Miguel has become a good friend, due to his always-smart comments on many episodes of this podcast, his help with editing and graphic design, and his insights on everything from UFOs to Mexican culture and history (which can be found at The Daily Grail). I always enjoy our conversations, and am thrilled we finally got around to recording one!
Miguel’s graphic design site, and his Twitter.
Find me on Instagram or Twitter.
To listen to this episode, plus get access to bonus content including bonus episodes, newsletters, and exclusive blog posts, please head over to Substack.
Intro music: “Brightside of the Sun,” by Basin and Range; “God’s Child,” by Selena and David Byrne; “Smoke Alarm,” by Carsie Blanton.
Chris,
Your impression of the mask-defying patriot in Walmart saying “Fuck you, I’m an American, I’m free!” made me spit out my morning coffee.
Thanks for this.
I understand that the non-masked patriot may not have the most nuanced point of view but like so much of what we are experiencing in this reality, I think it’s defensible if we are paying attention to how the entire COVID thing has been rolled out. There is a wealth of research on the usefulness of masks to constrain the spread of viruses. The research does not come up with consistent result saying that wearing of masks does in fact constrain viral spread. My reading has lead me to understand that they have no affect at all.
I have reviewed a dozen research articles on the use of masks in surgical suites to restrict the spread of infection from surgical staff to the patient. In half of the operations the staff wear masks, in the other half they are unmasked. All these studies indicate the wearing of the mask makes no statistical difference whatsoever. The conclusions tend to be, “the wearing of masks make no difference to post surgical infection rates, however, we may cause more stress in our patients by changing our methodology so lets just keep things as they are.”
That being the case – why are we being asked to wear masks and “its just common sense they stop the spread of infection”? I think that is by far the most interesting and important question. I am not certain of the answer but experience and analysis leads me to think we are being asked to acknowledge that those who authorize such things are the ones to be believed. The scientists vetted by the CDC and WHO are the ones who know. Those who disagree are unqualified and/or conspiracy theorists (this includes Nobel Prize laureates). The other intention is that we show compliance and acknowledge that yes, we are compliant and shall obey.
This whole pandemic (now labelled an outbreak by the WHO) does not smell right to me. I think that once again, we’re being played.
The reason the wearing of masks to deal with this current health problem has turned into a controversy is not so much the fault of scientists, but because political pundits are using Science’s methodology to their advantage, just like they did with Climate Change or the effects of cigarettes.
Science is not about getting the answers we want whenever we want them. To gather enough evidence so we can say with confidence what’s exactly going on with a virus that’s so new and different than anything we’ve encountered in the past, takes a lot of time and a lot of research. But because of the urgency of the situation, scientific journals are rushing to publish COVID-related papers that, in other circumstances, would have required a whole lot more scrutiny and peer review.
Take for instance the controversy caused by a paper which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on June 11. The authors were a professor of atmospheric sciences and a chemist –Mario Molina, a Mexican scientist– who is an expert in the behavior of aerosol particles in the atmosphere (Molina won a Nobel prize for his work involving the effects of CFCs in the ozone layer). The paper concluded that the best and most effective public policy for stopping the spread of COVID-19 (in conjunction with social distancing) was the general use of facemasks.
Now, several epidemiologists took a look at the paper and immediately called for its public retraction. Mind you, not necessarily because the conclusions of the paper were wrong! But because these scientists objected to the methodology employed by Molina and his colleague, and to some of the premises they employed. There’s also the fact that oftentimes scientists of a certain field don’t like it too much when scientists of a different field stick their noses in ‘their turf’ (for instance, some of us remember how Dr. Robert Schoch was treated by the archeological community when he used his geological expertise to conclude the Sphynx’s age is much older than what is currently agreed by current historical dating).
But because face masks has turned into a ‘hot topic’ in countries like the United States, Brazil and Mexico (all ruled by populists presidents who feel that wearing a mask makes them look weak) their supporters point fingers at the controversy generated by papers like the one published by Molina et al and they yell “AHA! YOU SEE, THESE EGGHEADS CAN’T GET THEIR STORY STRAIGHT, SO WHY SHOULD I CARE WEARING A MASK??” They used *exactly* the same tactics when they tried to justify their gas-guzzling Humvees or their two-packs-a-day habit, until the evidence was overwhelming that smoking *does* causes cancer, but by then it was too late –and of course, we all know Trump and his supporters are still refusing to believe the increase in global temperatures has a direct correlation with the burning of fossil fuels and industrial activity, and think the increase in forest fires can be prevented by RAKING the leaves of the forest grounds…
But never mind the fact that –just like with tobacco and climate change– the evidence is slowly-but-surely mounting that YES, face masks *do* make a positive difference (like this WSJ article, which BTW is not exactly a ‘radical left’ paper like the New York Times: https://www.wsj.com/articles/face-masks-really-do-matter-the-scientific-evidence-is-growing-11595083298). Ultimately, wearing a mask is such a small, minor inconvenience to most of us, you’d think our immediate mentality would be to wear them, and THEN let the eggheads figure out how effective they really were once we managed to contain this thing and get back with our lives. It’s a basic a decency as PUTTING DEODORANT when you know you’re going to ride the subway.
But NO. Apparently none of us can’t be bothered to think of our fellow neighbors before our own selfish needs. Maybe that’s part of ‘the American way’ so many countries (including mine) wanted to emulate so badly, and why the United States still ranks as #1 in the number of COVID-related deaths.
You can quote your scientists and I can quote my scientists. Why did it take this virus for some scientists to determine masks are useful when the previous 40 years and numerous studies determined the opposite? Are they just doing “better” research now? I suggest, there is an agenda that their research can support, thus, new research.
If you want to quote the USA as a bad actor due to their lack of masks and general bad behaviour resulting in high death rates please explain Nicaragua. How about Sweden? This virus acts suspiciously and is refusing to behave. Perhaps there is no consistency in testing procedures. Perhaps the tests are often invalid, which of course they are.
One statistic that I will trust is the overall death rate on our planet in 2020 versus 2019. What’s your bet? Higher this past year due to the “pandemic”, right? I’ll take your bet.
I’m 70 years old and like you, living in Mexico. I’d rather take my chances – go to the cantena (all closed), sit in the city square (taped off) or listen to the church bells and the sound of children playing (nope, sorry they’re locked up at home). Like all of us I’ve been taking chances every day of my life. Friends and family have died just as I will one day. While I’m on this planet I choose to live. Not half a life with no restaurants, baseball, concerts or crowded bars.
What I see is brain dead bureaucrats and administrators listening to the scientists they are supposed to listen to and totally unable to make any sense of a spectrum of information. Or, call me a conspiracy theorist, they’ve been co-opted.
Guess what? I wear deodorant and brush my teeth before leaving the house. I wear my muzzle to get into the grocery store but resent every minute of my compliance. This isn’t about the minor discomfort of wearing a mask – which to me is not minor. This is about a social engineering project which most people are compliant with because they don’t want to upset anyone and, gee after all, they are just really nice people. The notion that I am a selfish person and deserve shaming because I don’t share your point of view I find dangerous and offensive.
Intensive care units are empty. Hospital wards are being shuttered. Doctors who speak out have lost their jobs and are banned off social media platforms. Our governments response to COVID is so, so suspicious.
My criticism to people refusing to wear masks wasn’t directed to you directly.
You mention Sweden, which for a long time (and by that I mean a few months, but time moves different when you pandemic) was used to criticize restrictive lockdown measures. But nowadays no one mentions how Sweden began to do far worse than the rest of its neighboring countries. Mind you, that doesn’t mean that a restrictive lockdown was a solution: appropriate testing and contact tracing were the best solutions –oh, and wearing a mask if you go outside.
And yes, unfortunately we live in a world in which is difficult to ascertain the credentials of academicians offering counterpoints to scientific consensus. That’s why so many people fell for the ‘plandemic’ hoax.
The ironic thing about this, is that by now we know that both Trump and Melania got this thing. Call it the Mother of all poetic justices!
I’ve done a deep dive into the statistics regarding Sweden and its neighbours. I recommend Ivor Cummings on YouTube who spends a fair bit of time going through the data. Sweden is doing just fine. If in doubt, ask a Swede.
My main point is that we are suffering from a deep divide based on how people acquire, analyze and interpret data. We both have access to a shit ton of data. We appear to have come to different conclusions regarding what this “pandemic” is all about. Did we acquire different data? Likely. That takes the analysis and interpretation out of the equation. What can be done?
I try to put myself in the shoes of people who cross the street when they see my maskless face approaching. For quite some time it just pissed me off. Since we had a different understanding of reality and we wore different uniforms it was easy to place each other into a dehumanized category. I’ve modified my behaviour after looking at the social media behaviour of those who take Covid and it’s spread as a very dangerous event. They truly see people like me as “Covidiots”. They are cognatively dissonate in their response to any information which would contradict their world view. So I now wear my mask strategically positioned below my chin (so I can breath properly) and when I see a masked person approaching, quickly position it to the required position. Sometimes I even get a nod of approval. I’ve conformed.
Can they put themselves in my shoes? I see that there is a virus in our communities that unusually lethal to the aged if they were infected. The virus appeared to be passed normally. It had extreme respiratory effects including coagulation of blood in the elderly infected. Media attention and panic ensued. We were told by health authorities that masks were not effective or useful. I studied the research which overwhelmingly confirmed this understanding. Then what happened? A lot of exposed elderly died. Death rates among other age groups were similar or lower than the seasonal flu. Media pushed deaths and infections. Bill Gates announced there would be no return to normalcy until the vast majority of 7 billion persons were vaccinated. I followed those observers who were recording death rates which were becoming lower and lower and lower – even though there were more postive tests.
My conclusion – we are being played. So, put yourself in my shoes. I’m a reasonably intelligent, informed individual who has followed what MSM and our minders have been doing to us for years. The Gulf of Tonkin. Weapons of mass destruction. Babies being thrown from incubaters. Etc, etc, etc. It smells so suspicious. In the eyes of the believers, I’m selfish and inconsiderate if I express my understanding through my actions.
I respect your work. One day, post madness, if I make my way to Ciudad De Mexico, I’d love to buy you a refreshing beverage or two.
You’re on 🙂
I really enjoyed the latter half of this show. I would recommend the following UFO documentary films:
1. Out of the Blue
2. The Phenomenon (which Romero contributed)
3. Mirage Men
Here are some notes for those who are interested in UFOs/esoterica:
1. Investigative journalist, Mike Sager, wrote an excellent article long-form article on Castaneda: Shaman
https://www.thesagergroup.net/?book=shaman
“Castaneda wasn’t a common con man, he lied to bring us the truth. His stories are packed with truth, though they are not true stories, which he said they are . . . This is a sham-man bearing gifts, an ambiguous spellbinder dealing simultaneously in contrary commodities: wisdom and deception.” —Castaneda scholar Richard de Mille
2. 1h 05m – I had a very similar entryway to this subject matter. It started with UFOs and then flowed into remote viewing/psychic phenomena,
theoretical physics, near-death experience, and occult knowledge. I highly recommend:
a. Joe McMoneagle – a retired career remote viewer for the US govt. who is an expert in psychic phenomena, lucid dreaming, and has had a near-death experience. He was the very first remote viewer for the US govt. McMoneagle remote viewed UFOs and has a lot to report. Namely, what we encounter is mostly bio-engineered explorer aliens in space suits to guard from our environment. We rarely see who the explorers serve. Are mostly friendly. There are different species visiting earth. Bend time/space to travel. We are all psychic and are sharing info. with one another unconsciously. We need to stop monitoring radio waves and instead focus on psychic communication. Excellent presentation on remote viewing, evolution, and aliens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17JlNRPKOGI
b. Stephan A. Schwartz – Expert on consciousness and one of the founders of remote viewing. Issues a daily email called the Schwartz Report that highlights and provides commentary on global trends. Stresses intention focused awareness as well as making life decisions based on well-being. Good interview with Chris on TS although they get pressed for time and are not able to discuss consciousness as much as I had hoped.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLuYiLWZjO-s__xfcKHNa8EYx3jg8DJ6N8&v=avbsEEz98Ck
c. Jacques Valle – The godfather of ufology. Author of several books UFO books. I would recommend Messengers of Deception, The Alien Contact Trilogy (especially Confrontation), and Forbidden Science 4. Vallee has indexed alien contact throughout time. Helped develop the internet, and venture capitalist. Has also documented “the dark undercurrent” aka govt. infiltration of ufo groups and govt. misinformation of UFO media. One of the few good ufologists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLuYiLWZjO-s__xfcKHNa8EYx3jg8DJ6N8&v=avbsEEz98Ck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9pR0gfil_0
d. Leslie Kean – author of an excellent book on UFOs encounters documented by govt officials. Author of another book on near-death experiences/consciousness. Has broke into the mainstream with New York Times articles on UFOs.
e. Dean Radin – Consciousness scientist. Author of several books on consciousness, which he has proven with years of scientific-based research.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-DOXie3FmI
f. David Bohm – Theoretical physician. One of the most significant physicists of the 20th century.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-jI0zzYgIE
g. Max Planck – Another great theoretical physician. The possible inventor of quantum mechanics. Believed that consciousness is fundamental. Heavily influenced Stephan A. Schwartz
h. Mitch Horowitz – Author of several books analyzing and defining the occult and paranormal. Seems to be moving into UFOs. Charismatic speaker. Henry Rollins work ethic.
i. David Biedny – former ufologist, podcaster, and experiencer of the paranormal. One of the few good ufologists.
http://atlanticcoastufos.com/shatteredrealitypodcast.com/david-biedny-shattered-reality-7/?fbclid=IwAR1FFUTNSPR3-4KItxTfNlAWiL1Bnpm02YzVuddvFdqlDIXcPWjPoFlyJZg
3. 1h 06m – a lot of poltergeist activity is the result of people with latent psycho-kinetic abilities. Usually it’s unknown to them and manifests when they get furious. Carl Jung and Lyn Buchanan are two such people with this ability.
4. 1hr. 27m 45s – Interesting theory. I think Vallee has the best hypothesis on UFOs:
Vallée proposes that there is a genuine UFO phenomenon, partly associated with a form of non-human consciousness that manipulates space and time. The phenomenon has been active throughout human history, and seems to masquerade in various forms to different cultures. In his opinion, the intelligence behind the phenomenon attempts social manipulation by using deception on the humans with whom they interact.
Vallée also proposes that a secondary aspect of the UFO phenomenon involves human manipulation by humans. Witnesses of UFO phenomena undergo a manipulative and staged spectacle, meant to alter their belief system, and eventually, influence human society by suggesting alien intervention from outer space. The ultimate motivation for this deception is probably a projected major change of human society, the breaking down of old belief systems and the implementation of new ones. Vallée states that the evidence, if carefully analyzed, suggests an underlying plan for the deception of mankind by means of unknown, highly advanced methods. Vallée states that it is highly unlikely that governments actually conceal alien evidence, as the popular myth suggests. Rather, it is much more likely that that is exactly what the manipulators want us to believe. Vallée feels the entire subject of UFOs is mystified by charlatans and science fiction. He advocates a stronger and more serious involvement of science in the UFO research and debate.[11] Only this can reveal the true nature of the UFO phenomenon.
Since this was written, Vallee has been able to study some of the metals which have ejaculated from the crafts. Romero does a decent job summarizing Vallee’s research. This is also covered in the doc., The Phenomenon.
I do think UFOs and their occupants are external to our consciousness. I’d speculate we have different species interacting with mankind. Some may be extra-dimensional and some are extra-terrestrial. It’s interesting to note aircraft/lights in the sky have been documented throughout time and spanning different cultures for hundreds of years. Many of these incidents occurred early in mankind before different races were interacting with one another and yet the broad strokes of aircraft and lights in the sky and even some of the occupants are very similar. Lastly, there have been too many incidents of UFOs for them to be fictitious.
5. 1hr. 31m 24s – Since the late 1940’s the US govt. intentionally stigmatized and shamed any military member from reporting/questioning the company line ethos that UFO’s were fictitious. UFOs were the focus of fools and the insane. It didn’t help that most military members came from rigid Christian backgrounds. UFOs fell outside their narrow world views, and their continuing re-appearances would anger them and were eventually ignored. There were a handful of military officials who were both open-minded enough and able to overpower the stigma of UFOs.
Military members who had the misfortune of a close encounter and broke rank from this doctrine saw their career suffer or end. The general public then adopted the military’s attitude toward UFOs because who were they to question the “experts” who were studying this phenomenon. Concurrently, US intelligence agencies would deliberately spread misinformation in the mainstream news, stifle civilian attempts at UFO research, or make both look nutty.
It didn’t help that most reports of UFOs were misidentifications of regular naturally occurring activity.
Some of the apprehension the military had about acknowledging UFOs was understandable as the Cold War was raging, and the US was not entirely sure UFOs were not from another country or that Russia may try and leverage the phenomena of UFOs to their advantage. In addition, the UFOs boasted vastly superior tech as opposed to the US; there was little the US could do anyway.
6. 1hr. 29m. 35s – Good point by Chris. There are too many highly credible incidents for UFOs not to be acknowledged: The Ohare airport incident, the Miracle at Fatima, the Fravor incident, the Phoenix Lights, Stephenville, and Texas, Rendelsham Forest. This is in addition to the highly credible military accounts which are covered in Kean’s book.
7. 1hr. 36min. 45s. In regards to Jung and Freud’s heated argument, it had to do with Jung’s views on spiritualism, which Freud rejected. After the first explosion in the bookcase, Jung stated it was an exterior manifestation and could happen again. Freud noted this was “sheer bosch.” Jung then psycho kinetically manifested the explosion a second time, which severely disturbed Freud.
8. 1hr. 38m. 55s – Planck concluded consciousness is fundamental. I think many forces are acting upon man, but we do have the ability to affect matter through our thoughts. How, when, why, or who can do this are being studied by Radin, McMoneagle, Bohm, Planck, and Horowitz.
9. 1hr. 42m. 27s – John Mack seemed to be an intelligent and charismatic man, but I think he got lost in the UFO enigma. I believe this was due to being influenced by Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs, two highly questionable people in ufology, especially Jacobs. Mack also relied on practicing hypnosis upon abductees, a practice he studied for one week in medical school. Mack was later fooled by UFO hoaxer, Jim Sparks. I do think Mack did good work covering and bringing attention to the Zimbabwe UFO incident.
10. Vallee’s involvement in Skinwalker ranch is covered in Forbidden Science Vol. 4. There is also a decent Netflix doc on it by Jeremy Corbell.