- The Facts:
An experiment from 1965 shows that the elicitation of alpha brain waves in one twin creates the same effect in the other who is separated from their sibling. The researchers call it "extrasensory induction."
- Reflect On:
How much of reality is non-physical? What are the implications of phenomenon like "extrasensory induction"?
Before you begin...
Quantum entanglement has been observed, and it’s extremely fascinating, so much so that Einstein Called it “spooky action at a distance.” Quantum entanglement occurs when two particles, in their quantum state, are separated from each other yet, when you do to something to one of them the other one does the exact same thing, regardless of what distance is between them. For example, if you “spin” one of the particles, the other one will also instantaneously start spinning. This suggests that the two, what appear to be “separate” pieces of physical matter are somehow still interconnected in some way we don’t quite yet understand yet. It might also be that information is travelling much fasting than the speed of light.
Quantum physics experiments are extremely fascinating, perplexing and hard to understand, and that’s because much of what some experiments infer are simply mind-altering and often not thought of as being possible. It’s an area that brings consciousness into play, and in some cases what some would deem to be “paranormal” type of activity, because it’s been demonstrated that consciousness, thoughts, intentions, feelings and perceptions can and do interact with physical matter at the quantum level. There is also evidence suggesting that human consciousness can interact with physical matter at classical scale levels as well.
--> Our Journalism Is Moving - Our investigative journalism and reporting is moving to our new brand called The Pulse. Click here to stay informed.
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 comes parapsychology, the study of phenomena like telepathy, clairvoyance, remote viewing, distant healing, mind-body connection and more. Each all have strange yet fascinating links to quantum mechanics. Studies under the umbrella of parapsychology have yielded repeatable and statistically significant results. .
“What convinced me was just the evidence, the accumulating evidence as I worked in this field and I got to see more and more of the evidence. I visited the laboratories, even beyond where I was working to see what they were doing and I could see that they had really tight controls…And so I got convinced by the good science that I saw being done. And in fact I will say as a statistician I’ve consulted in a lot of different areas of science; the methodology and the controls on these experiments are tighter than any other area of science where I’ve worked.” – Dr. Jessica Utts, Statistics professor at the University of California, Irvine on Remote Viewing (source)
There are thousands of different experiments and studies to choose from. One interesting experiment I recently came across comes from 1965, published by TD Duane and Thomas Behrendt from, at the time, the Department of Ophthalmology, Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, titled “Extrasensory electroencephalographic induction between identical twins.” (Read paper here)
They found that “alpha brain rhythms were elicited in one pair of identical twins as a result of evoking these rhythms in a conventional manner solely in the other.” The paper points out that alpha waves are experienced when subjects close their eyes, when they stare at a uniform unpatterned background, or when one sits in the dark with their eyes open. These methods produce immediate and repeatable results, which is why they were used.
The paper explains:
The twins were seated in a separate lighted rooms 6 m apart and were instructed to open and close their eyes only on command. Electrodes were inserted subcutaneously over the occipital protuberances. A standard EEG electrode was used as a ground. The amplified signals were recorded on a Beckman Dynograph and a Honeywell Visicorder. The subjects were asked to sit quietly, remain serene, and leave their eyes open except when instructed otherwise.
Extrasensory induction is the appearance without conventional elicitation of an alpha rhythm in one twin while it is being evoked under standard conditions in the other.
This means, again, what is done to one twin, like evoking an alpha brain rhythm on purpose, seemed to happen in the other twin without evoking it in the other twin.
To date (1965), extrasensory induction has been found in 2 out of 15 pairs of twins tested…To establish the validity of these findings, the tests were repeated on several different occasions. In no instances did the induction occur between unrelated subjects…Extrasensory induction of brain waves exists between individuals when they are completely separated.
Fascinating, isn’t it? The researchers drew no conclusions from the study, and obviously how this was occurring remains a completely mystery. It’s also important to emphasize that extrasensory induction did not occur in all twin pairs studied, but was only present in two sets of twins. It would be interesting to know why it didn’t occur in the other pairs, and doesn’t occur between most pairs when studied. That being said, even if there were a thousand pairs of twins studied and the phenomenon only occurred in one, it would still be quite fascinating.
Other studies have examined this phenomenon as well. One published in 2012 titled “Entangled in the womb? A pilot study on the possible psychological connectedness between identical twins with different embryonic backgrounds” brings up quantum entanglement as a possible explanation. The researchers write,
Speculations have been made that they (extrasensory induction phenomena) might be explained by quantum entanglement as a biological level. The transition from possible biological quantum effects to those causal relationships occurring at the classical level has not been researched. In view of this, it is worth noting that identical twins originally were completely physically “entangled” in one cell (one string of DNA), and it can be speculated that even this form of entanglement might create a predisposition towards such experiences. Genetic “identity” is, however, much more complex than having 100% identical DNA. First, monozygotic twins show non-identical genetic developments since different genes are activated. Second, the zygote may divide into two embryos at different time points from approximately 0-11 days after conception, thereby affecting the amount of time the two future individuals have shared the same cell bodies.
The researchers explain that “paranormal” type of feelings between twins is quite common. This is interesting, because it correlates with the physical phenomenon of electrosensory induction seen in some pairs. The researchers explain:
Telepathic-like experiences, dates back to the work of Francis Galton. Since then, many claims have been made that some twins who are physically remote from each other show a sensitivity to each other’s thoughts, emotions or actions, pains, and sensations. The authors of a major survey in the United Kingdom found that 39% of twins believed they might have “the ability to know what was happening to their partner,” and a further 15% were convinced of it. Identical twins were twice as likely as non identical twins to report these experiences. These findings were given support by a Swedish survey in which 60% of twins reported telepathy-type experiences. Furthermore, frequencies were significantly greater among identical twins and significantly related to the degree of attachment between the pairs of twins. About one-tenth of identical twins report having experiences regularly.
The study also points out that many of them feel that they have synchronous physiological experiences regularly as well.
Because significantly greater frequencies of these types of experiences have consistently been found in monozygotic twins, and because the degree of attachment was related to the frequency of such experiences, genetic kinship or social bonding may be one factor creating a predisposition for such experiences. This hypothesis is supported by the findings, based on phenomenological data from case collections and surveys in several counties, that in the vast majority of cases the content of such experiences relates to a person emotionally close to the experiment.
Another study was published by the same researchers titled “Further possible physiological connectedness between identical twins: The London Study” if you’re interest in that.
There are a number of examples of gifted people doing extraordinary things, things that are deemed impossible by mainstream academia. Perhaps what we believe about the nature of reality, or what we’ve been made to believe, prevents some minds from being open to such phenomenon, but the fact remains that it’s been studied, observed and documented at the highest levels of government for many years. You can read about examples here, here and here if interested.
The example discussed in this article are not as shocking and eye opening as some others I’ve written about, like the articles linked above.
What I find interesting are these questions: 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’s curiosity. Study in these fields can truly expand human consciousness.
That being said, I don’t believe that human beings are operating from a place within ourselves to truly expand our minds enough to use some of the paranormal abilities often discussed. Our general day to day culture can be quite distracting. Further, the collective, in some sense, craves power, service to self, and the desire to advance oneself in a materialistically inclined way, we are not all operating from the level of consciousness to truly be responsible with 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.
At the end of the day, we are all connected in more ways than one.
Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!
Abductions & Car Vandalism – Startling Australian UFO Report Unclassified
Before you begin...
An uncovered Australian report performed by their Department of Defence. “Scientific Intelligence — General — Unidentified Flying Objects” is trending again. Those who have done extensive research on UFOs will find the Australian version of disclosure to be far more intellectually honest than the American version. Albeit it was conducted decades ago.
According to ex-US intelligence official Luis Elizondo, the Defense Department’s Inspector General is presently conducting three reviews. The inquiries vary from the Department of Defense’s handling of UFO claims to Elizondo’s alleged whistleblower retribution. The open IG cases are crucial to Australia’s report because they establish beyond a shadow of a doubt that the US Department of Defense is being dishonest and shady when it comes to the UFO subject. For decades, Australia has been a loyal friend of the United States. Within Australia’s boundaries, they share a military installation (Pine Gap). When a close defense ally’s intelligence agencies determined that the US was not being intellectually honest in its approach, perhaps it is reasonable to conclude that there is more to the tale than the 144 incidents studied since 2004 by the UAPTF.
The CIA became alarmed at the overloading of military communications during the mass sightings of 1952 and considered the possibility that the USSR may take advantage of such a situation.
Australian UFO study.
According to the summary, OSI, acting through the Robertson-Panel, encouraged the USAF to use Project Blue Book to publicly “debunk” UFOs. In a tragic twist of fate, when Australian authorities sought explanations from the US Air Force, the allegation was debunked. The authors of the study were depicted as conspiratorial and even crazy by the US Air Force. Ross Coulthart reported this, and it may be heard in a recent Project Unity interview. Courthart is an award-winning investigative journalist who is drawn to forbidden subjects. He also stated on the same podcast that a senior US Navy official identified as Nat Kobitz told him that the US had been in the midst of reverse-engineering numerous non-human craft. According to his obituary, Mr. Kobitz was a former Director of Research and Development at Naval Sea Systems Command.
Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!
PGA Tour To End COVID Testing For Both Vaccinated & Non-Vaccinated Players
- The Facts:
The PGA Tour has announced that it will stop testing players every week, regardless of whether they have been vaccinated or not.
- Reflect On:
Are PCR tests appropriate to identify infectious people? Should people who are healthy and not sick be tested at all, anywhere?
Before you begin...
The picture you see above is of John Rahm, a professional golfer on the PGA tour being carted off the golf course after tournament officials told him he had COVID. He was healthy and had no symptoms, yet was forced to withdraw from the tournament. He was told in front of the camera’s, and a big scene was made out of the event. You would think something like that, especially when you are a big time sports figure, would be done behind closed doors with some privacy.
Earlier on in June a spokesperson for the PGA Tour said that more than 50 percent of players on the PGA tour have been vaccinated. Although it seems that the majority of players on the tour will be fully vaccinated judging by this statement, it does leave a fairly large minority who won’t be, and that’s something we’re seeing across the globe as COVID vaccine hesitancy remains high for multiple reasons.
We are pleased to announce, after consultation with PGA Tour medical advisors, that due to the high rate of vaccination among all constituents on the PGA Tour, as well as other positively trending factors across the country, testing for COVID-19 will no longer be required as a condition of competition beginning with the 3M Open. – PGA tour Senior VP Tyler Dennis
The tour recently announced that the testing of players every week will stop starting in July for both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. This was an unexpected announcement given the fact that, at least it seems in some countries, vaccinated individuals will enjoy previous rights and freedoms that everyone did before the pandemic. Travelling without need to quarantine and possibly in the future not having to be tested could be a few of those privileges. Others may include attending concerts, sporting events, or perhaps even keeping their job depending on whether or not their employer deems it to be mandatory, if that’s even legally possible. We will see what happens.
Luckily for professional golfers, regardless of their vaccination status they won’t have to worry about testing positive for COVID, especially if they’re not sick. This is the appropriate move by the PGA tour, who is represented by their players and it’s a move that the players themselves may have had a say in. It’s important because PCR tests are not designed nor are they appropriate for identifying infectious people. A number of scientists have been emphasizing this since the beginning of the pandemic. More recently, a letter to the editor published in the Journal of infection explain why more than half of al “positive” PCR tests are likely to have been people who are not infectious, otherwise known as “false positives.”
This is why the Swedish Public Health agency has a notice on their website explaining how and why polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests are not useful for determining if someone is infected with COVID or if someone can transmit it to others, and it’s better to use someone who is actually showing symptoms as a judgement call of whether or not they could be infected or free from infection.
PCR tests using a high cycle threshold are extremely sensitive. An article published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases found that among positive PCR samples with a cycle count over 35, only 3 percent of the samples showed viral replication. This can be interpreted as, if someone tests positive via PCR when a Ct of 35 or higher is used, the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97 percent. This begs the question, why has Manitoba, Canada, for example, using cycle thresholds of up to 45 to identify “positive” people?
When it comes to golf, the fact that spread occurring in an outdoor setting is highly unlikely could have been a factor, but it’s also important to mention that asymptomatic spread within one’s own household is also considerably rare. It really makes you wonder what’s going on here, doesn’t it?
Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!
New Study Questions The Safety of COVID Vaccinations & Urges Governments To Take Notice
- The Facts:
A new study published in the journal Vaccines has called into question the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.
- Reflect On:
Why are people hesitant to take the vaccine? Why are scientists and journalists who explain why hesitancy may exist censored?
Before you begin...
A new study published in the journal Vaccines by three scientists and medical professionals from Europe has raised concerns about the safety of COVID vaccines, and it’s not the first to do so. The study found that there is a “lack of clear benefit” of the vaccines and this study should be a catalyst for “governments to rethink their vaccination policy.”
The study calculated the number needed to vaccinate (NNTV) in order to prevent one death, and to do so they used a large Israeli Field study. Using the Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR) database of the European Medicines Agency and of the Dutch National Register (lareb.nl), the researchers were able to assess the number of cases reporting severe side effects as well as the cases with fatal side effects as a result of a COVID vaccine.
They point out the following:
The NNTV is between 200-700 to prevent on case of COVID-19 for the mRNA vaccine marketed by Pfizer, while the NNTV to prevent one death is between 9000 and 50,000 (95 % confidence interval), with 16,000 as a point estimate. The number of cases experiencing adverse reactions has been reported to be 700 per 100,000 vaccinations. Currently, we see 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations, and the number of fatal side effects is at 4.11/100,000 vaccinations. For three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination. This lack of clear benefit should cause governments to rethink their vaccination policy.
The researchers estimates suggest that we have to exchange 4 fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2-11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations. This puts the risk vs. benefit of COVID vaccination on the same order of magnitude.
We need to accept that around 16 cases will develop severe adverse reactions from COVID-19 vaccines per 100,000 vaccinations delivered, and approximately four people will die from the consequences of being vaccinated per 100,000 vaccinations delivered. Adopting the point estimate of NNTV = 16,000 (95% CI, 9000–50,000) to prevent one COVID-19-related death, for every six (95% CI, 2–11) deaths prevented by vaccination, we may incur four deaths as a consequence of or associated with the vaccination. Simply put: As we prevent three deaths by vaccinating, we incur two deaths.
The study does point out that COVID-19 vaccines are effective and can, according to the publication, prevent infections, morbidity and mortality associated with COVID, but the costs must be weighted. For example, many people have been asking themselves, what are the chances I will get severely ill and die from a COVID infection?
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD, from the Stanford University School of Medicine recently shared that the survival rate for people under 70 years of age is about 99.95 percent. He also said that COVID is less dangerous than the flu for children. This comes based on approximately 50 studies that have been published, and information showing that more children in the U.S. have died from the flu than COVID. Here’s a meta analysis published by the WHO that gives this number. The number comes based on the idea that many more people than we have the capacity to test have most likely been infected.
How dangerous COVID is for healthy individuals has been a controversial discussion throughout this pandemic, with viewpoints differing.
Furthermore, as the study points out, one has to be mindful of a “positive” case determined by a PCR test. A PCR test cannot determine whether someone is infectious or not, and a recent study found that it’s highly likely that at least 50 percent of “positive” cases have been “false positives.”
This is the issue with testing asymptomatic healthy people, especially at a high cycle threshold. It’s the reason why many scientists and doctors have been urging government health authorities to determine cases and freedom from infections based on symptoms rather than a PCR test. You can read more in-depth about PCR testing and the issues with it here if you’re interested.
When it comes to the documented 4 deaths per 100,000 vaccinations and whether or not it’s a significant number, the researchers state,
This is difficult to say, and the answer is dependant on one’s view of how severe the pandemic is and whether the common assumption that there is hardly any innate immunological defense or cross-reactional immunity is true. Some argue that we can assume cross-reactivity of antibodies to conventional coronaviruses in 30–50% of the population [13,14,15,16]. This might explain why children and younger people are rarely afflicted by SARS-CoV2 [17,18,19].
Natural immunity is another interesting topic I’ve written in-depth about. There’s a possibility that more than a billion people have been infected, does this mean they have protection? What happens if previously infected individuals take the vaccine? What does this do to their natural immunity? The research suggesting natural immunity may last decades, or even a lifetime, is quite strong in my opinion.
There are also other health concerns that have been raised that go beyond deaths and adverse reactions as a result of the vaccine.
As the study points out,
A recent experimental study has shown that SARS-CoV2 spike protein is sufficient to produce endothelial damage. . This provides a potential causal rationale for the most serious and most frequent side effects, namely, vascular problems such as thrombotic events. The vector-based COVID-19 vaccines can produce soluble spike proteins, which multiply the potential damage sites . The spike protein also contains domains that may bind to cholinergic receptors, thereby compromising the cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathways, enhancing inflammatory processes . A recent review listed several other potential side effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines that may also emerge later than in the observation periods covered here …Given this fact and the higher number of serious side effects already reported, the current political trend to vaccinate children who are at very low risk of suffering from COVID-19 in the first place must be reconsidered.
Concerns regarding the distribution of the spike protein our cells manufacture after injection have been recently raised by Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist from the University of Guelph who recently released a detailed in depth report regarding safety concerns about the COVID vaccines.
The report was released to act as a guide for parents when it comes to deciding whether or not their child should be vaccinated against COVID-19. Bridle published the paper on behalf of one hundred other scientists and doctors who part of the Canadian COVID Care Alliance, but who are afraid to ‘come out’ publicly and share their concerns. Byram, as many others, have received a lot of criticism and have been subjected to fact checking via Facebook third party fact-checkers.
A recent article published in the British Medical Journal by journalist Laurie Clarke has highlighted the fact that Facebook has already removed at least 16 million pieces of content from its platform and added warnings to approximately 167 million others. YouTube has removed nearly 1 million videos related to, according to them, “dangerous or misleading covid-19 medical information.”
It’s also important to note that only a small fraction of side effects are even reported to adverse events databases. The authors cite multiple sources showing this, and that the median underreporting can be as high as 95 percent. This begs the question, how many deaths and adverse reactions from COVID vaccines have not been reported? Furthermore, if there are long term concerns, will deaths resulting from an adverse reaction, perhaps a year later, even be considered as connected to to the vaccine? Probably not.
This isn’t the only study to bring awareness to the lack of injuries most likely not reported. For example, an HHS pilot study conducted by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research found that 1 in every 39 vaccines in the United States caused some type of injury, which is a shocking comparison to the 1 in every million claim. It’s also unsettling that those who are injured by the COVID-19 vaccine won’t be eligible for compensation from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) while COVID is still an “emergency”, at least in the United States.
Below is the most recent data from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Keep in mind that VAERS is not without its criticism. One common criticism we’ve seen from Facebook fact-checkers, for example, is there is no proof that the vaccine was actually the cause of these events.
A few other papers have raised concerns, for example. A study published in October of 2020 in the International Journal of Clinical Practice states:
COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.
In a new research article published in Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, veteran immunologist J. Bart Classen expresses similar concerns and writes that “RNA-based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19.”
For decades, Classen has published papers exploring how vaccination can give rise to chronic conditions such as Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes — not right away, but three or four years down the road. In this latest paper, Classen warns that the RNA-based vaccine technology could create “new potential mechanisms” of vaccine adverse events that may take years to come to light.
There are a plethora of reasons why COVID vaccine hesitancy has been quite high. I wrote an in-depth article about this in April if you’re interested in learning about the other reasons.
Conversations like this are incredibly important in today’s climate of mass censorship. Who is right or wrong is not important, what’s important is that discussion about the vaccine and all other topics remain open and transparent. The amount of experts in the field who have been censored for sharing their views on this topic has been unprecedented. For example, in March, Harvard epidemiologist and vaccine expert Dr. Martin Kulldorff was subjected to censorship by Twitter for sharing his opinion that not everybody needed to take the COVID vaccine.
It’s good to see this recent study point out that the benefits of the vaccine, for some people, may not outweigh the potential costs.
Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!
The Bosnian Pyramid Complex: Larger, Older & More Mysterious Than Pyramids In Egypt
If the Bosnian pyramid of the sun is genuine, and there is very little doubt in my mind that it...
Quantum Experiment Sheds Light On The Metaphysical Properties of Human DNA
Vladimir Poponin is a well known Russian scientist who in 1995, with his colleagues, including biophysicist Peter Gariaev, conducted a very...