STO and STS – What Does it REALLY Mean?

Someone of you may have bee told how to live on this Earth and maybe you have heard the terms STO (Service To Others) and STS (Service To Self). What does those terms mean? Here’s something about it:

Before getting into an extensive discussion of the subject, let me first make some rather simple remarks that may answer the question in an immediate way.

In terms of Service To Others: You could say that a soldier in an army would declare that,

“I serve others because I Serve my Country, my People, my General, my Cause – and for this reason, I kill other human beings.”

In such a case, anyone viewing this with a historical perspective could see that it was clearly NOT Service To Others in a pure sense. It is “mixed” with many other factors such as fear, desire, pride and so forth. This “Service To Others” is in another sense, “Service to Self Against Others.” So, by using the term “Service to Others” and “Service to Self,” we have easily been able to identify the essential nature of the activity without even having to think about the values in specific, i.e. whether the cause is “just” or “unjust,” and who might be “right” or “wrong.” What you see is simply this: a judgment. One person in action against another, and that is the essence of Service to Self.

Yet, when we divide the world into “good and/or evil,” that is exactly what we are doing – we are judging. What is “good” is subjective, and what is “evil” is also subjective. We might try to use the terms “positive” or “negative” but we immediately fall into a value judgment of “good or evil,” so that won’t do. The terms “Service to Others” and Service to Self” give us a better handle on what we are dealing with in our world.

Lisa complains that it is “too simplistic,” and maybe so… but not nearly so simplistic and prone to error as “good and evil,” or “positive and negative.” If anyone has a better set of terms, I wish they would suggest them!

These terms, “Service to Others” and “Service to Self” are inextricably mixed up with the idea of “love.” On an individual basis, we may say that we Love this or that person, and want to Serve them, but then the question arises: WHICH PART OF THEM are we serving? The higher part that seeks spiritual growth and Union with God, or the Lower part that seeks survival in the Flesh? When we help someone who keeps making the same mistakes over and over again, we are clearly interfering in their lessons. What, then, are we serving?

Most likely ourselves because we are then able to “feel good” that we are so “long suffering” and “patient” and “self-sacrificing,” because we can certainly see, from the evidence of our eyes, that the other person isn’t making any progress by virtue of our efforts. And, it may be a far more difficult thing to deny assistance, particularly when it is someone we love, because it “hurts us to see them hurt.” Yet, that may be the very thing needed in order for them to grow – to be left to their own suffering until they have had enough so that they will begin to see their own way out of the difficulty, thereby building soul strength and accessing their own powers and inner potentials.

But, we run into the same problem of judgment here:

aren’t we judging whether the person is really asking from the soul level or the level of the flesh? And, can’t we be wrong?

Cassiopaeans:

Because an STS vehicle does not learn to be an STO candidate by determining the needs of another. If one “gives” where there is no request, therefore no need, this is a free will violation!

How do we know when our giving is violating another’s free will? Well, we DO have a little bit of a clue in many ancient teachings about “asking.” The stories say: “ask and you shall receive.” But, if you study this idea, you find that what they really say is “ask and keep on asking, and it shall be given you; seek and keep on seeking, and you shall find; knock and keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you.”

There are a number of Jesus’ parables that illustrate this point, particularly the “Friend at Midnight,” found in the Gospel of Luke, chapter 11, vs.5-13.

The same teaching is standard procedure among the yogis of India and Tibet. A sufficient effort must be made by the supplicant before a response is made. In some cases, it takes YEARS of asking!

So, a good general rule to follow is that TRUE asking is accompanied by sincere effort on the part of the one asking, and they must have done all that is in their power to achieve that for which they are asking.

Greg wants to travel into the past and reverse a “mistake” that he believes cost his wife her life. He believes that his motives are pure: he also wants to correct his mistakes and do the “right thing” this next time around. He has come face to face with the Universe and the anguish faced by millions upon millions of people down through millennia who have “wept when it was all done, for being done too soon…” In Greg’s opinion, the Universe made a mistake – God screwed up – and he, Greg, knows NOW what he was supposed to know then, so he wants another chance. He wants to manipulate Time. He wants another chance. (Don’t we all at one time or another?)

Manipulating time is not the same thing as going to the store and deciding to spend a couple bucks to buy this product or the other product. To buy one shampoo or another generally has consequences only for the self – whether one or the other product gives satisfaction. But, traveling into the past to change one single thing, even so simple a thing as which shampoo one buys in a store at a given moment, could have ENORMOUS consequences that are unknown without sufficient knowledge of the nature of our reality, the universe, time itself, karma, and a whole host of related issues.

When discussing the purported “Montauk Project” with the Cassiopaeans, the incredible potentials of time manipulation were made clear in the following remark:

Q: Were they able to materialize people from the past or the future?
A: Temporarily.

Q: Did they, in fact, do this?
A: Yes.

Q: Did they ask people from the future what kinds of events have occurred between then and now in order to refine their plans and activities?
A: No such.

Q: Why?
A: Variable futures. One of 329 decillion.

Q: Probable futures?
A: Yes. Up to a point…

Q: At which time something collapses into the now.

So, what might be the consequences of Greg’s desired manipulation? We, at present, have no way of knowing; we can only conjecture.

Nevertheless, to truly “serve others,” in a pure sense, and not in the sense of the soldier in the army who serves one side, one ought to wish to learn about these potential consequences. If you believe that manipulating time is possible, then you need to seek the knowledge of consequences by studying what is known about time, nature, life after death, the realms of existence, and related subjects in order to fully understand the consequences.

 

Before one should try to manipulate time for ANY reason, all possible energy should be expended to make sure that this is what the other person really wants, and then to make certain that such manipulation will not cause a disaster to others in some non-linear way. Otherwise, it becomes the same as the soldier in the army who is serving HIS country, HIS general and HIS cause, not regarding the country, general and cause of his “enemy.”

Sometimes, “Serving Others,” in the human sense of the word, is merely the serving of the STS part of the person, the 3rd density aspect of the flesh, and is NOT true STO in the sense of achieving higher balance.

If you give a child candy every time they ask for it, because you “love” them, or seek to “serve them” by meeting their every request, are you truly “serving” them? Even if their constant diet of candy leads to their ultimate physical death from diabetes?

If you intercede for your child every time he misbehaves in life, and prevent his experience of the consequences, how will he grow up?

Let me also add Ark’s comments on the idea of traveling into the past to change it:

“Experimenting without really understanding what we are experimenting with would be very dangerous. And not only for the experimentors. One has to understand the phenomena first. This understanding is still lacking. What Bearden and other Tesla fans are writing about in terms of time travel is totally unreliable and, in fact, is confusion and obfuscation. Of course you can produce an unusual effect here and there, but next time you try it – you produce what you didn’t intend. Therefore, and this is my strong belief, theoretical understanding is necessary. That is a good conceptual and mathematical model. There are several competing theories on the market – none goes far enough and none can be relied upon.

“(…). I hope, with time all that will be solved positively. “There is no time” – so be patient. If you stay patient, and not too long – you will see time travel implemented. Maybe not the way we like to think of it – yet real. We will kick “time” and it will kick us back.

“To play with inanimate gadgets may be fun. But to play with human beings and souls is the domain of STS.”



Another aspect that needs to be understood is this: In 3rd density, we are ALL Serving Self in one way or another. We cannot, by our very nature of existence in the flesh that must consume to survive, be pure STO beings. That’s the bottom line. And, it is in the understanding of this, the acceptance of it and then focusing on learning the lessons of this estate in which we find our being, that we have the chance of becoming “STO candidates.”

08-28-99

A: You are all STS. If you were not, you would not be where you are.

Q: (A) There are those who are happy in the STS mode; and there are those who are trying to get out of the STS mode…
A: STO candidate. You are confused because you seem to think you must be STO to be an STO candidate. You are STS, and you simply cannot be otherwise, until you either reincarnate or transform at realm border crossing.

Q: Alright, I got that. We are here, we are what we are, and until the realm border comes, we can’t be anything else.

(F) So, don’t worry about being STS. That is what we all are. As long as we eat food, that’s what we are. It’s that simple. You can be moving toward STO, but you aren’t there yet, and there is nothing wrong with that.
A: [And there are] different ways of getting there. Your respective developments have led you to where you are


12-09-94

Q: (L) Okay. One of the sensations I have experienced lately that this feeling of having had enough of 3rd density, in an absolute sense. Is this one of the primary motivators for wanting to find one’s way out of this trap we are in. I want out of it. Is this part of this “nature” as you call it?
A: Yes. When you see the futility of the limitations of 3rd density life, it means you are ready to graduate. Notice those who wallow in it.

Q: (L) Some people obviously wallow in extreme materiality. And there seems to be another kind that is more subtle, which has to do with saying that you want to grow and become enlightened, and yet such a person is unable to pierce the veil of their own illusions and delusions about how to become enlightened…
A: Wallowing takes many forms. More often, the sign of “subtle wallowing” is someone who does not feel alienated by the obvious traps and limitations of 3rd density


12-09-94

Q: (L) How does one know that one is a 4 D candidate?
A: You gradually “awaken”.

Q: (L) Are my children 4 D candidates? And my husband? You have to tell me this. If I have to deal with things, let me do it a little at a time.
A: You are not in correct frame of mind.

Q: (L) Well, that sounds ominous.
A: Wait for answer.

Q: (L) Wait until when?
A: You are ready.

Q: (L) So, in other words, some people may have to leave behind children or mates, or siblings or parents, is that true?
A: If so, will be prepared.

Q: (L) Is there any way to tell if someone is a 4 D candidate?
A: Inquire of them.

Q: (L) And, will they know?
A: Yes, at some level. In a sense. Those who are chosen feel it. You will know


12-10-94

Q: (L) How does one get to be a 4th density candidate?
A: Natural progression.

Q: (L) Is everyone on this planet a 4th density candidate?
A: No.

Q: (L) Could someone become a candidate overnight who is not now a candidate?
A: Yes


02-25-95

Q: (L) Once we move into 4th density we are on an equal footing with all these other guys and things will be more equal. At the same time, those who are not 4th density candidates are going to cycle back and start all over again. Basically they are all going to go into the primordial soup and experience another 300,000 years of strife and misery. (BP) And this moving into 4th density will be a change in perception, rather than a change in location, in terms of space/time, is that correct?
A: Close


03-04-95

Q: (L) Does that mean that when a person is a 4th density candidate that they have to leave their body to go to 4th density?
A: Yes unless they are in the body when The Wave arrives


08-05-95

Q: (L). What is the criteria to be a 4th density candidate?
A: There is no criteria. A criteria implies a judgment system which implies that an individual or individuals are watching over the progress of other individuals. It is merely part of the natural process of learning, which you are in total control of from beginning to end, in one sense. In that sense, you choose to be in the environment you are in, which does not indicate any recommendation of the environment by any higher source, or, conversely, any condemnation of the environment by any higher source, but merely the existence of the environment and your choice to exist within it. Therefore, being a candidate merely means that you have chosen to be a candidate for ANY level of density, be it first, second, etc. It is a choice of the self to continue that learning pathway.

In the following except, some aspects of being an STO Candidate are brought out in a discussion of an interaction with a potential abductor of the participants:

10-04-95

Q: (T) Why did he talk to us? Why did he approach us? I know exactly…
A: Spying on you and aural frequency reading, had you not been as strong, would have suffered permanent abduction because of your studies

Q: (L) What is there about strength that makes one inaccessible to permanent abduction?
A: Strength is of character, i.e. if STO candidate, not likely to be victim.

Q: (L) Not likely to be victim… OK, but what… is the thing inside one that stops them… I mean, is this something that is a core ingredient of certain human beings? Is this like something inside them that blocks this manipulation and victimization?
A: Soul pattern.

Q: (L) So in other words, there is something about us, or within us, that literally they cannot touch or harm, is that correct?
A: Basically, but difficult to facilitate.

Q: (L) OK, in other words, this is something that is in us, that creates an inherent barrier, but not necessarily something that we can, at this level of density, reach in, grab out as a weapon, and wave around, as in facilitate?
A: Can, but intricate to do consciously.

Q: (L) Is this some quality or ability that we can work at? Is this a state of focused awareness, whole body awareness, internal and external, basically whole body awareness…

(J) Going with instinct… ?
A: Helpful.

Q: (L) That’s helpful. Is there something we can do to develop this to the highest degree possible, while in these bodies, in this density?
A: Wait for 4th

Q: (L) 4th density?
A: Yes.

Q: (T) We can’t develop it ourselves, but if we…

(J) We can start the process…

(T) It’s a case of not developing it, it’s a case of that, if you can do it, it does it all by itself, you don’t think about it… It’s a do, it’s an involuntary, it’s there, it works when it needs to work. Is this the idea?
A: Yes


10-03-98

Q: (L) A reader asks: ’I would like to ask the C’s what we could each do to best develop ourselves to be ready for the transition. […] Maybe the question is: what do each of us, individually and/or as a group, need to do to ensure that we are candidates for 4th density during the transition, and can we help friends and loved ones?’
A: Not correct concept.

Q: (L) What IS the correct concept?
A: If one embarks upon a journey, what does one do to prepare?

Q: (L) Well, I guess that if one is not really sure of the route or destination that one tries to have as much of a variety of clothing and necessary essentials and packs the suitcase and gets ready to leave, yes?
A: Does one concern one’s self with the proper texture of the suitcase?

Q: (L) Not usually. If it is big enough and strong enough to hold what might be needed, that is all that matters. Are you comparing the suitcase to the body?
A: No.

Q: (L) Then I don’t understand the analogy.
A: If one walks down a street, does one choose the color of one’s socks based on what one expects to arise during the walk?

Q: (L) No, that would be an utterly trivial concern. And you pick your socks based on what you have, what you like and what feels good. Functionality… how well they do the job as socks…
A: Yes, so?

Q: (L) Okay, I get it. He further writes: ’I’m not sure what constitutes the requirements for transition to 4th density. I would have thought spiritual enlightenment and commitment to STO, and related attributes would have been high on the list. But there are Lizards on 4th density, and they are certainly not all that nice to us and are not STO, as a rule. How did they get to 4th density?’
A: He needs a better understanding in general, and this is a natural process, there is no preparation.

Q: (L) Okay, another reader writes in response to the first one: ’There is evidence for the case that mankind is devolving rather than evolving. We have descended from our forebears, not ascended from some ape-hybrid.
A: Devolving?!?

Q: (L) Are you saying that ’devolving’ is not an accurate way of describing this process?
A: Of course not!! Devolving does not exist! All there is are lessons.

Q: (L) Well, we are talking about the obvious evidence for higher and more advanced civilizations of the past. My thought would be…
A: That is not devolving. If your great grandchildren wind up tossing spears, that is ’evolution’ too.

Q: (L) So, it is the spiritual matters that count and not the technological state of the civilization?
A: Close.

Q: (L) So, a highly advanced civilization could be not as highly evolved, spiritually speaking, as a less advanced civilization in terms of spirit?
A: No matter what, it is still “evolution.”

Q: (L) Does it have to do with the fact that time is variable and selective, and all actually exists simultaneously?
A: Somewhat. There is no such thing as devolvement. All experiences are rich with lessons. Many in your realm need to move beyond this superiority/ inferiority kick.

Q: (L) Anyway, speaking of these ancient civilizations, he says: ’Yet they all met the same decisive end. They failed to graduate. Cataclysms overtook them all…’
A: Who says they failed to graduate? This gentleman proposes to know what constitutes graduation?!? How does he know this?

Q: (L) I guess it is an assumption that the state of the material civilization, or what happens to it, is a measure of the possible/probable graduation of the members of that civilization in whole or part. He says that we must ’rediscover what was known before. I personally believe that it was a failure to prepare for the transition to 4th density.’ He says: ’The 4th density, as I understand it, is one where the thoughts of the heart can actually generate external reality almost instantaneously. Can you imagine the devastation if one is not prepared for that. Preparation, it seems to me, would consist of honestly coming to grips with those demons within us and purging them through a variety of means until the water of Spirit runs clear from our intentions.
A: Preparation consists of merely being there!

Q: (L) I think that the issue is, what these two guys are trying to get to is that they want to transition to 4th density, they don’t want to be hanging out on a post-cataclysmic world where everything is all messed up, they don’t want to go back to square one and do third density all over again and suffer, and they want to know how or why or what to do to ensure that they make this transition?
A: You cannot honestly entertain such nonsense, can you?

Q: (L) Well, I have tried to explain to them that it doesn’t matter where you are or any preparations that you have made along this line, but it is important as to WHO you are and what you SEE. And, seeing is based on awareness, and awareness is based on knowledge. Therefore, it seems to me that the only thing one should be occupying oneself doing is gathering and gaining knowledge.
A: Closer.

Q: (L) Can we get closer than that?
A: No.

Q: (L) Okay. Let’s move right along here. This reader also says that what he thinks is part of the preparation for 4th density is an extensive effort toward the methods of creating our own reality in the sense of using visualizations toward a desired end with enough consistent emotional intensity as to manifest the phenomenon in the physical.’
A: Also, three cups of sugar, mixed with quinine and eye of gnute. Be sure to shake it three times over your head in a burlap sack while wearing an amulet depicting King George backwards over your left nipple. Say 14 oooms while shaking your left ankle 5 times, throw in some monoatomic gold…

[at this point we are becoming aware of what is being said and laughing so hard that it is difficult to call out the letters.]

Q: (L) I think I get the point. You are saying that all of this stuff that people are doing is, where they think they are doing something to get them somewhere, is simply a waste of time?
A: Oh no, not at all, we have forgotten to mention the sage, salt and the unleavened bread!

Q: (L) The bottom line that I have on the subject is that anybody who does this or that WITH THE INTENT of achieving 4th density, is following the STS mode because they EXPECT SOME RESULT or reward, and that is Servicing Self…
A: Yes, and they are missing the point. By the way, when does the next flight leave for North Carolina?

Q: (L) So, wanting to DO anything other than to just BE as fully as you can be in the here and now constitutes…
A: STS and… 3rd density thought.

 

10-18-94

Q: (L) Have the Cassiopaeans ever been in physical bodies?
A: Ever is subjective.

Q: (L) Okay, at any point in space time have you occupied physical bodies?
A: Have, will and do. Omnipresent.

Q: (L) Are you part of our higher consciousness?
A: So is everything else.

Source

Jim Humble – The Story Behind Miracle Mineral Supplement

Here’s the story that I found couple of years ago and if it’s not real it is still very interesting and tells a lot about how corporates try to sell ineffective drugs to Africa so that they can rip off the whole continent (Malaria, AIDS). So here’s the story about Jim Humble and how he discovered accidentally the cure to malaria:

jim_humble

Aerospace engineer Jim Humble‘s third career started accidentally while on a gold prospecting trip in the jungle of Venezuela. There, using stabilized oxygen, he improvised an effective remedy for his colleagues who were stricken with malaria. As curious as he had always been in his life, he returned to his native US and wondered why the cure had worked so well.

The answers to his own questions led him to the development of a more powerful form of oxygen therapy, chlorine dioxide, which he called Miracle Mineral Supplement (MMS).

With a mission to help the human race whatever he did, Jim made it widely available in the form of sodium chlorite which the user ‘activated’ by adding lemon juice or vinegar – and medical teams conducted 100,000 research trials in Africa where it was found that MMS would frequently relieve the symptoms of malaria in as little as four hours.

In this 75 minute interview, Jim talks with Project Camelot’s Bill Ryan about his life and work.

Charming, engaging and passionate, Jim reveals his most interesting background in aerospace and mining engineering – careers few users of MMS will be aware of – and then goes into detail about how MMS works, his experience successfully treating not only malaria but hepatitis, cancer and AIDS, and his personal spiritual and philosophical perspective on everything he does.

Jim Humble – Interview transcript
Jim Humble and the Story behind MMS – Miracle Mineral Supplement
Sasbachwalden, Germany

November 2008

Jim Humble: …I did things like set up A-bomb tests. I worked on Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. I was able to wire the first computer-controlled machine in the United States at Hughes Aircraft Company.

… So they called me in and had me repair the Lunar Vehicle. [laughs] And so, did they go to the Moon or didn’t they? [laughs] I don’t know whether they took it to the Moon or they took it out to the mountains in the desert.

… He was going through the files one time and he come upon this photograph, 8 x 10 photograph, that showed a space station on the back side of the Moon.

… I figured: They didn’t get all that gold out there. I can just go out and get a bunch of it myself. You know. And so I started in mining and I found out that pretty much that they did get all that gold out there after all.

… I developed new techniques for gold recovery.

… When you have a billion dollars invested in a particular process, it isn’t likely you’re just going to change, you know. It’s not something that they usually do.

… And these guys were really sick, and so I asked them if they would like to try to my water purification drops that I had brought along with me. And in four hours they were up, laughing about how bad they were feeling just a little while before.

… Normally speaking, a person who’s given MMS will be well from malaria in four hours. I’ve treated 2,000 people personally, and the people I’ve trained have treated over 100,000 people.

 


 

Bill Ryan: Are you allowed to say here on camera that MMS will cure cancer?

Jim Humble: Sure. [laughs] I can say it. MMS will cure cancer.

 

Start of interview

Bill Ryan: So, this is Bill Ryan from Project Camelot and this is Friday, the 21st of November [2008] and I am delighted to meet Jim Humble. Jim!

Jim Humble: It’s my pleasure.

BR: It’s wonderful to meet a man who’s got good taste in headgear. [laughter] And we’re here in southern Germany at Sasbachwalden, at a conference where Jim is speaking in a few hours’ time. And you’ve flown in from Mexico, I believe?

JH: Hermosillo, Mexico.

BR: A few days ago.

JH: Yes.

BR: Now, Jim, it’s very clear that you’ve had an extraordinary life. What’s your background? What was it that brought you to the point when you were in Guyana? You were prospecting? Was it for gold?

JH: Prospecting for gold. Yeah.

BR: So, take us through the fast-forward of your life, and your training, and how come you got to that point in Guyana.

JH: Well, I started, sort of, in the aerospace industries and… I started as a technician in the aerospace industry. And I just, as things worked out, I became a non-degreed engineer, as a research engineer in aerospace. And I did things like set up A-bomb tests and I…

BR: A-bomb?

JH: A-bomb.

BR: Atomic bomb tests?

JH: Atomic bomb tests. And I worked on Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles and I worked on power generation from plasma. Yeah, I just happened that I was in the right place at the right time. And back in those days… and I was able to wire the first computer-controlled machine in the United States at Hughes Aircraft Company.

You know, for a number of years there, I sort of lucked out and worked on the edge of science on a number of different projects. And I had a lot of fun [laughs] working on it, on the various different projects. And so…

But, you know, the Cold War come to an end, and the aerospace industry sort of come to an end, and so I went into mining. And I got interested in mining – gold mining, of course, because I was thinking that I could make a lot of money in gold mining. I was like a lot of guys. I figured: They didn’t get all that gold out there. I can just go out and get a bunch of it myself. You know.

And so I started off in mining and I found out that pretty much that they did get all that gold out there after all. And so, it…

But in the process of being in mining, I started working with the various different mining techniques. And I wrote five books on mining recovery, mainly on the recovery of gold, different ways of leaching.

And I wrote ways of not using mercury. A lot of mining was using mercury up to that time, and I wrote a book on how to use mercury safely. And then I wrote a book on how you didn’t need mercury after all. [laughs] And so I just sort of got into…

And I developed new techniques for gold recovery. And I could go into the jungle and recover gold that they had missed before because I could recover the very, very fine particles of gold with my particular technique. It uses nothing but water and it makes no harsh impact on the environment because there’s no chemicals. And it will… not only that, but it does a better job and a lot cheaper job than the chemical operations that they have now.

But those people who are using the chemical operations, they don’t particularly care to talk about it. So it’s not something that is easy to sell. It’s just like a lot of things. They don’t want to change, you know. People are doing something and they don’t want to change the way they’re doing it.

BR: So your second career actually has got a lot of interesting parallels with your third career, that the vested interests want to keep on using the more toxic and ineffective approach.

JH: That’s correct. There is a lot of parallels there and there’s… It would be a real good thing for the mining industry to use the process. It’s much cheaper, easier to set up. But when you have a billion dollars invested in a particular process, it isn’t likely you’re just going to change, you know. It’s not something that they usually do. And so I don’t worry about it too much.

BR: In your first career, which you had back in aerospace, didn’t you have something to do with the Lunar Module? Or the Lunar Lander, was it?

JH: I was working at the General Motors Defense Research Laboratories in Santa Barbara at the time. And they had taken the Lunar Vehicle up there to get it ready to be loaded on the ship going to the Moon, of course. And there was some parts inside of it that was broken. And I don’t know, minor, tiny accident, but there was a few wires that were broken and everything. And I happened to be an electronic technician, and they knew I was, so they called me in and had me repair the Lunar Vehicle. [laughter]

And so, I just got to work on it. And it was kind of interesting, what they were doing. And did they go to the Moon or didn’t they? I don’t know [laughs] whether they took it to the Moon or they took it out to the mountains in the desert. But I assume that they took it to the Moon.

BR: We actually heard from one of our whistleblowers that both of the stories were correct, that some of the missions went to the Moon, some did not. Some of the photographs were real and some were not. It’s a real mixed bag.

JH: Yeah. Right. I remember that flag, you know, waving. [laughter] So you’re never… of course, there wasn’t any air on the Moon, so the flag really shouldn’t have been waving.

BR: There were all kind of things, cross-hairs behind the image, anomalies. Didn’t you say that you were working in the room with a colleague who saw something interesting at one point?

JH: Well, yes, I did. I had friend who was working at JPL, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which was doing all of the Moon work at that time. And he was a draftsman and he had, well, he had the right to go into the various different secret files to get material out for his drafting, whatever it was that he was doing.

BR: He had the level of clearance.

JH: He had the level of clearance, yeah. And so he was going through the files one time and he come upon this photograph, 8 x 10 photograph, that showed a space station on the back side of the Moon. And it was far enough from the Moon that you could see the station and yet you could see that it was the Moon.

And it was pretty obvious to him that it was not the type of construction that the United States would do. In other words, it wasn’t the type of construction that JPL would do, because he’s familiar with all that. He was designing things along those lines, so he was familiar with what JPL did and didn’t do. And the construction that he saw on the Moon was totally foreign to Earth.

BR: So he said to you: Hey Jim. Look what I’ve just seen. Look what I’ve…

JH: That’s right. He didn’t show it to me. He didn’t bring it out. He just told me. He told me about it, explained it at the time.

BR: That’s a pretty interesting story. Someone should make a movie of your life. [laughter] That would be quite a story. You’ve had several careers in there, haven’t you?

JH: Well, I don’t know how interesting it would be, but it would be very interesting to me. [laughs]

BR: What would be wonderful here… I know there’s an enormous story you told, which you have told before. But for the benefit of people who aren’t familiar with your work, can you give a brief summary, if it’s possible, of your discovery – if discovery is the right word – of the Miracle Mineral Supplement known all over the world as MMS, what it does, and how it was that you came to develop this?

JH: Well, I was a gold prospector in South America, and a couple of my men came down with malaria. And so… we were quite a ways out in the jungle and there was no way to get any malaria drugs, and we had not previously believed that there would be any malaria in that area. So we had no malaria drugs.

And I sent a couple of runners off to a local mining operation. But it was going to take them a day to get there and a day to get back, and that’s a long time without a malaria drug when you’re pretty darn sick. And these guys were really sick.

And so I asked them if they would like to try my water purification drops that I had brought along with me. And they said they were willing to try anything.

They were very sick. They had all the symptoms. They were laying in bed and they were… they had a high fever, and they were shivering, and they had pains in their joints. And they had nausea. They were throwing up. They had extreme headache. They were just in bad shape.

And so I give them a… I give each one of them a glass with quite a few drops of the purification liquid. And in four hours they were up, laughing about how bad they were feeling just a little while before. And they ate dinner that night, normally, and they went to work the next morning.

And the next day a couple more of them came down, and the same thing happened. They were treated for malaria in the same way, of course, and they were well.

And after that I traveled through the jungle, and I treated a lot of people in the jungle in South America, which was the country of Guyana. And I became pretty well known in that part of the jungle because I treated a lot of people.

It didn’t always work at that time. I had not done any work with it, and so, sometimes it didn’t work and so… But I still became well known. And finally I went into the city and started treating people in the city. And that wasn’t the thing to do. The government stopped me at that time.

BR: The government in Guyana.

JH: The government in Guyana stopped me because several American drug companies called down there and said, told them, that if they didn’t stop “the guy that was curing malaria” that they were going to stop shipping drugs to the local hospital.

And the reason why I know that is because I had… a friend that I had made when I first got there was the guy that was directly under the president of the country. And he said, he told me, that’s what happened, and they had no choice but they had to make me stop because they couldn’t afford to have their hospital not have drugs. And so that was the situation.

BR: Mm hm.

JH: Anyhow, I went back to the United States and I started working on it, trying to figure out what was in it that caused the malaria to be cured. And I finally realized… What I was using was a solution that is being sold in all the health food stores and had been on the shelves of health food stores for like 75 years in the United States. And it’s called stabilized oxygen.

And so, that’s what I was using – stabilized oxygen. And I started working with it. And I sent it over to friends that I made in Africa, and they were trying it out on people who had malaria over there and telling me by email how it was working. And so they cured a lot of people.

And in the process, I was working out ways of making it work better and better. So we finally got to the point where it was curing everybody that they treated. There wasn’t any failures. And so, at that point, I didn’t figure that it needed to get any better. And so, I have been working with it the same way.

Now, stabilized oxygen has been used, and people have been talking about oxygen, and how wonderful it was to have the oxygen and stabilized oxygen. It’s been in books and on the internet, and so forth.

But the fact is, there is no useful oxygen in stabilized oxygen. It’s chlorine dioxide is what is available in stabilized oxygen, and there is no oxygen that’s available. So, they have been confused all that time. And that might be one of the reasons why it never got really developed into a… to the point that it would really cure everything that it treated.

However, that was the basics of the development of Miracle Mineral Supplement of the 21st century.

BR: And it was… Basically what you did then, was you figured out a more powerful delivery mechanism of the chlorine dioxide that the stabilized oxygen was delivering in the first place.

JH: Yeah. It was a simple thing, although it took me about a year to figure it out. But any good chemist would have probably figured it out in the first day. But my chemistry was limited to metallurgy, and so, a lot of chemistry I really didn’t understand. So it took me a while to realize what to do to it.

But the simplicity of it was, you simply add some vinegar or some lemon juice, and the acid in the vinegar or the lemon juice releases the chlorine dioxide. And that is what does the work – chlorine dioxide.

Now, chlorine dioxide is not the same as chlorine. And everybody gets really, really afraid of chlorine dioxide when they hear what it is. But it isn’t the same as chlorine at all. It doesn’t create the chemicals that chlorine creates in the body or in water purification systems.

Chlorine will create, in most any water purification system, several carcinogenic, you know, cancer-causing chemicals. But chlorine dioxide does not.

And it’s… chlorine dioxide is as different chlorine as table salt is different from chlorine. Table salt is sodium chloride, and so, it’s made from chlorine. So it’s quite different from chlorine, and it’s very, very effective in the body.

BR: Now, I know a little bit about oxygen therapies, and hydrogen peroxide in particular. Does it work in a similar way to hydrogen peroxide therapy?

JH: Well, it does work in a similar way, but it works in a… It is a less powerful oxidizer than hydrogen peroxide.

Hydrogen peroxide will oxidize many things that chlorine dioxide will not oxidize, which sort of makes chlorine dioxide an ideal oxidizer for the body. It doesn’t have the power to oxidize the healthy cells of the body, or the beneficial bacteria in the body, or a lot of the tissues of the body.

So, while hydrogen peroxide can oxidize a lot of things, chlorine dioxide oxidizes a very limited number of things. And so, the limit it’s limited to is so ideal. It will only oxidize pathogens. That’s the things that cause disease in your body. It only oxidizes the pathogens. And it won’t oxidize any of the beneficial things in the body.

So you don’t really have to worry about it. There’s no side effects from it. There’s nothing to build up with it. It turns into… after it’s in the body for about 2, 3, 4 hours, it turns into a chloride. Guess what. That’s table salt.

And it turns into such a small amount of chloride that it is not anything that you can worry about. It’s maybe two or three grains of table salt from a dose of chlorine dioxide, and that’s all it is. So it leaves nothing behind to cause any kind of side effects, or nothing to build up, to cause side effects.

BR: OK. Now, for people who’ve heard about MMS but who aren’t scientifically minded, what can you say about what you’re reasonably sure it can do? When you say it kills pathogens, you mean it kills harmful viruses and bacteria?

JH: That’s right.

BR: How does it single those out?

JH: The pathogens… In the body, those things that cause diseases – pathogens – are anaerobic.

Now, most everybody understands that there’s aerobic and anaerobic bacteria in the body. And the anaerobic bacteria, anaerobic microorganisms, are the ones that do the damage – the anaerobic.

The aerobic are oxygen-using bacteria, and they are much more powerful. They’re much stronger than the disease-causing anaerobic microorganisms. So the anaerobic microorganisms are the guys that cause all the trouble, and they’re the weak organisms. They’re not strong.

Just to give you an example of an idea, most people have been out in the woods, and they’ve seen the fungus growing on the trees. Well, that’s anaerobic. And you can walk up to the tree and knock the fungus off because it’s very weak. It don’t have the power that the trees, which are using the oxygen, have – they’re strong and healthy. But the fungus is very, very weak.

And it’s the same way in your body. The pathogens that don’t use oxygen are very weak. And so, when you put the chloride dioxide in the body, it’s a weak oxidizer, so it can single out the pathogens. Because it’s a weak oxidizer, it only has enough power to oxidize the pathogens.

Now, one thing about it is, although it’s a much weaker oxidizer than the other oxidizers like ozone and hydrogen peroxide, although it’s much weaker, it has a much greater capacity. It can oxidize a lot more. It’ll oxidize twice as much as ozone, or 2-1/2 times as much as ozone, but it can’t oxidize as many different things as ozone. It can only oxidize a few things, but those few things that it does oxidize, it oxidizes with a great deal of power.

It’s sort of like… Chlorine dioxide is an explosive, not only in large quantities, where it will blow your building apart, but it’s explosive in small quantities. To those things it can oxidize, it’s explosive, and it will do that.

And so, while I’m mentioning that, I will just mention to you that the way it kills a pathogen is, it blows a hole in the skin. Now, the normal antibiotic that you take, that antibiotic has to be built just for the particular pathogen it’s going to kill, because it has to go inside, and it has to make the nucleus quit working properly.

BR: Mm hm.

JH: But chlorine dioxide blows a hole in the side. And, because it blows a hole in the side, there is no possibility of any pathogen ever developing a resistance to chlorine dioxide.

Now, chlorine dioxide kills viruses in a slightly different way. Instead of that method, and instead of going in and trying to kill the nucleus of the virus, it prevents the formation of special virus proteins. And, of course, if the proteins can’t form, in a very short period it results in the death or the destruction of the virus.

So, it kills both bacteria and viruses. It also kills fungus, and several of the other types of pathogens that are in the body as well.

BR: It will kill parasites as well?

JH: And it kills parasites. It kills all kinds of parasites and it kills them fast. Because, for example, malaria is caused by a parasite. And, normally speaking, a person who’s given MMS will be well from malaria in four hours. I mean, the worst disease of mankind is well from malaria in four hours.

And it isn’t like we “think” it works. I’ve treated 2,000 people personally. And the people I’ve trained have treated over 100,000 people. And in that 100,000, normally you’d find 400 people that died. Normally in 100,000 people who get malaria, 400 people would be dead. And there were no deaths reported in that 100,000 at all.

So it really works well with malaria, and that’s parasites. And there are a lot of other parasites that we’ve treated as well.

BR: Even large parasites?

JH: Even large parasites. Even worms.

BR: Really.

JH: When we were treating the people in the villages in Africa, ever so often we’d get one kid or a guy and he would cough up a lot of worms, as… you know, as big around as an orange almost. So, it will kill the big ones as well.

BR: So the trials that you’ve done against malaria, where you said you trained somebody or a team who cured 100,000 people, this was in Africa?

JH: In Africa. Yes.

BR: Whereabouts in Africa?

JH: Well, it was both in Kenya and Uganda… some missionary, large missionary, operation in Kenya and Uganda. And then there was guys who I give the material to, MMS to, and they went to Sierra Leone. And then, quite a few people in Tanzania treated. And then, of course, I’ve treated a number of them in Malawi. All of these countries are in Africa, if you don’t recognize them.

BR: And what happens in those countries when word starts to spread that a scourge like malaria is getting handled so easily?

JH: Well, usually a lot of other people come in. But, unfortunately, things happen that sort of slow things down. One thing happened – there’s a couple of missionaries decided I was evil. And so they told all the missionaries in the area that I was evil, and so that sort of slowed things down. They actually quit using the MMS. And so, many people who wanted to be treated didn’t get treated.

BR: Because you were a threat to the power structure.

JH: Maybe that was it. I don’t know. They just decided. Actually, what happened is, one of the nurses came to me. She had a lot of pain in her hand. And I just put my hand on her hand, and I said:

 

Can you feel my fingers. You know? And she said: Yeah.

And I said: Feel my fingers. And I said it about 3 times.

And she said: Oh, the pain’s going away. I can feel it tingling. You know.

And this missionary come running over and said: Stop that! Stop it. Stop it. And she… I don’t know. She decided that I was evil.

BR: That implies that you’ve actually got healing hands to some degree, do you think?

JH: Well, no, but I developed a technique for healing by touch. I call it Touch Healing. And the basic theory of Touch Healing is that your brain controls all the healing in your body. And so, if you can increase the communication between the brain and the area that’s bad, it will heal faster. And it can heal in minutes sometimes… not always, but it often can.

And… somewhat, a little bit like Reiki, but not really. And the idea is that, as you develop pain in your wrist, the brain don’t like the pain, so it starts turning off the communication. And the worse the pain gets, the least communication. And so now, if you can get that communication going better, the pain will heal faster. It works pretty good. [laughs]

BR: And what response have you had from the orthodox medical establishment? Because the statistics sound pretty impressive.

JH: Well, it depends on where you’re at. In the United States, the medical establishment there is pretty much against MMS.

I had a millionaire who was willing to put up enough money to treat the entire country of Haiti, and so I went there with the idea of doing that. And I tried to communicate with the people there, and I talked to all of the missionaries there. And every one of them was connected with a doctor in the United States. And in every case, they called the doctor in the United States, and he says: Don’t have anything to do with it.

So, quite a few of them were enthused about doing it, but when their doctor told them not to they didn’t have any… So, the medical establishment in the United States, for the last couple of years, has not been very receptive to it.

But, on the other hand, I’m in Mexico now. And there the doctors have been helping me. A non-profit civil association was formed and a number of doctors have put their names to it. And we’ve started doing clinical trials for AIDS and hepatitis C and cancer. And those trials have been going pretty good.

And we have a guy who’s head of the prison system there. He’s also helping us. So, we’ve had… And the local hospital has agreed to give us 300 blood tests for free. And so, we’ve been out to treat the local Indians in the various tribes near there.

And it’s gone much better in Mexico than it’s gone in the United States, although there’s a lot of bottles of MMS being sold in the United States. There’s at least 15,000 bottles a month being sold in the United States right now.

BR: Are you allowed to say here on camera that MMS will cure cancer?

JH: Sure. [laughs] I can say it. MMS will cure cancer.

BR: OK. That’s a wonderful thing for a lot of people to hear. What statistics have you got on that, realistically, for people who might literally feel they’ve got their lives at stake here? Is there a good chance?

JH: There’s a good chance, in my opinion. You know, I’ve treated a few hundred people in Mexico. Some of them were cancer patients. I’ve treated over the telephone, when people call me and I set up treatments for them over the telephone, at least 2000 people over the telephone. And I’ve probably treated by email another 4000 people. And I have a lot of stories of people who have been cured of cancer.

I can give you… There was a gal down in Australia who had lung cancer, and the doctor had given her, said: You’re going to die in about 2 weeks. And she, of course, was in bed, and she wasn’t able to get out of bed except they would get her out to go to the bathroom and things like that.

And so, her doctor heard of MMS and brought it to her. He said: You’d just as well take this as not. You’re going to be dead soon anyway. You know.

And she said: Of course, she was willing to take it, what the hell? And in 11 days she was up walking around. And in 15 days, she got in her car and drove it down to the lake and walked around a small lake. And before the month was out, she was back teaching school. She wasn’t completely cured at that time, but since that time, of course, she’s been completed cured.

Just the other day, not more than a month ago, my friend who works with me there in Mexico, his uncle got cancer. And he got worse and worse, and he was finally in bed. And it was a pancreatic cancer. And so, he said: I want to go treat my uncle. And I said: Sure, go treat your uncle.

And so, he got on the plane and he flew to another Mexican city where his uncle was. And his uncle was lying in bed, totally depressed, would hardly even talk to him. And so he says: Here, I‘m going to give you some stuff to take. And he just handed it to him and said: Drink it. [laughs]

And then he did a whole protocol that we have, which is putting the MMS on the outside of the skin, and several other things. And by the next morning, he got up out of bed and walked around a bit.

And by the third day he quit taking the pain tablets. And that’s generally the first thing that really is a good sign, and most always, almost always, happens with cancer patients, is within 2 or 3 days they quit taking the pain tablets. And so he quit taking the pain tablets. And by the end of the week he was talking about going back to work.

Now, when I left Mexico, he wasn’t totally cured, but that guy was up, living his life again at least.

BR: And it works because chlorine dioxide heads straight for anything that’s anaerobic and basically just explodes it.

JH: That’s right.

BR: And cancer cells are anaerobic.

JH: Yes. But there’s a little bit more to it than that with cancer. You see, we put it on the skin. And we use DMSO. That’s a particular material that soaks into the skin. Now, it’s used by people to treat horses all over the world, and it’s used for treating a lot of animals. And a lot of people have used it, too.

BR: What’s that name again?

JH: DMSO. And if you mix it with the MMS, and you put it on the skin, it soaks into the skin and it takes the MMS into the skin, too. And so, when it takes the MMS into the skin, it heads directly for the cancer. And it soaks into the cancer, too.

Instead of attacking the cancer cells, the weak cancerous cells, because it’s DMSO, it soaks into the cell, and it kills the little bug that’s inside the cell that’s causing the cancer and that’s causing the cell to be weak and cancerous.

When you kill that little bug, the cell becomes healthy again. And so, you no longer have to kill the cell. And so the whole theory behind using MMS to kill cancer is, we use it three or four different ways, all on the same guy, because we want to have as much MMS in that person’s body as possible.

We want to make the body – environment of the body – totally reject the cancer. And so, the more we can get into the body, the more likely that it will kill the cancer.

But we’re limited, because we can’t make the person sick. We got to stay giving him just enough that he don’t get sick, but is on the edge of getting sick. [laughs] So we’ve got to keep him just on that very edge. And therefore, it’s pretty intense for cancer. It’s pretty intense. He needs to take it 4 or 5 times a day, small amounts 4 or 5 times a day, instead of a big batch at one time.

BR: What does “small amounts” mean?

JH: Well, “small amounts” means 3, 4, 5, 6 drops of MMS. And, of course, you’ve got to activate the MMS, too, but it’s small amounts.

And then, of course, the MMS that’s put on the outside of the body affects the body in a different way. And it doesn’t cause a Herxheimer reaction – a Herxheimer reaction being the reaction that’s caused by cells dying – because it goes in and it kills the bug that’s inside the cancer instead of killing the cancer… inside the cancerous cells, I should say. So it kills the…

So, we’ve been having a lot of luck with cancer and almost every other disease you can imagine.

BR: Now it sounds like… I mean, like now watching this video, there will be people who are paying very close attention to what you’re saying because they may be thinking, you know: This is my last hope. Do they buy a bottle and start taking it? Do they need to consult a practitioner, someone with experience? Are there special protocols for different kinds of cancer?

JH: Well, some people… You know, some people have the ability to self-medicate. And boy, I mean, the medical doctors really hate that. Self-medication, you know, it’s going to keep them from getting a few bucks. [laughs] And so they scream about self-medication all the time.

But self-medication’s a good thing. People are taking responsibility for themselves, and so I recommend that. Either way. If you can find somebody who has experience, that’s good, but get going.

And so, I have all of the data on my different websites. And those websites have protocols on them. And the protocols tell you how to do it, tell you how to do the cancer, tell you how to do others things as well.

And the latest one is, I say, a “Protocol for People who have Life-threatening Diseases.” And that is the latest protocol, and the protocol that we’ve been getting the best results for, for life-threatening diseases like cancer. There are a lot of other things that you don’t need to go that intense with. You can take it much easier.

But normally I have all of those different protocols on, and a lot of other data, too. And, for people who really want to study up on it, I have what’s called a MMS Answers site, and there’s more than 800 questions and answers that I have given people over the last year.

And those questions are cross-referenced in a number of different ways, so you can look up almost anything. If you want to look up pancreas, you can look up pancreas. If you want to look up colon, you can look up colon, or a number of other things in that manner.

BR: So what you want is to give people the power to take their own health welfare back into their own hands, away from the professionals.

JH: Exactly. Exactly. I think the more a person takes responsibility for his own health, the more likely he is to be happy and stay alive.

BR: And, in terms of a list of the diseases which MMS has been shown to be efficacious against, you’re talking malaria, AIDS, cancer. What else?

JH: Flu. Colds. All types of diseases of the mouth. Most people find that they… Even people who think they have healthy mouths, if they will brush with MMS once or twice a day, they’ll find that their gums will get harder, their teeth will get more solidly in place, the teeth will get whiter.

The MMS kills any bacteria that’s on the teeth and helps enamel remain solid, and helps the enamel build back to a certain extent. Because if you kill all those bacteria in there, the enamel can improve, to a certain extent. And all kinds of people who’ve had terrible, terrible diseases of the mouth – and including abscessed teeth. Including abscessed teeth.

Now, for a long time I was pretty much convinced that if the tooth abscessed from the inside, you couldn’t get MMS into it, and therefore you couldn’t cure it if it was abscessed from the inside. But the fact of the matter is… One of my guys said: Hey, I’m going to try that DMSO and see if it’ll soak in. And so he put it in, and brushed his mouth with a real light, soft toothbrush for a while, just dipping it in the DMSO and the MMS combination, and just brushing it. And in about two days, the abscess in his tooth went away.

Now, that’s a total impossibility, but it works. [laughs] And so, it does really great things with all… I mean, I’ve had lots and lots of people call me and tell me that their mouth was in terrible shape, and tell me how it had improved to normal, or even better than what you consider normal. So, it really works well with fixing the mouth up.

BR: Now there are two modern-day plagues that could spread, so we are told. One is tuberculosis, and the other one is avian flu, if it comes to that. Would you have reason to suspect that MMS could work against both of these?

JH: Well, I sure would. The avian flu… Of course, you know, there’s been an entire multi-billions of people on this Earth. There’s only been 300 cases of avian flu, and those guys that got that was in places that was highly susceptible to it.

The chances of it ever happening is very, very slim, although the president, Bush, thinks, and has been talking about how he expects it to happen, you know. And there’s a lot of people talking about, in the drug cartels, are talking about how it’s going to be, it’s just going to happen sooner or later, it’s got to happen but they just don’t know how soon it’s going to happen, but they know it’s going to happen.

BR: Some people think it’s been weaponized.

JH: That’s right. There are some people that think it’s been weaponized. But I think that the flu that’s been the most dangerous was the 1917 flu. It killed 50 million people. And they’ve gotten that one back, too. [laughs] So they reconstructed it from people who were buried up in Alaska, who had the flu. And they were buried in ice, and they’ve been in ice all these years.

But I think… MMS kills any flu that I’ve seen so far, and it’s just a pathogen, and so it should be able to kill that flu as well. So, the best way is to keep a bottle of MMS on your shelf. [laughs]

BR: Yes. Is there anything you can say about your own vision for the next few years? Because this has been a staggering story. This started in Guyana, how many years ago?

JH: In 1997 in Guyana. So what’s that? 10 years now.

BR: So in a decade it’s now a world-wide phenomenon.

JH: Yes.

BR: You see it on every discussion board, on every internet forum, and people are talking about it. People are writing to us about it. The alternative health community is abuzz with this. What’s next? Where is this going to go? What are your personal plans?

JH: Well, I’d like to start in Africa, and take one single country, and just cure all the malaria in that one country. And we’ll get a lot of the AIDS while we’re at it. Of course, AIDS is a much more complex disease and much harder to handle than malaria. But I think that we have some protocols, ways of using MMS, that will probably work on AIDS. So far we’ve had good luck.

BR: What country do you have in mind?

JH: Well, I have the country of Malawi in mind. It may not be that country, but that country would be a good one because I’ve already talked to all of the… I did talk to all of the people in the government there. They were all very helpful. They all were happy to see me. They were happy for me to be treating their people.

There was no governmental problems at all. Even, they had a malaria department in the government, and that department was happy to work with me. So I’d like to go somewhere like… I’d like to go there just because it would be easy to get things going without a lot of getting permission and problems. That would be the main thing.

BR: Is there any possibility that you could get scientific studies written up in the scientific journals?

JH: Yes, there’s a possibility, but I’ve discouraged that. I’ve had chances. People have asked me if I wanted to do that.

And I have discouraged it because we have been a grassroots movement from the very beginning. We’ve been very successful in being a grassroots movement. And when I say “grassroots,” I mean below the government’s radar. They haven’t been aware of us.

And I had one of my friends check with the FDA the other day. He went in and he went to the third man in control in the FDA and asked him about MMS. What did they think about it?

And the guy said: Well, that’s just crap. He said: We don’t worry about things like that. He said: We have these multimillion-dollar corporations that are furnishing herbs that are replacing some of the drugs. And we have a lot of… we don’t have enough money to control them. He says: Why are we going to worry about some little guy down there in the street selling MMS?

So, they aren’t aware of what MMS will do. They’re not aware of what’s happening. And I want to leave it that way. I don’t want the governments and the various different drug companies finding out about it.

I’ve had chances to go on national newspapers, and one or two chances to go on national TV, and I’ve always rejected it – although I’m happy to go on the internet, and I’ve had a lot of different internet attention.

But I don’t want… I didn’t want to get it spread out so much that the government’s going to get their hand in it. Because you know what they do; they stop whatever they can. So I’ve been avoiding that. Eventually it’s going to come, though. Eventually we’re going to have to let… the news is going to get out. But I’m going to wait as long as I can on that.

BR: And you’ve heard one or two stories of people who come up against The-Powers-That-Be and suffer a little bit for that, haven’t you?

JH: I’ve heard of a lot of stories. One of my… A guy that I know pretty well was trying to sell, was selling, a salve that affected cancer. It actually is called the Indian Herb, and it’s been sold for 70 years, and the lady who sells it has like 3,000 letters from people who’ve had cancer cured.

And he was selling this on the internet. And as soon as the FDA heard about it, they come out, and they confiscated his house, and his car, and his whole business, and his bank account. They got everything.

And they put him in jail. And then they kept him from talking to his lawyer by moving him from jail to jail, so that he couldn’t get to talk to his lawyer. And then, after 6 months they finally charged him. They moved him around for 6 months, then after 6 months they finally charged him and they…

And when he said: Not guilty, the judge said: Wait a minute. Let’s go to my chambers. And so the judge took him into his chambers and he said: You’ve got a choice. He said: Either you plead guilty and go to jail for three years, or I’ll make sure you go to jail for 20 years.

And his lawyer wasn’t there, and he didn’t know what to do, so he went ahead and pleaded guilty, went to jail for three years. And he got out of jail a couple years ago and now he’s down in South America. He don’t want anything more to do with the U.S.

But… I had another friend that I know. He’s become a friend because he knows what I’m doing. But he was in Africa curing malaria and some people, representatives from the drug companies, told him to stop. And he said he wasn’t going to stop. He was going to continue to cure malaria.

And one night when he went home… Well, he didn’t go home, he went to his hotel room, and he opened the door and a bomb went off and it blew both of his legs off. Didn’t kill him. He’s in California now. He’s in a wheelchair.

That’s just two of the people I know personally. Then a lot of the older guys, like a guy named Koch back in 1917, cured cancer. And his material was sold to many hundreds of doctors, and more than 100,000 people were cured of cancer before the FDA finally stopped him.

So. I can go on. There’s a lot of other stories about the same thing. There’s Rife. Later on, in 1930s, Rife cured another… His equipment and things cured another 100,000 people from cancer. And the FDA stopped him, burned all of his books and all of his laboratory equipment and everything.

And the FDA has burned many books, has had the burning of books many times. The DMSO book was ordered to be burned. And it was burned. They burned all the DMSO books that they could get their hands on.

And so, you got to stay out of the hands of the drug companies. And of course, the drug companies run the FDA.

In case you don’t know how that goes, the executives from the drug companies take a sabbatical. They take a leave from their drug company, and they go over and be the guy that runs the FDA for a year. And then another drug company. And so, the drug… the FDA in the United States is run by the drug companies. And [laughs] it’s ridiculous.

And they have stopped every case, everything that cures cancer. And they convince the people, which it seems to be easy to convince, they convince the people that these people who actually have cancer cures are charlatans and bad guys, and they convince…

And so, you know, I’ve had three or four friends who died of cancer and they said: Well, I’m not going to go to those quacks. And actually the medical people are the real quacks. They’re the ones that’s killing everybody. And so it’s… That’s the way it exists right now. It’s kind of a shame

BR: Have you had any threats against you from anybody, or are you under the radar?

JH: I’m still under the radar. I haven’t had any threats. But I live in Mexico, just in case. [laughs] I’m paranoid, so I keep out of the radar, and I don’t think that…

I think I probably have another year or two before the FDA says: Uh oh, this stuff is starting to reduce the income of the drug companies. And that’s what’s going to really do the thing. When the money starts decreasing, when it looks like that the MMS is starting to replace some of the drugs, then that’s what’s going to really make them mad.

BR: So your goal is to get as much out there as fast as possible before they…

JH: That’s right. Get as much out. Get as many people using it as possible, so that… And, you know, my book tells how to make it. And it even tells how to manufacture it in your kitchen, so that you can buy the book and set up to manufacture it and furnish it to your neighbors or furnish it to your family, or whatever.

BR: OK. And what you’re saying is… In your book you’ve actually got instructions about how to be completely self-sufficient as far as MMS, if you want to do that.

JH: That’s right. A step-by-step procedure to make a few bottles for yourself, and a step-by-step procedure to make hundreds or thousands of bottles to be sold.

BR: And for anyone who’s thinking of buying some, it goes a very long way. We’re just talking about a few little drops at a time. Right?

JH: That’s right. A $20 bottle will last you, personally… Say, if you want to take a maintenance dose every day, a $20 bottle will last you about a year and a half. And if you’re going to use it for your whole family, it’ll probably last for 3, 4, 5 months.

And the idea… and everybody has been really good at it… I ask everybody… I don’t sell it myself, except I’m starting to in Mexico, but for the last 10 years I haven’t sold it myself. I give bottles away, but mostly I encourage other people to sell it. And everybody kept the price down.

I said: Look, we want to keep the price down so anybody in the world can afford it. And they all, so far, are humanitarian-type people, and they’re all manufacturing and selling it for the same price, which is $20 a bottle. I don’t care whether it’s in Germany, or South Africa, or Australia, or the United States, or Mexico. It’s $20 a bottle.

And that’s less than a penny a dose. You can cure a case of malaria for 5 cents. And even the people in Africa can afford that. Now, when we go there, we aren’t going to charge them that much. We’re going to do it for free at first, but they could afford it if they had to.

 


BR: What’s your spiritual and philosophical backdrop that’s taken you through all these extraordinary years?

JH: Well, I like to believe that I’m a highly spiritual guy, but not religious.

BR: I appreciate the difference.

JH: OK. All right. And so, I believe that the more spiritual a person is, and the more he looks into doing things that he knows is right to do, the more power he has. And I believe that in the whole movement towards a better health movement, or a better movement towards making people well who are sick – which is totally against what the medical people are doing nowadays – but I believe that the more people work towards right things, the more power they have.

Because, if they’re really doing what they know is right, they aren’t going to have any guilt. They aren’t… Buried in everybody’s mind somewhere, if he’s doing wrong, if he’s fleecing people of their money, if he’s causing people to die, somewhere deep inside there he knows that he’s doing wrong. And if knows that, he loses more power as time goes on.

And I think that that’s happening on Earth today – now. I think that as those drug companies cause more and more deaths, and as the FDA causes more and more deaths in more and more people, that they are slowly losing their power. And not nearly as fast as we’d like, but they are losing their power.

And I think that the alternate medicine movement is slowly gaining power, and the people in it are becoming more powerful. And it’s happening to me. What’s happening to me, to a certain extent, is, people are showing up to talk to me about powerful things.

BR: Mm hm.

JH: And I’m not free to discuss most of them. But I think that we are on the edge of a paradigm-change in the healing industry. And I think that that paradigm-change will happen in the next very few years. It won’t be a long time.

And that will help us into a paradigm-change in the brutality of man against man. And I don’t know how long that change will take. That change may take 50 to a couple of hundred years, but it’s changing. And it never has changed.

For hundreds of thousands of years, there has been no change in the brutality of man against man. I mean, they talk about Jesus, and they talk about Mohammed, and they talk about all of these wonderful people that have come before. And there are hundreds of them, really. And they’ve all taught love, and they’ve all talked about these wonderful things.

 

And there’s been NO change in the paradigm of brutality of man.

And I think that those of us, now, are beginning to come together in communication – not necessarily gathering in one place, but in communication.

People are talking to me from all over the world. And other people, like this group here, that we’re having a congress here about alternate medicine, and that sort of thing. And I just was to another congress in Mexico City. And congresses are happening all over. And they’re talking about alternate medicine. And these things weren’t happening 20 years ago. Very few of them was happening even 10 years ago.

But, believe me, we’re going into a paradigm shift. It’s coming slowly, but it’s going to happen. And it’s going to happen because there are a lot of people on Earth now that are beginning to do what they know is right.

BR: I would say that this shift has started. We’re starting to see it in our own lifetime, and we’re very privileged to be here at this time.

JH: That’s right. Yeah. I feel exactly the same way. And I think that… And to carry it a little bit further than that, I think that in the past, many millions of years or thousands of years, that many of us… that there was a group of us who agreed to be here and to work on this particular paradigm shift.

BR: And I’m one of those, too! [laughter]

JH: See? And so, I’m meeting a lot of them. I mean, you’re not just… A lot of people are calling me on the phone and saying: Hey, I remember when we agreed to be here. You know? And things like that.

BR: Sure.

JH: Right. And so we’re doing what we know is right. And we’re so much more powerful than those guys out there that are screwing people over, and causing deaths, and causing suffering and pain, and all that. They don’t have a chance. They’ve lost. They just don’t know it. [laughs] And it’s going to take a while to get the point across to them, but it’s going to be. It’s going to happen.

So that’s the part of it I like to mention because I watched the suffering and the pain for so long that I like to see… I see it happening. I’ve seen the thousands of miracles in the past few years. And I know we’re going to see a lot more.

BR: I think you’re absolutely right. And you’re right at the vanguard of the shift. You’re part of the movement that’s actually making this happen. You’re exactly in the right place at the right time.

JH: Well, thank you. [laughs]

BR: You’re a great man, sir. You’re a very brave man for coming out to do this stuff so openly. Even if you are underneath the radar, there are tens of thousands of people who will be watching this video and who will be paying very close attention to what you’re saying. You’ll be saving a lot of lives. And I take my hat off to you, sir. [laughter] It’s been a great privilege.

JH: Well, thank you. Certainly it’s my privilege to be here and to have you say such wonderful things.

BR: Thank you, Jim Humble.

JH: You’re welcome. [background applause] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

BR: And I meant what I said.

JH: Great. I appreciate it.

BR: I’d love to see you again next year when maybe you can say a little more.

JH: Right!

Source

Breaking The Matrix

Are we living inside the computer program? It’s the question that only we can find the answer. Here’s a little brief of what it could mean:

It shouldn’t be a surprise that The Matrix and its follow-up, Matrix Reloaded, have become cult movie classics and have surpassed the financial expectations of filmmakers and film critics alike. The simple fact is that people here on this planet are waking up from their own long programmed sleep.

The movies raise many questions about our group reality and individual reality; the biggest being,

“who is really in control and what, if anything, can we do about it?”

Indigenous groups of the past understood this and within the program of their time learned all the nuances to keep themselves from being suckered into the black hole of lost and forgotten souls; that is, sheep being led to the slaughterhouse.

They learned to survive using their own senses rather than by the noise of outside institutions constantly telling them how to live, breathe, think, pray, and behave, to conform to rigid and unnatural social mores and laws.

However,

  • Who really are the controllers?

  • Is it one overlord, is it many, is it the government, or is it the entire institutionalized system?

The Matrix is confounding to most because not only does it present a scenario that most people haven’t ever considered, let alone understand, but one that presents a picture that is not pretty and creates fear for those who might even want to consider its message.

Exactly what is the Matrix?


We all dream and some are fortunate enough to remember our dreams. We are programmed by institutions such as psychiatry to view our dreams as preoccupations, fears, neuroses and sometimes psychoses. But the Maya and many indigenous cultures understood far better that our dreams were the key to reality rather than the other way around.

Our dreams show us a side of life that we all live when our ego is no longer involved in the process of maintaining the physical. They show us what is really going on from an objective point of perspective and can also be prophetic, helping us to realize our own power and those weaknesses that must be overcome to live unrestrained. Most of all, they show us how we remain bound in a controlled world, and sometimes they even show us how to break through the boundaries imposed on us by others, and mostly by ourselves.

Traditional psychiatrists would have us think that these dreams manifest to show us just the opposite; how we must find a means to control our impulses and fit into the system, rather than break out of it.


How does this tie in with the Matrix?

 If you take your current reality and your dreams, and transpose them so that your dreams are your reality and your reality the dream or maybe I should say, “the living nightmare”, you start to get the gist of the program.

If you can buy this, then you’re starting to understand the Matrix!

Then you begin to wonder just who is controlling the entire waking scenario, keeping you in a constant state of amnesia so that you don’t even realize you’re a walking, talking slave, feeding a system that cares little about your wellbeing. This faceless system feeds you crap about family values to contain you, and then brainwashes you into believing that there is value in fighting and dying and working for such causes as economic freedom, liberty, etc.

In fact, these actions do not liberate us but just tie us further into a system that benefits only a few and keeps us from determining our own values!

  • And where are the people who are feeding you this garbage?

  • Do you see them on the frontlines, or do they instead take your money and your time, and then run, glorify everything that will help them in their pursuit of power at your expense?

Now you’re beginning to understand the Matrix…

The Matrix is in fact a machine, a political machine, an economic machine, a social machine, a religious machine, a family machine, and any machine that feeds off the people without them realizing it.

The Matrix raises serious issues about choice, destiny, control, and the nature of God and faith.

  • Are we then all programmed to do exactly what we do and to believe exactly what we believe?

  • Or are there a few brave souls out there who see through the Matrix, ask questions, understanding that there is an element of choice, destiny, control and faith existing within the collective unconscious and even themselves?

  • Remember the old hippie adage, “challenge authority?”

  • How did we ever draw that conclusion?

  • Was it a result of programming, or by some of us choosing to expand our minds and tapping into the collective unconscious?

  • Was the drug culture a program to wake us up?

  • Do you understand why the church and government is so fearful of those who woke up and ask questions?

  • Is it any wonder that alcohol, a depressant is legal and marijuana, a mind expanding stimulant is illegal?

  • If we are one big universal computer program, can we break the code?

  • If so, what’s in it for us?

  • If we break the code, do we become terrorists as our governments want us to believe we are, or heroes to those of us who saw through the program of the few and mighty and fought it to obtain their freedom of choice?

  • But once broken, what are our choices then and what is our destiny?

  • Is there a God who created us as part of his imagination so that we think we’re living but instead we’re his program that he can turn on and off as he chooses?

  • Are there those in his favor who carry out his program for his and their own self interests?

  • Are his interests solely in his favor or are they humanitarian?

  • Do our lawmakers and church leaders really make laws to protect us or protect their own interests?

  • Are they part of the programmed hierarchy of foot soldiers and agents who get special treatment for doing so?

We are all God’s creation, whatever God is.

The God program has many embedded programs that play themselves out; some are useful and some become obsolete. We are not perfect and will never be so despite the God program that occasionally tries to wipe his own creations off the face of the planet either in biblical proportions or by use of his agents. Once here, we gradually mutate to accommodate our new environment.

New programs may be instituted to control mutants, and programs can even be aborted if they no longer have the desired effect. But some mutants may become anomalies. They adapt but sometimes not according to plan. They run amuck and threaten the status quo. Some programs may contain their actions but ultimately lose control due to unforeseen expectations; that is, the lack of foresight in programming.

These anomalies somehow manage to tap into the spiritual guidance source code; sort of like the hippies of the 60s. They get inspiration from the angel program, the ghost program, the UFO program, or the oracle program.

As humans, with spiritual guidance, we learn we must move beyond playing by other people’s rules if we want to spiritually survive. While we physically mutate by evolutionary design to adapt to our physical environments, we also have the capacity to change our destiny and make our own choices by taking back control of our thoughts, beliefs, and creativity.

Believing in anyone or anything other than ourselves keeps us a prisoner in the Matrix. Some people succumb to the spiritual program, and as with most religions, give up their free will believing that a higher force they do not understand has more power than them. However, understanding that we each have a role in creating our own destiny if we follow own intuition and heart, and by refusing to play by other people’s or higher power’s rules, is the key to breaking through matrix prison.

There can never be a perfect world if that world is conceived only by one and everyone else becomes a part of that person’s limited and controlled design. We are all “the one” when it comes to controlling our own destiny. And when we realize we are all “the one” and we each have the same purpose of fulfilling our individual destinies, we all become one with each other, raising a new consciousness level that breaks the old programming.


The currently running limited-edition God program will most likely abort in the near future. More sheep are due to wake up upon realizing something is very out-of-sync, which will result in cracking the cosmic code.

Then a brand new program will take over within the God program.

  • Could that program be the one where we are expected to progress to a new level of understanding; the understanding that the one ultimately in control is just “you”, and that the choices we make must be of our own free will, and that those choices are what ultimately create our destiny?

  • Do we have enough faith in ourselves to unravel and understand our coded purpose?

Don’t bother to ask the “authorities” for the answers because authorities won’t tell you.

They have too much to loose and everything to gain by keeping us trapped in a six-sided, limited-view box. You must find the answers within yourself to free yourself.

You are your own oracle and your oracle’s sole purpose is to function not as a slave master, but as a guide, moving you to new dimensions in awareness.

Source

Silenced people, author and blogger Mac Tonnies (murdered)

And again I highly think that something weird happened to this guy, because the topics he talked and the young age when he died, only 34. So here’s the story of Mac Tonnies:

 

Here’s a little bio:

Mac Tonnies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mac Tonnies (20 August 1975 – 18 October 2009[1]) was an American author and blogger whose work focused on futurology, transhumanism and paranormal topics. Tonnies grew up in Independence, Missouri, and attended William Chrisman High School and Ottawa University.[2] He lived in Kansas City, Missouri. Tonnies had an active online presence and a “small, but devoted” readership, but supported himself by working at Starbucks and other nine-to-five jobs. In 2009 he died of cardiac arrhythmia at the age of 34.[1]

Books

His first book, a collection of science fiction short stories titled Illumined Black, was published by Phantom Press Publications in 1995, when Tonnies was in college.[2][3] It carried a cover blurb by Bruce Sterling and was positively reviewed in Booklist.[2] His second book, After the Martian Apocalypse, was published by Simon & Schuster in 2004.[4] His third book, The Cryptoterrestrials, was published posthumously by Anomalist Books in 2010.[5]

In November, 2012, Redstar Books published the first volume of Posthuman Blues, which contains excerpts from Tonnies’ long-running blog of the same name.[6] In the introduction, historian Aaron John Gulyas writes that, “Posthuman Blues is of a piece with the Lost Generation of the 1920s and the Beat Generation of the 1950s. Tonnies spoke for his generation with passion, eloquence, and a rare insight.” [7]

Other media

In 2007 the play Doing Time, which he co-wrote with Canadian filmmaker Paul Kimball (who was working on a documentary about Tonnies),[8] premiered in Halifax, Nova Scotia.[9] He also appeared in the documentary Best Evidence: Top 10 UFO Sightings,[10] and an episode of the Canadian television series Supernatural Investigator.[11]

His blog, “Posthuman blues” was described by The Pitch as “one of Kansas City’s best blogs, filled with well-written, intelligent takes on offbeat news items and humorous rants from a left-leaning political perspective.”[2]

He appeared on Coast to Coast AM in September 2009.,[12] and was a frequent guest on The Paracast.[13]

Cryptoterrestrial hypothesis

The cryptoterrestrial hypothesis was developed in Tonnies’s blog, and later published posthumously. It proposes that extraterrestrial beings are actually mysterious and secretive races of earthly origin. These races have existed upon Earth for at least as long as humanity, and present themselves as extraterrestrials or occult beings. Some[who?] have suggested that this is an extension of the ideas of Richard Shaver.[14]

Source

Ghost In The Machine

Do you know what singularity with computers mean? It’s time to find out and meet the guy called Raymond Kurzweil:

 

And here’s the article about Singularity:

Photo-Illustration

by Phillip Toledano for TIME

On Feb. 15, 1965, a diffident but self-possessed high school student named Raymond Kurzweil appeared as a guest on a game show called I’ve Got a Secret.

He was introduced by the host, Steve Allen, then he played a short musical composition on a piano. The idea was that Kurzweil was hiding an unusual fact and the panelists – they included a comedian and a former Miss America – had to guess what it was.

On the show (see the clip on YouTube), the beauty queen did a good job of grilling Kurzweil, but the comedian got the win: the music was composed by a computer. Kurzweil got $200.

Kurzweil then demonstrated the computer, which he built himself – a desk-size affair with loudly clacking relays, hooked up to a typewriter. The panelists were pretty blasé about it; they were more impressed by Kurzweil’s age than by anything he’d actually done.

They were ready to move on to Mrs. Chester Loney of Rough and Ready, Calif., whose secret was that she’d been President Lyndon Johnson’s first-grade teacher. But Kurzweil would spend much of the rest of his career working out what his demonstration meant.

Creating a work of art is one of those activities we reserve for humans and humans only. It’s an act of self-expression; you’re not supposed to be able to do it if you don’t have a self. To see creativity, the exclusive domain of humans, usurped by a computer built by a 17-year-old is to watch a line blur that cannot be unblurred, the line between organic intelligence and artificial intelligence.

That was Kurzweil’s real secret, and back in 1965 nobody guessed it. Maybe not even him, not yet. But now, 46 years later, Kurzweil believes that we’re approaching a moment when computers will become intelligent, and not just intelligent but more intelligent than humans. When that happens, humanity – our bodies, our minds, our civilization – will be completely and irreversibly transformed.

He believes that this moment is not only inevitable but imminent. According to his calculations, the end of human civilization as we know it is about 35 years away.


Computers are getting faster. Everybody knows that. Also, computers are getting faster faster – that is, the rate at which they’re getting faster is increasing.

True? True.

So if computers are getting so much faster, so incredibly fast, there might conceivably come a moment when they are capable of something comparable to human intelligence. Artificial intelligence.

All that horsepower could be put in the service of emulating whatever it is our brains are doing when they create consciousness – not just doing arithmetic very quickly or composing piano music but also driving cars, writing books, making ethical decisions, appreciating fancy paintings, making witty observations at cocktail parties.

If you can swallow that idea, and Kurzweil and a lot of other very smart people can, then all bets are off. From that point on, there’s no reason to think computers would stop getting more powerful. They would keep on developing until they were far more intelligent than we are. Their rate of development would also continue to increase, because they would take over their own development from their slower-thinking human creators.

Imagine a computer scientist that was itself a super-intelligent computer. It would work incredibly quickly. It could draw on huge amounts of data effortlessly. It wouldn’t even take breaks to play Farmville. Probably.

It’s impossible to predict the behavior of these smarter-than-human intelligences with which (with whom?) we might one day share the planet, because if you could, you’d be as smart as they would be.

But there are a lot of theories about it.

Maybe we’ll merge with them to become super-intelligent cyborgs, using computers to extend our intellectual abilities the same way that cars and planes extend our physical abilities.

Maybe the artificial intelligences will help us treat the effects of old age and prolong our life spans indefinitely. Maybe we’ll scan our consciousnesses into computers and live inside them as software, forever, virtually. Maybe the computers will turn on humanity and annihilate us. The one thing all these theories have in common is the transformation of our species into something that is no longer recognizable as such to humanity circa 2011.

This transformation has a name: the Singularity.

The difficult thing to keep sight of when you’re talking about the Singularity is that even though it sounds like science fiction, it isn’t, no more than a weather forecast is science fiction. It’s not a fringe idea; it’s a serious hypothesis about the future of life on Earth.

There’s an intellectual gag reflex that kicks in anytime you try to swallow an idea that involves super-intelligent immortal cyborgs, but suppress it if you can, because while the Singularity appears to be, on the face of it, preposterous, it’s an idea that rewards sober, careful evaluation.

People are spending a lot of money trying to understand it. The three-year-old Singularity University, which offers inter-disciplinary courses of study for graduate students and executives, is hosted by NASA. Google was a founding sponsor; its CEO and co-founder Larry Page spoke there last year. People are attracted to the Singularity for the shock value, like an intellectual freak show, but they stay because there’s more to it than they expected.

And of course, in the event that it turns out to be real, it will be the most important thing to happen to human beings since the invention of language. The Singularity isn’t a wholly new idea, just newish.

In 1965 the British mathematician I.J. Good described something he called an “intelligence explosion”:

Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever.

Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an “intelligence explosion,” and the intelligence of man would be left far behind. Thus the first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make.

The word singularity is borrowed from astrophysics:

it refers to a point in space-time – for example, inside a black hole – at which the rules of ordinary physics do not apply.

In the 1980s the science-fiction novelist Vernor Vinge attached it to Good’s intelligence-explosion scenario.

At a NASA symposium in 1993, Vinge announced that,

“within 30 years, we will have the technological means to create super-human intelligence. Shortly after, the human era will be ended.”

By that time Kurzweil was thinking about the Singularity too.

He’d been busy since his appearance on I’ve Got a Secret. He’d made several fortunes as an engineer and inventor; he founded and then sold his first software company while he was still at MIT. He went on to build the first print-to-speech reading machine for the blind – Stevie Wonder was customer No. 1 – and made innovations in a range of technical fields, including music synthesizers and speech recognition.

He holds 39 patents and 19 honorary doctorates. In 1999 President Bill Clinton awarded him the National Medal of Technology.

But Kurzweil was also pursuing a parallel career as a futurist: he has been publishing his thoughts about the future of human and machine-kind for 20 years, most recently in The Singularity Is Near, which was a best seller when it came out in 2005.

A documentary by the same name, starring Kurzweil, Tony Robbins and Alan Dershowitz, among others, was released in January. (Kurzweil is actually the subject of two current documentaries. The other one, less authorized but more informative, is called The Transcendent Man.)

Bill Gates has called him,

“the best person I know at predicting the future of artificial intelligence.”

In real life, the transcendent man is an unimposing figure who could pass for Woody Allen’s even nerdier younger brother.

Kurzweil grew up in Queens, N.Y., and you can still hear a trace of it in his voice. Now 62, he speaks with the soft, almost hypnotic calm of someone who gives 60 public lectures a year. As the Singularity’s most visible champion, he has heard all the questions and faced down the incredulity many, many times before. He’s good-natured about it.

His manner is almost apologetic:

I wish I could bring you less exciting news of the future, but I’ve looked at the numbers, and this is what they say, so what else can I tell you?

Kurzweil’s interest in humanity’s cyborganic destiny began about 1980 largely as a practical matter. He needed ways to measure and track the pace of technological progress.

Even great inventions can fail if they arrive before their time, and he wanted to make sure that when he released his, the timing was right.

“Even at that time, technology was moving quickly enough that the world was going to be different by the time you finished a project,” he says.

“So it’s like skeet shooting – you can’t shoot at the target.”

He knew about Moore’s law, of course, which states that the number of transistors you can put on a microchip doubles about every two years.

It’s a surprisingly reliable rule of thumb. Kurzweil tried plotting a slightly different curve:

the change over time in the amount of computing power, measured in MIPS (millions of instructions per second), that you can buy for $1,000.

As it turned out, Kurzweil’s numbers looked a lot like Moore’s. They doubled every couple of years.

Drawn as graphs, they both made exponential curves, with their value increasing by multiples of two instead of by regular increments in a straight line. The curves held eerily steady, even when Kurzweil extended his backward through the decades of pretransistor computing technologies like relays and vacuum tubes, all the way back to 1900.

Kurzweil then ran the numbers on a whole bunch of other key technological indexes – the falling cost of manufacturing transistors, the rising clock speed of microprocessors, the plummeting price of dynamic RAM. He looked even further afield at trends in biotech and beyond – the falling cost of sequencing DNA and of wireless data service and the rising numbers of Internet hosts and nanotechnology patents.

He kept finding the same thing: exponentially accelerating progress.

“It’s really amazing how smooth these trajectories are,” he says. “Through thick and thin, war and peace, boom times and recessions.”

Kurzweil calls it the law of accelerating returns:

technological progress happens exponentially, not linearly.

Then he extended the curves into the future, and the growth they predicted was so phenomenal, it created cognitive resistance in his mind. Exponential curves start slowly, then rocket skyward toward infinity.

According to Kurzweil, we’re not evolved to think in terms of exponential growth.

“It’s not intuitive. Our built-in predictors are linear. When we’re trying to avoid an animal, we pick the linear prediction of where it’s going to be in 20 seconds and what to do about it. That is actually hardwired in our brains.”

Here’s what the exponential curves told him. We will successfully reverse-engineer the human brain by the mid-2020s.

By the end of that decade, computers will be capable of human-level intelligence. Kurzweil puts the date of the Singularity – never say he’s not conservative – at 2045. In that year, he estimates, given the vast increases in computing power and the vast reductions in the cost of same, the quantity of artificial intelligence created will be about a billion times the sum of all the human intelligence that exists today.

The Singularity isn’t just an idea. It attracts people, and those people feel a bond with one another.

Together they form a movement, a subculture; Kurzweil calls it a community. Once you decide to take the Singularity seriously, you will find that you have become part of a small but intense and globally distributed hive of like-minded thinkers known as Singularitarians.

Not all of them are Kurzweilians, not by a long chalk. There’s room inside Singularitarianism for considerable diversity of opinion about what the Singularity means and when and how it will or won’t happen.

But Singularitarians share a worldview.

They think in terms of deep time, they believe in the power of technology to shape history, they have little interest in the conventional wisdom about anything, and they cannot believe you’re walking around living your life and watching TV as if the artificial-intelligence revolution were not about to erupt and change absolutely everything.

They have no fear of sounding ridiculous; your ordinary citizen’s distaste for apparently absurd ideas is just an example of irrational bias, and Singularitarians have no truck with irrationality.

When you enter their mind-space you pass through an extreme gradient in worldview, a hard ontological shear that separates Singularitarians from the common run of humanity. Expect turbulence.

In addition to the Singularity University, which Kurzweil co-founded, there’s also a Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence (SIAI), based in San Francisco. It counts among its advisers Peter Thiel, a former CEO of PayPal and an early investor in Facebook. The institute holds an annual conference called the Singularity Summit. (Kurzweil co-founded that too.)

Because of the highly interdisciplinary nature of Singularity theory, it attracts a diverse crowd. Artificial intelligence is the main event, but the sessions also cover the galloping progress of, among other fields, genetics and nanotechnology.

At the 2010 summit, which took place in August in San Francisco, there were not just computer scientists but also psychologists, neuroscientists, nanotechnologists, molecular biologists, a specialist in wearable computers, a professor of emergency medicine, an expert on cognition in gray parrots and the professional magician and debunker James “the Amazing” Randi.

The atmosphere was a curious blend of Davos and UFO convention. Proponents of seasteading – the practice, so far mostly theoretical, of establishing politically autonomous floating communities in international waters – handed out pamphlets. An android chatted with visitors in one corner.

After artificial intelligence, the most talked-about topic at the 2010 summit was life extension.

Biological boundaries that most people think of as permanent and inevitable Singularitarians see as merely intractable but solvable problems. Death is one of them. Old age is an illness like any other, and what do you do with illnesses? You cure them. Like a lot of Singularitarian ideas, it sounds funny at first, but the closer you get to it, the less funny it seems. It’s not just wishful thinking; there’s actual science going on here.

For example, it’s well known that one cause of the physical degeneration associated with aging involves telomeres, which are segments of DNA found at the ends of chromosomes. Every time a cell divides, its telomeres get shorter, and once a cell runs out of telomeres, it can’t reproduce anymore and dies. But there’s an enzyme called telomerase that reverses this process; it’s one of the reasons cancer cells live so long.

So why not treat regular non-cancerous cells with telomerase?

In November, researchers at Harvard Medical School announced in Nature that they had done just that. They administered telomerase to a group of mice suffering from age-related degeneration. The damage went away.

The mice didn’t just get better; they got younger.

Aubrey de Grey is one of the world’s best-known life-extension researchers and a Singularity Summit veteran. A British biologist with a doctorate from Cambridge and a famously formidable beard, de Grey runs a foundation called SENS, or Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence.

He views aging as a process of accumulating damage, which he has divided into seven categories, each of which he hopes to one day address using regenerative medicine.

“People have begun to realize that the view of aging being something immutable – rather like the heat death of the universe – is simply ridiculous,” he says.

“It’s just childish. The human body is a machine that has a bunch of functions, and it accumulates various types of damage as a side effect of the normal function of the machine. Therefore in principal that damage can be repaired periodically.

This is why we have vintage cars. It’s really just a matter of paying attention. The whole of medicine consists of messing about with what looks pretty inevitable until you figure out how to make it not inevitable.”

Kurzweil takes life extension seriously too.

His father, with whom he was very close, died of heart disease at 58. Kurzweil inherited his father’s genetic predisposition; he also developed Type 2 diabetes when he was 35. Working with Terry Grossman, a doctor who specializes in longevity medicine, Kurzweil has published two books on his own approach to life extension, which involves taking up to 200 pills and supplements a day.

He says his diabetes is essentially cured, and although he’s 62 years old from a chronological perspective, he estimates that his biological age is about 20 years younger.

But his goal differs slightly from de Grey’s. For Kurzweil, it’s not so much about staying healthy as long as possible; it’s about staying alive until the Singularity. It’s an attempted handoff. Once hyper-intelligent artificial intelligences arise, armed with advanced nanotechnology, they’ll really be able to wrestle with the vastly complex, systemic problems associated with aging in humans.

Alternatively, by then we’ll be able to transfer our minds to sturdier vessels such as computers and robots. He and many other Singularitarians take seriously the proposition that many people who are alive today will wind up being functionally immortal.

It’s an idea that’s radical and ancient at the same time.

In “Sailing to Byzantium,” W.B. Yeats describes mankind’s fleshly predicament as a soul fastened to a dying animal. Why not unfasten it and fasten it to an immortal robot instead?

But Kurzweil finds that life extension produces even more resistance in his audiences than his exponential growth curves.

“There are people who can accept computers being more intelligent than people,” he says.

“But the idea of significant changes to human longevity – that seems to be particularly controversial. People invested a lot of personal effort into certain philosophies dealing with the issue of life and death. I mean, that’s the major reason we have religion.”

Of course, a lot of people think the Singularity is nonsense – a fantasy, wishful thinking, a Silicon Valley version of the Evangelical story of the Rapture, spun by a man who earns his living making outrageous claims and backing them up with pseudoscience.

Most of the serious critics focus on the question of whether a computer can truly become intelligent.

The entire field of artificial intelligence, or AI, is devoted to this question. But AI doesn’t currently produce the kind of intelligence we associate with humans or even with talking computers in movies – HAL or C3PO or Data.

Actual AIs tend to be able to master only one highly specific domain, like interpreting search queries or playing chess. They operate within an extremely specific frame of reference. They don’t make conversation at parties. They’re intelligent, but only if you define intelligence in a vanishingly narrow way.

The kind of intelligence Kurzweil is talking about, which is called strong AI or artificial general intelligence, doesn’t exist yet.

Why not? Obviously we’re still waiting on all that exponentially growing computing power to get here.

But it’s also possible that there are things going on in our brains that can’t be duplicated electronically no matter how many MIPS you throw at them. The neurochemical architecture that generates the ephemeral chaos we know as human consciousness may just be too complex and analog to replicate in digital silicon.

The biologist Dennis Bray was one of the few voices of dissent at last summer’s Singularity Summit.

“Although biological components act in ways that are comparable to those in electronic circuits,” he argued, in a talk titled ‘What Cells Can Do That Robots Can’t,’ “they are set apart by the huge number of different states they can adopt.

Multiple biochemical processes create chemical modifications of protein molecules, further diversified by association with distinct structures at defined locations of a cell.

The resulting combinatorial explosion of states endows living systems with an almost infinite capacity to store information regarding past and present conditions and a unique capacity to prepare for future events.”

That makes the ones and zeros that computers trade in look pretty crude.

Underlying the practical challenges are a host of philosophical ones. Suppose we did create a computer that talked and acted in a way that was indistinguishable from a human being – in other words, a computer that could pass the Turing test. (Very loosely speaking, such a computer would be able to pass as human in a blind test.)

Would that mean that the computer was sentient, the way a human being is? Or would it just be an extremely sophisticated but essentially mechanical automaton without the mysterious spark of consciousness – a machine with no ghost in it? And how would we know?

Even if you grant that the Singularity is plausible, you’re still staring at a thicket of unanswerable questions.

  • If I can scan my consciousness into a computer, am I still me?

  • What are the geopolitics and the socioeconomics of the Singularity?

  • Who decides who gets to be immortal?

  • Who draws the line between sentient and non-sentient?

  • And as we approach immortality, omniscience and omnipotence, will our lives still have meaning?

  • By beating death, will we have lost our essential humanity?

Kurzweil admits that there’s a fundamental level of risk associated with the Singularity that’s impossible to refine away, simply because we don’t know what a highly advanced artificial intelligence, finding itself a newly created inhabitant of the planet Earth, would choose to do.

It might not feel like competing with us for resources. One of the goals of the Singularity Institute is to make sure not just that artificial intelligence develops but also that the AI is friendly. You don’t have to be a super-intelligent cyborg to understand that introducing a superior life-form into your own biosphere is a basic Darwinian error.

If the Singularity is coming, these questions are going to get answers whether we like it or not, and Kurzweil thinks that trying to put off the Singularity by banning technologies is not only impossible but also unethical and probably dangerous.

“It would require a totalitarian system to implement such a ban,” he says.

“It wouldn’t work. It would just drive these technologies underground, where the responsible scientists who we’re counting on to create the defenses would not have easy access to the tools.”

Kurzweil is an almost inhumanly patient and thorough debater. He relishes it.

He’s tireless in hunting down his critics so that he can respond to them, point by point, carefully and in detail.

Take the question of whether computers can replicate the biochemical complexity of an organic brain. Kurzweil yields no ground there whatsoever. He does not see any fundamental difference between flesh and silicon that would prevent the latter from thinking. He defies biologists to come up with a neurological mechanism that could not be modeled or at least matched in power and flexibility by software running on a computer.

He refuses to fall on his knees before the mystery of the human brain.

“Generally speaking,” he says, “the core of a disagreement I’ll have with a critic is, they’ll say, Oh, Kurzweil is underestimating the complexity of reverse-engineering of the human brain or the complexity of biology. But I don’t believe I’m underestimating the challenge. I think they’re underestimating the power of exponential growth.”

This position doesn’t make Kurzweil an outlier, at least among Singularitarians.

Plenty of people make more-extreme predictions. Since 2005 the neuroscientist Henry Markram has been running an ambitious initiative at the Brain Mind Institute of the Ecole Polytechnique in Lausanne, Switzerland. It’s called the Blue Brain project, and it’s an attempt to create a neuron-by-neuron simulation of a mammalian brain, using IBM’s Blue Gene super-computer.

So far, Markram’s team has managed to simulate one neocortical column from a rat’s brain, which contains about 10,000 neurons.

Markram has said that he hopes to have a complete virtual human brain up and running in 10 years. (Even Kurzweil sniffs at this. If it worked, he points out, you’d then have to educate the brain, and who knows how long that would take?)

By definition, the future beyond the Singularity is not knowable by our linear, chemical, animal brains, but Kurzweil is teeming with theories about it.

He positively flogs himself to think bigger and bigger; you can see him kicking against the confines of his aging organic hardware.

“When people look at the implications of ongoing exponential growth, it gets harder and harder to accept,” he says.

“So you get people who really accept, yes, things are progressing exponentially, but they fall off the horse at some point because the implications are too fantastic. I’ve tried to push myself to really look.”

In Kurzweil’s future, biotechnology and nanotechnology give us the power to manipulate our bodies and the world around us at will, at the molecular level.

Progress hyper-accelerates, and every hour brings a century’s worth of scientific breakthroughs. We ditch Darwin and take charge of our own evolution. The human genome becomes just so much code to be bug-tested and optimized and, if necessary, rewritten. Indefinite life extension becomes a reality; people die only if they choose to. Death loses its sting once and for all.

Kurzweil hopes to bring his dead father back to life.

We can scan our consciousnesses into computers and enter a virtual existence or swap our bodies for immortal robots and light out for the edges of space as intergalactic godlings. Within a matter of centuries, human intelligence will have re-engineered and saturated all the matter in the universe. This is, Kurzweil believes, our destiny as a species.

Or it isn’t. When the big questions get answered, a lot of the action will happen where no one can see it, deep inside the black silicon brains of the computers, which will either bloom bit by bit into conscious minds or just continue in ever more brilliant and powerful iterations of nonsentience.

But as for the minor questions, they’re already being decided all around us and in plain sight. The more you read about the Singularity, the more you start to see it peeking out at you, coyly, from unexpected directions. Five years ago we didn’t have 600 million humans carrying out their social lives over a single electronic network.

Now we have Facebook. Five years ago you didn’t see people double-checking what they were saying and where they were going, even as they were saying it and going there, using handheld network-enabled digital prosthetics.

Now we have iPhones. Is it an unimaginable step to take the iPhones out of our hands and put them into our skulls?

Already 30,000 patients with Parkinson’s disease have neural implants. Google is experimenting with computers that can drive cars. There are more than 2,000 robots fighting in Afghanistan alongside the human troops. This month a game show will once again figure in the history of artificial intelligence, but this time the computer will be the guest: an IBM super-computer nicknamed Watson will compete on Jeopardy!

Watson runs on 90 servers and takes up an entire room, and in a practice match in January it finished ahead of two former champions, Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter.

It got every question it answered right, but much more important, it didn’t need help understanding the questions (or, strictly speaking, the answers), which were phrased in plain English. Watson isn’t strong AI, but if strong AI happens, it will arrive gradually, bit by bit, and this will have been one of the bits.

A hundred years from now, Kurzweil and de Grey and the others could be the 22nd century’s answer to the Founding Fathers – except unlike the Founding Fathers, they’ll still be alive to get credit – or their ideas could look as hilariously retro and dated as Disney’s Tomorrowland.

Nothing gets old as fast as the future.

But even if they’re dead wrong about the future, they’re right about the present. They’re taking the long view and looking at the big picture. You may reject every specific article of the Singularitarian charter, but you should admire Kurzweil for taking the future seriously. Singularitarianism is grounded in the idea that change is real and that humanity is in charge of its own fate and that history might not be as simple as one damn thing after another.

Kurzweil likes to point out that your average cell phone is about a millionth the size of, a millionth the price of and a thousand times more powerful than the computer he had at MIT 40 years ago.

Flip that forward 40 years and what does the world look like? If you really want to figure that out, you have to think very, very far outside the box.

Or maybe you have to think further inside it than anyone ever has before.