Connect with us

Here’s Your Chance To #BeChange With CE, Help Us Bring Clean Water To Those In Need

Avatar

Published

on

One of the most common messages that we receive via e-mail and Facebook messenger is of people looking to get involved and to be a part of creating change on the planet. To us, messages like this are exciting because they stand as further proof that more and more people are resonating with the content that we share and are ready to step outside of the box.

advertisement - learn more

Collaborating initiatives that involve everyone from all over the world can certainly be tricky, but we at CE are now – more than ever – looking to make this possible. What started with the Be Change section on our site has now evolved to include a more conscious effort to involve ourselves with great organizations that we know and trust – something that we are referring to as the #BeChange initiatives.

--> Practice Is Everything: Want to become an effective changemaker? Join CETV and get access to exclusive conversations, courses, and original shows that empower you to embody the changemaker this world needs. Click here to learn more!

Back in October of last year we started local and small with a homeless food handout, which ended up being quite the unexpected eye-opener (see why). We are now happy to announce that we have begun our own Charity Water campaign to help bring clean water to those in need.

What Is Charity Water?

Founded by Scott Harrison, Charity Water is an easy-to-use and adaptable platform for individuals and organizations to raise money to help build clean water projects in parts of the world that currently do not have access to clean water.

What truly sets it apart is that 100% of everything that Charity Water raises goes directly to building clean water projects  no middle man taking a cut of the much-needed financial resources. Donators are also given photos, GPS co-ordinates, and e-mail updates showcasing the progress of the water initiative they helped to bring into fruition – giving further peace of mind that the money is being put to good use.

Our Campaign: ‘CE #BeChange: Project H2O’

The goal of our campaign is to raise a minimum of $5000 to help at least some of the 748 million people that currently live without access to clean water. We need your help to hit our goal and we’ve come up with some exciting incentives to make reaching it that much more interactive:

advertisement - learn more
  • At $1000 —  Joe and Mark of the CE team will film and release a special episode of their YouTube series “These Guys” where, for every view that the episode receives over a 1 week period, CE will donate $0.01 towards the cause (up to a maximum of $1000).
  • At $3000 — We as a team will volunteer our time at a local animal or homeless shelter in Toronto.
  • At $5000 — Everyone on the CE team will give up coffee, tea, soda, and alcohol for an entire month.

In addition to these incentives, when we collectively hit each of the thousand dollar landmarks, CE as an organization will be donating $100, $200, $300, $400, and $500 respectively to the overall goal. To start us off, all 8 of the core CE team members have donated $50 of our own money to give us a $400 head start towards our goal.

How To #BeChange

donatenow

To find out more about our campaign click on the image above, or check out the following video that we put together to announce the project. Even if you cannot help us achieve our goal financially you can still be a part of the project by sharing the campaign on social media. Let’s come together and make a huge impact!

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

New Research Adds Evidence That Weed Killer Glyphosate Disrupts Hormones

Avatar

Published

on

New research is adding worrisome evidence to concerns that the widely used weed killing chemical glyphosate may have the potential to interfere with human hormones.

In a paper published in the journal Chemosphere titled Glyphosate and the key characteristics of an endocrine disruptor: A review, a trio of scientists concluded that glyphosate appears to have eight out of ten key characteristics associated with endocrine disrupting chemicals . The authors cautioned, however, that prospective cohort studies are still needed to more clearly understand the impacts of glyphosate on the human endocrine system.

The authors, Juan Munoz, Tammy Bleak and Gloria Calaf, each affiliated with the University of Tarapacá in Chile, said their paper is the first review to consolidate the mechanistic evidence on glyphosate as an endocrine-disrupting chemical (EDC).

Some of the evidence suggests that Roundup, Monsanto’s well-known glyphosate-based herbicide, can alter the biosynthesis of the sexual hormones, according to the researchers.

EDCs may mimic or interfere with the body’s hormones and are linked with developmental and reproductive problems as well as brain and immune system dysfunction.

The new paper follows publication earlier this year of an assortment of animal studies that indicated glyphosate exposures impact reproductive organs and threaten fertility.

Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide, sold in 140 countries. Introduced commercially in 1974 by Monsanto Co, the chemical is the active ingredient in popular products such as Roundup and hundreds of other weed killers used by consumers, municipalities, utilities, farmers, golf course operators, and others around the world.

Dana Barr, a professor at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health, said the evidence “tends to overwhelmingly indicate that glyphosate has endocrine disrupting properties.”

“It’s not necessarily unexpected since glyphosate has some structural similarities with many other endocrine disrupting pesticides; however, it is more concerning because glyphosate use far surpasses other pesticides,” said Barr, who directs a program within a National Institutes of Health-funded human exposure research center housed at Emory. “Glyphosate is used on so many crops and in so many residential applications such that aggregate and cumulative exposures can be considerable.”

Phil Landrigan, director of the Global Observatory on Pollution and Health, and a professor of biology
at Boston College, said the review pulled together “strong evidence” that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor.

“The report is consistent with a larger body of literature indicating that glyphosate has a wide range of adverse health effects – findings that overturn Monsanto’s long-standing portrayal of glyphosate as a benign chemical with no negative impacts on human health,” said Landrigan.

EDCs have been a subject of concern since the 1990s after a series of publications suggested that some chemicals commonly used in pesticides, industrial solvents, plastics, detergents, and other substances could have the capacity to disrupt connections between hormones and their receptors.

Scientists generally recognized ten functional properties of agents that alter hormone action, referring to these as ten “key characteristics” of endocrine-disruptors. The ten characteristics are as follows:

EDC’s can:

  • Alter hormone distribution of circulating levels of hormones
  • Induce alterations in hormone metabolism or clearance
  • Alter the fate of hormone-producing or hormone-responsive cells
  • Alter hormone receptor expression
  • Antagonize hormone receptors
  • Interact with or activate hormone receptors
  • Alter signal transduction in hormone-responsive cells
  • Induce epigenetic modifications in hormone-producing or hormone-responsive cells
  • Alter hormone synthesis
  • Alter hormone transport across cell membranes

The authors of the new paper said a review of the mechanistic data showed that glyphosate met all of the key characteristics with the exception of two:  “Regarding glyphosate, there is no evidence associated with the antagonistic capacity of hormonal receptors,” they said. As well, “there is no evidence of its impact on hormonal metabolism or clearance,” according to the authors.

Research over the last few decades has largely focused on links found between glyphosate and cancer, particularly non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL.) In 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen.

More than 100,000 people have sued Monsanto in the United States alleging exposure to the company’s glyphosate-based herbicides caused them or their loved ones to develop NHL.

The plaintiffs in the nationwide litigation also claim Monsanto has long sought to hide the risks of its herbicides. Monsanto lost three out of three trials and its German owner Bayer AG has spent the last year and a half trying to settle the litigation out of court.

The authors of the new paper took note of the ubiquitous nature of glyphosate, saying “massive use” of the chemical has “led to a wide environmental diffusion,” including rising exposures tied to human consumption of the weed killer through food.

The researchers said that though regulators say the levels of glyphosate residue commonly found in foods are low enough to be safe, they “cannot rule out” a “potential risk” to people consuming foods containing contaminated with the chemical,  particularly grains and other plant-based foods, which often have higher levels than milk, meat or fish products.

U.S. government documents show glyphosate residues have been detected in a range of foods, including organic honey, and granola and crackers.

Canadian government researchers have also reported glyphosate residues in foods. One report issued in 2019 by scientists from Canada’s Agri-Food Laboratories at the Alberta Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry found glyphosate in 197 of 200 samples of honey they examined.

Despite the concerns about glyphosate impacts on human health, including through dietary exposure, U.S. regulators have steadfastly defended the safety of the chemical. The Environmental Protection Agency maintains that it has not found any human health risks from exposure to glyphosate.”

Written by Carey Gillam, research director of U.S. Right to Know, where it was originally posted. 

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Portuguese Court Rules That The PCR Test “Is Unable To Determine” A COVID-19 Infection

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A Portuguese court has determined that the PCR tests used to detect COVID-19 are not able to prove an infection beyond a reasonable doubt, and thus determined that the detainment of four individuals was unlawful and illegal.

  • Reflect On:

    With no clear cut answer, and many doctors and scientists contradicting each other, should governments be allowed to take measures that restrict our freedoms? Instead of force, should they provide the science and simply make recommendations?

What Happened: The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test “is unable to determine, beyond reasonable doubt, that such positivity result corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2 virus”, said the Lisbon Court of Appeal. (source)

A Portuguese appeals court has ruled against the Azores Regional Health Authority, declaring the quarantining of four individuals is unlawful. One of them tested positive for COVID using a PCR test, and the other three were deemed to be high risk due to exposure, and as a result, the regional health authority forced them to undergo isolation. The appeal court heard scientific arguments from several scientists and doctors who made the case for the lack of reliability of the PCR tests in detecting the COVID-19 virus.

The court found that, based on the currently available scientific evidence, the PCR test is unable to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that a positive test actually corresponds to a COVID-19 infection for several reasons, two of the main reasons were that the test’s reliability depends on the number of cycles used, and the test’s reliability depends on the viral load present.

This was also brought up recently by tech mogul Elon Musk who recently revealed he had four tests completed in one day. Using the same test and the same nurse, he received two positive results and two negative results, causing him to state his belief that “something bogus” is going on here. He then asked his Twitter following

“In your opinion, at what Ct number for the cov2 N1 gene should a PCR test probably be regarded as positive? If I’m asking the wrong question, what is a better question?”

In the Portuguese appeal hearing, Jaafar et al. (2020) was cited, stating that “if someone is testing by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the US), the probability that said person is infected is  <3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%.”  The court further noted that the cycle threshold used for the PCR tests currently being made in Portugal is unknown.

They also cited Surkova et al. (2020), stating that any diagnostic test must be interpreted in the context of the actual probability of disease as assessed prior to the undertaking of the test itself, and expresses the opinion that “in the current epidemiological landscape of the United Kingdom, the likelihood is increasing that Covid 19 tests are returning false positives, with major implications for individuals, the health system and society.”

The court also made the point that a medical diagnosis is a medical act, thus only a physician can determine if a person is ill, no other person or institution has a right to do that.

The court concluded that “if carried out with no prior medical observation of the patient, with no participation of a physician certified by the Ordem dos Médicos who would have assessed symptoms and requested the tests/exams deemed necessary, any act of diagnosis, or any act of public health vigilance (such as determining whether a viral infection or a high risk of exposure exist, which the aforementioned concepts subsume) will violate [a number of laws and regulations] and may configure a crime of usurpação de funções [unlawful practice of a profession] in the case said acts are carried out or dictated by someone devoid of the capacity to do so, i.e., by someone who is not a certified physician [to practice medicine in Portugal a degree is not enough, you need to be accepted as qualified to practice medicine by undergoing examination with the Ordem dos Médicos, roughly our equivalent of the UK’s Royal College of Physicians].”

In addition, the court rules that the Azores Health Authority violated article 6 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, as it failed to provide evidence that the informed consent mandated by said Declaration had been given by the PCR-tested persons who had complained against the forced quarantine measures imposed on them….From the facts presented to the court, it concluded that no evidentiary proof or even indication existed that the four persons in question had been seen by a doctor, either before or after undertaking the test. (source)

According to Vasco Barreto, a researcher at the Center for the Study of Chronic Diseases (Cedoc) of the Faculty of Medical Sciences of the Universidade Nova de Lisboa,  it was irresponsible the way two magistrates dealt with the case. “PCR tests have a specificity and sensitivity greater than 95%. That is, in the overwhelming majority of cases they detect the virus that causes covid-19,” he said. This is indicated in a scientific article that is cited in the judgment, but that is read “completely wrong” by the magistrates, according to Germano de Sousa, former President of the Ordem dos Médicos and owner of a network of laboratories.

You can read more on why this judgement was “unscientific” according to them, here.

Why This Is Important: When it comes to the testing used to detect a COVID-19 infection, there is a wealth of information making it quite clear that the  (PCR)  tests are inadequate and unreliable for determining who is infected and who isn’t. As a result, there seems to be a strong possibility, according to many experts, that the number of cases recorded around the globe probably include a great number of false positives, meaning people who tested and do test positive for the virus don’t actually have it.

But is this true?

There is also a great deal of information making it quite clear that the PCR tests being used are indeed accurate, and very accurate. So, ask yourself this, how can there be “clear” information on both sides? What’s the correct information? How do we know what to believe? Are you open to consider another perspective about this pandemic, one that opposes what you believe? Can you see from the perspective of another person even though they may disagree with you?

There are many examples to choose from that reflect the idea that PCR tests are not accurate, and that they are. For example, the Bulgarian Pathology Association claimed that they are “scientifically meaningless.”  They cite an article published in “Off Guardian” that makes some very interesting points.

It’s been a common theme. Well after this, British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab stated that:

“The false positive rate is very high, so only seven percent of tests will be successful in identifying those that actually have the virus.”

In July, professor Carl Heneghan, director for the centre of evidence-based medicine at Oxford University and outspoken critic of the current UK response to the pandemic, wrote a piece titled: “How many Covid diagnoses are false positives?” He has argued that the proportion of positive tests that are false in the UK could be as high as 50%.

Former scientific advisor at Pfizer, Dr. Mike Yeadon argued the proportion of positive tests that are false is actually “around 90%”.

How declaring virus pandemics based on PCR tests can end in disaster was described by Gina Kolata in her 2007 New York Times article Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.

On the other side of the coin, According to Dr. Matthew Oughton, an infectious diseases specialist at the McGill University Health Centre and the Jewish General Hospital in Montreal:

”The rate of false positives with this particular test is quite low. In other words, if the test comes back saying positive, then believe it, it’s a real positive.”

According to Dr. Robert H. Shmerling, Senior Faculty Editor at Harvard Health Publishing.

False negatives – that is, a test that says you don’t have the virus when you actually do have the virus – may occur. The reported rate of false negatives is as low as 2% and as high as 37%. The false positive rate – that is, how often the test says you have the virus when you actually do not – should be close to zero. Most false-positive results are thought to be due to lab contamination or other problems with how the lab has performed the test, not limitations of the test itself

It also seems to be accepted by many scientists in the field that the number of infected persons is much higher than what we’ve been made to believe from testing, thus driving the infection/fatality rate even lower than what we are seeing. Estimates of infection fatality rate are on par with seasonal flu from this perspective according to many scientists and health professionals.

For example, Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist, Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician and epidemiologist created The Great Barrington Declaration opposing lockdown. Approximately 45,000 doctors and scientists have now signed it. The compares COVID -19 to the seasonal flu.

The Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC) recently published a report titled “Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) Compares COVID-19 to Previous Seasonal and Pandemic Flu Periods.”  John P. A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at Stanford University has said that the infection fatality rate is close to 0 percent for people under the age of 45 years old, explaining how that number rises significantly for people who are older, as with most other respiratory viruses. You can read more about that and access that here.

These are a few of multiple examples.

Is There Conflicting Info Due To The Politicization of Science? 

Kamran Abbas is a doctor, executive editor of the British Medical Journal (BMJ), and the editor of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization. He has recently published an article about COVID-19 in the BMJ, the suppression of science and the politicization of medicine.

In it, he offers some food for thought,

Politicians and governments are suppressing science….Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science.

Globally, people, policies, and procurement are being corrupted by political and commercial agendas…The UK’s pandemic response relies too heavily on scientists and other government appointees with worrying competing interests, including shareholdings in companies that manufacture covid-19 diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines. Government appointees are able to ignore or cherry pick science—another form of misuse—and indulge in anti-competitive practices that favour their own products and those of friends and associates.

The stakes are high for politicians, scientific advisers, and government appointees. Their careers and bank balances may hinge on the decisions that they make. But they have a higher responsibility and duty to the public. Science is a public good. It doesn’t need to be followed blindly, but it does need to be fairly considered. Importantly, suppressing science, whether by delaying publication, cherry picking favourable research, or gagging scientists, is a danger to public health, causing deaths by exposing people to unsafe or ineffective interventions and preventing them from benefiting from better ones. When entangled with commercial decisions it is also maladministration of taxpayers’ money.

The Takeaway: Politicization of science was enthusiastically deployed by some of history’s worst autocrats and dictators, and it is now regrettably commonplace in democracies. The medical-political complex tends towards suppression of science to aggrandize and enrich those in power.”

Are we really going to get anywhere if we are constantly polarized with regards to what we believe about this pandemic? More important than information and facts is our ability to empathize with another person who does not share our own beliefs and try to understand where they are coming from and why they feel the way they do. It’s also important for them to empathize with you, and at the end of the day we all must do this with each-other if we want to move forward. Polarization and separation, constantly arguing and fighting with one another will never get us anywhere at all, and simply leaves us open as a collective to harmful responses by governments.

Why is so much information being censored? Why is everything that’s controversial these days deemed a “conspiracy theory” and not really explored by a large majority of people? Given we are deeply feeling the need to make sense of our world, is it time we begin to look at developing the inner faculties necessary to move beyond ideology, limited thinking patterns and truly begin looking at what evidence around us says?

If there’s anything this pandemic has taught us, it’s that we need to change the way we think and how we relate with one another. Obviously, the measures being forced upon us are difficult, and may be causing a lot more harm than good, if any good at all.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Consciousness

CIA Document Demonstrates The Remarkable ‘Paranormal Writing’ Ability of a Gifted Girl

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A study from China, translated and archived in the CIA's electronic reading room, demonstrates the ability of a gifted girl to physically write on a piece of paper inside a closed container using nothing but her mind.

  • Reflect On:

    How much do we really know about ourselves and what we are capable of?

Do paranormal abilities exist? A bold question we often feel is based on belief and not science. But looking to parameters that can help determine if something is real or not in our world, like peer-reviewed publications, video footage, and the ability to experience something, then yes, paranormal abilities do exist and there are many different examples to choose from that clearly illustrates this.

The funny thing is, these abilities are studied and trained at the highest levels of government and military, yet within academia, it’s almost completely ignored.

As the Chinese Institute of Atomic Energy pointed out in 1991, in a study archived by the CIA:

“Such phenomena and paranormal abilities of the human body are unimaginable for ordinary people. Nevertheless they are really true.”

In the study the Chinese researchers provide multiple examples of a Qi Gong master, who under double-blind controlled conditions, was able to teleport small objects out of containers from one location to another using nothing but mental influence (breaking through spatial barriers). Multiple test subjects were able to do this including gifted children. This is just one example of research and published observation of this type of phenomenon under tight controls.

Another great example and the main subject of this article, comes from a study published in The Chinese Journal of Somatic Sciences by researchers from Fudan University, a major research university located in Shanghai. The study is/was also documented and translated by the CIA at the time, but not approved for release until the year 2000.

The study is titled Investigation Into The Force of Parapsychological Writing. The study explains that parapsychological writing is only one form of paranormal abilities displayed by humans, and cites a “large number of experiments” where this type of phenomenon has been demonstrated and documented repeatedly.

Parapsychological writing includes a number of complex parapsychological phenomenon including moving the writing instrument, breaking through spatial barriers and thought directed writing. These paranormal phenomenon cannot be explained using modern scientific knowledge. However, the recording of paranormal phenomena, especially of the accumulation of data on experiments conducted using strict scientific methods must eventually approach and disclose the truth about this unknown realm.

The study was designed to detect any type of possible “force” that could somehow be measured when gifted people demonstrated their ‘paranormal’ ability. Three experiments to do this were conducted.

The first one used a mechanical balance and a girl named “Little Gi.” The balance had a glass cover and was very sensitive to lightweight objects. On the left plate of the balance, the researchers placed a plastic film canister. Inside that film canister they placed a square of white paper. The lid to the film canister was slightly open. On the right hand side plate of the mechanical balance, they placed a piece of material identical to the weight of the canister with the piece of paper inside it, so the balance would be kept level.

More illustrations are available in the study.

Placed next to the mechanical balance was a concrete slab with a pen on it.

The experiment required Little Gi to use her thoughts to “write” or “draw” on the piece of paper located inside of the film canister with a black ink fountain pen. The results were incredible:

She was to concentrate her thoughts on this to the exception of everything else. We conducted a total of nine experiments, of which three were successful. Each experiment lasted for 15 to 25 minutes. The words and drawings were all black like the ink in the fountain pen used in the experiment. In the three successful experiments, two had clear characters and drawings and the other had fairly blurry circles and dots. Neither of the two observers saw the mechanical balance move at all, demonstrating that the film canister was not under any observable “outside force”.

If you’re floored by the claimed results of this study, you’re certainly not alone. What we’re seeing here is an example that humans may have abilities far beyond what we are aware of today, and that it may be a matter of development for others to realize these abilities.

For me, it would have been interesting if before and after the experiment they examined the ink inside of the pen to determine if it somehow was the source of the writing. But the various pens used had different color ink, and in the next experiment, researchers mention how the ink marks that appeared on paper were both blue and green, just like the ink in the pens.

The second experiment used a thermobalance to try and detect some sort of force generated by the mental will of the subjects. A thermobalance gives a continuous recording of the relationship between mass and temperature. In the experiment, a blank piece of tape was stuck to one of the arms of the thermobalance. The arm was covered with a glass tube to keep air currents from affecting the experiment. Little Ji sat at the edge of a table that was 0.5 meters from the balance with her back turned to the instrument. On the table there was a fountain pen.

The experiment required that the subject use her thoughts to “write” on the white tape with the fountain pen. During the experiment, those administering the experiment always observed the progress of the experiment from the side, and the automatic recorder drew the weight/time graph. Ten experiments were conducted in all, and three of these were successful. Each experiment lated approximately 20 minutes. The “writing” was always dots in the same color as the ink used in the fountain pens in the experiment (green and blue).

Yet another incredible result, but they weren’t done.

The third experiment was similar to the previous two. Only this time it used a piezoelectric crystal to try and detect some sort of electromagnetic force. There was no force detected, but multiple subjects in this experiment were able to successfully write on the blank paper ten successful times.

There is no known and widely accepted explanation for the phenomenon observed by the researchers, and perhaps our methods of detecting some type of “force” aren’t advanced enough yet. Regardless, these abilities are real and have been demonstrated many times, yet we fail to come up with an explanation to explain them. Moreover, most people would likely be too skeptical to even wish to attempt to wrap their minds around how this is happening, and it would likely challenge their entire worldview.

The authors of the study explain that:

…the “pen” appears in their “mind”, they imagine the object on which the pen is to write (paper, tape, etc). Finally, the ‘pen’ will suddenly write or make a mark on the paper or tape in their minds with a flash and the process is over. There are also times when the person will use thought to image the paper or tape and then to imagine the “pen”, and finally the flash described above.

The authors hypothesize that some sort of thought waves are directly interacting with the “matter waves” of these objects, but again, there is no possible way to tell exactly what is going on. Right now it remains unexplainable, but one thing seems certain, the power, intention and sheer will of the human body, possibly not only of the mind, is somehow interacting with physical material matter. We’ve seen this in a number of consciousness and quantum physics experiments at the quantum level, and also at the conventional level using, in this case, people with ‘paranormal’ abilities.

Why This Is Important: The scientific study of such phenomenon is often ignored, belittled and ridiculed from the get go. Many people, especially within the scientific community, are quick to instantly dismiss the possibility that such things can be true or possible. Not examining phenomena, or at least acknowledging the results of a phenomenon based on what we believe to be true or not, is not very scientific. Once again, this demonstrates a common challenge amongst humanity that we are often not willing to look at information that could deeply challenge our foundational worldview.

Anybody looking at this subject matter from an objective standpoint would no doubt have their beliefs challenged. Studies in this field really make one question the true nature of our reality, what we are capable of, and how much we know about ourselves. It’s no secret that a very conservative mainstream scientific establishment often rejects anomalies based on subject matter alone.

How much do we limit our consciousness and perceptions about our world, who we truly are, and what we are capable of as a result of our beliefs, and our determination to say “this is the way things are?”

Cassandra Vieten, PhD and President/CEO at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, which was founded by Apollo 14’s Dr. Edgar Mitchell touches upon this point in her piece, it’s a quote I’ve used many times to illustrate this point “When Skeptics Face The Evidence.”

There seems to be a deep concern that the whole field will be tarnished by studying a phenomenon that is tainted by its association with superstition, spiritualism, and magic. Protecting against this possibility sometimes seems more important than encouraging scientific exploration or protecting academic freedom. But this may be changing. The session I presented in was very well-attended, and I found that most people, while not exactly open-minded, were open-hearted, thoughtful, and willing to engage in respectful discussion about the topic.

The Takeaway: It’s important to mention again that there are many examples of such parapsychological phenomenon. This article is only providing a tidbit on the subject. Why is most of the literature available on this subject coming from defense departments of multiple countries? Why is it that it’s studied in classified and secretive settings and not really made available or open to public scrutiny? Why are these things being studied at the highest level of government yet completely ignored and unacknowledged within academia?

I truly believe that all humans possess capabilities we are not yet aware of, and I believe this has been demonstrated quite well. In a free, open and transparent society we would be utilizing these concepts and learning more about them, simply because they seem to be a natural part of the human being.

Study in these fields can truly expand human consciousness.

That being said, I don’t believe that human beings are operating from the correct place within to utilize or learn these concepts. The collective, in some sense, craves power, service to self, and the desire to advance oneself in a materialistically inclined way, we are not yet operating from the correct level of consciousness to have these abilities present in our human experience.

It’s like technology, we can use it to make weapons, make money, not share it, or use it for the collective good. It’s a choice, but what drives our choices? It’s not our abilities or technology that can create change, it’s the level of consciousness we operate from and the place from within we implement these solutions, not the solutions themselves.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Due to censorship, please join us on Telegram

We post important content to Telegram daily so we don't have to rely on Facebook.

You have Successfully Subscribed!