[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] The end of the 20th century. Millennium psychosis ruled and non-linear time really began kicking in. The nature of reality was tenuous at this time. Millions interacting in a medium beyond time and space. Within a relatively short time, the net had expanded my mind, boosted my creativity and altered reality. It was about at this time that a new purpose came to me. What we're going to do is we're going to all wire ourselves together. Digital rebirth complete, a virtual world. A world where imagination is the only border. So I imagined asking timeless questions of the planet's intelligentsia. A selected group of scientists, philosophers and artists. I think we stand on the brink of the first true civilization. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Parameters successfully passed. Neural reality network accessed. Are we evolving as a species or are we doomed to extinction? Accessing expert opinions. Right now we're at the 11th hour. Civilization as we know it is in grave danger. 99% of all organisms that have ever lived on this planet have gone extinct. The dinosaurs were very cool, you know, but they had their day. The dinosaurs were wiped out almost certainly as a result of an asteroid impact. If the asteroid hadn't hit, maybe the dinosaur would have evolved to be an intelligent creature standing on two legs with eyes at the front, more or less like us. The big question is, are we to remain a fleeting moment or are we to endure into the future? I think we're living in a time right now that is the darkest time in history and also the lightest time in history. Well, yes, we have an evolutionary future. It's just of uncertain duration. We are, as a species, enmeshed in forces that are much vaster than us. We're either heading down a road for absolute disaster and self-destruction or we're evolving to something greater than ourselves. We have our self-destruction almost programmed into us. There is disturbance of viral habitats on a scale never before encountered. I mean, that's why the Ebola is loose and why the green monkey fever is loose. It's because there's this funny revenge of the rainforest going on. If we blew ourselves up in nuclear wars, if we caused catastrophic decline of human populations through chaos, anarchy, pandemics, all the terrible things that could happen, this could lead to a catastrophic drop in human numbers and the end of civilization as we know it. Large global changes are well underway. There's very little doubt that humans have affected the composition of the atmosphere and are continuing to do so. What we're pumping into our atmosphere here on Earth, we don't seem to be easily able to remove. They're putting stuff into the atmosphere that is almost there for good. And whether we can eventually survive this way, that I kind of doubt. The degradation of our biosphere is going apace. Actually, it's not even apace because it's going faster and faster. There is an aspect of non-linearity, which many people don't appreciate because they haven't grokked the essential non-linearity of nature. The laws of nature in which we're embedded are actually undergoing some kind of a convulsive rearrangement. It's not at all linear, so we have to expect that the crisis that is approaching us now will approach faster and faster, and therefore we can't even guess how much time we've got. And in this race against time, we may very well not make it. In fact, many people believe, knowledgeable people believe, that it's already too late. I guess I don't see humans as being that important. Frankly, we're doing more harm than good. Should we not self-destruct? I think we should bear in mind that the age of science will be looked back on as a primitive, Darwinist, materialist age of man. A historical apocalypse created by overpopulation and resource abuse and untrammeled militarism and dominator politics. I think there's hope for the planet. The planet's a self-organizing system that can get on perfectly well without us. If we don't have an evolutionary future, something else does. Something will survive in our civilization, and it will remember. They will remember, and we'll learn from the accident. It's not going to be the end of rats as we know them, or bacteria as we know them, or blue-green algae, or plankton in the sea. Life has survived enormous catastrophes in the past, and it will in the future. The future of the planet is not in question, in my opinion. The only thing that's in question is the future of humanity, and particularly modern, technological, industrial civilization. The jury really isn't out yet on whether we're coming or whether we're going. Whether it's entropy or evolution, chaos, World War III, Armageddon, spiritual revival, enlightened capitalism, environmental pollution, atomic fallout. I mean, the future isn't what it used to be. It was going to be the Russians or us, and now it's just us. Mankind, nature is at our command. We can do whatever we like. We can fly, we can make greenhouses that we can live in when the air gets too polluted. We can create our own little ecosystem under a bubble. Now we're responsible for everything that went wrong here. The American dream is a brainwash. Of course, we as we are, are too stupid to survive. Humanity as it is today is doomed. That's for certain. But it doesn't necessarily have to stay as it is today. In the evolutionary leap, what precipitated major cultural bifurcations in the past? And how can we intentionally intervene in history so as to create a different future? The whole of the human genome and many other species' genomes somewhere in computers. As we sit here, machines of a very intelligent sort control enormous portions of the human, of global civilization. At this point in time, the recent computer revolution has given a huge boost to our collective intelligence. And that may lead in a short time, a matter of generations, to a completely different species that would have a future, at least have a longer future, buying time for yet another evolutionary leap. Of course we're still evolving. Everything's still evolving. There's no question that humans are still evolving. Homo cybernaticus. Perhaps new laws, new domains of potential openness are occurring as the universe ages. And complexity previously disallowed is now possible. And we are that complexity. We are nature moving out of its genetic phase, a phase under the control of chemical genes, which are physical structures, into an epigenetic phase, a phase of culture ruled by codes, transformable, culturally confined codes, mathematics, religion, philosophy, art, dance, humor. The major things that are going to influence our future evolution are nanotechnology, which is atomic engineering, the ability to engineer things from the atomic level, which is the way that nature designs things. The first rule of nanotech is thou shalt make no machine visible to the human eye. Much as I love Terence's comments and speculations about the nanotech, cybertech utopia that awaits us all, it's a few decades from now. And if we're going to make it to that place, we need to get our act together and solve a number of major problems that face this planet and our species. Overpopulation being an obvious one. Ecological destruction, wars, famines, imperialists, enslavement of the rest of the world for resources and all of these things. I mean, everybody knows there's something wrong with the world. And if you read left-wing politicians or deconstructionists or thoughtful historians, they will offer thoughtful critiques of our situation. But the question is, you know, the Tolstoyian question, what is to be done? The question is, how do we navigate ourselves past this next 20 to 40 years? And we'll either be a hyperspatial, super-technological gods, essentially, you know, or we'll be living in caves gnawing on bones. [Machinery] I don't think that a consumerist lifestyle can extend to all the inhabitants of this planet and be sustained by the planet. It's obvious it can't. It's obvious within a few years we'll begin to see oil prices going up. The whole economy, based on cheap energy and stuff, isn't going to go on the way it is. Business as usual isn't an option. The most unlikely scenario, in my opinion, is that we can sustain an illusion of business as usual. In other words, it's very hard for me to imagine 500 more years of Western history, of idiot politics, daytime TV, soccer scores. I mean, obviously, the least likely thing is that anything like what we have is going to survive. The civilization that we've got going is going to crash. Every civilization has crashed. Look at our cities. Man, what is it meant to live like that? Concrete jungles and smog and pollution and noise. Beam it down from outer space. Use solar-powered satellites. Eco-cities is my idea of the utopia, or the new-topia, and that's a new good place. Governments can't think beyond the next quarter, let alone the next decade or 50 years. If we were to place our power at the service of our imaginations rather than our primate politics, we would create a civilization worthy of the name. Things will change, but I'm afraid they'll change in response to disasters rather than through the anticipation of them. Evolution, at least a time rate of change, is faster and faster. So we have this not only runaway population density, but also runaway cultural transformation. When we reach this point where we are this globally connected entity and you can just, you know, instead of setting up your computer, you can just lay back and close your eyes and bring down the net. This is our evolutionary future. We see maybe in the next 15 minutes all the change that happened in the past century. We can't even say where our horizon is because things are changing so fast. Generations are coming faster and faster, so our evolution is a certainty. But in terms of Earth years, rotations of the Earth around the Sun or something, we don't know how many of those there will be before our evolutionary track comes to a shrieking halt. I think that humanity is in its wild adolescent phase where the unconscious self-destructiveness is surfacing at the same time that its power and strength have never been greater. And so the capacity and the power to annihilate yourself is growing at the same time as the possibility for our waking up collectively at a faster rate than ever before possible. The post-industrial, constipated, existential, prosthesis-divided creature that we are is going to crack its exoskeleton and the new primitive is going to walk out, you know, with black contact lenses implanted in the eyelids, menus hanging in space, able to access vast three-dimensional simulacrums of imaginary realities, but basically living a close-to-hunter-gatherer lifestyle in very small, localized human communities with very focused ecological and land-based concerns in the three-dimensional surround. And all artificiality will be virtual. Reality sequence complete. By the time I'd woken up, billions had evolved from citizens into netizens, fused by technology into a single consciousness. But what is consciousness? Neural reality accessed. [Music] What's popularly known as the evolution of consciousness, in other words, that the expansion of cognitive repertoire that occurs in human beings, which has always been a great puzzle to evolutionary theory, I believe occurred in the presence of a kind of catalyst for the human imagination. What is cognition? Cognition, I think, in its most basic sense is knowledge or knowing. When you cognize something, you understand it, you rock it. There may be a meta-program running of some kind here. We have what we can call a meta-self that is capable of seeing the Darwinian self for what it is. In other words, this program that is controlling the organism, the individual, to respond rather automatically to a certain stimuli. It's become important for us to expand human cognition, to expand human cognition in order to get us out of the mess we're in. We have latent in our brain, futique or futuristic states of consciousness that are designed for our future. The brain may be processing consciousness in the same way that the lungs process it. Consciousness is the ocean of life. Consciousness is the breath of life. Consciousness is overrated. I sometimes think I'm too conscious, I'm going nuts. What is consciousness? Does it mean just awareness? Like, I'm aware, I have eyes in the back of my head, I can walk downtown, I can see when there's something, a foot don't go there. God looks after me because I'm conscious. Is that the level? Consciousness is eternal, all it does is change form. People understand consciousness as subjectivity. This subject of self, we can call it Darwinian self because it has been shaped by evolution. The Darwinian self, enslaved to this chain reaction, stimuli, sensations, feelings, emotions, motivation, behavior, chain reaction, enslavement. We know a fair bit about how the Darwinian brain functions. The Darwinian brain underlines the Darwinian mind. However, we know very little about how the non-Darwinian mind functions, almost nothing. We already know from the meditative traditions and from the shamanic traditions and from religious mystical traditions, that there's more to consciousness than modern psychology departments would have us believe. The origin of consciousness. What happened here? I mean, this planet had been producing chipmunks and birds of paradise and ant colonies cheerfully for hundreds of millions of years. Without this left wing swerve into tool building, cognitive systems, energy release and so forth and so on. What happened? Why did the natural order admit of a creature as bizarre and as at apparent cross purposes as our dear selves? I mean, this is really the question of philosophy. What is our place in the natural order of things? You know, fallen angel, risen demon, prodigal scion of the elect or existential monster roving a landscape of conferred meaning. Who are we? This is the question. And so it becomes a question of why did consciousness emerge? [Music] I suppose the question that comes to everybody's mind is who am I? What is this consciousness that I have inside myself? How does, where am I in the universe? How does the universe relate to myself? [Music] Who am I? Who am I? I am the temporary expression of a gene swarm that is much larger than myself. I am a member of an animal species protruding into the phenomenon of existence. [Music] Cognition is, I don't even know that we can define that in the archaeological record. It's hard to know how you would, how you would measure cognition in objects. Like you said, art is relatively easy, but then how do you define art? God is an artist. God's the ultimate artist. [Music] The implicit suggestion being that somehow matter gives rise to mind or mind emerges from matter. But this somehow has never been explained. It wasn't really consciousness that evolved out of matter, but actually vice versa. That consciousness came first and matter evolved out of consciousness. Dualism, mind and matter equally fundamental. We have the idea that with evolution things became more complex. You developed a nervous system. The nervous system became a little more complex. It could do more things. Finally you got the brain. And then the brain evolved. It became bigger and bigger. And finally we got the human brain, the neocortex, and we had consciousness. But that is to suppose that mind evolved out of matter. But what about the idea that maybe mind was present from the very beginning? There was proto-mind. Mind was there from the beginning, from the Big Bang, from the creation of the universe. And that mind in a way is guiding matter. It's helping matter in matter's evolution. [Music] Consciousness is got to be what the human journey through time is about. I mean if the future does not hold more consciousness, then what kind of future could it possibly be? [Music] Neuroscience can measure what goes on in the brain. What brain states correspond to the mind states. Potentially within our power to induce whatever state we desire. [Music] What should our response be when they build machines that can read your mind? And that's about ten years ahead. If they think drugs are a threat, what are they going to do when there are neurotechnologies that are not drugs, but that can induce virtually any state of consciousness you want? [Music] Get control of your brain and your mind, you know. If consciousness has anything to do with anything, it has to do with experience, surely. It's a state of consciousness of objective knowledge. The Buddhists would call it, I believe, it refers to the same kind of objectivity as Vajra in Tibetan Buddhism. [Music] The Vajra consciousness, you know, the kind of diamond-like interconnectedness of all beings and things in this empty, clear, brilliant, diamond-like, pure, primordial Buddha mind. That is the real fabric of the multiverse, you know, the Buddhaverse. [Music] There are amazing insights that have come out of Tibetan Buddhism and other forms of Buddhism and out of Hinduism. But also out of Shamanism and about magical techniques of conscious transformation in different parts of the world through the use of psychoactive substances in various cultures. All of which have contributed to explorations of consciousness. Previously, these were confined to the cultures in which they happened. What's new today is that we can access them all. And if we assume that different cultures have discovered parts of the puzzle and that they're complementary, somehow being able to integrate these and learn from all these different traditions could take us further than people have been able to get on their own in the past. It hasn't happened yet, but it is one of the great possibilities, one of the great promises, I think, of the present day. I think it's the responsibility of people who have reached higher states of consciousness to be able to then take what they've learned, integrate it into their life, and then through art, music, writing, science, medicine, politics, whatever avenue that you express yourself in, to then take what you've learned from that and then broadcast it out so that you can help change consciousness around the world. Let's use the electronic advantages we have to raise people's consciousness. Reality sequence complete. I've learned a lot, but am I really more than a carbon-based humanoid? Is God a myth or is something, someone, watching it all? What is God? Genesis, day one. [music] [music] God, God, look into space, walking in the clouds, in lightning, in rain, in flowers, in trees. This is the spiritual path. God is the universe becoming slowly more conscious of itself and experiencing itself. Some people see God as a being that is separate from the universe, that created the universe. Some people see God as the universe itself becoming self-aware. Some people see God as a state of consciousness that we can all unify with. Was there a God that finds you in the universe? Were there an infinite number of universes, some of which didn't survive, most of which didn't survive, a few survived, and we're on one? Plato said, "If God does not exist, human beings will create him." I don't believe in a personal God as such, but I believe that in some way the universe is God. I think that what God really is is the universe in my, as I can see, process of becoming conscious and the process of waking up. I think you could probably say that humans invented God somewhere between 20 and 70,000 years ago. Whoever God is, and it works in a mysterious way that I have to finally just say, "Hey, I can't figure who it, God, she is," but there's a benevolent thread in my paradigm. Belief, the ability to believe. God is everything. God is everything. The impossibility of putting God into words, it's beyond words. It's the source of words. The words can't contain it. It contains the words. It's another whole level. The indescribable. Something other than our own consciousness. The repository of world intelligence. Something immortal or timeless in the intelligent sphere in which we live, which has a longer horizon than the planet Earth. I look at God as the self-organizing principle of the universe. There are many ways of viewing the concept of God. The idea that the universe is interconnected, the idea that we're all one in some sense, that every consciousness is interlinked, and that there are ways to access these states of consciousness and become unified. I think that's what people mean by the concept of God. Theosis, you know, the magnetizing of a soul toward the ultimate source. Theosis, coming closer to God. We are only as divine as we are selfless. Just being aware of spirit. That's for me, spirituality. We've forgotten that we're the spiritual being. Religion usually is the handed down exegesis of some original revelation, almost always polluted and perverted and manipulated by a cultural agenda. Mohammed said, "Trust in God, but tie your camel." I think the Christian conception of the afterlife is one of the biggest and most destructive illusions in our culture. There's only one God and the only way you can communicate with him is through us. You've got basically three options. Hell, heaven, and some in-between state for a good day. That's terrible. Simplification and a rigid schematic scheme superimposed on the infinite variety of afterlife experiences that we can all have. It's a propaganda thing. It's designed to control. If you back off of religion and you don't talk about the religious systems that are in place, and you start talking about religion, then you're talking about this whole entity, much like science as a whole, sort of culturally constructed entity. But if you think about the thing that underpins religion, frankly, the ability to believe in something that isn't rational, that you haven't thought through yourself. We have an ability to believe in things that we haven't thought through ourselves or haven't seen and rationalized all the time. Someone tells you that the earth is round and you believe it. You haven't necessarily seen it, but you believe it. So this ability to believe that underpins, in particular, I think, religion. That's the point that gives me hope, is that the theater of humanity and its drama is poised toward transformative self-realization from an internal mechanism. Some scientists are trying to account for religion in Darwinian terms, as an adaptation. Science, I think, is going to blast out of that narrow, limiting model. And when it does, when we realize that the mind is more extensive than the brain, that the brain is clearly related to the mind, but the two are not the same thing. When we see that our minds reach out beyond our brains all the time, in every act of perception, through non-local awareness, there's increasing evidence that our minds are not confined to our brains, and they certainly don't feel as if they are. Then, I think we get to a point where we can take spiritual experiences, religious experiences, much more seriously. May God mind hear my prayers and email me an answer I can understand. Meantime, back in the 21st century, can the fusion of science and spirituality accelerate the evolution of consciousness? Neural reality accessed. [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] How do things come into existence, and how do they maintain themselves, and how do they disappear? And what is the unfolding of the world as we experience it? When I look and see a scene around me, that scene is not the actual physical reality. It exists within the cyberspace of my brain. Neuro-cybernetic globalized tribe. There are no colors out there in the real physical world. There is only light, consisting of electromagnetic radiation of different frequencies. Our brains, our minds, take this light in, convert it into neural impulses, which then we build a model of, and we decode those different frequencies into different colors. We paint the colors in. We paint the green in. We paint the blue in. We paint the red in. It's not out there. The traveler is the journey. What you see is not what you see, but who you are. The most important moment shaping this moment is a galaxy of moments scattered through time, some of them millions of years ago, some of them seconds ago, some of them centuries ago, and together they create the incredibly rich, affect-laden environment that we call being a thinking human being paying attention. Nobody is given the script, you know, the day until every moment of now occurs. All time is in the present. The moment in which I speak is in the past, and the future does not exist except in our imagination. I saw time as a river. We can imagine all the way back to the Big Bang. You know, we can feel the echo from that in ourselves and in the sounds that we hear and things, just because without that there wouldn't be this. The dominant ethos in biology and psychology is reductionist mechanistic. Scientific reductionism we can think of as kind of downwards reductionism. Everything is reduced down to matter, whereas religious modernism is a form of upwards reductionism, where everything is reduced upwards to mind. Can spirituality and science be reconciled? I think philosophy is the bridge. It's not just science that creates cities, it's art, it's religion that creates cities. Religion and science are kind of parallel constructs. It's the underpinning stuff. It's the belief versus rationality. You only have to pose questions like, what was there before there was the Big Bang beginning to the universe and you're in trouble. The idea of the Big Bang, it's like a religious, it's like a test of religious faith. The great obstacle to spirituality is the lack of objectivity of seekers. Science came in, made a deal with religion, you know, we're going to deal with matter, you can deal with spirit. This fiddling around with spirits is not scientific. The tragedy of modern physics is that at the moment it lacks a place for soul in the world. The best I can do for science is just say to people, cut them some slack. The province of religion begins exactly where Darwinian adaptationist processes end. Science and spirituality are coming together now more than ever before. That's the birth that we have to do. Eventually science and spirituality will merge seamlessly, as they sort of do in books like the Tao of Physics. Ultimately spirituality will become a branch of science. We are so busy doing science, we've seldom paused to reflect about science and just what is it that we're doing. A new dialogue between science and spirituality can be very constructive, very helpful for everybody. In fact, one of the most exciting things that could happen. But it can't happen for those scientists who remain locked into this very narrow view of the mind and the brain. Science at the moment has become obsessed with the will to power, will to dominate. It's obsessed with progress, it's obsessed with control. And that is going to change. How do we create global justice? The ethics of what we're doing, we have to consciously move into the future. Because we've seen again and again the consequences of what you might call science unleashed or technology unleashed. In the world we live in generally, disunity at the moment is bigger than unity is. It doesn't really matter whether you're a Buddhist or a Christian or a Jew. The point is to recognize and respect one another's religious values and interests. And to take responsibility for your own consciousness. You can talk about morality and love and various things in religion. It helps you answer those sorts of questions. And you can answer questions about the material world and various other things using science. And so they can work next to each other. As conscious beings we experience an apparent fundamental dualism. The dualism of mind and matter. This leads many people, many scientists and many non-scientists as well, to develop an ideology that matter is more fundamental than mind. As a result, the dualism that we experience gets reduced to a monism. Scientific materialism or scientific monisms. It's one world in which I have two world views. It's one world. Science has to expand and it's limited. We'll borrow time as it is. Is there like a common denominator between all paradigms, all cultures? Is there a unity in this whole thing or not? We do, each of us, create our own universe. We can support completely disjoint ideas in our minds at the same time. And this is the kind of coexistence we have now between science and the spirit. But science could wholeheartedly and openly embrace the individual soul, the world soul, and the higher realities of the spiritual life. It could become acceptable in science and maybe even transform science into a more integrative paradigm, which would decrease the negative function of science, which is to harm the environment out of ignorance or dogmatic belief. There is no hierarchy of elder knowledge in my social vision of things. There are only people learning and sharing in a very complex environment. The control of science is run a bit like the church before the Reformation, as a sort of college of cardinals that decides what can happen. The data is never in. We have such an intolerant, narrow system at the moment that I think one way of opening it up is to bring the principle of democracy into science. It's never been there before. It's the one institution in modern life which has no democratic input. I just think this form of organization is outmoded. The data actually is in. It's a narrow dogmatic system that's now become closely allied to corporations and governments in a way that I think is beginning to do more harm than good. What is not patented is prohibited. I still believe in science, but I think it has to be liberated from its present self-imposed limitations. Event systems tend to steer themselves into cul-de-sacs and then go into equilibrium, and then they become irrelevant. It's a deeper reality than the nation-state system. It's a world without borders and a world with one ocean. Creative dreaming in the presence of technology is a place haunted by genies. Genies that will wrap you in the blanket of their mysterium and lead you forward. March forth, humanity, to greet a new dawn as you slid and swat and crawled and walked down the spiral chains of evolutionary metamorphosis to your final awakening. For this is the day when you will sleep no more. Reality sequence complete. I don't sleep much anyway, so I imagined encoding myself and living forever. But what happens when you pass over behind the veil? Is there new life after the old? What happens when you die? Do you fear death and what lies beyond? I don't think I feared birth and what lay before, and I don't think there's any difference. A glacier rattles in the cupboard. The desert sighs in the bed. And the crack in the teacup opens a door to the land of the dead. The Maya call this shibalba, the road to the dimension of the dead. The undiscovered country from whose born no traveler returns puzzles the will. You just go off and continue your life on other levels. It's called the spirit levels or the astral plane. You go through different things. It's all mapped out. After you die, there's a period of 49 days approximately. There's an intentional direction that an evolving soul can at least go for. Ultimately, say, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, the Buddha of active compassion, our most high and honored, exalted 14th. I hope it's over. There could be some floating consciousness that is waiting for some ex-hairdresser who's become a movie heaven. What happens to consciousness after death is what you believe happens to consciousness after death. There isn't a standard formula for what happens when we die. Probably a large determinant of what happens when we die depends on what we believe happens when we die. When we die, I think we're in the realm of the mind, which is then separated from the body. There is this persistent theme in all of these notions that death is made more easy, whatever that means, if you've learned the territory before you get there. And in the Mahayana Buddhist situation, it even becomes as extreme as saying life is essentially a preparation for death, a studying of the maps, a learning of the skills, a packing of your picnic basket so that when you get out there and the demons are sniffing you up one side and down the other, you don't bungle your mantras. In vine-shrouded jungle, do not your mantras bungle, lest a god-plant eat you and into void excrete you. It's voidness of divineness and beyond, beyond, beyond. Death is powerful. There's nothing sad about death. People can remember their previous lifetimes and the times between lifetimes. We can't know where we came from. We can't know where we're going to. And why should I bother wasting my time trying to figure it out? I'll know when I die where I'm going. Nobody owns anything because we die and that's good. It's a race, if you will, to get there, to figure out the meaning of life, instead of figuring out who we are individually. Have I died to myself and come back again transformed? I hope that perhaps there was a flip side, like wow, transcendence, it's like a bird flying out of a bag. I am full of doubt as to the survival of any kind of consciousness, individual human consciousness, through the veil of death. There's a kind of collective consciousness and even though one may die, others will continue. I happen to be, to accept this notion of the reincarnation. A transfer of memory, even if we accept it's really happened, doesn't necessarily prove reincarnation. According to my morphic resonance theory, you could have memory transfer without necessarily the individual, the entire core of the individual being transferred. Some people can be reincarnated, but it's a minority pursuit. It's something that only happens to some people and most people aren't. That, I think, is the most reasonable interpretation of the evidence. When I die, could I, in fact while I'm alive, could I not download my consciousness and then I could go ahead and die? One can only hope that after death comes rebirth. The internet was part of my rebirth, so any more births are a bonus. See you next time around. Translation complete. Translation complete. Translation complete. Translation complete. [Screaming] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Spirituality should always use the scientific method. [Music] Civilization as we know it is in grave danger. [Music] I don't want to believe that I'm a puppet on a string. [Music] Western civilization has got to die. [Music] I'm only interested in ideas that support life. [Music] [Music] Consciousness now is so close. [Music] Spirituality is here. [Music] [Music] Science is the highest form of spirituality. [Music] [Music] [Music] Artificial intelligence is going to allow us to re-engineer our bodies. [Music] How do we know that this universe really is for real? [Music] It's as if the universe was incredibly fine-tuned. [Music] The seeds of our own self-destruction are in our DNA. [Music] [Music] I guess I don't see humans as being that important. [Music] [Music] The future does not exist except in our imagination. [Music] [Music] There is an aspect of non-linearity which many people don't appreciate. [Music] [Music] The resonance occurs through what I call morphogenetic fields. [Music] [Music] Theosis, coming closer to God. [Music] [Music] Who is in control? You or your dog in your mind? [Music] [Music] [Music] You monkeys only think you're running things. Spirit fell deep, deep, deep, deep into matter, limitation, and chaos, and somehow is slowly making a return to its higher and to the source of itself, which it has been so long severed from and longs to return to with such incredible urgency that it evolves life on planets and technologies inside cultures as mere stepping stones to its return to the contemplation of its self-image. Is this religion? Is this science fiction? Well, who knows? And where was it written adamantium that we should know? It's a mystery. We are caught inside a mystery, veiled in an enigma, locked inside a riddle. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] www.Energyanalyst.com {END} Wait Time : 0.00 sec Model Load: 0.66 sec Decoding : 4.78 sec Transcribe: 4121.59 sec Total Time: 4127.03 sec