Paranoid American Podcast 004: David Charles Plate of The Sync Book

➡ The Paranoid American Podcast delves into world mysteries, seeks to interpret concealed truths, and challenges widely accepted views of reality since its inception in 2012. In a recent episode, they have engaging discussions on movie and music synchronization and its societal impact.
➡ The text chronicles the speaker’s fascination with syncing films, a hobby he’s been doing since 6th grade. He believes that there’s a pattern between certain films and their release dates, or the connections between people involved in those films. He also expounds on the deeper meaning of these syncs, suggesting that they might be artistic intentions not meant for the general public or a representation of universal patterns. His encounter with these synchronicities keeps him continuously intrigued and engaged.
➡ Stephen King is often confrontational, the speaker appreciates continued discussions, and announces an American Homunculus owner’s manual – a powerful, educational comic detailing forgotten occult knowledge and the process of creating a homunculus, available for purchase on specific websites.
➡ The text discusses on various themes: the blending of music and film in creating a unique artistic experience, hidden musical tracks in vinyl records, backmasking, and the increasingly shortening human attention span in the age of the internet.
➡ The speaker shares his differing opinions from a friend named Bill on running experiments. He believes the convenience of setting it all up before the participant is beneficial. He shares multiple anecdotes including one where his set up was disrupted during a party. He also discloses his experiments aligning different albums with movies, discovering unexpected but pleasant mixtures. Despite some unsuccessful attempts, he continues to experiment. He talks about 9/11 as an inside job and his neutral stance on Bigfoot’s existence. He expresses openness to the potential of coexisting hominoids and is skeptical about reptilians.
➡ The speaker discusses David Icke’s work about reptilian beings, connecting it with evolutionary theories and personal hallucinatory experiences on DMT. The speaker also brings up the theory of past events or beings being embedded within current life forms or locations, likening it to poltergeist hauntings. Finally, the speaker debates the involvement of Lee Harvey Oswald in JFK’s assassination, suggesting the existence of multiple shooters.
➡ The speaker discusses various conspiracy theories and speculations about the JFK assassination. He delves deep into concepts of existence and consciousness, the potential reality of ghosts in an electromagnetic energy concept, metaphysical imprints on physical reality, the principle of emanations, and ancestral karma. He contemplates the energy of living beings and Kabbalistic concepts. He also introspects on Crowley’s body star and its tarot card correspondences, reflecting on the nature of brutal honesty and the evolution of language over time.
➡ The text discusses themes related to societal norms around strength, the symbolism of the golden bow, and interpretations of black magic. It touches on questions about ‘good’ and ‘bad’ energy, demonology, and the idea of control in conspiracy theories. The conversation also covers beliefs about dinosaurs and Kabbalah. Lastly, it explores the concept of discovery and invention in relation to mathematics.
➡ The text discusses the inherent subjectivity in human perceptions, interpretations, and representations, highlighting the paradox of our dependence on them to understand our reality. It also points out how these representations can cloud our understanding of the original concept or experience, taking on their own significance and leading to disagreements. Additionally, the text reflects on the impact of societal views on personal experiences, particularly, how contradictory or taboo ideas can amplify the significance of certain revelations.
➡ The speaker reflects on the psychedelic experience as a personal theory aligning with the ‘stoned ape theory’ and its potential relation to ancient mystery schools and religious practices. The speaker discusses substance-induced prophecy experiences described in religious texts, expressing concerns about conflating technology with biology and human life, specifically referring to the handling of AI. The conversation extends to the works and interpretations of filmmakers Stanley Kubrick and Steven Spielberg, expressing disappointment at Spielberg’s handling of ‘AI’ and apprehension towards his upcoming project on Kubrick’s Napoleon.
➡ The text discusses the distinct differences in Spielberg’s and Kubrick’s filmmaking styles, emphasizing the latter’s unique approach and depth. It also discusses various cultural, psychological, and philosophical aspects of their works and movies, connecting these to broader themes in society and culture. The speaker suggests that there exists a human phenomenon where people desire to become something they admire or crave. They also touch upon Freudian theories, the culture war, and several films including “The Shining,” “US,” and “Dr. Sleep.” Lastly, they criticize Stephen King’s resentment towards the film adaptation of “The Shining” among his other works and express their admiration for Kubrick’s work.

Good evening, listeners. Brave navigators of the enigmatic and the concealed. Have you ever felt the pull of the unanswered, the allure of the mysteries that shroud our existence? For more than a decade, a unique comic publisher has dared to dive into these mysteries, unafraid of the secrets they might uncover. This audacious entity is paranoid American. Welcome to the mystifying universe of the paranoid American podcast. It launched in the year 2012.

Paranoid American has been on a mission to decipher the encrypted secrets of our world. From the unnerving enigma of MKUltra mind control to the clandestine assemblies of secret societies, from the awe inspiring frontiers of forbidden technology to the arcane patterns of occult symbols in our very own pop culture, they have committed to unveiling the concealed realities that lie just beneath the surface. Join us as we navigate these intricate landscapes, decoding the hidden scripts of our society and challenging the accepted perceptions of reality.

Folks, I’ve got a big problem on my hands. There’s a company called Paranoid American making all these funny memes and comics. Now, I’m a fair guy. I believe in free speech as long as it doesn’t cross the line. And if these aigenerated memes dare to make fun of me, they’re crossing the line. This is your expedition into the realm of the extraordinary, the secret, the shrouded. Come with us as we sift through the world’s grand mysteries, question the standardized narratives and brave the cryptic labyrinth of the concealed truth.

So strap yourselves in, broaden your horizons, and steal yourselves for a voyage into the enigmatic heart of the Paranoid American podcast, where each story, every image, every revelation brings us one step closer to the elusive truth. What up? What up, y’all? It’s Paranoid American podcast, and tonight I’m super excited to talk to one of the coolest people that I have the pleasure of usually talking to every Tuesday on Think Tanks, and that is my friend David Charles Plate.

And don’t worry, this is going to be the full layout. I just been playing around with david, I know you through SingTank, we talk with Andre Zurtis almost weekly, but you also run the Sync book, which is one of the coolest projects. It’s also one of the longest running projects, and I want to let you explain it and who you are and where to find you so I don’t butcher it.

Well, just to be clear, I do not run the Sync Book. I have a page on the Sync Book website with over 200 films for streaming and download that are sync films. And so Alan Abadessa green. He actually runs that along with Guillaume and Doug. There’s a sync community. And so I’m not like the it of the website, nor is it really alan is really the sync pimp.

I’m just know I’m one of his bitches. It’s okay. I’m fine with that. Is he going to hit you if you don’t give him the proper credits? He won’t. No. Okay. He treats us well. Yeah, but yeah, no, I love it, and I’m infinitely grateful to be given a platform where I can share my videos and I don’t have to deal with navigating copyright and a lot of those issues.

I mean, we argue fair use, technically, fair use is an American thing. You can’t take something from even the UK apparently, and argue fair use on its use. I mean, you can argue it, but fair use is actually for American media. Does that restrict you to American movies? It should, but yeah, maybe I shouldn’t out myself right away and make something, but yeah, no, I don’t know. We published a few books.

There’s two sync books and then there’s other books from Sync book press. And I was a contributor to Sync book too. And so we had a podcast called Always Record that was with Alan and Bill Klaus, who actually lives with me now. He was originally my co host from Chicago and then he moved out to and for anyone that doesn’t know about the it’s a cool project. So you guys take or you take a movie and then lay it on top of an album.

And like, anyone that’s ever heard of Syncing Up what is it? Wizard of Oz with one of pink dark Side. Dark side of the moon. There you go. So it’s that concept, but you’ve extrapolated that to hundreds of movies at this point. Right. So Dark Side of the Moon, the wizard of Oz was first popularized, I believe, in the 1970s, and it was from a call into a radio station, and I actually postulate that that was potentially a leak.

So, like, maybe an intentional leak. It fits that well for promotional reasons or for a cult? Well, it’s complicated. If you’re a musician or even a filmmaker or something and you know, you’re producing something that people will be relating to on a certain level, it could be a means to keep kind of like a personal relationship with a thing that you can share with people who are close to you or whatever.

It’s a cult. And so it’s like if there was intention behind that, I won’t argue one way or the other. Ultimately, I have my feelings with certain ones that are just so over the top. I’m like, if that just happened on its own, then that’s crazier than if there was some intention behind it. I don’t think that it would have to be as mechanical as some people might assume to make something happen like that because things already sync up to a certain degree no matter what.

And so what really fascinates me is when it crosses a line and then crosses it even further, you know what I mean, where something’s just so ridiculously on point that just blows your mind. So that’s my interest. And at the same time, things kind of just do that to some degree. In other words. I don’t know how meticulous one would really need to be to make that work that way.

You’re like a huge cinema file. You probably know way more about movies than most people that I know. And I guess in terms of music, there’s almost this meta structure where it’s constantly building up anticipation and then subverting expectations, but then also sometimes playing into those expectations. That’s why you return back to a chorus when you have that kind of a flow. And I assume that there’s probably a very similar dynamic in filmmaking and cinematography where you’re trying to draw the eye and then, okay, no, we’re not going to give you the whole shot.

And then maybe a little bit more. Right. If there’s two different creatives that are on the same wavelength, you don’t have to necessarily be working together to have two different pieces of artwork that sync together. Right? Well, there’s a thing that happens with a lot of films where just stories in general, where they’ll come back around and you’ll be in similar circumstances than you were at the beginning.

Or there’ll be parallels to like because films will go often in a cycle, they could have two or three cycles where you see things from different perspectives, but they have commonality with the first portion. So when you’re dealing with looping an album or something, like fascinating things will happen where you’re like, wow, they’re doing the same thing they were the first time and the song’s playing. But there’s kind of a different context because it’s a different so it’s like The Count of Monte Cristo where it’s know he gains so much and then he loses everything and then he gains it again.

He goes through these things. Like, if you were to take I don’t even know if there’s a film of The Count of Monte Cristo, but if there was or there’s not as much, the newer one is definitely worth a watch, too. If you haven’t seen it, it’s worth it. It’s got Jim Cavazille, who’s in the news now. Oh, wow. Okay. Well, he is the that but you know what? It goes it goes through these cycles.

And so when you’re doing an album film pairing, the format that was kind of set up with Dark Side of the Rainbow is that you’re literally just replaying the album when it reaches its end. And films are generally longer than albums, but there’s strange things that happen depending on the particular album film pairing. Like Ready Player One, the year that that came out, oasis came out with an album called Time Flies, which was like their final big compilation album.

And if you start the album the second that the movie starts, the last song on the album actually goes exactly 1 minute past the end of the film. The last line you’ll hear at the very end of the credits is, I need more time from the album. So that’s the lyric and then if you watch that movie there’s Zemeckis’s Cube that allows you to go back in time 1 minute and so it’s know that just happened like that.

I don’t know what the hell but yeah, the album is the full length of the Know plus a stuff like like I was just messing with Et. And poltergeist again. I just returned to it and I had kind of like a shoddy editing program years ago when I first did it. This was like, I don’t even know, ten years ago or something, and I didn’t even realize the degree to which so if you start et and poltergeist on the same frame, so the bars are just lined up, when it gets to the end of both of their credits at the same time, they will fade out to the frame.

So you can literally click back to the faded end of the one credit and then the next frame it’s black. It’s just like on both films at the same time. One came out was it June 11, 1982? The other one came out June 4, 1982. Both were filmed simultaneously. Both are Spielberg. Spielberg produced Poltergeist. Toby Hooper directed it. But you can see it’s really a Spielberg film. I’m sure Toby after Texas Chainsaw Massacre and before Mean.

I know he was a good director and everything, but none of his other films have that. So like the two sets had crossover. So where the filming locations? So even some of the same houses that are in one are also in the other. There’s things like that and you’re just like did they really just happen to land to the same to end on the same frame? On that note too, and in a vague way, but also in a serious way.

What does it all mean to you? Are you finding cheat codes? Did you find like a game genie just without the manual out? In reality, do you think that people are encoding messages or is it just like oh, that’s a funny coincidence. What is it? Well, I’ve been at it for so long, so it’s been since 6th grade, so I’ve been since junior high, middle school, and I’m like 41 and it’s been like my most consistent activity in my life as far as interests go, like Hobbies or whatever.

So it’s like over time I have different rationales for pairing different things. Sometimes it’s like there’s a backstory where people actually knew each other or know like with Alejandro Hodorowski and Marilyn Manson with like Holywood and Holy Mountain or something. And then you see that, oh, this person actually officiated Marilyn Manson’s wedding. So there’s definitely a direct connection in the real world there and there’s examples of that.

There’s also dates where something comes out the same day and year as something else. And then beyond that there’s a resonance on top of it’s. Not just that. And then you’re like so I run the experiments. I have a very open mind. And I also think things are fun even if it’s not like that magic that I sometimes come across. I’m still fascinated by it or I still enjoy it.

And so it’s just every so often when you keep it something that consistently it’s like you’ll have alignments occur that are beyond what I would ever dream of. And also there’s a syntax aspect to the whole thing. So it’s like how I arrive at it. So it’s like I won’t try something with something else. So like, for example, like ex Machina and under the skin. Like if you start those two films on the same frame, they will cut to black for the credits on the same frame.

When I say syntax, it’s like, I didn’t try either of those movies with something else. I tried them with each other and that’s what happened because I saw a strong resonance there. And so, yeah, there’s one is intuition where it’s like just looking at resonance. So something resonates with something else. Like the wizard of Oz and dark side of the moon. They absolutely resonate. And the biggest kicker with Dark Side of the Moon and The Wizard of Oz is like the third round.

You know what I mean? It’s all cool, it’s all interesting. Like the way money starts, right when it turns to color, stuff like that. When she opens the door and the cash register goes if you start on the third roar, the MGM line. But it’s like the third round is like when she wakes up in bed and it’s like on the point, it’s like she’s back and then it’s home, home again.

I like to be there when I can. That’s crazy. It’s really satisfying when something delivers like that. But if somebody was to watch Dark Side of the Rainbow and they watched like a few songs or something, they’re like, I got the idea. It’s like, no, you didn’t really get the idea because you won’t know it’s. One of my big pet peeves is like, you can go to the theater or whatever and walk out.

Like anyone’s free to do that. But in my opinion with my I feel like if you walk out of a movie, your opinion isn’t worth as much as somebody who finished it. Because I’ll tell you what, it’s not common, but sometimes you’ll have a really shitty movie and the end will be such a payoff that you’re like, oh, I have to reevaluate the whole movie now. It doesn’t happen often, but it can happen.

So if you went to Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey and you walked know, that could have just been a really bad movie and you’re right to walk out and that’s that. But your opinion isn’t worth the same as somebody else who at least finished it, whether you didn’t like it. That’s actually a great movie. Why I chose it to give as an example and then it’s a matter of attention span too.

So things will happen. If I show a film to somebody, like a sync film that I’m really familiar with, and we’re sitting there and I’ll have to wait. I don’t want to interrupt it because even the moment that I go to say something, they might be missing the next thing. But it’s like, things will happen, and you’re like, I have to sometimes stop and be like, did you catch that? Because it’s right there in front of you, but you don’t always see it.

And then once you see it, you can’t unsee it, kind of thing. Are there any films that you’ve been, I don’t want to say, working yourself up to, but every artist or writer has that novel that they want to write before they die. Is there like a movie that you just don’t want to touch yet because you’re trying to approach it just perfectly? Or do you just kind of come with whatever floats your boat at the time? Usually it’s not as much of me.

I try to make it a point to be objective, so it’s like I want things to reveal themselves. If you just stack up information, sometimes the information will point to a place that if you were jumping ahead and trying to leap at something, you wouldn’t necessarily get the same kind of insight, you know what I mean? So I try to just remain open and notice patterns and notice correspondences and then just take note.

And then if enough pile up, then I’ll be like, okay, I got to try that, see what happens. I want to ask this again in a different way, but do you think you’re like tapping into something other than just your own pattern recognition and curiosity? Do you think that there’s an actual pattern that exists outside your perception? Is there like an objective pattern that you’re tapping into as you do these? Yeah, in certain instances.

And so I have over 200 films that are kind of like the cream of my crop that are online, but in my hard drive, I don’t even know what do I have 500? And even beyond that, just over the years, even with VHS and LPs and CDs, just trying to play with it and get there’s, what I share. And then it’s like of those 200, I think that there’s probably like a good like 20 that I can’t imagine how this happened on its own.

And if it did, then the universe is a crazier place. It says something about patterns exist everywhere in nature. So it’s like we’re not separate from nature. So our goings on, even when it comes to media, even like pop culture, it’s like, is that really separate? Is it distinct but not separate? And so that calls that up sometimes and makes me question. But I don’t rule out the possibility in a major way that in certain instances this is part of the creation.

Like this is what the artists actually intended, but it’s not meant for the public, because the public already they have their product, but then meanwhile, they have their own kind of way of relating to it. They can have their own communication with it. That’s what it looks like to me, but I don’t know. You should see how Roger Waters has responded when people bring up Dark Side of the Moon, the wizard of like, he gets mad and it’s like, I don’t know why there’s such a charge on it.

It’s like he’s upset about it. I’m like, didn’t you guys start out doing soundtracks? Like, you got The Valley with Obscured by Clouds and you got more and more, the movie more and the album more. It’s like, you did soundtracks and then The Wall is basically a giant music video that’s like you’re watching a movie on mute with your album over it. Isn’t that what that movie is like? For the most part.

So it’s like, I don’t know why he has this, really. People will just see what they want, whatever. He’s irritated that people are crediting them with being genius enough to sync up their music with a movie, but then he’s angry because they didn’t actually do that. Is that the maybe. I don’t even know. Or he wants to dismiss it because he doesn’t. Because this is the thing, too.

This is major. So if this were true, if you’re entertaining the possibility that there’s intention with any of these, to admit it would destroy it. Because the occult nature of it and the mystery of it is that the listener and the viewer to go on your psychedelic journey and come to that, if you admit it, it’s gone. Like, all of that, because you know what I mean? Don’t talk about Fight Club.

Yeah, you talk about you just ruined the mean. I’ve had so many people that I’ve gotten to and they’ll like it. They’ll respond to it in some cases, Saul Williams and stuff. But then it’s like, no comment. Just like, just enough acknowledgment or they’ll follow you or whatever. If you’re talking about Twitter or something, but you’re like, hey, what do you think of this? Nothing but enough acknowledgement that they’re not upset or something.

Roger Waters actually gets upset. He’s the only person I know that actually gets upset about it. I’d be interested to know if other musicians actually get upset. And I don’t know if David Gilmore ever got upset about the was it the drummer where somebody stopped him and asked him about Dark Side of the Rainbow? And he was like, well, have you tried it with any other films? Like, have you tried the Wall and Ben Hur or something? I think that’s literally the example he gave, and it’s like with a smile on his face.

That’s a good response. That’s like one for the fans. I don’t know why there’s such a charge on it for roger, but whatever. In addition to music syncing with movies and stuff, do you have any strong opinions on Back Queuing or like the hidden messages to play, like, a record in reverse? And what’s your thought? Do you think there’s any legitimate ones that people give credit to? The first album that used backmasking admittedly is I think it was Magical Mystery Tour.

Right. And that’s been discussed. So there’s an interview somewhere and I forget which beatle it was, but one of those guys explained that the idea actually came from William S. Burroughs. So they were hanging out with Burroughs and he was showing them to play Phonograph records backwards. Now, where did Burroughs get it? Well, he was a thelamite I don’t think Burroughs was actually in the Oto, but he was studied Crowley, or at least read Crowley and stuff.

And Crowley mentions that. I think it’s in book four, is that Magic in Theory and Practice, where he advises the student to learn to speak backwards. And I think he even says to play Phonograph records backwards. This is early. I don’t know what year that was exactly. Is that like the 1920s when he wrote that? I forget. But the point is that that probably came from Crowley to Burroughs to the Beatles and then other people played around with that.

There’s effects that you can do. I’ve never heard anyone talk about this but the band Tool, when they released Opiate on vinyl I don’t know if it’s all pressings or what, but my pressing of Opiate, if you put the needle one groove into the first track actually on the B side. So the first track on the B side, there’s a song between the grooves and if you look at the record, you can’t see it at all.

So they put their on the D. It’s like you just wait for the song or whatever. But it’s like I had a friend once, he took some acid. Now he thinks he’s a fire engine. It’s okay until he pisses on your lighter or whatever, that song where he says Satan a bunch of times. So they put that song in between the grooves on the first track on the B side on the record now.

Interesting. So if you put it on the regular lead and you wouldn’t even know about it, you would never know. And I actually played that record so many times before I accidentally found this out. Actually, I worked at a record store at the time and I put the needle into the song just willy nilly. I went back and forth and I was like, oh, if you said it here, it does this.

If you said it here, it does that. Actually, one morning I took some psychedelics with a friend the night before and I told him about this and I went to show it to him and I forgot it was the B side. And I was trying to show it to him on the A side. And he gave me this look. He was like, because I’m a little weird or whatever, and he’s known me for a while, but it was like I could see he was really questioning, like, is David really crazy? I’m like, no, dude, there’s a song between the grooves.

Let me show hogwarts is right through this. Find the right spot. And I kept on trying to find it and I couldn’t find it. And it was like a few minutes went by or whatever, and I was like and I started questioning myself. I’m like, am I crazy? I swear this happened. So, yeah, no, I flipped it and then I saw it was on the B side. Then he was like, oh, wow, okay.

But yeah, there was that moment where you’re just like the cognitive dissonance and whatever. Maybe I’m just hanging out with a totally crazy person. I never actually heard of a hidden vinyl track like that. Right. I remember the old CD ones. You would just let it run and then like 40 or 50 minutes into silence, all of a sudden song would show up, right? Like Tools Undertow had it where it’s like the 69th track and every track leading to it after the initial twelve or whatever it was, was like 3 seconds.

Those were so cool on CD because I don’t remember exactly what album it was, but there was one album that you had to go to the last track and then rewind it. And the hidden song was actually in the negative space of the last song. So you couldn’t get there by just letting it play through. You’d actually have to. I don’t even know why people did that, but it was so cool.

It was like finding the hidden level in Mario. It was like find like a warp tunnel, right? So here’s my question, okay? I know for a fact that you can do this. You can put a hidden track into a record and you look at the record, you can’t tell. So my question is, if it wasn’t the first track, would I ever have found it? I mean, I guess if you’re DJ and you’re going in there, it might by mistake come across it.

But I’m just like, how long has that gone on? So that’s like straight out of 1984, where it’s got the pages between the pages and you undo it and you’re like, oh, there’s another book in here. It’s like, they can’t be the only one. Unless if you show it to somebody directly, depending on what it is, they might not ever believe you like, oh, check this out. Did you know that Chicago has this track in the third song on Side Beat, the needle would just go you could go forever.

And then the thing is, too, is that I was so naive when I was young. I thought when you discovered something that’s really significant and profound, with media that that’s just like, oh, you discovered it, you get credit. And then it’s like the thing explodes. Because I saw what happened with Dark Side of the Moon, The Wizard of Oz, because it’s that on point that it’s like no one can really deny that whatever the case, there’s something to this.

And so I thought that it just worked that way. Like, you discover it and then this is what follows. And then I came to find out, even with the Internet age, where you can be shouting it from rooftops as loud as you can for years, it doesn’t necessitate that people are even going to realize, because it takes the time and attention to actually sit down and watch a thing and to actually consider what you have to see something.

Can you sum that up in a ten second TikTok dance, please? That’s what I’m saying. Yeah, that’s the thing. And I think that attention spans maybe in the 70s when that came out, not just attendance, but people’s lives and people’s time and the way that media was treated. What’s cool about that is that you’d have to run the experiment, which is almost like it’s got a ritual aspect to so, you know, I have friends like Bill who’s kind of a purist with this in a sense.

Maybe that’s not the word, but he feels that people should run the experiment themselves to get the full experience. Like if you put it together for them and all they have to do is push a button, that’s a different kind of thing. But I feel like even just it’s worth doing it for me just for the convenience of my own. I can pause the thing if you have to align it yourself and start the album at a certain whatever it happens to be, third roar or whatever.

It’s like this happened to me once in junior high when I was showing somebody Dark of the Moon, the wizard of Oz at a house party thing, and I had it all set up and all these people were watching it. I was like I was all stoked. I was like, wow, they’re paying attention. They’re watching it. And then some guy walks in. He goes, oh, this looks interesting.

And he bumps the shelf. And it had the CD player and it just went skip, skip. And they were like, oh, no. And I was like, that’s it. And I was like, do you want to start over at the beginning? We’re already 20 minutes in, or whatever. And I was like, yeah. And at that time, now I could fix it because I know enough of the points where the things occur where I could cheat and skip ahead.

But at the time I didn’t know that. And I was just like, I guess that’s it. It’s like that kind of thing. Do you find it easier to do with older movies versus newer movies, or is there. No real it just works sometimes and sometimes it doesn’t. Exactly. Yeah, no, that’s the way it is. I mean, there’s some if you play Beatles Revolver with 1918 Bluebird, it’s a silent film.

That’s incredible. There’s some silent film ones. A lot of these it’s like I had a certain feeling about the musician or whatever. And I might not like the music in most cases or in some cases, but I end up appreciating things that I otherwise wouldn’t because I’m relating to it in a different context. So if I play Lady Gaga’s, the fame monster with Metropolis and start at where the pyramid at the beginning turns, that I love that.

But I wouldn’t necessarily listen to Lady Gaga just because, you know what mean, like but in this context, it has a whole different feel. And there’s something about that with film and know where it’s like you’ll relate to the music through a different lens. I wouldn’t listen to Imagine Dragons, but I’ll tell you what, Imagine Dragons, they have an album that goes with Cloud Atlas that’s just phenomenal.

And not only will I listen to Imagine Dragons, I’ll loop the album and listen to it again, you know what, but like and enjoy. But I’m not putting on Imagine Dragons while I’m cleaning my house or whatever. I could see that. I would almost think of maybe some juxtaposition of putting like Rafi’s Banana phone on with Cannibal Holocaust or something, where now all of a sudden you’ve got a new appreciation for one or the other.

Yeah, exactly. I don’t think that you might have an answer, but I’m just curious. Is there either a movie or album that is just unsinkable, where it’s just like this is just absolute garbage. I can’t even think of what like Veggie Tales, but I assume that maybe even Veggie Tales you’ve synced up at some point. Well, if you take into account all the years that I’ve been doing this, there’s more movies that I’ve tried that didn’t deliver magic.

And nobody’s ever going to know that I put together unless I tell them, you know what I mean? Because it’s like I have no reason to share that. So it’s like there’s so many attempts at this and that has become further in between because usually if I bother to do it, there’s enough to it that I’ll at least enjoy it, even if it’s not profound, you know what I mean? But yeah, there’s like an old film called The Egg and I really felt like should sync with Adam Hart mother.

Now I know that Adam Hart mother syncs with Summer of 42. Like nobody’s business if you start the album on the 42nd second of the film. That’s crazy. And it works so well. But I tried to play that with the egg and I over. And I was like, it feels like it should work, but it doesn’t. There’s a lot of those that I feel like it should work, but it doesn’t.

I wanted Bjork’s Vesper team to work with. Was that French phil? Amelie? It just feels like it should, but I never got the magic, so I gave up eventually. So I want to ask a couple more sort of your opinions on, like, esoteric and occult topics, but before then, I want to see if you’ll do some PCP with me. But actually it stands for I got to remember the paranormal conspiracy probe.

So I’m just going to throw you like, a handful of questions and I want to get your rating on one to ten for how plausible you think this is. Just instant reaction. Don’t even think about it. And if you want me to say one through ten in terms of how much I think that it’s okay. It’s a legit thing. Yeah. So if you say one, then it’s like, okay, BS.

Psyop. Don’t bother me with that. If it’s ten you’re like, you’re all in. Was 911 an inside job? Absolutely, it’s ten. But the thing is that I would say that when you say inside job, any of these questions you’re going to ask me, I can tell you right now, I’m not going to just be able to leave it at a number because it requires qualification. So I would argue that in my estimation not like I know, but in my estimation, I would argue that 911 was an inside job that involved rogue facets of obviously the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel.

And so I’m not saying that the governments worked together per se, but that there was rogue facets of intelligence agencies within those governments that colluded to do what they did on 911. And to clarify for listeners, those rogue factions you just mentioned are also the sponsors of today’s episode. So thank you. Saudi Arabia, Israel, Hall, Burton, and actually, this is the fourth, I think, episode now, and I always forget to lead with the most important question of all.

David, are you a cop? Because if you’re a cop, you have to tell me. That’s actually a myth. I don’t have to tell you. So you are a cop? No, of course not. All right, well, this was a quick one. Thank you guys for tuning up. We’re going to keep going. The one to ten is bigfoot. Real dude. Five. I framed a picture of Bigfoot today. I framed a painting of Bigfoot Foot on velvet today.

Probably worth a few thousand dollars or so. It’s beautiful painting, but yeah, Lauren Coleman, he’s the world’s expert in bigfoot. I think he’s written more books on Bigfoot than anybody who’s alive today. He actually named me Synchro mystic of the Year in 2017. He’s awesome. He’s a friend of mine. So you’ve got some bigfoot credentials. In a way. I live in Santa Cruz, and Santa Cruz Mountains has their bigfoot museum and Lauren Coleman has been there.

Let me ask you, since you said five, did you used to be closer to ten and weaned yourself to five? Or did you start at one and grew into a five? Or you just started at non applicable? And I probably like, at some point went five and it stayed there. Could you ever see yourself getting to six? Or is it just like five because you wanted to believe? Sure, I could see myself getting to six.

Yeah, I could see myself getting to four and zero, too. I don’t know what’s your gut opinion on why nobody has found just the conclusive proof of bigfoot, do you? If you want to know, it’s because it actually ties to a larger issue of coexisting hominoids and so humanoids or whatever, the idea that evolution wasn’t this kind of linear movement of this to that, that there’s actually coexisting lines of evolution that kind of like synchronize, like they correlate.

And so the idea that there could be beings on this planet who are human like, but like elongated skulls or whatever, maybe they wear headdresses to hide it. Maybe they’re some of the richest people on the planet, but they pay to not be included in the Forbes list and stuff like like, I’m totally open to that. So, like, bigfoot, it’s like, oh, could be another line of some kind know, human expression that’s not actually a semantic way into it too.

Okay, so if bigfoot’s five, tell me about reptilians one to know his first I think we’ve discussed this before, maybe on Think Tank, but David Ike’s first, I think couple books. I think he had two. I’m not sure. It may have just been one. But his first books are really hard to find, and I don’t even know where they’re listed necessarily. And if you go to look at what are David Icke’s books? Well, David Icke’s first books were like he was way into Lucius Trust.

And one of my extrapolations with him is that in all likelihood he’s come across at least translations of Esoteric text that was quite old, maybe twelveTH century or anywhere between twelveTH and second century. And the way that, for example, the cleopat are treated is often, like often, but in certain cases is communicated in a very reptilian way. Like you have nehesh. The serpent in the garden is obviously a reptile, and it was a serpent with feet, right? And so there’s this kind of communication around what the reptilian in us is.

There’s this idea that if we came from the dinosaurs, right, the dinosaurs were here on the planet, and then they died off, and then now we’re here. So when people say, like, dinosaurs ruled the world and then you’re like, humans ruled the world, is it possible, evolutionarily, that some aspect of what those reptiles were is still in us? And so when people talk about the reptilian brain as the medial brain and where we go with fight or flight and why it is the way it is, I’ve had experiences where I’ve seen things that I’m sure I’m not alone know.

DMT does. That where I’ve literally seen reptile scales appear actually on Jack Nicholson? I was watching the shine. Maybe I shouldn’t share this, but whatever. It’s free country. Whatever. We’re out in you Jack Nicholson? Yeah. Years ago, I was watching The Shining while smoking DMT, and there came a point where, you know, when they’re in the bathroom, he’s with was it it’s it was like going back and forth.

And Grady was just stable. Like he looked like Crowley. And then it would cut to Nicholson. And I took a big rip of DMT, and my room kind of telescoped out, and I could see the TV off in the distance. And I’m looking at Jack Nicholson’s face, like, he kept on having these bulges come out of it, like these bubbles, like he just looked like he know, kind of squirming around.

And it was really twisted. And then it would cut back to Grady. And Grady was just immediately like, this is why hallucinations with EMT aren’t the same as other. Like, it’s its own thing, right? I don’t know how to explain this, but Grady was just stable, and then it cuts back to Jack, and he’s continuing on with his weird thing. And then there came a point where it’s just like these scales just emerged on his face that were like rainbow, and they were, like, moving, and it was just like he turned into a lizard.

And it looks so real. And I was just like it’s like a very visually convincing hallucination. And what it felt like was that my mind was trying to articulate something. And I think what it was trying to articulate was like it’s hard to explain, but it was like, there’s this idea that if the pressure is too great, this is why fight or flight? If you don’t know how to reconcile something, there’s a place that you can go that’s kind of like, for all intents and purposes, like, cold blooded.

So it looked as though it was like he couldn’t reconcile this thing, so he just settled into this other thing. And I felt like it was, like, lower on the evolutionary scale of expression. So it was like instead of elevating to the next phase of evolution, it settled into the previous. And so I treat that. It’s know Jim Morrison, he had the Don’s Highway thing where it’s like he sees the dead Indians on the road when he’s a kid with his family in the car.

I only know that from the Wayne’s World movie, by the way. Oh, really? Yeah, but I know what you’re talking about. Well, this is crazy. I’m a huge Doors fan, right? Like, I share a birthday with Jim Morrison. I’ve been a huge Doors fan since I was young. And my favorite Doors album is actually Post mortem, so you have an American Prayer was released after his death. It was still my favorite because it’s his poetry that he recorded, mostly his poetry that he recorded on his last birthday before he died.

And there’s a thing in the song progression where you have this story that he shares about when he’s on the road in a desert at dawn. This is the equivalent of Nietzsche’s story about his neighbor killing the lamb, by the way, in the lightning storm. I’m pretty sure that’s where he has his own version of it, like it’s what inspired him. So it doesn’t matter if it’s true or not.

It’s just because it’s used to illustrate this larger point. So he sees these dead Indians on the road, like they had either hit another car or he didn’t know what happened, and the souls of the ghosts of one or two of those dead Indians leapt into his soul and has been there ever since. And that’s the meaning of his hitchhiker thing. So when he’s talking about the hitchhiker stood by the side of the road with his thumb out, he’s saying, like, his body is being used by a hitchhiker.

Who is this? And so it’s this idea. But that album actually goes directly from that to Blood In the Streets. So blood in the streets in the town of New Haven, blood sands the roofs, in the palm trees of Know, blood is the rose of mysterious union, et cetera. It’s this idea that when you build on top of something that happened, that whatever it was previous is still embedded or integrated somehow into the thing that built on top of it.

So it’s just like Poltergeist or The Shining, where they’re like, in The Shining, they’re like, this was an ancient Indian barrel ground, and we had to fend off several Indian attacks while building it. And then it’s like that’s now, imbuing the space, right, is the spirits of what happened there. It’s like the idea of a haunting, right? So poltergeist is the same thing. You move the headstones, but you didn’t move the bodies, didn’t you? It’s like, that’s us, that’s America.

Something happened here, and we’re trying to continue to go about our business. And that’s the nature of repression sublimation. You repress something and then it sublimates into another area. It doesn’t always have to be a matter of, like, oh, it’s gone into a more respectable place. It’s just it’s got to go somewhere. You try and push it down and it’ll find some other corner to work back through into the thing.

You know what I mean? So I’m an engineer by nature, so if I have to boil that down to a number, I’m going to put you at about 7. 8 for reptilians based on your explanation that you’d have to expand the definition of reptilian to some kind of life form that preexisted us. But we have now sort of built on top of, right? It’s more of a matter of, like, for all intents and purposes, ten.

But if you’re not saying for all intents and purposes, and you’re just leaving at that with no qualification, then I can’t even answer it at all. Okay, this is fine. Dude, I like picking these apart. Sure. One to ten. Lee Javi Oswald shot JFK with the shot. I can’t just give you a number for that one. Again, you got to give me a number. You got to give me a number.

Okay, well, the thing is that Lee Harvey Oswald very well may have been one of the eight. You know, from what you know, shots were fired simultaneously. They fucked up. They didn’t hit him. They went to shoot again. They fucked up again. And then he was hit by a guy in a sewer drain 15ft away. And the Zapruder film is faced the other way. You can see the angle came from below.

That’s what it looks like to me, at least. I mean, I’ve watched it enough. If you look at the film itself, you see the shot, and then you look at the autopsy photos, they don’t match. That’s not what happened to his face. So what happened that was even the same person after it took me twice as long as it would take just the average viewer to watch. Was it JFK to 911? Everything is a rich man’s trick.

Because I had to keep pausing it and looking shit up to see if things I don’t know if you know that conspiracy video, but I watched it years ago, and at the time, I had to check all so many of those things, especially that particular section where he’s talking about the multiple shooters. And I’m unable to debunk it. And so I’m not going to stand by it and be like, this is what it is.

Absolutely. But it’s the thing that’s made the most sense to me. And so although it may appear outlandish to some, I think the official narrative is more outlandish. So did Lee Harvey Oswald shoot JFK? He may have been one of those not he may have just been a complete really I don’t really know. The longer time goes on and the more that I look into the JFK assassination in particular, there’s this quote.

I might butcher it. I think it’s Peter Lavenda, but it’s something like, was the JFK assassination a particle or a like that describes it so well? Because, man, it almost feels like it exists in this completely different reality. All the players involved, there’s so much going on. It would take a lifetime. Unpack. It all the guy that with the weird drawn on eyebrows that was directly involved, who also run the Civil Air Patrol that Lee Harvey Oswald joined when he was, like, a youth.

And that George Day Morinschill knew Jackie when she was just a kid. And he also welcomed Lee Harvey to Dallas because and then he worked in then, right? And Thornley, too. And his testimony regarding what was Discordianism. So Lee Harvey Oswald was connected with the founder of Discordionism. I’ve never heard that before. Yeah. So I interviewed this guy, Adam Go, rightly, I believe is his name. I think he lives in Yosemite.

That guy’s written books on Thornley, I think. More than one. And yeah. Lee Harvey Oswald’s. Close friend. Yeah. I recommend the Books of Go. Rightly. And I recommend Sinister Forces by Peter Lavinda. As far as all that stuff goes, those are very insightful books, and they seem to be very empirical, as far as I can tell. It’s hard to argue with a lot of that stuff. Let’s keep this rolling because I got so many more for you.

Oh, cool. I love it. Yeah. Do we have a time limit? Are we talking for 2 hours? No. So I usually run these about 90 minutes max. Okay. Pretty tight. Okay. Are ghosts real? And I already know you’re going to have like a whole thing to explain before we get to the numbers. So you can quantify it however you need to. Ten ghosts are absolutely real. Right. Although here comes all these things.

It’s like ghosts and aliens, like I was saying, like Alien and Poltergeist, like as far as I’m concerned, they’re the same movie. When you’re talking about influences on consciousness, if you refer to the clepode as like the outside ones, it can be a little misleading because, you know, everything is of ainsof. So I’m just speaking Kabbalistically. So when you say ghosts, like a dead person that now is wandering around in purgatory or whatever, that’s another matter.

I’m not going to take a position there. I’ve always really liked I believe it was Blavatsky. I think I heard it from her one time where she was basically relating to this idea that suppose you’re in a house and you were saying that the house was haunted. This is a haunted house. Well, suppose somebody lived in that house for most of their lives or something for years and years.

And they had routines and they walked up and down the stairs and they went and they did the same pattern over and over and over again. And just because we are energy, we’re electromagnetic energy field. Like we walk around, we repeat. It’s not out of the question that that could infuse into the space, so to speak. So that this is still playing out. And we’re composed of elements, and we’re not ultimately separate from our environment.

And so if you’re speaking to when we die, is that it? Maybe in terms of if you’re speaking like the Atman or whatever, it’s like maybe there’s spirit goes somewhere or whatever. But what’s all enshrouding that and around that that makes us up like our actual organism? Not only do I not rule it out, I think it almost seems like to me it feels absolute that it’s like something continues.

When somebody dies, there’s something that continues whether or not that’s your soul is another question. But we’re composed of matter, and that matter is not entirely like physical in the dense physical sense. I believe in the principle of emanations. So it’s like when things come into form, they go from etheric to growth to gross. Right? So it’s like you become more dense. Physical objects are just one side of the spectrum of emanation.

And so I acknowledge that there’s an etheric aspect to what we are. And if you want to call that ghost, then that’s cool. It sounds too like you were describing a little bit of what I guess I would call psychometry, where I guess your energy sort of leaves an imprint in matter that can be detected much later on. I understand that. Or that there’s grooves that get set up.

So it’s like if you had a stream and it’s running along, and then you have parts of the stream that are like they whirls up, it gets caught up. There’s these kind of nooks and crannies that kind of keep things going, and that’s happening while the stream is going. So we’re continuing, but then we have these kind of knots or something that aren’t quite reconciled. And so I also have this idea that I know I’m not alone with people.

Come out of people, come out of people. So we’re a living fractal, right? We’re not a regular fractal, like a computer fractal, because if you go into any part of that and you find the whole mandel broad set or whatever, we’re more like it’s alive. So if the thing is actually the idea of ancestral karma or ancestral, like, what your ancestors experience, that you’re still continuing on that same trajectory? Lamarckian genetic memory or something.

Yeah, like, Katerovsky talks a lot about that kind of stuff, and I really resonate with that. That’s one of those things like what I was saying. It’s like I don’t know how that couldn’t be true. That just seems so know. Well, if we talk about a subset of ghosts, you mentioned the movie Poltergeist. I don’t want to just say the word poltergeist because it means something very specific.

Spirit is literally what it means. So I want to understand. Do you believe in good and bad, Matt? Like angels and demons? Or could you inherently walk into a place that has bad energy and it rubs off on you and now you’ve got bad luck? Yeah, I don’t believe in bad energy. I believe that energy is energy. And then what surrounds that energy. When I was speaking to ebb and flow of the stream, it’s like Kabbalistically.

There’s the Shaifa, which is the life of the thing, the essential aspect of the thing that is like I amness. And then everything else is another matter. So it’s like they say with the kabbalistic tree that there’s two orders to the sephiroth. There’s like the actual organism order that we see in trees and lightning and everywhere. And then in everything organic. And then there’s what we would call this translate as the sustaining order of the empire.

And that’s a cultural thing, that’s a social thing. And that goes really deep, but it’s not profound like the Shaifa is, but it organizes itself to kind of mimic the same expression that we see in you know, there’s this idea, like if you’re talking about Crowley, like the Saudi star issue, I was just talking about this last night with Bill. It’s like my housemate and my this I don’t know if you’re familiar with Crowley’s body star.

Can you explain it? Five words or less. I have to do it. Like if we have the time restraint, it’s like for Brevity, you’re actually going to have to do a TikTok dance for me to get this right. So basically he took the liberty to switch some Arcana of the trump cards in the Tarot deck because every card has its correspondence with a Hebrew letter. So he, in the Book of the Law, had this download didn’t come from him, it came from Iowa.

But anyway, he gets this download that says, Saudi is not the star. All the letters in the book are right, but Saudi is not the star. So he’s relating that that book is the book of what? And what is that? But for him to communicate is the so, you know, all of those Arcana relate to the Kabbalistic tree in very specific ways. As far as Crowley, Eliphus, Levi and dawn, you know, Israel Guardia, all those people, they’re working with the same symbol, Set, right? And so he switched these cards arguing that there was basically a defect.

But I don’t believe that that was actually like any kind. Like he did probably did some weird what you could call black magic or whatever, for lack of a better word. But what I actually take the Saudi star issue to be is basically like brutal fucking honesty because it’s what we’re dealing with in the relative world. It’s not ultimately the name. Like if you’re treating that the Arcana are like a name of 22 because this is the original conception of the alphabet as far as origins go from the Phoenician and Chaldean pictographic roots or whatever, if you have this kind of burst of expression that happened with language and then you look at, over time, the way that things shifted.

And when I say over time, I mean even at the beginning, like the fall starts right away, so to speak. So it’s like, basically, as far as I can tell, he’s acknowledging a defect that exists in society that’s kind of like subliminal or subconscious, and it has to do with our ideas around what constitutes strength. This relates to the arcana of strength, which for Europeans and beyond that, it would be the pathway of Tet, Hesed and Gavora on the Kabbalistic tree.

And so this basically is like Phillip Petite, the guy who put the wire between the two towers and walked across it. In the know. Joseph Gordon Levitt did a film called The Walk about that. Like, that act of him doing like that is the equivalent of pulling the golden bow by him doing basically it’s basically a statement of that. This is going to collapse, like in the same way in the golden bow where the outsider pulls the limb off the tree, which is symbolic of the king’s phallus and daughter.

At the same time he’s challenging the king and the king is as good as dead when he pulls the branch. And so I see this man from France coming to America walking back and forth between this position, because if you’re relating to those towers, like those are the Yaakin and Boaz as it relates to the seven lower sephiroth, then he’s literally walking the pathway of strength. And so it’s Oz.

So the Hebrew word Oz is what the wizard of Oz is named after, right? So there’s Oz, which relates to the Shaifa, it relates to the emanated flow that extends as a lightning flash through the material world, right, through organic expressions. And so then you have a kind of a substitute and that’s where we get the symbolism of like Semael and Lilith, which for Christians would be the archetypes of the scarlet woman and the beast of the apocalypse.

So the idea is that there’s the ultimate reality of what the thing in itself is, as Kant would say, and then there’s what we’re projecting and what we’re relating to, which we can manipulate. And so to try and speak to your question, I guess, what was your question? One more time. I’m such a we started on our ghost reel and then it was like, is there good or bad magic? Right, good and bad magic.

And this is a great example of that because I would be like, is it bad magic? Is it black magic to address what it is that we’re dealing with? Krishnamuri it’s no measure of good health to be well adapted to a profoundly sick society. So if he’s acknowledging what the dynamics are that it has built in all the assumptions that we hold together collectively around what constitutes strength, then one could call that black magic, but at the same time it’s like, well, then we’re all doing that.

So what are you going to do about that? So somewhere between a philosophical interpretation of black magic and then there’s like the 13 year old that bought their first book on Wiccan pagan rituals and they’re listening to whatever nine Inch Nails I’m dating myself. But somewhere between those two extremes, there’s someone that’s legitimately trying to summon Balal. They’re trying to summon some demonic entity to help them in their lives.

I’m just curious, in your perspective, is that person just doing like a really fancy self help ritual with extra steps? Are they tapping into a real energy that some people consider. Demonic, but it’s not really demonic. Or are they just LARPing really hard. Right? It calls in a bigger question of what are demons? Because King James is largely responsible for this kind of shared view of what a demon is, because he wrote the book on demonology, I think before they arranged the werewolves, he believed in kinds of shit.

But the thing is this is the thing is that with a lot of this stuff, it doesn’t even matter in certain cases, like what’s ultimately true, if people believe it, and what kind of influence those people have. So if people are in positions of power and they believe some outlandish shit, it almost doesn’t even matter if it’s real or not, because the fact that these people believe it and they’re influencing our lives in various ways, then it’s like, that’s what we’re dealing with.

You know what I’m saying? Yeah. So I don’t know. As far as demonology goes, the clepo, the idea is that in the world that is to come, they’re transformed that’s alchemy. So in other words, the way you could put that is just I’m sorry, this is kind of crystal hippie, but it’s the same way that Eckhart Tolle talks about the pain body, that the pain body is itself presence.

We’re just relating to it wrongly. We react to it when it arises in the wrong way. It’s life energy, but we restrict it. So a simpler way to put this would be like when you’re laughing, you’re releasing energy, right? Like you’re just letting go. And you actually don’t think when you laugh generally, you know what I mean? There’s like a moment of just like that laughter is a state, right? Well, when you cry, you’re also having an energetic release.

But when you cry, you’re allowing the release, but you’re resisting it at the same time. So it’s like with the laughter, it’s just full release. There’s no resistance for the most part. And then with crying, there’s more of a contracting expression that goes along with the thing. But like I was saying before, you were asking about bad energy, good energy. I’m like, energy is just energy as far as I’m concerned.

But then the way you respond to that energy determines what that energy looks like. Because it’s not really that energy that’s changing, it’s just everything that surrounds it. And so that’s the issue, you know what I’m saying? These are some good I wasn’t expecting any of these answers, so I’m actually glad we’re going. I’ve only got a few others, so let me cherry pick some interesting ones. I guess does the government control the weather? And I guess that’s already like a yes, obviously.

But do they control the weather through like, harp or other taboo technologies that the government and who knows, influence the weather to some degree and to what degree they actually influence it in any particular? I don’t know. I’m not privy to that. But weather modification. Sure, yeah, I’m a ten on that. But I wouldn’t say control. And for the same reason that when it comes to conspiracy shit in general, I don’t care for the word control because I think it’s kind of like arrogant.

I think that there’s like, the Illuminati, whoever they are, I’m sure they’d love everybody to think that they’re in control, not just influencing us. Will you control the workers in Metropolis? And she’s like, yeah, I got it taken care of. Don’t worry. And you sort of touched on this one, and I might know your answer, but dinosaurs? One being fake. Psyop. Ten being yeah, they definitely existed exactly as we see it in the Museum of Natural History.

Ten, but not as we see it in the Museum of Natural History. Because a lot of those fuckers probably had feathers that were really elaborate and whatever. I don’t think that Jurassic Park is showing us what dinosaurs look like, but we’re inferring that. From what evidence we have, I do believe the dinosaur bones are real. Apparently the bronosaurus wasn’t real, but it was just like a modification of another dinosaur that was really similar.

But that guy wanted credit. That happens a lot with archaeology, too. Not just that happens all over the place. So it wasn’t Satan just burying things to make us question our creator? To test my patience, I can’t even hope to get into enough. I was joking about doing, like, a Dummies guide to Kabbalah, but I know it’s something that you’ve been studying for a while. And I guess the American bumpkin version of this is that my understanding is kabbalah is kind of like the oldest version of, like you were saying tarot and the original Phoenician and Chaldean alphabet, but that this might be like the origin of all Esoteric knowledge just repurposed throughout history.

Right. Is there something older than the tarot that you think that came from? Or like chicken or egg. Right. What breed of chicken was it? Suppose you’re talking about geometry. You wouldn’t say that any particular culture owns geometry even if they came up with it because it’s a believe. I’ve been saying that more lately. I didn’t used to say I believe so much, but it’s fun. And I read a lot of Robert Antoine Wilson.

He’s from Santa Cruz and I don’t know, he’s really influential to me in my 20s, but he’s like, you don’t have to have beliefs. But I believe that we discovered math and that we didn’t invent it. I believe that we invented the symbols to communicate it. But mathematics itself is a living thing. And then when we replicate that in our minds and try to understand it, that’s another matter.

That’s like yaakin and boaz. The right is one thing, the left is replicating the pattern, and the replication is copy of a copy. The right is even a copy ultimately. So it’s like if a copy of a copy, it’s not going to be the thing in itself. But yeah, cepharot means numeration. That’s literally what the word means. So it’s like things that stand out in space. Like if something doesn’t stand out in space, we can’t say that it exists because the word exists literally means to stand out in space.

So if we’re talking about something that’s on the etheric side, like in the spectrum of existence, you don’t really have a language for that in English, at least if you look at a lot of there’s Sanskrit terms and there’s Hebrew terms that really don’t have a definition in English, like you can’t really define them. And in certain cases the best you can do is kind of point at what they are by saying what they’re not.

So you kind of come to an affirmation through a negation. Like that happens sometimes in mystery schools. That’s almost a hermetic principle itself is that if you don’t understand something in a certain context, you explain it in another one and you’re like it’s like that, you know what I mean? Exactly. And that’s funny because we say as above, so below. And apparently the Emerald Tablet has had some it’s been scrutinized people saying that it doesn’t date as far back as people thought.

I know that the Zohar is at least as old as the twelveTH century. It may be as old as the second, but we know it’s at least as old as the twelveTH. But that seems hardly the point. A good rabbi will tell you it likely came from Egypt. And so that’s the thing. That’s an awesome point I wanted to get into, because there’s almost this concept that the most ancient equals the most, right? So if I can show you a holy book or an old book that’s 10,000 years older than yours, to some people that means that one’s more accurate because the ancients had a closer connection to God or to the original consciousness or whatever.

But if we’re never actually inventing math, we’re just constantly rediscovering it and finding it new ways. What do you think of the ancients are more right than modern times because we’ve got plastic and TikTok. Well, when you say the ancients, that’s the thing is that I was trying to say that earlier, that even if you talk like the fall is right away. So it’s like if you’re saying like the original conception is one thing and you’re like, what did the ancient people say? Well, you find some ancient text and they have their opinion or whatever that they’re communicating, it’s like that’s not the same as the original conception.

The revelation. It’s like tool in what was it 10,000 days when he’s like having this acid trip, he’s like, but I forgot my pen. You know what I mean? It’s like somebody didn’t forget their pen at some point, you know what I mean? They got the download, they’re like, oh, I got this. You know what I mean, but there’s strange things like you’ll find with the pyramids, for example, the way that the pyramids were constructed, they had a couple of tries that were like, failed, and then all of a sudden they achieved the fucking thing.

And then there’s this long degradation from whatever that revelation was. And insight works like that even in your own life, you’ll notice it, you’ll have a profound insight and then you start building ideas around it. And you can almost like if you have an experience, you can kind of imbue the experience after the fact and lose touch with whatever it was that in that moment you actually saw, because you’re representing it, you’re giving it representation.

And the truth doesn’t need representation. It is its own thing. You can’t actually encapsulate it. And that compartmentalization gets in the way. And that’s what we see with organized religion. Like religion is one thing in essence. And then there’s that old story about the devil walking down the road with a guy. The devil goes and he picks something up off the ground and he smiles and he puts it in his pocket and the guy walking with him goes, what was that that you just picked up? And the devil goes, oh, it’s truth.

And he goes, oh, it must be a very bad business for you then. And the devil goes, not at all. I’m going to help man organize it. It’s not about that. It’s about what is built up around that. And then that’s what becomes the problem. You know what I’m saying? That reminds me. I’ve heard this explained in a way, but that if you try to think of one of your oldest memories, if you’re three or four, some people claim they can remember baby memories, but at a certain point you start remembering the memory of it, like I’m remembering the last time I remembered it.

And there’s a certain threshold when you’re no longer connected to the original event. You’re just playing it back over into a certain 2030 years in the future. It has no real bearing on what actually happened back then, but it doesn’t make it any less real because it’s been inside your head for so long, right? And the point is there is that the memory isn’t the thing. And so you’re dealing with a representation.

And that’s one of the big problems with people, is we do that. We take a representation as though it were the thing in itself, and then we fight over the representation as though it were that thing. Because in a lot of cases, you just can’t fight over the thing in itself because it wouldn’t make any sense. It’s like people rioting over the death of Martin Luther King, who probably didn’t like him while he was around, but they’re going to riot on his behalf once he’s gone.

You know what it’s like. That’s obviously not about the thing in itself. That’s about whatever you decide that means, you know what I mean? My favorite is sports, too. Sports is a great example where people will get into fights or they’ll become brothers with some guy that they don’t know at the bar next to them just because of how things are playing out on this screen of people that they don’t know it.

I love that dynamic, man. Dude, I was in this place in the Himalayas. It’s a village around a lake. And I was, like, sleeping in this room. And all of a sudden, it was just like there was this fucking loud explosion, and the room lit up, and I was like I thought it was bombs. Like, it was so loud. And I got all freaked out. And I went and I went to look out the window, and the first thing I see is some guy hit a pole with his car.

And I’m just like people are running around screaming. And I’m just like, what the fuck is going on? And then I realize I’m like, those are fireworks. There’s fireworks going on. These aren’t bombs. And I see everyone’s screaming and running around speaking in Hindi. And I get dressed and I go downstairs and I go to this guy at the desk of this motel I was staying, like and he’s just freaking out, and he’s got a television.

And I’m like, what’s going on? And he turns at me and he goes, India just beat Pakistan at cricket. And that’s what was happening. And I’m just, like, really? That’s that level. This is in the middle of nowhere, and they’re connected to this, and that’s tribalism. I’m not even necessarily saying there’s anything wrong with tribalism per se all on its own. Our nationalism, it’s what we put on top of it.

It’s like one definition of Zen is life with nothing added. That’s actually what a monk told me at an abbey in Shasta. Sounds like a Klaus Schwab sales pitch at this point, right? Well, the point is, it’s what we put on top of it, and that you can have an experience. And that’s one thing. It’s like my mom’s advice when she found out I was doing psychedelics, at a certain point, she said because my mom grew up in San Francisco in the know, it’s a big part of her childhood.

And she said, you can trip, but don’t trip on your trips. You know what? Don’t. Don’t trip out on the trip. Just have the trip. You don’t have to put all this weight on it. And I think that people just have this tendency to do that. They’ll have an experience, and then they’ll want to make it into something beyond. Especially if you don’t have a parent that’s like I would call that supportive.

But if you live in a sort of environment where it’s taboo, it’s the devil, it’s evil, you’re immediately going to go to jail for the rest of your life. You might as well be a murderer. So when people go into with that mentality, I think that when they have this huge revelation, it’s a huge impact. And they do trip on the trip because now it feels like this coveted knowledge that they weren’t allowed to get a hold of this.

And actually I kind of like that aspect of the psychedelic experience because it’s almost like the ancient mystery schools where you might end up dead if you told someone about what that experience might have been like to the point where maybe it got lost over time. I don’t know that’s my personal theory is that the whole lost name of God might be some kind of representation of the stoned ape theory.

Just like the Eucharist might have originally been a little mushroom cap, and then over time they hit it so well that they forgot about it, and then it goes in this big cycle. I don’t know. Yeah, totally. Yeah, I hear that. I mean, that’s the thing, even if you look at in numbers where it describes the temple incense and you’re looking at the ingredients right now yeah. Is it kings? Is the first kings maybe? I don’t know what the hell I’m talking about.

I’m sorry. I studied Torah and the tonuk and the zohar for over ten years with a rabbi. I was raised studying the Bible, but I don’t always retain everything, so excuse me if I get some things wrong, especially numbers where it’s just like begat, begat, begat. I think I’m just realizing I’m talking about first kings, as I said, numbers. But anyway, no, where it describes the temple incense.

And if you look at a lot of those ingredients, we don’t know what they were. We just don’t know because there’s describing it. But some of them we do know. And of those ingredients included in those is acacia, which even like the Ark of the Covenant itself. And the tabernacle was said to be built of acacia and eastern acacia. You can derive diomethyl tryptamine from it’s in the incense.

And this isn’t just like, oh, they lit a stick of incense. This is like they’re hot boxing a large space, and they’re describing how they’re experiencing prophecy from this as that as part of this ritual. And so it’s like, okay, so it really does look like these people that they’re describing, even if you were to argue that this is just mythology, they’re describing substances that exist, that did exist as well.

There’s no question, whatever the case, people talking about the burning bush, was that Salvia? I don’t need to go there. That would be so cool if it was actually salvia. I don’t think the region matches up, but I want to know that now. Yeah, I know, right. But yeah. And the Salvia told him, tell them I am that I am has sent you Moses of a walker. Right.

When I read the Torah, especially, I see humor that’s like next level humor. That’s like 2001 a Space Odyssey. Humor and Eyes wide shut. Those movies, as far as I’m concerned, are hysterical. They’re deadly serious and hysterically funny at the same time. I suggest you sit down calmly and take a stress pill and think things over. That’s fucking like the computer afraid of dying. That’s a hysterical idea.

But it’s also like, is that what it is? What the hell? Because it’s something we’ve manufactured. And so I’m just going to continue to talk about some issues I see with humanity at large. I really strongly feel that the conflation of technology with biology is one of our biggest downfalls. And I think if you look at the COVID hysteria and all that stuff, it feels like you got a lot of not just technocrats, but people who respect technocrats taking like, they’re all ones and zeros.

So they’re just, like they treat things that are true for technology as though this applied directly to our physical selves. They do that without skipping a beat. Like, there’s just no problem with that. And I see that as extremely problematic. So I always am really keen on qualifying distinctions when we’re discussing technology and then translating it to our physical bodies and environments. You know what I mean? You would find that problematic.

User 19785 B well, you know, I pissed some people off recently talking about AI on Twitter. We’ve discussed this before, but I can’t help it. It’s just like the time that I spent looking at the original, not just the screenplay proposals for AI, but Kubrick’s own handwriting, reacting to different things that were presented in those proposals. One of those things is he didn’t want a fucking family film.

He was making a horror Sci-Fi movie. That was the conception and the whole end of that movie, the way that they have it, where it’s like this fairy tale thing. Yes, he’s taking from Pinocchio, no doubt, like, that was in it to begin with, but in the original conception, that was meant as a punishment to the mother for abandoning the child. It’s not the same story like the flesh I’m sorry, and I know I never met fucking Kubrick, whatever, but I have a feeling that he wouldn’t be down with the way that they did the Flesh Fair, where it was like in hook with Rufio or something.

It was just like, what are you doing to like, there’s so much potential squandered. And it just feels like he’s just pissing all over Kubrick’s grave because he’s just like, I can do what I want. Because Kubrick was not a Hollywood director. And I think that Spielberg, from what I’ve gathered from interviews and from everything he’s had to say about Kubrick, that when he treats Kubrick, talking about sending him the fucking fax machine, and he had it hooked up for less than a week before unhooking it because it was bothering him and all of that.

Like, he wanted to talk to him on a private line. And he’s laughing it he’s it’s talking about paranoid. He he laughed at that as just paranoia. And you know, that Vanity Fair article where Michael Her speaks to that quote from Burroughs of a paranoid schizophrenic is somebody who’s begun to realize what’s going. And Michael Hur argues that when Kubrick saw that, he relays a story that Kubrick shared that with everybody because he was like, oh, what is it, one of those things that you can’t find the words for and then somebody says it for you and you’re like, oh, yeah, that’s know, it’s like Spielberg didn’t take that know, he didn’t resonate with Kubrick’s ideas in those ways.

Conspiratorial ideas. He saw him as paranoid. Didn’t he used to listen to air traffic controllers and be like, oh, there was a close one. Free time on the clock. Yeah, I mean, what’s crazy about Kubrick is that it’s just like, how did this guy have that much, like, with a life, like, being a family man? And then apparently he had the time to like, if you watch Kubrick’s boxes from John Ronson or Ron Johnson john Ronson? Yeah.

And and you’re just like, how many scripts did this guy write that never went anywhere? And then also just people sharing scripts, passing them around. He’s adding to, like I think there’s some real strong cases for Kubrick contributing to movies that we wouldn’t necessarily assume. I think that’s true for Waterloo with Hal Craig. Like, if you look at Hal Craig’s obituary, it says that he wrote Barry Lyndon.

And then he wrote, like which started production, like, three months after Kubrick didn’t do his Napoleon film, which he was supposedly turned down from MGM which I’ve never found any real evidence of. That he was turned down. Especially considering that he did the math of what the film would cost him and it would cost less than what Waterloo costs which is a Dino De Laurentis movie. It’s just like but once again, just like with AI.

He stressed that he didn’t want a war epic. Now I’m really interested to know what Spielberg is going to do now with a seven part series of Kubrick’s Napoleon when original, the original conception was Napoleon and Josephine. And it was meant to be more of a romance than it was a war epic. And so that’s Kubrick’s own explanation of what it was that he was working on. So I’m guessing we’re probably going to see a war epic.

Just like he stressed that he didn’t want a family film and then we ended up with a family film. It’s just like, what the hell? I’m glad we came around to Kubrick as we’re wrapping this up because we’re coming on 90 minutes here. And man, I want to actually get you back on and just talk about Kubrick soon. I think his birthday coming up in like a week or something.

But I’m curious. Do you think based on Spielberg just absolutely destroying AI. And know, flippantly, do you think that Kubrick might be involved in some kind of, like a King Kill ritual where they’re publicly disgracing Shaming, doing the opposite of his wishes just to absorb his power and redirect it in a way? Do you believe in any of that? Ten? Okay. And is this just them trying to take the momentum of Kubrick? That’s what a king kill ritual is.

You take the energy of some kind of a leader, and if you are the one that gets to decide when that gets extinguished, you actually get to redirect it to the next generation. Yeah. I say this as somebody who and it doesn’t stop at Spielberg by any means, but I say this as somebody who really does love Spielberg’s catalog of films, and I think that they’re great, but they’re a completely different style of filmmaking than we see from Kubrick.

Yes, he has his meta narratives, for sure. And I do believe that a lot of Spielberg films incorporate Kabbalistic stuff in not that dissimilar of a way, as Kubrick did, but he’s Sin City in Kubrick’s own words. So he’s like, Why do you want to live in Sin City? Because there’s Kubrick’s own life the way he lived his life. It’s a different treatment, and it comes across in his filmmaking, it’s a completely different thing.

And so it’s almost like kind of like a Vampireism. It’s like Kate Winslet towards Leonardo DiCaprio and Titanic. It’s like she wants something that he has, but not maybe just she, but there’s this thing that exists where people want something that somebody else has, but there’s no shortcut to it. She wants that peasant dick is what she that was. That’s a it’s a trope where somebody slums it.

It’s like Saturday Night Fever or know. And I’m not saying that Spielberg’s slumming it necessarily, but there’s a depth that Kubrick had that he can’t necessarily get at, and so he wants to take it. Okay. One of my absolute favorite things that Freud ever said people talk shit about Freud I can go off to he’s got his issues, and especially a lot of his know, I’m just, like, roll my eyes at it.

But there’s certain I love Freud, so there’s certain things that he said that are meaningful, that are very meaningful and should be considered. And one of those things that are foundational to even his own arguments. Like, I was talking before about repression, sublimation. That’s a Freudian idea that you’ll find in the Zohar as well. So whatever. Maybe he was in Vienna, and he didn’t want to have people having that association or whatever, but I don’t know.

But anyway, he said the desire to have something or someone or whatever is ultimately a desire to want to become that. So it’s like you want to integrate the thing that you want to have to have. It is one level of it to become it is another. So I think that what we’re seeing in the world right now, like, in the culture war shit, a lot of that is symptomatic of that phenomenon or that neuroses that people have this tendency, and you see a lot of different expressions of it.

So speaking to what you were postulating as a possibility as far as, like, we’re talking about Spielberg, but just like, people wanting to take that, they literally want to become the thing. And you can’t stick feathers up your ass and call yourself a chicken. I mean, you can, but it doesn’t make you a chicken. You know what mean? Like, it’s just a featherless, I think. Yeah, so anyway, I don’t know if that answered that, but well, David, this has been freaking awesome.

I can’t wait for our regular sink tank to start back up. I think next week, next Tuesday. We usually do that on Tuesdays, but I definitely want to maybe just have you come on again in the near future and just talk about Kubrick nonstop for a little while because it requires its own episode, in my opinion. Totally. I’m down. Yeah. And I like talking to you about Kubrick because it seems like you’ve done enough research beyond just having watched the movies, that, you know, some backstory.

And so it’s nice talking to you because it’s like, dude, people were mad about what I was saying about Spielberg. I was like, dude, I didn’t even say the know, like, that he’s like a child molester or whatever. I’m like, it’s possible. Crispin Glover also one of the sponsors of this episode. Thank you. Wow, cool. That’s awesome. Yeah, no, I would like to do more. I realized it about halfway through the show, even before I even started talking about Kubrick, because I was like, oh, we should talk about Kubrick.

You’re the guy to talk about Kubrick with. But yeah, no, we will. I’m specifically waiting until I got to build a Tantric release. I have to build up all of this Kubrick energy, and then we’ll just all release it together on, like, a live stream or something. I put your moloch sticker in my dining room on the wall. Got your books there. The inflatable moloch sticker. Yeah, we actually needed to produce the inflatable.

David, again, you make videos on the sync book. Give yourself another shout out and where people can find you, please. Oh, yeah. So thesyncbook. com you can see that there’s like can we go there? Actually, I’ve got it pulled up right now. Oh, cool. There we go. Nice. So if you click on syncflicks there with Dorothy with the single beam going through her head. And then so this one I just put up, this is Et.

And Poltergeist together with 50 50 transparency starting at the same time. This is the syncbook. com syncmediaresearch. And yeah, I have over, like, 200 films here for streaming and download. It works differently for. Some people, if you have a strong Internet or whatever, it shouldn’t be a problem. But if it is, if something looks interesting enough to you, I’d recommend downloading. Mine is definitely Lagging, right? Yeah, yeah, that’s the thing.

And I think with iPhones, for some reason, with a certain andreas figured it out. He figured out what the issue was. I think they’re trying to phase out streaming. That’s not like the sanctioned streaming, like Netflix and YouTube and whatever. So if you have a different streaming service, a lot of these things are trying to get rid of that. It looks like maybe I’m just going to net neutrality, man.

That’s the net neutrality right there something’s going on. I don’t know. Have you seen this one? The untethering right there with Saul Williams. This is one of my favorite just because I’m a huge Saul Williams fan. Even the movie that gets a little bit of panda views, I can’t remember the name of it’s called, like what? Slam. Slam. Oh, my God, I love that movie so much. Great movie.

Yeah, there’s Slam and there’s his recent musical that he did, which is phenomenal. And so yeah, no, this is US. And The Shining is mirrored against itself with Saul Williams amethyst rock star. So this is almost exactly 20 years in between each one of those components. So it’s like 20 years between The Shining and the Saul Williams album from, I think, 2000, 2001, and then US came out in 2019.

So this is like a continuum. This is a whole other rabbit hole to go into. But with US, you have Jack Nicholson’s grandson appearing in the credits as know, if you if you watch US and you notice the way that the woman speaks where she’s like, we’re Americans. That’s Tony. Okay? Make no mistake about it. US. I wouldn’t call it a sequel, but it’s a continuation of the same kind of philosophical conundrums presented in The Shining.

So they’re absolutely connected. Only one person dies in The Shining other than Jack. The Shining is a very racial related film, so some people seem to miss that component. Know? Do you see Dr. Sleep as a worthy sequel, the movie to The Shining, or it’s so painful. It’s so painful. You’re into the deep fake type stuff and I’m just like, oh, my God. I don’t know, maybe it was a legal issue or whatever, but I’m like, what a missed opportunity.

Because to be, you know, and Danny danny was like, did Danny turn it down? Did they ask Danny Lloyd if he would play Torrance? Like, because he’s only done one movie, would he do a second if it was a sequel? If that was actually Danny Lloyd in that movie, it would probably be one of my favorites. But it’s not. Maybe the acting chops weren’t there, though. Maybe I don’t know what happened there.

I’ve only done one. Know, and it’s not like child acting translates directly into adult acting. No, but even if it was bad, I don’t like, I would rather have a bad acting Danny Lloyd than Owen McGregor. And I like Owen McGregor I got no problems with. Know. But you know what? It’s a also excuse me. That’s like a Floydian slip. No, it’s also Stephen King, who, for some know, it’s the only movie that was made out of his books that he puts down.

He doesn’t put down Langoliers. He’s not going to put down Maximum Overdrive with the all AC DC soundtrack milio west of his movie. He doesn’t put down, like, there’s so many movies that were made of his stuff, and he only has The Shining two in Soul, which is, like, the best one. I agree with you. I don’t even know how controversial this is, but I think the stand sucked.

Even the remake, it’s the epitome of never go full R word. Right. One of the things I love about Twitter is that you can really see people who you might revere, like, you put on a pedestal, and then you just see, oh, that’s how they are. It’s like the hellboy, guy. Yeah. Right. Stephen King is one of Know, where you’re just like, really mean. I know. I guess he’s old.

I don’t didn’t he’s just always clapping back from, like, a baseball stadium, I imagine. Right. All right, man. Well, thank you again for your time. We have so many more conversations coming up here and elsewhere. So I’ll see you with those ones. I’m always looking forward to it. And thanks again, man. And to all of the viewers out there, I just want to remind you guys that total paranoia is total consciousness.

I think that was Jesus. I think that was Jesus, right? Introducing the paranoid American Homunculus owner’s manual. Dive into the arcane, into the hidden corners of the occult. This isn’t just a comic. It’s a hidden tome of supernatural power. All original artwork illustrating the groundbreaking research of Juan Ayala, one of the only living homunculogists of our time. Learn how to summon your own homunculus, an enigma wrapped in the fabric of reality itself.

Their power at your fingertips, their existence, your secret. Explore the mysteries of the Aristotelian, the spiritual, the paracelcian, the crowlean homunculus. Ancient knowledge lost to time, now unearthed in this forbidden tale. This comic book holds truths not meant for the light of day. Knowledge that was buried, feared, and shunned. Are you ready to uncover the hidden? The paranoid American homunculus owner’s manual. Not for the faint of heart.

Available now from paranoid American. Get your copy@tjojp. com or paranoidamerican. com today. Sam. .