Kerry Cassidy: So
this is Kerry Cassidy and Bill Ryan, and we’re here with
Clif High from Half Past Human, a very interesting website, I’ve
got to say. So it’s great to have you with
us and we are Project Camelot and Project Avalon.
we just want to talk to you, basically, about your site and
about your research, and some of the things you’re
getting in the near future. And then talk about some of those
things that you’re seeing long range as well.
Clif High: Okay. You guide. It’s
entirely your forum here so you ask, I shall reply.
K: OK. To start out with, I guess the most interesting
way to start would be to explain a little bit about the technique
you’ve got going on here.
C: OK, I’ll give you the basic spiel on the thing
and we’ll go from there. And in 1994 I came across this
idea that I called “The Language Model for Storing Data” while
working for some of the high-tech… well, the largest
software companies on the planet.
And finally over time I wrote some software to support the
idea, in an attempt to mine the internet for emotions around
the idea of stocks and bonds, with the idea that, if I knew
how people felt about them, I could predict what their
reaction would be to developing news, ahead of their being
able to make that actual reaction themselves…with the
idea that this could be sold as a profit-making kind of a venture.
1997 I came across something that totally flipped my mind
about this whole idea, in the sense that I went looking for
Stanford University Network, a stock at the time, and came
across “suns” because… in terms of the fuller
energy source we’ve got for us… and noticed that
there were some really interesting things going on in the language
I was picking up.
I… From 1997 to 2001 I deduced some of the
following principals: All people are psychic. Most don’t
know it. Even if you do know it, it does not impact the next
statement I’m going to make, which is: That all humans
leak out these psychic impressions in the language that they
choose to use in ordinary conversation. And that was my basic
premise to begin with.
theory from that point was that if one could sample enough
of the conversations going on around the planet and sift
for the nuance between why one word might be chosen in an
ordinary conversation as opposed to another word for the
same conversation that basically you’d had a week ago,
then one could determine what is moving us, if you will, at
an unconscious level and be able to make some forecasts from
that in a very interesting way. Sort of an extension, if you
will, of my work, of the focus of it in 1997, which was commercial.
C: OK. So basically at that point I’m
assuming that all these psychics are out there. And I had
educated myself on language, and how linguistics works, and
how the human brain works, and all this kind of thing. Along
the way I wrote this little piece of software that allowed
me to read off the computer screen at up to 2000 words per
minute, so I was able to suck down vast quantities of text
over those years. And it led to some interesting breakthroughs
on its own.
any event, the issues about language… It turns
out that there is a nuance. We have, taking English speakers
as an example, we might know more or less intuitively or internally
the definitions of, say, about 100,000 words. Depending on
your specialty and what you do for a living at the time, technically
that might be slightly larger or slightly less. But any given
human English speaker may only use 11 or 12,000 words in any
given week. And the 11 or 12,000 words is not static from week
to week to week. It shifts.
So if we
start thinking about this in terms of set theory and fuzzy
set theory, which is part of the programming, and I wasn’t
really into the programming of it all, then you start getting
into the idea of: Well, why from
week to week to week, do some of the words within our basic
set fall out and are replaced by others?
And that was my premise that: Oh
well, that’s occurring
because of something that we are picking up as human antenna
walking around vibrating on the planet and also picking up
information just because we’re here. Again that
sort of makes sense, right?
K: But what do you mean, you weren’t interested
in the… I’m not sure. You weren’t interested
in the computer modelling side of it? Or are you saying someone
else took care of that?
C: No, no. I did all of that. I was fascinated by the
math in the language and so on. And I’m a programmer.
That’s basically where I came from. I programmed for
a software company. It’s like Microsoft. I wrote software
for phone companies, worked on some very complex stuff. Worked
for GEC Marconi and very large companies, those kind of things,
almost exclusively in the software realm.
it rose up to the point where I was working on algorithms
and computer theory, as opposed to actual software, over
the course of… I don’t know how many… fifteen,
twenty years, or something. I got to the point where the software
component of it became less and I was getting down into the
deep-sea secrets, if you will.
OK. I would say maybe the philosophical side of it began
to draw you more.
C: Sure. Correct. And basically, I developed some software
that goes on out and eats large chunks of the internet. It
reads public domain stuff off of forums and other areas, sometimes
strays into chat groups. It’s not very deterministic
and it follows links, so sometimes when we set it off, we don’t
really know where it’s going to end up going in terms
of what text it’s going to eat. And that’s part
of the whole thrill of it all, if you will.
a serendipitous approach to this because we tell the software,
which are called spiders, to sit
on this server, open up this one web page, go and find any
key words on that web page that we tell you out of this list
to start with. And if you find those words, read back a certain
number of words and read forward a certain number of words,
copy that, do some stuff with it, and if you find any links
in there, well, have at it. Go follow those and do the same
thing down there.
it would go and eat some net and move and read more web pages
and keep going and going and going. And I think we’ve
got a 256 limit on how deep it can go, in links, before it
has to unwind and come back and go on to the next stage. So
it can get some huge amounts of text out of here, on the order
of, usually, about 90 million leads.
And a lead
is a construct that we use, where we have 2,048 bites fore
and aft, if you will, of the key word that it found. It constitutes
a lead, but it also brings back the context of where it found
that. In other words if it’s in a gardening
forum, if it’s dating, car repair, whatever. And some
other information, these kind of things...
K: But in essence… This
is something Bill and I had been discussing, asking each
other whether or not you actually were feeding it key words
that you were looking for.
C: That part of the process is extremely unique and
I don’t want to go too deep into it because it actually
is the real key to the thing, I think, and it’s a trade
secret. We do have a seed list and we do have a seed list of
300,000 forums to begin hunting in. But, no, it is not deterministic
in the sense of data-mining where we say: Go on out and
count the number of times you run across, you know, tire or
wall or bridge or something. It doesn’t work that
C: OK. Basically what it’s doing is this here’s
a long column of what we call context. These contexts can be
thought of as the name for a larger group of words. And you
might give it 30,000 of these names to start with. And one
of them might be forward or energy and we
tell it: OK, take the word energy out of this long list
of 30,000 words, go over and read the entire context that we’ve
got associated with that, and store that in your memory.
And that itself might be 30- or 40,000 words. And then
go over to this website and see what you can match out of that
in the following manner. Make sense?
It sounds even more complex than I originally thought.
Bill Ryan: What that tells me is that, instead, what
you’re doing, actually you’re looking for significant
correlations. Is that a better way of looking at it?
C: Correct. We’re no longer… We don’t
actually even look at the words, the words themselves. The
whole thing was written in a… The spiders and so forth
are in a much more deterministic software language called C,
and some Perl script. Most of the processing is done by Prolog.
But the Perl script will go through and do a match and replace,
if you will. And from the time we actually find any of the
words we’re looking for, from that point on, really all
it deals with is a four-digit text number that we assign to
And that’s just so we are not dealing with the word
itself, but we are indeed… Perhaps you heard that the
government has this… the US government has this software
out there, that says: Hmm, this fellow dialed that fellow
on this phone number, or He sent this fellow an email, and
it tries to develop up the concept of networks from it, right?
Who’s talking to who. Not about what, but just who’s
talking to whom.
we actually heard that, you know, they do use key words,
C: Oh sure. Sure. But basically what I wanted to come
back to was that Bill’s correct. Actually we’re
not looking for the words per se, nor the count of them, or
anything but the relationship between that word and other words,
because we’re looking for the nuance.
B: I can understand how by taking this very dated snapshot
of the web you can find out what’s happening now and
what people are looking at now. But how do you target
specific points at a future time, and a specific future
So we send the spiders out and they go out and they find
out that oh oh… They get real excited
and they come back and they tell us that somebody’s using
the word “jack”, like: I’ve jacked my
old lady’s car. OK?
think about that word… and basically a lot
of this was all down to slang anyways to get the idea across.
We look at… We’ve assigned… Let me back
I got a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary in
the form of a lexicon, just a list of all the words, way back
when in 1994 or something, about 300,000 English language words,
right? And I started assigning values to these things in a
numeric way to assign emotional relationships to them, so that
I would say, you know, that this word fear has an
emotional relationship to trembling, to stomach
clenching, and all the other various other ways in which
fear impacts the human body. And then I assigned a numeric
value to those that indicated the duration of that word fear
impacting, or that particular word impacting, on the body,
if you will.
So that anxiety had less of an impact on the body
instantly, but may be longer-termed duration than fear, because
fear may be instant, and you may literally empty your bowels
and piss yourself. But it may only last a few minutes. And
then: Phew! Boy, that train just barely missed me! And
blah blah blah. But after a few days it’s gone. On the
other hand, anxiety may dominate your life for decades. Does
that make sense?
OK. So, to assign a value, what we did was, we had on each
and every one of these words, we assigned what we called a durational value.
In other words, how long does this word, at its core level,
have an impact on your particular future?
be three days, some might be three months. And so in the
case of slang, usually the impact is short, immediate. It’s the intent of slang to get across a new emotional
context that usually has much more greater immediacy, because
your father’s words are old and staid and they seem to
have a longer duration and they don’t really reflect
what’s happening right now.
And so when we assign values we took that kind of thing into
account. So, thus, legal language has in fact a long term value
on it. So when our spiders come back, we say it came back on
such-and -so day, found such-and-so word, and such-and-so word
has this length of duration. And we plot that on the calendar.
K: OK. But it’s the relationship between… And
when you say you actually tracked it in time, that was a value
judgment on your part.
C: Correct. It’s
K: And it was based on a relationship between words
to each other and to life as we know it. In other words, it
was subject to your interpretation of what it means to, you
know, as you said, a value judgment basing… saying fear
may last a shorter time than anxiety. That could be an interpretation.
C: That is an interpretation, not a could
be. I know that this thing is entirely self-centric.
What apparently makes it work is that I’m not particularly
egocentric and I’m somewhat of an empath, so that I’m… And
I’ve been knocked around on the planet all over and
exposed to all kinds of people and all kinds of languages
and understand basically the emotive nature of how cross-cultural
archetypes work. And then I’ve done a lot of research.
As I say, I educated myself in this in some serious ways.
So, yes, it is an interpretation but it’s a very educated
Did you do this on your own? Or did you have partners that
you worked with?
C: No, no. I sat around and typed all this stuff up
and all the software noodled on it over… from ’94
to ’97, when I first started really getting serious about
setting down the data. I happened to be running some servers
and doing something else with those servers, and I had some
spare processing time here, so while I was sitting here in
my little office I got serious about it and started the whole
process off then. It took from ’94 to ‘97, basically,
for the ideas to gel and for some of the programming to get
B: How about other languages? Because the Chinese might
be talking about things that are different from what we’re
talking about in the western world.
C: Sure, they do it in different… and in fact,
different alphabets. Alphabets, to transliteration, to translation
- all of this really impacts. So we’re doing more than
just simply English language at this stage although we are
English-centric because that forms the core of our lexicon.
We could of course have millions of words and millions of languages
but we’re not up that far.
basically a garage operation with myself and a fellow that
has agreed to go by the name of Igor who is my server slave
and goes out and manages all my servers while I manage all
of the rest of the operation. And it’s just a, you
know, basically a two-man operation on this end and George
Ure is our public face and really about all the free information
that we want to give everybody in the sense of what we’ve
got. And that’s kind of where we’re at.
K: Well, this is really fascinating because when you
gave us access to this information, I was actually delighted
by the sense of the absurd and also the warning at the beginning
of your interpretive reports, in other words, where you’re
actually linking up what seem to be key words or key
a storyline that might follow, where one event may follow
another, and then putting it in a sense, in time. But you have a huge disclaimer at the beginning
in which you actually say point-blank to people that: You
could be considered crazy if you actually take this seriously
or follow it.
C: That’s quite correct, and we have to do this.
This is for entertainment. We’re in a litigious society.
The fact that the Universe chooses to put any kind of
substantiation behind our words is not our fault. We can’t
be blamed for any part of it, failure of accuracy.
me point out that we recognize we’re in the
forecasting business, which is shading into fortunetelling.
And on the other side of that range you have prophecy, and
that we’re gonna get involved with all those kinds of
emotions. And we wanted to be very clear about this.
We’re not doing prophecy here. We are forecasting, but
since forecasting, honestly, is future-telling, there is one
sin in future-telling and that is accuracy -- good or bad.
If you’ve very accurate, that’s a sin. And if you’re
not so accurate, that’s a sin. And so we had to be very
careful to sort of tread a certain line, relative to the times
we live in.
But we’re not out there bullshitting people. You know,
we charged a lot of money to get into our reports to start
with, and then we cut the price by three-quarters if you decide
to stay on as a continuing subscriber. And we’re running
model actually relates to what used to be known as “private science,” that ran in the 1800s, where
people would get together on a subscription basis to fund a
scientist doing a particular project. And they got the benefits
of that before any of the public did, but they had no right
of ownership of it. And that’s kind of how we’ve
decided what the model is going to be here.
we’re a pirate ship in the sense that we’re
a democracy. We make enough money to survive. We’re not
after wealth. If we ever got to the point where it was sustainable,
and fully funded, we’d just give it away free.
fact of the matter is, we have very high costs in bandwidth.
We’re eating up huge amounts of electricity
with servers. And so on. So I think I might fit into middle
class in the United States. My server-slave Igor works doing
this job and then two others just to keep himself and his future
K: OK, but it also looks like there was a certain level
at which you wanted to kind of be a “gatekeeper” over
this information, to restrict access on a certain level, because
it was, or could be, you know, taken as very potent and/or,
you know, I don’t know what you want to call it. You
said the word “hot” when we talked in a conversation
earlier about certain issues. And the barometer for getting
in is just raised really high.
C: Yes. And that’s quite deliberate. A) We needed
a lot of money to start with, and we need it every month, just
on our electricity and bandwidth costs, so we must raise those
funds to keep going. The other issue is that we did not want
to take funds from… Everything on this planet is in
a state of flux. There’s no such thing as a fixed point
in anything, so we have to look at things like a Taoist or
a Buddhist, where everything’s shading from one into
the other. And it’s, really, what part of the circle
are we looking at?
in the future-telling business. We do forecasting and some
parts of that, you have people over there, you know, for
Wall Street, etc., doing a very piss-poor job. And then on
the other end of the spectrum you have individuals that you
have to watch out for, that are prophecy addicts.
really bothered me. I didn’t want the karmic
debt or interaction with those persons, that because of their
age and circumstances, are in the position of wishing to spend
their Social Security money on reading prophecy. And we shade
close enough to that that they might think that that was the
case. And so we were very deliberate. And if I could afford
to set it higher, I would have.
K: OK, that’s very interesting and I picked that
up. So what we’re looking at here, and I know that this
is why we brought you onboard for the moment to talk with you,
is that you had made some very interesting, I don’t know
if you use the word “predictions,” but predictions… what
seem to be predictions… about your data.
OK, your forecast around the month of October. And because,
as Camelot, we have been inundated with information about
the month of October from various deep-black sources, including
some intuitive information that we ourselves were getting.
have, I think Bill would say, 13 data-points that all cross-correlated
with the month of October, which is very unusual in what
we’ve been doing for the last two and half years,
which is collecting testimony from whistleblowers and truth-tellers
around the planet.
of that, we wanted to contact you and just have you maybe
describe, as you have done on other shows, what you’re
getting for October, and then kind of maybe try to drill down
a little bit, based on what we are getting.
information for October is part of a context that
we’ve been picking up for a number of years relating
to what we call “The Death of the Dollar.” We started
talking publicly about “The Death of the Dollar,” I
think on July 4th, 2007, but we’d actually been picking
it up in the data a number of years before that.
a tendency to see, to find, really big events showing up
years ahead of time and it takes us a while to sort through
everything and really get a handle on what was going on. The
closer we get to the event, the more data-points we get within
our source that allows us to get a broader picture. So, at
this stage, we’ve got a pointer that said we would hit
a sort of an emotional plateau.
Bear in mind that all of our stuff is basically built around
a numeric representation of what I think human emotions
are, relative to certain words, and I’ve used that
form of input for that as well. We had this data stream that
said that around 9/22, around the 22nd of September, we would
reach a point where, from there until the 27th, we would have
an emotional plateau of some high level of what we call Building
And Building Emotional Tension is
the state we’re
in right now. And everybody who’s worried about the market
knows exactly what that feels like, and what it does to their
digestion, their sleep, etc., hair falling out, and so on.
So, it’s probably pretty self-evident.
And we then had data that suggested that there might be a
little tiny dip from 9/27 until October 7th in terms of the
amount of that building tension, but it was basically still
on that same plateau.
on October 7th.… And I chose…well,
you know, the Universe moved me to choose it, I chose ten minutes
after 7 in the morning, UTC time, which makes it ten after
midnight my time here on the Pacific coast on October 7th would
be the point at which we would slip into what I call Release
Release Language is
where everybody is letting out the emotion, as opposed to
letting the emotion in, in effects on their body. They just
can’t take it any more, and
they’re expressing that emotion. Good, bad, or indifferent,
they’re expressing it. So release has to do
with expression. Building has to do with input.
And we’re going to get into a period that goes from
October 7 until… Now the new data run is showing it
moved into about mid-March of 2009, pretty straight-forward release language
that entire period, with no little stair-steps, if you will,
in the building-tension language.
to be said that mostly life is up-and-down, up-and-down,
you know, good days/bad days kind of thing in our giant collective.
We rarely…and in fact have never since 1997
seen anything in the models that looks like what’s gonna
happen in October, from October through the first part of March.
K: And to make people aware of what you saw during 911… You
didn’t see such a long release period, if I remember
C: No. That’s quite correct. There was about 6
days of a fairly precipitous release following 911 and then
there were three or four days of less steep release. And then,
basically on the 11th day following 911, we were back into
that stair-step building period. We’d already, if you
will, absorbed the emotional impact of the event and were starting
to respond and build emotional patterns to cope with it all.
So if we
look at the two in a comparison the…not the
level, not the intensity of the emotion, but the duration of
the emotion, is many, many, many times longer than what was
felt after 911. But that isn’t to say that it’s
gonna be emotionally as intense that way continuously.
That rarely would happen, I would think. It could, but it just
doesn’t seem to be too likely.
K: OK, but what about the actual event itself? In other
words, was the 911, I don’t know, “spike” if
you will, matching the spike that you’re getting
on October 7th? Or is it much higher for October 7th?
C: It doesn’t work that way, OK? Because our data
can’t be compared exactly from 2001 to now, because in
the nature of our programming we’ve refined our technique
So we have
to state that right out, that we’re kind
of in a sense like a doctor that discovers a new disease, and
then over the course of time gets really, really good at diagnosing.
And it spreads out -- everybody gets really good at diagnosing
the disease. And all of a sudden you’re seeing statistics
showing that this disease is everywhere. And it’s just
simply because we’ve been able to look at it with a sensitization
to the process.
So we can’t make a direct comparison that way. Nor can
we say that there’s going to be a particular event at
7:10 in the morning UTC.
That’s what I’m saying: That my model-space, with
the best granularity I’ve got, shows the whole planet
starting to shift over into release language.
indeed be an event, and I’m kind of expecting
something, but it need not be either visible on the global
media-screen nor particularly intense at that stage to start
the process off because we’re at such a huge level of
could be as innocuous as someone showing up at the LIBOR
Bank early in the morning to go to work and the door being
locked and the key broken off in the door such that it takes
an additional four hours to get in. And LIBOR doesn’t
open when it should. And a fiscal tremor goes around the world
that crashes the whole financial system. See?
K: So it could be a rather small actual event, is what
C: Correct, correct.
what it portends, or what it results in, is of very long
Because that door was not locked. You know, for want of a
nail the horse was lost…
K: OK. I know that you said that, if I remember correctly… Like
on Rense, you talked about that there were actually proportions within
the actual event…
C: Yes, that’s
there were military a certain amount, economic a certain
amount. Can you explain that?
C: Correct. But that’s
not within the
event. That’s within the state of the model-space at
the time the event occurs.
mind, see, we don’t do prophecy. We construct
a highly quirky and weird little interface in time in a model-space
in the computer and then advance it tick by tick by tick and
watch as it makes changes. And then, on top of that, we have
to look for something significant.
we’re seeing is, at the point at which this
trigger event or precipitating event, however we think about
it, occurs, the emotional tension balance is about 48% economic,
shading up to about 51% at the moment, but that may back down
by the time we get to October 7th. And then about 40 to 45%
military. Then the rest is what we call Terra Intrusions,
which is really Earth changes kinds of things, hurricanes,
that sort of deal.
when you say it could be a small thing that lasts five months
in duration, it could be triggered by a tiny thing,
K: It could be something … I’m
could be a calamity.
it could be a virus for example, could be a release of a
virus that at first is actually not even noticeable.
C: I suspect that that won’t be the case in October.
If that’s the case, the virus has already been released,
because what’s gonna happen is, the language shifts
at that point. So somebody starts talking about something at
that point. Now, whether it’s a whole lot of people talking
about it…? Make sense?
K: OK, but there’s also, correct me if I’m
wrong, but it looks like you track what looks like “trends” in
K: Because I’m
noticing that some of your key words are things like revolution, transformation, duality.
they are meta data layers. Those are not key words.
is that we build our model-space. It gets all sliced up into
all these various different entities, and then over time
we allow the Universe to give us words to populate ‘em.
And it turns out that over time whole lots of words that all
fall under the context of Revolution showed up in
the markets entity, and showed up in our representations of
the populace of the US, and showed up in global populace representation,
and so on.
are not keys words. We don’t go hunting for
those. Those are derived contexts. And those are showing
up serendipitously. Rather, the data is coming back that nicely
and neatly sorts, in all of our entities, into those categories
that are headed by those words. And I sure hope that was understandable.
K: Yeah, it’s
kind of like packets.
K: OK. But I’m also interested in the way you’re
looking your data, such that you’re interpreting your
data. Do you find that looking at it changes it?
C: Yeah, Heisenberg… No, I don’t believe
so. I don’t believe it… If you’re talking
about the Heisenberg Principle of Uncertainty kind of thing
in the immediate scene, no, I don’t believe that that’s
the case. Undoubtedly at a quanta level there’s some
of that going on. Now, if you’re asking: Because
we see this, will the Universe change? We don’t
know about that.
K: OK. What about the idea that you’re… I
mean, somehow I stumbled on your information quite some time
ago, although I didn’t remember it as being associated
with your website. Then when you re-emerged, and you started
to be, you know, sort of have more of a media profile, if you
will, which seems to be even lately…
Let me tell you why that is.
C: All right, let’s divert here for a second.
Our model is built in this software called InteliCAD InteliCAD
is an artificial model-space, if you will, for drawing virtually
any kind of an object in a CAD sense – computer-aided
design. It turned out to be very handy for us because we can
expand it at will.
our problem is that if we have people read our reports and
then cut and paste the text out there, when our spiders read
their own words, then it’s considered to be self-reinforcing,
and we spiral down, and everything goes to hell in a handbasket
real quick. So we have to be very careful about who reads our
reports so that we don’t get ’em out there cutting
and pasting this stuff wildfire, because we end up spiraling
down and we can’t do anything.
to help prevent this I developed this software. In late 2001
I started working on it and it went through 2003 and I finally
got it working and we called it MOMS. And that’s
the Model of Model-Space. And basically it’s
a representation of OUR work within the model-space, separate
from the model itself, a rather abstract, kind of screwy idea,
but it works very well.
there, we model ourselves, for instance. And along about,
let’s say December of 2006, basically MOMS started
being able to put out some forecasts for us.
means I’ve got to divert for a second and
say that my particular approach to reading these forecasts
is based on sort of a non-western style of thought, and so
I started taking them seriously. And I thought to myself: Hmmm,
wonder what would happen if I started harmonizing with what
MOMS says might be in my future?
And that’s where we are now, because MOMS suggested
that it was a good time to get on out and “capture” October
7. So I said: OK, MOMS, I’ll do it.
K: So in sense you’re
running an experiment within an experiment.
radical linguistic experiment, correct.
C: … can
the future be altered?
K: But going out there, that’s actually… gets
back to my question. For example, you’re talking to us
K: And we have quite an audience out there. And
they’re going to take this onboard and add this to the
rest of the stuff we’ve been telling them. And, in a
sense, that could act upon the event such that either it won’t
it may be modified in some form or fashion. Is this…
it could also be totally transformed.
understand that release language could be good of bad. Release
language, for instance, might happen on, early in the morning
on October 7, because some idiot pushes a button and starts
off a nuclear bomb. Or releases a virus. Or does some other
Release language could also happen because 25- or 35- or 100-million
people wake up that morning and say: I’m not gonna
take this shit anymore. I’m going out there and stand
there until they arrest that guy. And something changes.
That kind of release language is different, but it’s
nonetheless release language.
K: But are you able to tell the difference when you
look at what you’ve got, that it’s positive versus
C: Positive and negative have an interesting
connotation within our work, and within the lexicon and within
language itself. And a lot of it is culturally based.
how about constructive versus destructive?
C: Destructive. Yes, we are able to tell that. And at
this point in our reading, in terms of how we’re going
through the data, the release language from October 7 onward
is not what anybody would consider to be pleasant, so you may
want to put a deconstructive nature on it. It’s something
that we must go through. Let us understand that.
is a horrible, terrible, brutal thing in which lots of emotions
and people are shed, but it is a positive thing in the end.
Good, bad, whether they win or not, the revolutionary means
is positive. But it brings along with it a lot of brutality
and excesses and so on. But you’ve got to get that out
of your system, just the way that we must have the
coming crash in the economic system, which will start on October
seems to suggest that, regardless of what the trigger event
is, over those next five or six months the economic system
goes from really, really nasty now to something we don’t
want to even describe.
K: That means that things like… I’m gonna
ask you here… Things like food shortages…
specifically because you track English more than any other
language, is it focused on the US? Or is it because the US
keeps coming up? Because people do speak English all over
the globe and on the internet.
C: Rather the latter, and because everybody is so focused
on the US, mostly hating us, or denying that hate, if you’re
inside these boundaries, that all those emotions are focused
on the US whether you’re in the Amazon or you’re
in Pakistan or wherever. So, yeah, we have a tendency to be
US-centric and I frequently apologize to our international
readers. We just can’t help that.
K: So what you are seeing in the future, at least in
the next 5 months, linked to the October 7 economic situation,
is that it’s dire now but it’s gonna be something…
C: Brutally true. OK. This weekend we’re putting
up a new report that continues to refine that, because we’re
getting in new data. In the market descriptors, the market
section there, we’re gonna be describing it as brutally
transformative. In your lexicon, what would that mean?
C: Well, that’s the return of the… over
time, not instantly, but the return of the equitable balance
of population-to-resources. Here we currently have a situation
where 6 percent of the population on the planet is using 28
percent of the biota. That six percent had better get down
to 6 percent, because that’s what’s gonna happen.
And any of the ramifications from that is all speculation.
have food shortages? Sure. Will we have rationing on everything?
Sure. Exactly where and when? That’s speculation
at this point. But it’s actually occurring as we speak.
K: OK, but in five months’ time
it will become brutal or unheard-of and then continue from
C: OK. Imagine yourself right now in the United States,
just a walking-around, regular kind of a guy, and five months
from now you’ll be opening your eyes. Many of these people
will be encountering huge amounts of cognitive dissonance
because it will be as though they’ve walked out of their
house to just after the collapse of the Soviet Union and they’re
living in Russia.
is this a rise in chaos?
So are you tracking chaos itself?
do have a chaos subset of contexts, yes.
And are you seeing a rise in chaos that continues up to and
C: No. Our data sets is… As a rule, we start
losing granularity at about 19 months. That’s because
of the nature of language, that most of the language, for instance,
that might impact your particular life in any given week that
would extend beyond 19 months you don’t use. You would
rarely use language that had that level of duration. So granularity
falls off after 19 months.
So we did
have some spotty bits of information and we’re
starting to put together this new entity that we’re calling FuturePop that
is gonna be about the populace that will exist in about 2018
and what they’re gonna be doing.
are curious sets of inconsistencies that are appearing around
2012, and that’s probably because of the emotional
response that everybody has to it. But it could very well be
due to the biospheric conditions that we’re all gonna
found a really interesting point that was recurring in some
of these reports, which was talking about, in essence, what
appeared to be a battle with aliens.
C: Oh sure. Yeah, we’ve got really strange stuff
in there that suggests, for instance, that we’re gonna
go through a summer of hell in 2009 here in the US that will
precipitate a seething anger and so forth into actual bloody
revolution. AmRev-2 we’re calling it. But it’ll
just be part of a global wave of revolution against what we
call The Powers That Be.
This is also coincident with a meta-data layer that we call Secrets
Revealed, where events of revolution goes on. Certain
institutions will be captured by the populace and the data
will be released that’s been hidden for hundreds of
years, which then starts its own set of threads and means
about revolution. They’ve been duped.
we go forward in time through 2010, we get into the area
where we’re starting to get what we call Alien
Wars… information about 2011.
has to be understood, that the granularity out there is very
sparse. We don’t have a whole lot of details.
It does appear that this is not some kind of false flag operation.
It also does appear that humans are involved at many different
levels, not merely at a shooting level, but also as perhaps
some kind of a prize level, like, you know, we’re
what everybody is fighting over, that kind of thing.
You talk about human body parts, etc.
C: Yes, exactly. Yes. Well, that’s
actually coming from the release of all the Russian and other
UFO information around the planet these past few months.
Once that hit all the various different language boards,
it really started coming out as to how many of the crashes
they had found human body parts catalogued in.
K: OK. And just to come around to the election, because
we briefly talked about that. You said you don’t dial
in on personalities, but you do dial in on incidents that seem
to be… or the trends around those events, such that
you talk a lot in your papers about confusion around the election
C: Correct, which I think you’d have to agree
we’re entering into. The Republicans are confused as
to with why McCain is doing whatever he’s doing. And
everybody’s confused about the economy, and it’s
all affecting this. And McCain’s even confused about
whether or not he’s gonna debate [the first scheduled
national TV debate with Obama] and it’s getting more
confusing as we go forward.
have information that seem to indicate that McCain could
drop out due to health before the… actually near
the end of September, but really before the 15th of October.
But it doesn’t necessarily mean that…
we’ve already seen some of that language fulfilled.
He has withdrawn. He announced that he withdrew.
It was from the debate, not the campaign. But he suspended
his campaign. So the word campaign came in there,
and it was due to the economic health of the country. So it
was sort of a quasi-hit. The language we’d seen a year
ago to that effect about this time actually has started to
And that’s… George Ure calls this a rickety time
machine. And he’s got a real good point. There are big
gaps in the technology. And it’s not like it’s
foolproof. And this is why we really have to worry about all
these people that think it’s prophecy and it’s
gonna be written in stone. It just does not work that way.
When we’re right, we have a tendency to be absolutely,
spectacularly right. We refine it over time. We’re getting
better as we go forward, so maybe we’ll be a lot more
right than we have in the past. And in the past we’ve
actually done, we think, twice as good as chance should allow.
In that sense, maybe McCain will withdraw
finally. In itself, it might not be good, etc., etc, increasing
confusion. And we’ve been talking about the fact that there’s
just basically the dominant word is confusion around
the election, and we’ve been reporting that since January
of this year, but we saw it since probably June of last year.
K: OK. One thing that I’ve
noticed is that you actually were talking about McCain dropping
out [of the first debate] and yet I think today in the news
I actually heard that he has now decided he will debate.
C: Sure, sure. That’s what I’m
saying. The stuff we get is not written in stone. What we
saw was the appearance of language that said: McCain / withdraw / campaign.
Now we didn’t know that there would be other words in
between there because of the nature of what we’ve encountered.
Beyond that, we didn’t know that there would be any supposition.
Now, also we have to acknowledge, time is kind of strange.
McCain may yet withdraw from the campaign as a whole
and all of that language together was what we saw even though
it was strung out over a number of days.
K: So it sounds like when you find language that matches,
an occurrence occurs, in a sense it’s kind of like solving
the crossword puzzle, or in a way it’s almost like the
Bible code. The words themselves…
C: No, no. I would skip the Bible codes business, because
the Bible codes will work on any sufficiently long text. And
even if you were to unscramble our DNA and just put it out
there, the various key letters, the Bible codes will bring
back what you think might be meaningful. And that’s not
how we do stuff.
is true that there is a… This is not deterministic,
and we don’t know exactly how time will work out. And
there is some… a whole lot stuff about this that we
just don’t know, that we’re learning as we go along.
We’ve had new postulates form over the last couple of
years, which we sit down and noodle on this stuff, and they
appear to be reasonable theorems at the moment.
And one of the postulates is this idea that there is bleed-through.
And the idea of bleed-through is best illustrated
with the Sumatran tsunami, which occurred at the end of the
year. At the beginning of that year we got the words for 300,000
people dead or killed or missing / a nation pushed back to
a previous age / large earthquake / and electric-driven water.
And then we also got words that said courthouse emptied
due to the earthquake / famous personalities scrambling around
due to the earthquake as they scrambled out of the courthouse, and
so on and so on.
beginning of the year we couldn’t tell that it
was two separate events, that in that year the Scott Peterson
trial in California would be emptied due to an earthquake and
all these famous lawyers and stuff would go scrambling around
with all the media, as they all emptied the courthouse building.
And then another six-plus months would happen and the 300,000
people would be killed or missing and the nation would be shoved
back to a previous age.
K: OK, but in this case you actually didn’t
get the name of the nation. Is that right?
K: OK. And you also didn’t…
C: And that’s
California in the Scott Peterson.
C: Correct. And that’s deliberate because… See,
here’s part of our problem. On the internet we’re
not actually after conscious language. So we don’t
go out and count the number of times someone says California
and match that up and say: OK, the earthquake’s gonna
happen in California. We can’t rely on that stuff
because geographic references are so frequent. And we can’t
rely on someone saying numbers. So we work on archetypes.
correct. Just like this year. We knew there was gonna be
a large earthquake. I sent out a warning to our subscribers.
George Ure put it on his urbansurvival.com site some 36 hours
ahead of the Chinese quake. We knew there was just gonna
be one great big whump of a quake. We had no clue as to where
it would be beyond certain boundaries. And we refine this
next time we do an earthquake predication… which
is for December 10th through 12th. We think there’s gonna
be two very large earthquakes. They’re not necessarily
in the same place on the planet, but they could be. We have
some references that we seem to think are valid for the Pacific
northwest, where I live.
have some references for the band of latitude 32 degrees
north to 36 degrees north, which would cover places life
California, Japan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, etc. And that’s
the best we can do at this stage.
you emotionally affected by your work at this point?
C: I tell ya, I’m
a depressed bastard, no question about it.
C: Seriously. Oh yes! I have to work at… I’m
very diligent at maintaining an appropriate mental attitude,
at maintaining my health and those things that are important
to me, and shutting off the rest of it…because it is
extremely depressing stuff. And I don’t report a quarter
of what we actually end up seeing.
K: What’s your, I don’t know, “hit
record” at this point, would you say?
C: Well, I don’t
know. I mean, we hit 2001. We had everything but the terrorism word. We had military plus accident,
and so on. We got anthrax attack. We got the Columbia
space shuttle disaster. We got the disaster, the accident to
the Greek athletes prior to that Olympics. We’ve gotten
the quake for China. We’ve gotten another wedding quake,
subsequent quakes in Indonesia we picked up on.
been very accurate with economics. Some of our subscribers
made a huge amount of money because we told them about the
Brazilian oil fields to be discovered about 8 months before
it occurred and they bought in on Brazilian oil-hunting companies.
So, as I said, we figure about better than chance. About half
of what we say ends up manifesting in a way that we can say
hit it by time or the language descriptors. And eventually
probably about 55% of the language ends up showing up even
if we misinterpreted it.
Bill, did you have any questions that you wanted to run by
Clif at this point?
B: It’s been more interesting than [laughs] some
of the interviews I’ve heard because it’s focused
on some of the methodology and the technology behind the forecasting
which I and many other people find very, very interesting.
The details have really been covered elsewhere. What’s
also interesting, I think, to many of the people listening
to this, is that you’ve given some indication of your
own personal involvement in this.
in essence I have to, because MOMS
had suggested that there were some unique things that may be
linguistic experiments to be tried here at this particular
point in time. And I’m willing to try that because the
potential for gain outweighs the risk.
to be quite honest, we are at that huge crux from now on.
From October 7th onward we won’t return
to the emotional levels that we’re at now, in a positive
way, until beyond 2012. George Ure and I have decided that
if we’re still here in 2013 we’re gonna get together
and party like it’s 1999.
This is interesting, because you actually said there would
be a five month time after October 7.
what you’re now saying … you’re
actually saying there‘s a place that we’re at here,
emotionally, that’s actually we’re gonna go down from
here to 2012 -- for the next four years?
C: OK. Up / Down. You really shouldn’t
phrase it that way. Just like Buckminster Fuller used to
bitch at everybody, because there is no up or down on
this planet. There’s only closer to the center of the
Earth and further away form it. An in and out kind
of approach. So let’s not use pejorative terms like up
or down because that implies certain things.
the emotional tonalities that we’re living
at the moment, especially those tonalities associated with
words like normalcy and nostalgia, and all
of this kind of thing, will not be seen again. From October
7th onward, we won’t recover those, as near as I can
tell in my data.
And it may well be the case that, you know, those things that
come along, such as the global coastal events, subsequent magnetic
shifts, and perhaps even a crustal shift and the destruction
of most of the population on the planet, may indeed be the
reason for that.
I have to say that the biospheric degradation, and the changes
in the solar system, the magnetosphere, the heliosphere, etc.
etc. all tend to support the idea that the language is spitting
out to us, that the bizarre days ahead are -- however inconceivable
-- are basically our destiny.
gonna live through some of the strangest times that have
certainly been around on the planet for many thousands of
years. And on the other side of it, those of us who pop out,
we probably all ought to get together and say Whew!
K: So in a certain sense, you’re relying your
entire model on the “psychic-ness,” the intuitive
psychic ability of people when they’re speaking.
C: Yes, in a certain sense, because they don’t
know that they’re leaking out these changes. And I have
some, if you will, “hidden” knowledge that tells
me that that’s a pragmatic way to go. And that
hidden knowledge comes down to a whole series of enlightenment
events I’ve had over the course of my life, and that
have got me to where I’m at.
I’m self educated. I didn’t go to college for
linguistics. I don’t have degrees in any of these things.
I taught myself to program. Anything I’ve created I’ve
done on my own this way with the assistance of those in the
universe around me. And it has chosen… the universe
has chosen to provide me with some enlightenment experiences
that set my frame of reference outside of what we might think
of as “normal.” And that has aided me in this ability
to do this.
K: That’s evident in what you write. And, you
know, I have to say that we’re very lucky that a person
such as yourself came up with this sort of modeling technique.
C: OK, there we would disagree, see, because I don’t
believe in luck.
universe wanted this to happen and it created this way so
this confluence of events is precisely…
virtue of who you are, this is why it was created the way
it was created.
Exactly. The universe said: Well we
need this thing, you know, in this time, so let us start
altering and working on this particular human. And,
by the way, before I incarnated I checked out everybody and
said: Oh that would be an interesting life to live,
and plopped into that human. And here we are.
K: [laughs] OK. I think that that’s really great
and I happen to agree with that perspective. One thing that
I’ve noticed about reality is that in many ways when… if
you want to track it, we are aware of what’s coming because
in a certain sense it’s already happened, because time
is actually not linear.
K: So I think that that must also be influencing what
you’re talking about when you say, in a sense, that most
people know. It sort of invades their language, if you will.
Their consciousness is revealed by their language and their
choice of language.
C: Yeah, it actually ends up being… As we say,
it leaks out. Even if they wanted to stop it, I don’t
think they could.
K: Exactly. They can’t help it because they actually
do know. It’s actually true that we actually do know
and therefore we choose, based on our knowing, without knowing
that we’re doing so. Or at least some of us.
also have to work around the limitations of the human brain
relative to that as well, because the human brain has
been engineered to perceive time in a linear fashion. And at
the same point, the mind is non-linear. So there’s
that kind of like duality, both/and, juxtaposition kind of
stuff there. So there’s sort of a bleed-through both
ways within the individual.
And then, because most individuals are in a state of denial
about the true nature of reality, it expresses itself, as we
say, in the bleed-through or the leaking out of the psychic
K: But there’s also the levels at which you experience
it. In other words, when you’re talking about this modeling
technique, in a sense when you’re in one sense of the
mind, if you will, where you’re not being linear, then
it’s actually not a problem because you see the long
range and you sense that this is actually gonna be good in
the long run although it’s gonna be difficult to go through.
K: But if you’re
in a linear state...
rather frightening, yes. You feel trapped there.
K: If you’re in a linear state, you tend to sort
of “Pavlov” into the fear mechanism and so on.
C: Right. And, you know, the Taoists say that an ordinary
person sees everything as a curse or a blessing, and the aware
observer or the enlightened being or the sage, however you
want to label ’em, sees everything as a challenge. And
that’s quite true, because “good” and “bad” are
labels we apply.
people that are trapped in the linear view of the world are
indeed subject to this up-and-down, up-and-down, and they’re suffering greatly at the moment, especially
on this economic stuff. And they’re gonna suffer even
worse in the coming months and that’s expressed in the
language that they’re pre-saying now.
all of our words, our whole language actually encodes all
of this information. It’s just layer upon layer upon
layer that could just drive you crazy if you start me off on
Because … Pre-saying, pre-sage, fore-cast … look
at the roots of the words, the etymology of how all this evolved.
And you see that we’ve been doing this for countless
generations. And our own language, taken from ourselves, encodes
deeper levels of meaning than our conscious mind is aware of.
And I’m not talking about the funny fellows that’re
going out doing reverse speech and trying to find hidden information
and stuff like that. I’m talking about just linguists,
and what they know about how closely connected our particular
expressions of language, no matter what language we use on
the planet, and DNA. DNA itself is a language. And it starts
tunneling in, and you start getting all these cross-connections.
And you end up with a view of the universe that says: Hmm,
wonder what people are saying today.
K: Right. Well, that’s
actually very good. In a sense, for an example, if you say death, it can
appear to be very limiting, but if you say release,
you’re actually talking about death but it’s from
a very positive point of view.
C: But I’m not into sugarcoating anything. I come
from a tradition that is… I’ll be flat-out about
it, it’s Aikido, and I follow Osensei‘s metaphysical
approach to things. And that relates all the way back to what’s
known as The Complete Reality School of Taoism.
death is death and needs to be treated as death. And it’s… Positive or negative is someone’s
personal view of how they’re going to deal with that.
And all death is traumatic and painful until the moment of
separation and unconsciousness. It doesn’t matter. And
there are “positive” deaths, you know, good / bad.
I’ve been involved with a lot of deaths and the after-death
experiences of people. And it’s… You gotta face
it flat-out. I don’t like sugarcoating.
except that you, you know, you yourself are using this word release language
and it’s kind
of, there’s something about that…
C: But that’s
K: …that is… Actually, as you’re
tracking, each word does contain an emotional connotation and
actually the nature of the word release has within
it certain enlightenment aspects.
And release is in the context of...
If we go into our death context within our model-space,
you’ll find the word release in there, but release
is being taken at a broader and a different context in this
case where we’re just talking about the expression.
could be. And there’s nothing to say that all
of the fearfulness, the wave, if you will, the big bubble or
envelope, of people being afraid of the mega-death that is
coming is expressing itself in everyone worrying about pandemics
and all these other things, as well as people worrying about
the kill-off from The Powers That Be.
probably, in the nature of our work, a giant level of future
knowledge. The fact that we’re afraid of it,
the fact that we’re discussing it, the fact that we’re
actually involved with those words at this time tells us something
about what’s coming down the next few years.
other words, a sort of a self-warning.
Well this has been very, very interesting and I can see how
you can really go down a rabbit-hole [Clif laughs] as far
as layer upon layer…
K: …and getting into this. By the look of things,
do you think that, for example, and I know in a sense you maybe
haven’t been at this long enough, but is it possible
that you could be looking at an event and a whole, you know,
structure of things, that actually suddenly could shift or
change and go in complete opposite direction to what you thought
it was gonna be?
C: Oh sure. We’re wrong all the time. That’s
why I say release language could be good release language -- Hooray,
hooray, the parade’s passing -- or bad release language,
you know -- Oh how sad that the dog died. That kind
of thing. Right? So release language is neither good nor bad
but we could be certainly misinterpreting it.
have from October 7 until sometime in the end of February
that everybody could be quite happy because the politicians
get it right for once, the banks cooperate, the Federal Reserve
does the honorable thing, and so on and so on and so on. And
we’re all happy with the economic condition and then
everybody lays down their arms and isn’t shooting at
each other any more and the Israelis and Palestinians embrace
each other as their long-lost cousins that they truly are.
Now you tell me if the odds favor that.
K: OK. But what I really want to know is not whether
the odds favor that, but whether or not the language and the
model you’re tracking indicates that. And my guess is
that it does not.
C: It doesn’t. No. And I believe that we would
pick that up. I don’t believe we could be on that side
of duality without knowing we were there.
So is it possible for you to say at this time that there
is a positive change or that there is an action that
people could take that would change, for example, what seems
to be a timeline, if you will, that they’ve agreed upon, pre-agreed
C: Ah… not that I’m aware of. I’m
not that smart. And I hope that that would be the case. I kind
of like the idea that maybe we could all get together and decide
that this particular set of fears isn’t going to be realized.
And that was certainly the premise of the generation I grew
up in and all of the political action in the ’60s.
it actually works at a timeline level, I cannot say. There’s nothing I can recommend. I would be very… As
I say, I’m no one’s guru. I’m just out here,
I’m more like the Oracle at Delphi. And you take from
it what you can and intrude into your life with it. And some
people have been successful at doing that, and others haven’t.
So, you really don’t want me to say: Oh, go and do
x, y, and z. And I don’t want the karmic implications
but I did see a positive event that had to do with chemtrails
that you talked about.
K: There’s going to be an event such that it’s
gonna clear the skies, you even said.
but that may not be positive, because
the chemtrails appear to be The Powers That Be attempting to
change the albedo of the planet and to reflect back radiation.
All other suppositions as to their activity seems to be secondary.
If they’re gone, we may suffer greatly. We don’t
know yet. Chemtrail pilots and those people that put the whole
program together may be absolute heroes, even though they may
end up killing, you know, untold numbers of humans. Maybe other
untold numbers of humans will survive and the species will
flourish because we were able to reflect radiations that are
incoming and there won’t be that level of damage. We
K: Well, let me ask you this. If… In a sense,
my understanding of chemtrails is… You’re saying
the secondary effects may not be positive, but the primary
might be exactly what you say it is. But if it’s secret
language and it’s not released, how is it that you think
you could be tracking it? Because my understanding of what
the chemtrails are doing is something else entirely, and it
sounds like you haven’t tapped into that. If it’s secret,
it’s not going to be talked about.
C: Right. But we don’t deal in things that are
talked about. We don’t count words. We deal in archetypes
and then, up through an interpretation, we apply them to what
we see around us.
instance, we’ve got an archetype of a maritime
disaster that would cause the whole United States to go into
a great sorrow. And we’ve got all of this information.
And it turned out not to be maritime per se, because
we were off in the interpretation of that archetype. And we
should have just translated it as “the ship” and
then matched it closer to reality and decided that it was the
Shuttle, the space ship.
So we did
some of these things wrong. But at the same time, we don’t
deal in conscious words per se. We deal in the archetypes
and let it bubble up from that.
understanding of chemtrails comes from the archetype that
The Powers That Be are intensely scared and scared at all
these different levels. One of the things they’re
scared about is not going into an ice age. If we don’t
go into an ice age, as in Lovelock’s book, Gaia is doomed
to go the way of, supposedly, Venus. We get extra-hot and everybody’ll
usually at this particular point in our orbital permutations
we get to the 100,000-year cycle and we go into a mini ice
age, which cools everything down, refreshes the oceans, etc.,
etc., That is not occurring at this point because we’re
lining up with the dark rift on the side of the galactic central,
and we’re getting extra radiation coming on in, which
is heating everything up. Everything from the GRBs, the solar
radiation, the heliosphere radiation pouring on in, etc., is
raising the temperature on all the planets, in spite of the
fact that, at this point in our cycle of 100,000 years, we
should be cooling down, to the betterment of the planet.
So The Powers That Be got really scared and at least at one
bespoke level of their internal fear they wanted to react and
change the albedo by putting up a radiation shield that would
cool the planet down as though we had glaciers all over the
place, as though we had gone into the ice age. They
hoped to trigger it that way.
Now, there’s also all kinds of other fears buried way
down deep in the archetype that goes to some really strange
stuff, like they’re really afraid of the pineal
gland in humans.
The consciousness of our own power. And, on top of that,
also alien invasion. And on top of that, what about Planet
X? And what are you getting in that respect?
C: The Planet X stuff is a non-starter. It appears to
be almost 100 percent disinformation from our viewpoint, in
terms of what we call SKED: Subject Knowledge Elucidates the
Domain. It’s an analysis technique. And within our data-sets
none of the Planet X material is as it is mythologically defined
within our current culture.
there’s probably large-sized asteroids, etc.,
zipping around, and even some mini-planets. But there’s
no giant dwarf star kind of thing that’s gonna come on
in and cause that kind of problem -- because the solar system,
at one point, cannot survive such a thing.
not allow… For instance, the whole mythology
does not allow for what we call quanta effects of interplanetary
kinds of material. In other words, not just gravity, but there’s
also antigravity, a repulsive force. And so, those kinds of
things intrude on the idea.
our data-sets, Planet X is within a very deep subset of what
we call the SpaceGoatFarts, in an area of disinfo. We’ve
never shown any of the Planet X info emotionally, in the
context in which we use, to come out of that category.
K: OK. But it sounds like you’re putting your
interpretation in terms of the science that you know versus
not being able to talk about the science you don’t know.
C: OK. There is that. That certainly is the case. But
absent that, the whole idea of the context of Planet X as was
originated and is mostly… most completely embodied by
the zetatalk thing… that has never come out of the disinfo
bin in our SpaceGoatFarts. Now, there’s a whole lot…
what about Nibiru? In other words, are you having problems
with the choice of language here?
C: No no no. Because we’ve got it modeled on the
various different parameters, all the way going back to Sitchin
and everything. And besides which, he’s was a very poor
linguist and mostly did a lot of bad translations on some stuff.
But the best representation of that kind of a model is a couple
of the scientists out there -- Paul La Voilette who is working
on the electric universe model etc., and their concept as to
how these small little intrusions are going to act.
So, I’m sorry, but we don’t show Planet X. We
also show all kinds of things that are current in pop culture
as falling in that bin where we don’t have an emotional
archetype that supports them outside of the disinfo category.
When you say you don’t have an emotional archetype
that supports it, is it possible that you… there is
a reason why you wouldn’t have an emotional archetype?
C: Sure. There are some artifacts within our processing
that could certainly occur. I question… We have these
debates internally, and I question sometimes whether, for instance,
we would be able to accurately predict a meteor that would
come on in and attack the planet, because it’s so far
out in left field, so to speak, that humans wouldn’t
necessarily be cognizant of it.
if we’re working on the alternate view of reality,
that we’re all interconnected in the common mind, and
our minds are impacted by every other mind etc., etc., in a
giant network, then I don’t see how anything in reality could occur
that could not communicate to that mind.
fact that I don’t particularly have a model shouldn’t
matter that much because it should reveal itself in the language,
and I shouldn’t have to root around and discover what
that is. Just for instance, I did not have terrorism modeled.
And words showed up that said military / accident / money
center / within 85 days of the middle of July. And it
turned out to be, of course, the attack on the wtc and 911.
And I didn’t have terrorism modeled.
K: OK, but I would counter that by saying because it
wasn’t perpetrated by terrorists.
C: Well, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t
matter. Everybody applied the label of terrorism
to it. So the fact that my people are applying the label
of Nibiru or Planet X or whatever … it’s applying
to an underlying context that should show up if in fact that
were some emergent basis in the fear.
In other words, we got a context, again one I had not modeled: electric-driven
water. And if I’d been smart I would have said: Force-driven
water. Hmm, what kind of force could drive water? And
then it would have dawned on me: a tsunami. But I never even
thought about it. I went the other way. I thought: Ooh,
electricity, storms, giant storms, hurricanes that happen
at the same time as the earthquake.
Well, I was wrong about that. Electric-driven water was pretty
straight-forward, but we did not have any emotional quantifiers
attached to the word tsunami in our lexicon.
Now I see you reference hyper-dimensional
physics, though, rather repeatedly in your documents
K: And I think that’s really interesting. So,
are you able to talk about things like how that impacts what’s
gonna be happening to us as we move into the galactic center?
And what’s going on with, for example, the Face on Mars,
the pyramids, 19.5, things that Hoagland talks about, for example?
C: Sure, and actually that developed because… A
few years back I started another thing, that the entities were
shifting around and we had to do some things… Like,
we had this big entity which we called Bushco, which
was the amalgamation of the Bush Administration and the Corporatocracy. And
it severed. And it came into the Bushistas and then
in the markets etc. So the data changes on us enough to force
us to look at this.
And a few
years back we started getting all this Unknown Energies from
Space business. We didn’t really have a bin to throw
it in. It was tucked into the Terror entity, or sometimes it
would show up in the GlobalPop or the AmericaPop subsections:
subsets-science, subsets-government, etc., etc.
get all these repeated bits of information that appeared
like they all wanted to go together. So we decided: OK,
let’s create a bin. And we called it the SpaceGoatFarts.
it was gonna be in that area that we’d hold
all of our unknown and officially-denied space-based,
but also interdimensional, also, you know, basically hyper-dimensional,
and all of this kind of stuff. As that data-set… As
that entity has grown over time and pulled in more and more
sets of data on its own, it’s forced us to examine this
kind of stuff and to follow some of these rather intriguing
subjects, like hyper-dimensionality.
have to say that I’m aware of all of this about
electricity since way back when. I knew about the electric
model before even getting into the work I’m in now. And
I’m also an aficionado of Buckminster Fuller’s
work that he did through synergetics. So a lot of this stuff
that is being expressed at the level of hyper-dimensional physics
has been out there in various different places on our planet
in various different formats and you could have gone out and
picked up little bits and pieces from here and there.
interesting is how many people have done just that and are
putting them all together. And then we have to ask ourselves: Why are they being motivated to do it now? Well
probably because we need to know about it now.
And then one last question and I’ll let you go
because I know this has gotten quite long.
C: Oh, I’m fine, we can chat all night. I’ve
K: Really? OK. There’s
a lot of talk about going from the third to the fourth to
the fifth dimension -- the actual Earth itself -- as a result
of the transformations that are happening on the planet.
Have you been getting information about that?
C: We may be. I have to be somewhat vague because, again,
it’s an issue of do we have it modeled correctly? In
our SpaceGoatFarts entity, we have a subset called unknown and
within that we have another subset called energy, and
it splits off into these various different areas.
to be a whole lot of information about extra energy coming
in from space. The data-sets might be reflecting major changes
at levels that might go down to what we call the ESR or the
Electron Spin Resonance. So, who knows what that’s
be able to adequately project the result of something like
the change in the electron spin resonance level across the
whole of the solar system if we get into some of these energetic
areas, in a way that we could meaningfully pick up? I don’t know. We might be getting some hints that there’s
some huge changes along that level coming up.
popping into the fourth dimension… the fourth
density or something, we don’t have any words specifically
towards that, other than we’re picking up some of those
that are coming from those people that are promulgating that
idea out there. We’re not picking up any of the archetypes
that I would suspect should arise. It doesn’t mean that
we won’t. We’re just not at this moment.
because, for example, it seems to me that maybe an archetype
symbol would be the spiral.
C: [long pause] Yeah, but that’s all tied up in
the idea of the eschaton and the singularity and so on. It’d
be awful hard to separate that from those previous contexts
and apply it.
We do see
a whole… We do see mass kinds of changes
coming in at various different levels that are affecting the
data at unexpected places. And they’re pointing to things
like, as I say, the pineal gland.
this coming report we’re gonna write about fluoride
because there’s gonna be a huge emotional wave building
in 2009 about the damage that was done to people as a result
of fluoride and its interaction with the pineal gland. And
a lot of people are gonna be very, very, very upset because
they will feel that something has been stolen from them. And
I think that what they’re going to be feeling is that
the potential or capacity for a better expression of humanity
has been stolen from them, once they know certain information.
K: Wow. OK, well I’m… Thank you. This has
been really fascinating. And I’m sure that we could go
on all night but I’m gonna let you go here.
thank you so much for sharing so much with us. This has been
very, very interesting.
Any time. And, you know, like I say bona
fortuna to us all. You know, good luck to us all. We’ve
got some hard times coming, so everybody needs to, you know,
get strong to go long.
well this has been great and we would love to check back
in with you, hopefully after October sometime, maybe in late
October or even November.
All right. Take care and thank you very much.
Thank you, bye.
been Project Camelot and this is Kerry Cassidy and Bill Ryan.
It’s Friday, September 26, 2008. Thank you
Click here for
the original audio