 100% truth and there's no – there's not even a tiny room for you allowed to question it. Yeah. Yeah, a level of – do you think the sign of pathology would be the excessive abstractness or mathematization of a particular field?
In other words, they're saying here is the golden rule and nobody can change it and that's the way it is. Yeah, exactly the kind of mathematization that involves digitalizing everything, making things computable. That was one of the deepest hidden principles of the deep state was to support the digitalized reality behind science and math. No analogs of reality because those are interpretations and allow participation. But the most authoritarian kind of reasoning comes from the computable, absolutely digitalized, purified kind of symbolic manipulation.
Symbols are ultimately without meaning because the meaning is always tending towards fullism and combining categories. Bertrand Russell I think was the first person to verbalize that distinction and he essentially decided to stop doing philosophy when he saw that to a common sense person, Leibniz had the right approach, a holistic approach to everything. Like the philosopher said, I am I and my circumstance. Every time your circumstance changes, your identity changes and computability starts out by saying no, we need language free of context, absolutely contained within the symbols.
And it turns out that you've at that point exactly lost all possibility of knowledge. So what do you think somebody like Chomsky or von Neumann would say to the already proven, even mathematically, that reality is non-computable? How would they continue to defend their argument and push forward given that it cannot be computed? He would say your mentality is so inferior you don't belong at MIT. Even though it was Kurt Gödel who proved that or like Einstein who proved that, they would have no call saying this to Gödel or Einstein.
When I ran into Chomsky, I was a linguistics major in the late 50s and I saw what he was doing as probably the most evil man in the world at that time because of the thoroughness with which he said that language is a matter of abstract. Abstract categories that are born into us, into our genes. Just like Conrad Lorenz said, it's right there in your genes and can't be changed. So Chomsky and Dawkins would make great conversation partners is what I'm guessing. I don't know if Dawkins ever went to such extremes.
Were you in the same room as him? Did you hang out with him or were you just talking about introduced to his work? No, I was in Ohio State linguistics program and a professor there said with your odd ideas, why don't you go study with Chomsky? Okay, this will be an interesting segue but ever since we talked about it last time, people have been saying, have Ray talk more about synchronicity.
And so does William James' radical empiricism and the idea that things are never static and they're always changing, does that have anything to do with synchronicity? Undoubtedly because it's the way things are and you can't recognize synchronicity if you aren't open to reality. But does that, is there some level of predetermination in that? Like, oh, I'm supposed to be here, the universe was guiding me here to have this conversation with you guys right now. Because that's more of a religious idea, right? That things are all predetermined?
Yeah, I think there are probably things like the formative principles, the morphogenic fields and so on, that incline people to put themselves in certain situations in which coincidences become more likely to be recognized as productive discoveries. I've noticed that routine is a great way to destroy synchronicity or at least greatly decrease it as an experience in everyday life. Conversely, being spontaneous and doing things on the fly, so to speak, tends to increase such events, at least for me.
So I think it has something to do with the way the person's individual consciousness resonates with the rest of the environment. And when you're under artificially set rules that make you behave in a certain way, you can't resonate with the universe, or at least you don't experience it. And that impedes the learning process. Does it sound about right? It's actually right. And then last, kind of more random question, but, and I know we've talked about this multiple times, but maybe just to cement it here.
Incandescent red light or a kind of a multi-wavelength light versus a single wavelength. And I'm bringing this up because people sell those single wavelength devices for such an extraordinary amount of money. And if they could get an incandescent light, which would be superior, that might be a good thing to bring up. And then maybe you mentioned that the single wavelength might actually be harmful in some way. So can you maybe talk about that a little bit? Yeah. The systems are, if you analyze the physics of what electronic and optical resonance consists of,
it instantly goes beyond physics because physics doesn't want to deal with the mechanisms of what the fine scale of resonance is. And the specific frequencies are something that just never existed in nature. And so the whole system is experiencing something new when you hit an absorptive molecule with a single frequency that causes it to resonate. The fine structure of the resonance is always going to be something unnatural and unique. And the difference just hasn't been studied enough to be sure that it's even safe. There isn't enough skepticism about what pure red lights are doing,
but there is data showing that it can make cancer grow for the incandescent or sunlight type of absorption and resonance. No one has ever seen those effects from a full spectrum. Okay. And let's do a short advertisement here. Okay. The newsletter, your newsletter, Ray, is available by email now. It's $30 for 12 issues. I'm going to mess this up again. Over three years, right? Yeah. Right. And then they can email the same email, [email protected], to obtain your books. And so you still have physical copies of some of these, right? Right.
Yeah. Somebody was mentioning they purchased one of your books on Amazon for $100. And so I didn't know if that was... They probably got it cheaper. I've heard worse than that. Well, good to know. And then do you have any idea what stock is on hand? Like which ones are printed? The one that we ran out of first was generative energy. And one we have most of is mind and tissue. And I think there are still copies of the female hormones and progesterone in orthomolecular medicine. Our chat is really out of control today.
Okay. Okay. And Progest-E from Ketogen, you can email Catherine to purchase that at [email protected]. And each bottle contains 3,400 milligrams of progesterone. And you know, Ray, people, a common topic on this show is liver problems, whether non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, etc. You know, and I know you're not shocked that a lot of people experience poor liver function. How is progesterone helpful specifically for the liver? By optimizing the degree of excitation of cells. The same transmitters that cause brain damage, excitotoxic glutamate, for example, will cause excitatory damage to any other cells such as the liver.
And estrogen and PUFA and the glutamic acid range of excitants, those are all defended against by progesterone. And progesterone favors thyroid hormone production. And so the energy increase adds to the stabilizing effect. Thyroid deficient people have all kinds of liver malfunctions including gallbladder disease. And that goes with elevated excitability of the ducts and the gallbladder itself. And progesterone relaxes those spastic reactions to low thyroid and high estrogen. And then I have a paper I think it's calling like low thyroid could be a pseudo liver disease basically.
And so what the liver obviously needs lots of energy to perform all its functions. Is that the basic pathology of that like the hepatocytes cannot function properly without thyroid? Yeah, the liver's energy is a large part of it is used to regulate both environmental toxins and to balance the hormones. And so when your thyroid is low, if you're exposed to pesticides or high estrogen for example, your liver doesn't have the ability to inactivate and excrete those toxins and so they accumulate.
And so if you are fasting and failing to energize your liver, you accumulate those harmful substances that tend to be stored in the fat or are constantly being produced by stress tissues such as estrogen. So fasting like low thyroid function leads to general systemic poisoning experiences from the environment and intrinsic estrogen and hormones get out of balance. Thank you for that. And I feel like I had one other question about oat bran. People are asking me how do you make it?
Do you have any special process for making oat bran? I know that's a complete non sequitur. For making what? Oat bran. Is there anything a person has to do specifically for it? No. I think whatever tastes best for you is good. I like to add a little bit of masa to it. It gives it a rounder flavor, sort of like tamales. Amazing. Okay. Will Georgie interrupt me at any point? We'll get into the questions here. Okay. Could you ask him about dietetics as a form of political control? He has spoken about this previously.
But I would love to hear resources recommended. Is there any books he recommends on the topic? On dietetics? Yeah, like people eat beans and rice for a reason. I think maybe that was from Nutrition for Women a long time ago. Yeah, the Diet for a Small Planet was popularizing that, making it a political issue that you should economize by making the foods overlap and so on. It's a possible diet, but they neglect the toxic aspects of focusing only on the exact nutrient content of food.
You have to look at the social aspects of it, and especially the toxic components of a high-vegetable diet. And maybe, I can't remember, maybe in Plato's book, what was it called? Didn't he talk about slaves eating bread and crackers and stuff like that? Food as a form of political control goes back really far, correct? Yeah, the Spanish enslaving the Mexican Indians and South American Indians put them on a minimal diet of basically beans and tortillas, and saved money that way, and weakened them, and prevented rebellion because they were too weak and depressed to defend themselves.
Wasn't that also one of the major techniques of the Christian missionaries that went into these indigenous tribes and they convinced them that together with the religion, they're sinners, they need to repent, that's why they need to eat these crappy foods, and that way they were weakening the local population and making them much more easy to take over, to subjugate. Yeah, they were the political wings of the Spanish empire. And then just to wrap this up, didn't Henry Kissinger call food an instrument of national power or something in his famous Kissinger Report?
Like they've known that they could use food to control people for a long time. Okay, next question here. Thank you for that Georgie, thank you Ray. Does the act of lying and dishonesty have anti-metabolic effects? Does true physiological coherence require radical honesty? Yeah, the awareness of what you're doing, the culture doesn't encourage that sort of thing, but the person with excess energy is going to maintain a high degree of healthy animal coherence,
and that includes a big control of what take in mentally and physically. They will be opinionated by their needs and preferences rather than by learned principles. Thank you for that. Sorry, I'm like dealing with the chat at the same time, I find this conversation really obnoxious. Okay, Deborah says, "Please discuss intuition, or maybe how it relates to the metabolism. Would a person have better intuition if they had a higher rate of metabolism?" Yeah, probably. A hypothyroid, tired person has a very limited repertoire of thought processes.
When your energy is high, you will cycle through different states, deep sleep, deep relaxation, and high intensity conscious activity. Those cyclings will take you through a variety of attitudes and experiences, and going from one to the next gives you a broader perspective. Out of that bread, you can put together things that would never occur to someone who is staying on an energy level. Wouldn't intuition be just a way of measuring open-mindedness, which is a surrogate itself for metabolism?
Yeah, open-mindedness in the sense of a certain amount of going out of your self-curiosity, looking for things to perceive, a sort of desire to perceive, leads to novel perceptions and novel intuitions. Maybe what we talked about a long time ago, you have your cultural consciousness and then the animal consciousness. Is the intuition more part of the animal consciousness? Yeah. Thank you for that. Okay, can he talk about abiotic oil? Oh, yeah. Mendeleev was the first one to notice it, I think.
He dissolved iron in sulfuric acid and noticed an oily film appeared on the surface, and it smelled like petroleum. He gave samples to people who were experienced with actual petroleum chemistry, and they identified it as resembling particular natural exudations of petroleum from the earth. So the idea that iron dissolves carbon at a high level, and when it decomposes in acid, it spontaneously synthesizes that carbon. That was around the 1850s that he noticed that. And it was a long time before anyone else started following up on it.
I'm pretty ignorant to this. This is the idea that the earth is creating oil, right? And then the powers that be say it's running out or something like that? Yeah. I think the geologist's consensus is still that the center of the earth has a very high concentration of a fairly heavy metal like iron. And the capacity of that iron to dissolve carbon amounts to vast amounts of potential petroleum. So you would expect it to constantly, as the iron reaches new conditions, volcanic action pushing it in the chemical reactions,
then you would expect that vast amount of iron to be releasing more or less steadily a huge supply of petroleum-like molecules according to what Mendeleev observed. Did you see the news that they found these oceans of oil and liquid methane on one of the Saturn moons? I think it was Enceladus. It was one of the planets orbiting Saturn as a satellite. And basically, even the article in the popular press, I think it was newscientist.com or whatever the website is,
it said, "Hmm, that kind of throws a wrench into the whole theory of dead dinosaurs being the source of oil." Because either dead dinosaurs were roaming Enceladus or the Russians were right about the abiotic oil theory. Yeah, I ran into the Russian research following up decades after Mendeleev made his observation. And they were doing calculations showing that the fossil fuel idea of petroleum really has no basis in science and that it's extremely probable that it's a natural geological consequence of this gigantic mass of iron or other heavy metals.
Do you suspect a political nefarious motive here in pushing that theory about the fossil fuel origins or was it just stupidity? Yeah, fostered stupidity. The oil companies want to maximize everything they can squeeze out of the public in the process of selling their oil by making them fear that it's running out. So they can charge higher price? Yeah.
Are you familiar with the – I think Shell had popularized carbon footprint. Maybe it was around before them, but they had turned that on the public saying that the climate change was the public's responsibility and not the oil companies. Have you ever heard that before? That's a general principle that the companies aren't responsible for anything. They're just serving the public. I just thought that was hilarious that carbon footprint was popularized by an oil company. It just doesn't get more ironic than that. Okay, thank you for that, Ray. Okay, where am I here?
Ray's mentioned considering artistic movements according to their energy and context. Is there a particular movement in painting or literature that he considers especially positive? Well, it's the alertness factor. When it's used to point out truth that can only be perceived easily that way, I think that's the real value of painting. It shows up occasionally in very different styles, but you can tell that the person was experiencing reality in a very complex and constructive way, and the viewer gains something from seeing that complexity that someone else perceived and represented.
It's like a subtle historian noticing things and writing about them and allowing a new perspective on what's going on in the world. Thank you for that. Okay, next question. Does randomness have a place in our universe, or is everything just interdependent and can be explained? The special place in our universe is that a doctrine of everything being random has been used to control whatever it is you want to control. The science doctrine wants to say that all change is random, otherwise that would mean that something in nature itself is intelligent.
That idea of an anti-authoritarian respect for the intelligence of the way nature operates, they have to find some way to get people not to trust the intelligence of life and physics and so on. So they argue that randomness is the basis of everything in the universe. Mutations are only random. Nuclear decay is only random. For hundreds of years, people have been showing non-random evidence, and that has sorted science and culture into the mechanistic, based on the doctrine of randomness, versus the holistic, more or less trusting in the intelligence of how things are working.
Amazing, thanks for that. Okay, next question here. And Ray, we'll let you go pretty soon. I think we only have a few more questions here. Okay, what does Ray think of Reich's Cloudbuster? I think he was obsessed with the misconception. Completely unrelated question, but he writes so badly about communism. What is he experiencing that maybe you would disagree with, or did he have something – do you know what I'm talking about? He writes so vitriolic about it.
It was his early experience with the Nazis specializing in killing communists and socialists and wanting to get rid of him along with the – he was activating the sex-pol, sexual politics movement, freedom, sexual freedom associated with political freedom, and that was – to the Nazis, that was considered just a variation on communism. And I think the stress of being exiled and pursued and almost murdered by the Nazis affected his judgment. At one point when he was in prison, when he heard an airplane going overhead, he said that is President Eisenhower keeping watch on me.
Definitely unrealistic judgment of what was happening in the world. So just – if I heard you right, he was equating the Nazis with communism? No, the Nazis were equating his sexual political movement with communism. They were killing pretty indiscriminately anyone with dissenting political ideas. So he didn't like being associated with the communists, and that's why he writes negatively about it? Yeah. He was put under stress by the attack on sexual politics and being lumped in with socialist annihilation.
Maybe into the surreal is like understandable given what a target he was. It sounded like he had a pretty rough life. Yeah. His interactions with Freud exposed Freud as the cultural fraud that he was. He wasn't really wanting to change anything to take advantage of the way oppression works. Do you think Freud's whole theory of psychoanalysis is just a very elaborate way of concealing what the real source of mental health problems in the population were at the time?
Yeah. Reich goes into that in detail. Freud chose to be on the side of the super-ego against the revolutionary truth of the organismic perceptions. And it's also like the key to dissolving your problems is always in the hands of this person with esoteric knowledge, and only this person can open the door to your psyche. You can never help yourself, right? You're basically entirely dependent on that person with master knowledge.
Yeah. Basically, authoritarianism and Reich was essentially anti-authoritarian. He really had an accurate understanding of – at first he respected Freud but then realized he was fraudulent in choosing authoritarianism rather than liberation. Does Freud have – or did Freud have deep state connections? Do you think he was working for people? Not directly. I think he saw where his income was coming from. It was the middle class and not shaking things up too much.
I mean some of the stuff that CIA psychologists developed as part of Project MKUltra and how to break the terrorists in Guantanamo Bay, it sounds like it was heavily based on a lot of these Freud ideas. I mean they were deliberately making people stay naked, shaming them all the time, right? All of these things have a very heavy Freudian underpinning when I read about what they did to these people. Yeah, and it seemed to be especially directed to the highly moralistic Islamic culture.
They were already an example of Reich's armored personality. Sexual oppression was central to their idea of morality. Okay, amazing. Thank you so much for that Ray. Okay, we'll get through a few more of these. Ray has almost sounded like he was against monogamy and pro-polygamy from previous comments. What does Ray think of gender relations today? What does he view as the problem? What does he view as a healthy gender relations and solution? Being in a healthy economic social environment is the first step.
The marriage has evolved from a matter of property rights of men over women and children. As those literal ownership properties were questioned, then the new problems have developed. So first you have to think about what society and economics is doing. Are you really wanting an equal partnership or is there still some kind of a financial interest involved? Rich people marry rich people and middle class people marry middle class people, and they don't like to talk about the property values of marriage, but that's still the main driving force behind the gender interactions.
Related question: How does disappearing women as a protected class, bathrooms, sports, prisons, crime statistics, and surgeries on minors serve particular interests? How do those things, how does the disappearing woman as a protected class and surgeries on minors, what agenda is that? Who is driving that agenda do you think? The same forces that create a doctrine of randomness, that the holistic understanding, the natural animal understanding of gender and interactions and who we are, that can be displaced and social rules can be imposed to the extent that you deny the reality of biology.
Denying the reality of biology fits right in with all of the other authoritarian randomness based things. If you can choose your gender, it's the same thing as having the random determination of all of your properties. It isn't going out of your interior nature. I know you're not necessarily interested in dissecting every weird, sick thing the ruling class do, but do you think that kind of blurring of the lines of gender and stuff is preparing people for their transhumanist agenda?
Basically, digitalizing society so that you can be assigned a code number or a gender role and that supersedes your actual needs and desires. I think some of the rise of transgenderism that we're seeing is basically a desperate attempt by the ruling class to conceal the radically declining quality of life of all genders. The rates of homosexuality, transgenderism, cross-dressing, whatever you want to call it, have been steadily rising since the '60s. A lot of it has to do with extreme stress in the environment, poor diet, all of these serotonergic, estrogenic drugs, etc.
This is all completely normal instead of having to explain how come suddenly we have these drastically increasing rates of what used to be pathology. Yeah, I think that's true. Just one more last thing on this. If you're consuming any of their material with what they want to do, given your understanding of physiology, is it just ludicrous merging man and machine? That just doesn't sound like it would work on its face.
No. All of this talk about finding biological compatible materials and so on, it's all phoniness. Essentially everything that's the latest news in biology and medicine, it's essentially fraudulent. Ray Kurzweil, who used to be the patron saint of transhumanism, is nowhere to be found. He refuses to be interviewed. Who is that? There's this guy called Ray Kurzweil. He used to be an MIT professor or something. He was very active and published a few books back maybe 10 years ago.
I haven't heard anything from him over the last five years. I think several of the mainstream media tried to interview him and he refused. They suspect he's of particularly poor health due to his heavy experimentation with some of the things that he was pushing and saying they're going to lead to transhumanism. It looks like he damaged his spinal cord or something like that. It's not completely clear, but he used to be the patron saint of transhumanists and now he doesn't want to be bothered by any of that.
There was a kind of funny image on Instagram and it was like, I know I'm a little bit early, but I'm also an anti-microchipper. Like an anti-vaxxer. A few more here. Does Ray believe in the renewal of life through a purgatory function of nature? Ray talks about orientating life towards regeneration of self-ordering systems, but what does he think of sacrifices of those systems for the attainment of new fertile cycles of life? It would depend on just what you mean. What you want to sacrifice.
I think that question is reminiscent to one that you got asked a few episodes ago. Is there anything worth dying for? Any idea worth dying for? And I think you said no. Whose ideas would I be dying for? And I think that, I mean, at least that's the way I'm reading the question. Is it worth ever to sacrifice oneself in the name of a new, improved system? But I mean, I'll let you answer that. To me, the answer is no, because you never know for sure who is pushing that agenda.
Yeah. The principle of fertilizing through death has its function, but the idea of sacrificing something existing for something that might develop, it's often the priests are calling on you to sacrifice for something that benefits them. I don't know if this is even in the same territory, but like estrogen rising and tearing down a structure, is that a type of, I'm using air quotes here, of sacrifice for the renewal of a tissue? Or is that too orderly, or then that couldn't be considered a sacrifice?
It's a built-in process. Growth is always renewing and reconstructing according to present needs. Amazing. Okay, let's see. I have a few more here, but I'm going to let you go. Okay, how about we end on, let me just pick one here. We'll end on this one. Can you ask him for further information about stars being conscious? No. I don't know of any source of information on that. Maybe Electric Universe? Some of the orderly signals that there have been publicizing about lately in the news, these signals that exhibit patterns that are reminiscent of intelligence,
and they're getting them from several of these stars that are light years away and whatnot. Do you think some of that may be like an indication of an orderly structured intelligent activity in those regions of space? Yeah, everything is orderly. So complex ordering exists everywhere. It's just a matter of whether we perceive and accept it or not. But I don't think it implies what we think of as consciousness. Maybe we talked a long time ago about the whole cosmos being like a gigantic organism or something like that.
Maybe that's where this question is coming from. Maybe you said that a long time ago? Yeah, I think so. The Teilhard de Chardin idea of a noosphere, that the whole thing is a calculating system. Okay, let's do, I just have to ban all these people. We got like raided in the chat tonight. Okay, last thing. Okay, the newsletter is available by email now. It's $30 for 12 issues over three years. You can order it from [email protected]. You can order Ray's books from PMS to Menopause, Progesterone and Orthomolecular Medicine,
General Energy, My Favorite, Mind Tissue and Nutrition for Women if you email [email protected]. And then you can purchase Progesterone by emailing katherine@[email protected]. And each bottle contains 3400 milligrams of Progesterone. And final last question, Ray, what are you working on right now? The new perspective on the ideology of cancer, putting it in the same context exactly as COVID and infectious diseases and the aging process and getting away from the helpless theory based on the mutagen origin of cancer. It's a disease that causes a mutation rather than mutation causing the disease.
Amazing. Ray stay on the line. Guys, thank you so much. Sincerely appreciate you guys hanging out. Georgi Dinkov, thank you so much. I won't even say any more final words here. We'll just get off. Okay, guys, thank you so much. Have a safe weekend. Ray stay on the line. And yeah, we'll see you guys again soon. Take care, everybody. Peace out. Bye. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]