Skeptiko – Science at the Tipping Point

Gordon White’s new book challenges our understanding of Chaos Magic and religion. photo by: Skeptiko Gordon White’s new book Pieces of Eight: Chaos Magic Essays and Enchantments stirred up a lot of questions for me. Gordon not only tackles materialism, panpsychism, idealism and animism (his preferred harbor in the storm), but also the role Chaos Magic might play in understanding and navigating this “spirit haunted world.” In fact, I had so many questions for Gordon I’ve prepared this episode of Skeptiko in order to lay them out before he joins me to hammer out the finer details of life’s deepest mysteries. Click here for forum discussion Click here for Gordon’s RuneSoup.com website NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505

Neuroscientist, Professor George Paxinos defends atheists who love life. photo by: Skeptiko George George Paxinos is a heavyweight. With over 45 books on the structure of the brain of humans and experimental animals his groundbreaking work has been cited more than almost any other in science, but that’s not why I wanted to talk to George. This is why I wanted to talk about: Why psychology lost its soul: everything comes from the brain. I went into this expecting a debate with a hard-core dogmatic, atheist/materialist, but found myself in a warm, if sometimes pointed, conversation with a learned scientist and lover of life. And while George may not know much but Consciousness Science, the philosophy of the mind, or Near-death Experience science, his willingness to engage is in science’s big picture questions is refreshing. Click here for forum discussion Click here for Professor Paxinos’s website NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505

Neuroscientist, Professor George Paxinos defends atheists who love life. photo by: Skeptiko George George Paxinos is a heavyweight. With over 45 books on the structure of the brain of humans and experimental animals his groundbreaking work has been cited more than almost any other in science, but that’s not why I wanted to talk to George. This is why I wanted to talk about: Why psychology lost its soul: everything comes from the brain. I went into this expecting a debate with a hard-core dogmatic, atheist/materialist, but found myself in a warm, if sometimes pointed, conversation with a learned scientist and lover of life. And while George may not know much but Consciousness Science, the philosophy of the mind, or Near-death Experience science, his willingness to engage is in science’s big picture questions is refreshing. Click here for forum discussion Click here for Professor Paxinos’s website NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505

Greg Carlwood of The Higherside Chats on the difference between conspiracy data and interpretation. photo by: Skeptiko On this episode of Skeptiko, I’m joined by Greg Carlwood to talk about his podcast,  The Higherside Chats: Greg Carlwood: …I consider myself a conspiracy talent scout. I scout out the researchers and I’m like, “This guy, he makes a good case for his position,” let’s have them do their thing and help walk them through their own research, because it’s often very dense… it takes a lot of framing to be like, “This is where we’re going to go today. We’re getting off on this level of the elevator today.” … one aspect that’s important to me is separating data from interpretation. I know you talk about a lot of data here; that line is something Gordon [White] has just drilled into my head… when you’re listening to a guy talk for two hours about [his] research, you have to be able to say, “Where was the research and where was the spin you put on it?” Because you can look at the same data and come to different conclusions, so it is important to separate data from conclusion.  Click here for forum discussion NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505    Read Excerpts: Alex Tsakiris: Today we welcome Greg Carlwood to Skeptiko. Greg is the creator and host of The Higherside Chats podcast, a popular and very influential alt-media kind of thing that explores all manner of topics most people would lump into that category we so lovingly call “conspiracy theory.” What was the first conspiracy? What was the first thread on that sweater that started you down this path? Greg Carlwood: Well, I was always rebellious in general. I loved punk music, which is very anti-authoritarian. And I went to a really rigid private school, so I was just anti-authority from a young age. I guess I was always looking for excuses to keep that worldview in order to validate it. And so when you start digging into what authority is usually doing — which is unusually abusing people, abusing their position and the people below them — it really solidified me as just being an anti-establishment growing up. But [as far as my first conspiracy] it had to be 9/11. Alex Tsakiris: Really? Greg Carlwood: It’s kind of cliché, everybody says that now, but I was in high school and we came in and everybody had to get in the gym, and they announce this thing and we see it on the TV and even that day, I was like, “That doesn’t really look right.” Alex Tsakiris: Really? Greg Carlwood: Yeah, I was, “That doesn’t look right.” And I had a couple of good friends who…we could never offend each other. We loved the most offensive comedy, so I knew I wasn’t going to lose a friendship for bringing that up. I was like, “Yeah, it’s a little odd,” but it kind of went away. And then later, Loose Change, the documentary came out and my buddy’s like, “Dude, this thing, we didn’t think it looked right, here’s somebody who’s like, ‘Yeah, it doesn’t look right. There’s a big conspiracy here. It could be an inside job.’” And that was kind of what set me off. I was like, “Okay, that’s not abstract anymore. It’s very real.” And I’d say as cliché as it is,

Greg Carlwood of The Higherside Chats on the difference between conspiracy data and interpretation. photo by: Skeptiko On this episode of Skeptiko, I’m joined by Greg Carlwood to talk about his podcast,  The Higherside Chats: Greg Carlwood: …I consider myself a conspiracy talent scout. I scout out the researchers and I’m like, “This guy, he makes a good case for his position,” let’s have them do their thing and help walk them through their own research, because it’s often very dense… it takes a lot of framing to be like, “This is where we’re going to go today. We’re getting off on this level of the elevator today.” … one aspect that’s important to me is separating data from interpretation. I know you talk about a lot of data here; that line is something Gordon [White] has just drilled into my head… when you’re listening to a guy talk for two hours about [his] research, you have to be able to say, “Where was the research and where was the spin you put on it?” Because you can look at the same data and come to different conclusions, so it is important to separate data from conclusion.  Click here for forum discussion NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505    Read Excerpts: Alex Tsakiris: Today we welcome Greg Carlwood to Skeptiko. Greg is the creator and host of The Higherside Chats podcast, a popular and very influential alt-media kind of thing that explores all manner of topics most people would lump into that category we so lovingly call “conspiracy theory.” What was the first conspiracy? What was the first thread on that sweater that started you down this path? Greg Carlwood: Well, I was always rebellious in general. I loved punk music, which is very anti-authoritarian. And I went to a really rigid private school, so I was just anti-authority from a young age. I guess I was always looking for excuses to keep that worldview in order to validate it. And so when you start digging into what authority is usually doing — which is unusually abusing people, abusing their position and the people below them — it really solidified me as just being an anti-establishment growing up. But [as far as my first conspiracy] it had to be 9/11. Alex Tsakiris: Really? Greg Carlwood: It’s kind of cliché, everybody says that now, but I was in high school and we came in and everybody had to get in the gym, and they announce this thing and we see it on the TV and even that day, I was like, “That doesn’t really look right.” Alex Tsakiris: Really? Greg Carlwood: Yeah, I was, “That doesn’t look right.” And I had a couple of good friends who…we could never offend each other. We loved the most offensive comedy, so I knew I wasn’t going to lose a friendship for bringing that up. I was like, “Yeah, it’s a little odd,” but it kind of went away. And then later, Loose Change, the documentary came out and my buddy’s like, “Dude, this thing, we didn’t think it looked right, here’s somebody who’s like, ‘Yeah, it doesn’t look right. There’s a big conspiracy here. It could be an inside job.’” And that was kind of what set me off. I was like, “Okay, that’s not abstract anymore. It’s very real.” And I’d say as cliché as it is,

Dr. Jane Kent practices Wicca and High Magic in concert with traditional Western psychotherapy. photo by: Kali Bardi On this episode of Skeptiko, I’m joined by Dr. Jane Kent to talk about her new book,  The Goddess and the Shaman: The Art & Science of Magical Healing: Alex Tsakiris: …when I talk to people who are deep into magic, Wicca or any of those things… and I’m not a Christian, I’m not a Buddhist, I’m not a religious person, but if a Christian comes to me and says, “Hey, you know what? It’s all about love and it’s all about selfless service.” I get that. Dr. Jane Kent: Nothing wrong with that. Alex Tsakiris: Right. But here’s the thing, I may think that their knowledge of history is pretty lame and I’d probably push them on the historicity of Jesus. And I may think they’re kind of closed-minded about how their sacred text have been twisted by institutions for control and manipulation, but what they’re saying speaks to my heart. Versus, if I speak to someone and they practice magic, and the first thing they tell me is about Aleister Crowley and “do what thou wilt” — I don’t get it. Love, selfless service speaks to my heart. “Do what thou wilt”, I can’t get there. It comes back and it starts sounding a lot like power, control… Dr. Jane Kent: Self-indulgence. I do talk about that in the book, about Crowley’s approach to things. I go into quite a lot of detail about that. But yeah, love is at the basis of spiritual reality, so I think people who focus on that, good on them. That’s fine. But Huhn says that the whole Jesus story, the whole basis of Christianity is actually taken from the Egyptian text and that in Egypt and Greece, that the mystery plays and the mystery tradition were all about understanding that coming into the physical world is coming into really like death. What we think about death as death is not how those people saw it. The physical world is death and the spiritual world is life. Click here for forum discussion   NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505  Read Excerpts: Alex Tsakiris: Today we welcome Dr. Jane Kent to Skeptiko. Jane is a therapist with a postgraduate degree in counseling and psychotherapy and a doctorate in social ecology from the University of West Sydney in Australia. And she has a new book out titled The Goddess and the Shaman which really shatters that nice sounding academically sanitized bio that I just read for you because as you’ll hear, her book documents her own “dynamic tension”, to use her words, with the Western paradigms of health and healing and her unexpected encounters with extended consciousness realms, high magic, Wicca, and shamanism and, in particular, how she’s managed to meld all that into what she calls the “fragility of therapy.” It’s quite a journey and quite an interesting, interesting book. Jane, welcome to Skeptiko. Thanks so much for joining me.

Dr. Jane Kent practices Wicca and High Magic in concert with traditional Western psychotherapy. photo by: Kali Bardi On this episode of Skeptiko, I’m joined by Dr. Jane Kent to talk about her new book,  The Goddess and the Shaman: The Art & Science of Magical Healing: Alex Tsakiris: …when I talk to people who are deep into magic, Wicca or any of those things… and I’m not a Christian, I’m not a Buddhist, I’m not a religious person, but if a Christian comes to me and says, “Hey, you know what? It’s all about love and it’s all about selfless service.” I get that. Dr. Jane Kent: Nothing wrong with that. Alex Tsakiris: Right. But here’s the thing, I may think that their knowledge of history is pretty lame and I’d probably push them on the historicity of Jesus. And I may think they’re kind of closed-minded about how their sacred text have been twisted by institutions for control and manipulation, but what they’re saying speaks to my heart. Versus, if I speak to someone and they practice magic, and the first thing they tell me is about Aleister Crowley and “do what thou wilt” — I don’t get it. Love, selfless service speaks to my heart. “Do what thou wilt”, I can’t get there. It comes back and it starts sounding a lot like power, control… Dr. Jane Kent: Self-indulgence. I do talk about that in the book, about Crowley’s approach to things. I go into quite a lot of detail about that. But yeah, love is at the basis of spiritual reality, so I think people who focus on that, good on them. That’s fine. But Huhn says that the whole Jesus story, the whole basis of Christianity is actually taken from the Egyptian text and that in Egypt and Greece, that the mystery plays and the mystery tradition were all about understanding that coming into the physical world is coming into really like death. What we think about death as death is not how those people saw it. The physical world is death and the spiritual world is life. Click here for forum discussion   NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505  Read Excerpts: Alex Tsakiris: Today we welcome Dr. Jane Kent to Skeptiko. Jane is a therapist with a postgraduate degree in counseling and psychotherapy and a doctorate in social ecology from the University of West Sydney in Australia. And she has a new book out titled The Goddess and the Shaman which really shatters that nice sounding academically sanitized bio that I just read for you because as you’ll hear, her book documents her own “dynamic tension”, to use her words, with the Western paradigms of health and healing and her unexpected encounters with extended consciousness realms, high magic, Wicca, and shamanism and, in particular, how she’s managed to meld all that into what she calls the “fragility of therapy.” It’s quite a journey and quite an interesting, interesting book. Jane, welcome to Skeptiko. Thanks so much for joining me.

What do new replications of Dr. Daryl Bem’s parapsychology research tell us about the original phony replications? photo by: Skeptiko On this episode of Skeptiko, I’m joined by science/psychology podcaster and creator of ThePsychFiles.com, Dr. Michael Britt. And while I didn’t contact Michael looking for a way to follow-up on Dr. Daryl Bem’s Feeling the Future experiment, I found one… and a lot more. Because it’s only through the lens of time (Bem’s original work was published in 2011) and through the hard work of Bem and his colleagues who replicated this important parapsychology experiment 90 times that can we truly appreciate what the PSYOP parapsychologists are up against… Michael Britt: I have to say I’m a little uncomfortable with you playing clips from previous episodes. I don’t know if it’s fair to play a clip from what someone said without that person being here. Alex Tsakiris: Well the first clip was your clip, right? Michael Britt: And frankly, I was curious whether or not you used my clip. And I thought to myself, you know, if I go along with this guy and I say something that he disagrees with, so it’s three or four episodes down the line, are you going to say, “Here’s a clip of Michael Britt saying this,” and then criticize it without me being there to say, “Well, you know, he didn’t clarify.” Alex Tsakiris: Let’s break that down because this could be the most important part of the discussion. Michael, I played a clip from your show. So if it was a clip that was out of context, I would understand that objection and we could deal with that. Was the clip out of context? Was it different? Did I edit out something at the beginning or the end that would add to what you said? Michael Britt: Not to my knowledge. Click here for forum discussion Click here for Dr. Michael Britt’s podcast — The Psych Files Click here for Dr. Daryl Bem’s Meta-analysis of 90 Experiments on the Anomalous Anticipation of Random Future Events (and his website) NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505 Alex Tsakiris: Here’s the story. Daryl Bem, who’s this highly regarded social psychologist, publishes this parapsychology experiment in 2011, and unlike 99% of other parapsychology experiments, this one kind of explodes on the stage and makes a big splash. And he’s on the Colbert Report, on Comedy Central, and he’s in all these places — then boom, out of nowhere, out comes Richard Wiseman. Out comes other scientists saying we not only object to this experiment and all these ways that it was done, we question whether or not psychology can even go forward with the kind of crazy statistics we use that allow people like Dr. Daryl Bem to come up with these crazy conclusions. It was really kind of an outrageous claim. And then they doubled down by saying we’re going to challenge everyone to replicate this experiment, but we’re only going to give you six months to do it. And then they did that and as planned, they got a failure of replication.

What do new replications of Dr. Daryl Bem’s parapsychology research tell us about the original phony replications? photo by: Skeptiko On this episode of Skeptiko, I’m joined by science/psychology podcaster and creator of ThePsychFiles.com, Dr. Michael Britt. And while I didn’t contact Michael looking for a way to follow-up on Dr. Daryl Bem’s Feeling the Future experiment, I found one… and a lot more. Because it’s only through the lens of time (Bem’s original work was published in 2011) and through the hard work of Bem and his colleagues who replicated this important parapsychology experiment 90 times that can we truly appreciate what the PSYOP parapsychologists are up against… Michael Britt: I have to say I’m a little uncomfortable with you playing clips from previous episodes. I don’t know if it’s fair to play a clip from what someone said without that person being here. Alex Tsakiris: Well the first clip was your clip, right? Michael Britt: And frankly, I was curious whether or not you used my clip. And I thought to myself, you know, if I go along with this guy and I say something that he disagrees with, so it’s three or four episodes down the line, are you going to say, “Here’s a clip of Michael Britt saying this,” and then criticize it without me being there to say, “Well, you know, he didn’t clarify.” Alex Tsakiris: Let’s break that down because this could be the most important part of the discussion. Michael, I played a clip from your show. So if it was a clip that was out of context, I would understand that objection and we could deal with that. Was the clip out of context? Was it different? Did I edit out something at the beginning or the end that would add to what you said? Michael Britt: Not to my knowledge. Click here for forum discussion Click here for Dr. Michael Britt’s podcast — The Psych Files Click here for Dr. Daryl Bem’s Meta-analysis of 90 Experiments on the Anomalous Anticipation of Random Future Events (and his website) NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505 Alex Tsakiris: Here’s the story. Daryl Bem, who’s this highly regarded social psychologist, publishes this parapsychology experiment in 2011, and unlike 99% of other parapsychology experiments, this one kind of explodes on the stage and makes a big splash. And he’s on the Colbert Report, on Comedy Central, and he’s in all these places — then boom, out of nowhere, out comes Richard Wiseman. Out comes other scientists saying we not only object to this experiment and all these ways that it was done, we question whether or not psychology can even go forward with the kind of crazy statistics we use that allow people like Dr. Daryl Bem to come up with these crazy conclusions. It was really kind of an outrageous claim. And then they doubled down by saying we’re going to challenge everyone to replicate this experiment, but we’re only going to give you six months to do it. And then they did that and as planned, they got a failure of replication.

New Near-Death Experience research from Dr. Jeffrey Long challenges science’s understanding of the afterlife. photo by: Skeptiko We’ve covered a lot of Near-Death experience science over the years, but I can’t think of a more important book than Dr. Jeff Long’s, God and the Afterlife. Jeff is not only a medical doctor, but a meticulous researcher who’s not afraid to follow the near-death experience data wherever it leads: Alex Tsakiris: Dr. Long, you’ve written this second book, God and the Afterlife. We’ve covered a lot of your background, and your long-time experience studying near-death experience science … and that you’re a physician, and that you’re careful about your research, but with that title, a lot of people are going to assume, this is a religious book. Did you have a religious agenda with this book? Dr. Jeff Long: Absolutely not. My only thought was I was developing the research behind the God and the Afterlife. I just wanted to know the truth. I set out with a commitment that whatever I was going to find, I was going to publish. Wherever that path would go. Somewhat to my astonishment, as I kept digging into near-death experiences, I encountered God. And I was amazed once again at the consistency at what was being described. I have two hundred seventy-seven near-death experiences that either were aware of or encountered God. It’s not a small study. So I just really wanted to publish what I found. There’s no religious agenda at all with this. In fact, if you talk to people that encountered God in their near-death experiences, it really seems to be, while it’s God, it doesn’t seem to be related to their prior religious beliefs. Whatever religious belief they had doesn’t seem to affect the probability of them encountering God or what will happen when they do encounter God in their near-death experience. So God seems to be in near-death experiences very independent from religion. Click here for forum discussion Click here for Dr. Jeffrey Long’s NDERF website Click here for Dr. Jeffrey Long’s book, God and the Afterlife Click here for The Self Does Not Die book NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505 Alex Tsakiris: Dr. Long, in 2010 you published Evidence of the Afterlife: The Science of Near-Death Experiences. New York Times’ Bestseller, a game-changer really, for science, because the evidence you presented was very straightforward and very compelling. Your conclusion, by every way we can look at it, [is that] consciousness seems to survive death for these people. These people who are experiencing near-death experience, but I still get e-mails all the time from people who don’t know that. For example, you investigated people who were blind from birth and the first a...

New Near-Death Experience research from Dr. Jeffrey Long challenges science’s understanding of the afterlife. photo by: Skeptiko We’ve covered a lot of Near-Death experience science over the years, but I can’t think of a more important book than Dr. Jeff Long’s, God and the Afterlife. Jeff is not only a medical doctor, but a meticulous researcher who’s not afraid to follow the near-death experience data wherever it leads: Alex Tsakiris: Dr. Long, you’ve written this second book, God and the Afterlife. We’ve covered a lot of your background, and your long-time experience studying near-death experience science … and that you’re a physician, and that you’re careful about your research, but with that title, a lot of people are going to assume, this is a religious book. Did you have a religious agenda with this book? Dr. Jeff Long: Absolutely not. My only thought was I was developing the research behind the God and the Afterlife. I just wanted to know the truth. I set out with a commitment that whatever I was going to find, I was going to publish. Wherever that path would go. Somewhat to my astonishment, as I kept digging into near-death experiences, I encountered God. And I was amazed once again at the consistency at what was being described. I have two hundred seventy-seven near-death experiences that either were aware of or encountered God. It’s not a small study. So I just really wanted to publish what I found. There’s no religious agenda at all with this. In fact, if you talk to people that encountered God in their near-death experiences, it really seems to be, while it’s God, it doesn’t seem to be related to their prior religious beliefs. Whatever religious belief they had doesn’t seem to affect the probability of them encountering God or what will happen when they do encounter God in their near-death experience. So God seems to be in near-death experiences very independent from religion. Click here for forum discussion Click here for Dr. Jeffrey Long’s NDERF website Click here for Dr. Jeffrey Long’s book, God and the Afterlife Click here for The Self Does Not Die book NEW: leave a message on the call in number (858) 876-4505 Alex Tsakiris: Dr. Long, in 2010 you published Evidence of the Afterlife: The Science of Near-Death Experiences. New York Times’ Bestseller, a game-changer really, for science, because the evidence you presented was very straightforward and very compelling. Your conclusion, by every way we can look at it, [is that] consciousness seems to survive death for these people. These people who are experiencing near-death experience, but I still get e-mails all the time from people who don’t know that. For example, you investigated people who were blind from birth and the first and only tim...

A critical look at an academic near-death experience book by Dr. Ben Mitchell-Yellin and Dr. John Martin Fischer.  photo by: Iwan Gabovitch It’s hard to be surprised by the lengths some academics will go to trash near-death experience research, but the recent non-research-research of today’s guest surprised even me. But the real story may be that Dr. John Martin Fischer and Dr. Ben Mitchell-Yellin managed to wrangle more than $4 million dollars from the very “spiritual friendly” John Templeton Foundation to promote this “secular” hit piece of a book titled Near-Death Experiences: Understanding Visions of the Afterlife: Alex Tsakiris: I’m challenging you on a couple of those [arguments]… there isn’t a single, credible near-death experience researcher I can think of that’s come to the conclusion that you do. It always amazes me. I mean, who are you going to cite? Dr. Greyson doesn’t believe that. Pim van Lommel doesn’t believe that. Sam Parnia doesn’t believe that. Janice Holden doesn’t believe that. Dr. Jeffrey Long doesn’t believe that … you could go down the list. There isn’t a single, credible near-death experience researcher — and there are hundreds of peer reviewed scientific journal articles on this — where they’ve concluded the same thing that you’ve concluded. They’ve all concluded that near-death experiences seem to suggest that consciousness survives bodily death in a way that we don’t understand. Dr. Ben Mitchell–Yellin: That’s not actually what we conclude. I just want to make it clear I don’t think that we agree with all of the people you listed. For example, we don’t have the same position as Pim van Lommel because he doesn’t think that they’re consistent. As far as I understand his position, he thinks that near-death experience suggests that we should give up the physicalist view. Alex Tsakiris: Exactly. So I guess I’m saying on what basis do you go against all of this published data by all of the top near-death experience researchers who suggest otherwise? Click here for forum discussion Click here for Dr. Ben Mitchell-Yellin website Read Excerpts From Interview: Alex Tsakiris: What [Dr. Mitchell-Yellin] was getting pulled into is a much more interesting story… So why is this important? Well, it turns out that the funding for this research–and I’m using air quotes there because these people didn’t really do any original research other than reviewing the literature and criticizing near-death experience scientists who had done actual research. That plays out clearly in the interview. He doesn’t have any response to that. But I digress again because the way they did the book was they received a grant of $5 million from the Templeton Foundation (NOTE/CORRECTION/CLARIFICATION: The Immortality Project was a 3-year,

A critical look at an academic near-death experience book by Dr. Ben Mitchell-Yellin and Dr. John Martin Fischer.  photo by: Iwan Gabovitch It’s hard to be surprised by the lengths some academics will go to trash near-death experience research, but the recent non-research-research of today’s guest surprised even me. But the real story may be that Dr. John Martin Fischer and Dr. Ben Mitchell-Yellin managed to wrangle more than $4 million dollars from the very “spiritual friendly” John Templeton Foundation to promote this “secular” hit piece of a book titled Near-Death Experiences: Understanding Visions of the Afterlife: Alex Tsakiris: I’m challenging you on a couple of those [arguments]… there isn’t a single, credible near-death experience researcher I can think of that’s come to the conclusion that you do. It always amazes me. I mean, who are you going to cite? Dr. Greyson doesn’t believe that. Pim van Lommel doesn’t believe that. Sam Parnia doesn’t believe that. Janice Holden doesn’t believe that. Dr. Jeffrey Long doesn’t believe that … you could go down the list. There isn’t a single, credible near-death experience researcher — and there are hundreds of peer reviewed scientific journal articles on this — where they’ve concluded the same thing that you’ve concluded. They’ve all concluded that near-death experiences seem to suggest that consciousness survives bodily death in a way that we don’t understand. Dr. Ben Mitchell–Yellin: That’s not actually what we conclude. I just want to make it clear I don’t think that we agree with all of the people you listed. For example, we don’t have the same position as Pim van Lommel because he doesn’t think that they’re consistent. As far as I understand his position, he thinks that near-death experience suggests that we should give up the physicalist view. Alex Tsakiris: Exactly. So I guess I’m saying on what basis do you go against all of this published data by all of the top near-death experience researchers who suggest otherwise? Click here for forum discussion Click here for Dr. Ben Mitchell-Yellin website Read Excerpts From Interview: Alex Tsakiris: What [Dr. Mitchell-Yellin] was getting pulled into is a much more interesting story… So why is this important? Well, it turns out that the funding for this research–and I’m using air quotes there because these people didn’t really do any original research other than reviewing the literature and criticizing near-death experience scientists who had done actual research. That plays out clearly in the interview. He doesn’t have any response to that. But I digress again because the way they did the book was they received a grant of $5 million from the Templeton Foundation (NOTE/CORRECTION/CLARIFICATION: The Immortality Project was a 3-year,

Dr. John Brandenburg’s interview with Gordon White reveals inner workings of government secret space program. photo by: Skeptiko Every since Gordon White appeared on Skeptiko to talk about his book Star.Ships, I’ve been itching to get him back on to talk about his research into the secret space program and how this conspiratorial view of things might be helpful in understanding science-as-we-know-it. Gordon delivered big time by guest hosting and bringing us this interview with plasma physicist and Mars researcher Dr. John Brandenburg: Alex Tsakiris: This interview that you’ve done with Dr. John Brandenburg requires a little bit of contextualization. Before we start with Dr. Brandenburg’s theories, which are extremely controversial and can take us in a million places, do you want to tell us who he is? Gordon White: Dr. Brandenburg is a plasma phycisist who has spent any number of years with Top Secret clearance, occasionally not. [And] working in the privatized Space Program so he’s XJPL. He’s worked on the Clementine mission. He’s worked in some of the companies that have fed into the Regan Star Wars program. That’s been his career. Alex Tsakiris: Let me just fill in one detail: you say hard scientist. If you scan the internet for this guy, you’re likely to see, as you always will on anything that’s interesting, a lampooning of him in a number of different ways, [but] let’s be clear: Cal-Davis PhD. Theoretical Plasma Physics from Lawrence Livermore Laboratories. That’s top notch; the real deal. That’s a nerdy scientist. Sandia Labs, JPL…all of the places; rubbing shoulders with Carl Sagan — a personal relationship. Exchanging emails and telephone calls. [Also] Richard Hoagland. This is the real deal so if you do run across [him] in that Google search, and he’s portrayed as some kind of buffoon, that’s not the case here. Gordon White: One thing is verifiable, we can prove based on this conversation and some casual research afterward, there is a section of the Anglo-American military that believes there are artificial remains elsewhere in the solar system. Whether there are or not is frankly open to interpretation. But it is self-evident in the policy over the last 70 years, that an element of the American Military Industrial establishment believes there are artificial remains around the solar system and it’s affecting policy. It is affecting internal policy and it’s affecting off planet policy. I think when Dr. Brandenburg says quote, “They want this information out,” if they did I would suggest they go to the New York Times. What they’ve done is given it to brilliant, rigorous, oddball groups because you’ve run a P&L. You know what it’s like. You don’t want the dog project on your books, but you do need the research anyway. That was Dr. Valet’s conclusion as to why FBI agents would show up to a UFO conference in the middle of nowhere. They’re not there in some kind of mysterious way that maybe someone’s [has] burst out with some secrets. They’re actually there because we’re in an area where we have to outsource the research because the dis-info component that comes with the National Security implications makes it very difficult to otherwise navigate.   Click here for forum discussion Click here for Dr. Branderburg’s website (lifeonmars.com) Click here for Gordon’s website (runesoup.com) Click here for Gordon...

Dr. John Brandenburg’s interview with Gordon White reveals inner workings of government secret space program. photo by: Skeptiko Every since Gordon White appeared on Skeptiko to talk about his book Star.Ships, I’ve been itching to get him back on to talk about his research into the secret space program and how this conspiratorial view of things might be helpful in understanding science-as-we-know-it. Gordon delivered big time by guest hosting and bringing us this interview with plasma physicist and Mars researcher Dr. John Brandenburg: Alex Tsakiris: This interview that you’ve done with Dr. John Brandenburg requires a little bit of contextualization. Before we start with Dr. Brandenburg’s theories, which are extremely controversial and can take us in a million places, do you want to tell us who he is? Gordon White: Dr. Brandenburg is a plasma phycisist who has spent any number of years with Top Secret clearance, occasionally not. [And] working in the privatized Space Program so he’s XJPL. He’s worked on the Clementine mission. He’s worked in some of the companies that have fed into the Regan Star Wars program. That’s been his career. Alex Tsakiris: Let me just fill in one detail: you say hard scientist. If you scan the internet for this guy, you’re likely to see, as you always will on anything that’s interesting, a lampooning of him in a number of different ways, [but] let’s be clear: Cal-Davis PhD. Theoretical Plasma Physics from Lawrence Livermore Laboratories. That’s top notch; the real deal. That’s a nerdy scientist. Sandia Labs, JPL…all of the places; rubbing shoulders with Carl Sagan — a personal relationship. Exchanging emails and telephone calls. [Also] Richard Hoagland. This is the real deal so if you do run across [him] in that Google search, and he’s portrayed as some kind of buffoon, that’s not the case here. Gordon White: One thing is verifiable, we can prove based on this conversation and some casual research afterward, there is a section of the Anglo-American military that believes there are artificial remains elsewhere in the solar system. Whether there are or not is frankly open to interpretation. But it is self-evident in the policy over the last 70 years, that an element of the American Military Industrial establishment believes there are artificial remains around the solar system and it’s affecting policy. It is affecting internal policy and it’s affecting off planet policy. I think when Dr. Brandenburg says quote, “They want this information out,” if they did I would suggest they go to the New York Times. What they’ve done is given it to brilliant, rigorous, oddball groups because you’ve run a P&L. You know what it’s like. You don’t want the dog project on your books, but you do need the research anyway. That was Dr. Valet’s conclusion as to why FBI agents would show up to a UFO conference in the middle of nowhere. They’re not there in some kind of mysterious way that maybe someone’s [has] burst out with some secrets. They’re actually there because we’re in an area where we have to outsource the research because the dis-info component that comes with the National Security implications makes it very difficult to otherwise navigate.   Click here for forum discussion Click here for Dr. Branderburg’s website (lifeonmars.com) Click here for Gordon’s website (runesoup.com) Click here for Gordon’s ne...