Eric: Look, I certainly believe that every major government has some kind of PK group, psychokinetic, psychic phenomenon group, call it whatever you want.

I think it would be deep in the CIA, and there’s reason to believe, when you read articles that come out about remote viewing and all these things, they did have significant success. You don’t dismiss that. What you do do is you dismiss it. In other words, you dismiss it publicly, because what do you do when you have something that you cannot control? You downplay it and you say, “Oh, you know, well, we’re not really doing this,” or “It’s not reliable or it’s not this or that.” How can you dismiss, even if it’s one significant detail hit on something that’s overseas, that—out of four of them. Even one, you’ve got to say, “Oh my god! That’s crazy, the detail of it!”

If I were some government and I knew [about it], I don’t want to encourage other governments because how do we control it? It’s not something exclusive to us. The only way you keep it exclusive is by dismissing its potency or effectiveness, this way discouraging others from pursuing it. This is what our government and most governments do. It’s misinformation. It’s misleading the public, misleading your thinking, affecting your thinking. So, therefore, it’s only a logical thing. When you read even one report where they acknowledge, “Look, this is pretty phenomenal!” They found this or they did this and they described all of this in detail. That, alone, is huge.

If you look at satellites, satellites are only as good as we can have somebody looking for something. When you can go to a remote viewer and say, “This is what we’re looking for,” and they can give you some roundabout information, where do they know to triangulate their consciousness at? Where do they learn to really look at something?

So, that’s a huge advantage over satellites. Why would you bury that? Why would you say, “one out of five times, one out of ten times, it’s only going to be a hit.” Fine, let’s do ten rolls. Let’s check them all out, because it’s that important. It could be billions of dollars worth of investigation.

So, dismiss to the public? Absolutely. I would not dismiss it within the ranks of saying, “This is an incredibly powerful tool. This is one that we have to make sure that every Tom, Dick, and Harry is not encouraged to do,” because how do we defend against that? How do we do anything with that?

Jesse: Right.

Nick: So, why would you bring this now to the public? Why would you record yourself talking about this.

Eric: I don’t think it’s something that is like, “Ooh, now I’ve gotta bring it up!” All because—I think there’s a lot of people who are already aware of it. I don’t think it’s anything new. I’m just saying in this conversation we were discussing this, and whether or not the government uses people like this to protect the presidency, or to whatever…My answer is of course they do. I don’t think it’s something that’s allowed to be discussed. I think it’s guarded as UFOs or anything else.

Imagine the hysteria that—The power of a government is so effective on the mentality of the people that if you say to the people, “We have people that can look and see what you’re doing. We have people that can manipulate what you do in life. We have people that can do all these things.” You immediately look at the government and that’s unnerving, especially if you have disagreements with them. That’s another thing, you’re always fighting with the government because they have too much [governance].

So, the smart thing would be to dismiss or negate any conversations in that topic, and that in turn solves a lot of problems of unrest. When you look at stuff like—I forget what it’s called, but I want to say it it’s CERN, but the weather-manipulating thing and all this stuff. I mean, people go bonkers over this, and rightfully so! It’s very concerning, but there’s also another saying:

“If we’re not doing it, the other governments are doing it.”

So, should we not do anything? All of sudden, we are so unable to defend ourselves technologically because we didn’t evolve that we’re shooting ourselves in our own foot. So, I think that that government has a policy, or at least the military, of “dismiss, dismiss, dismiss but don’t dismiss it on another level,” that this becomes a format of stuff.

Now, you could drive yourself crazy trying to figure it out, but I’m like, “Well, we try to figure out all the time what the newest aircraft technology is. What is the new stealth level? What is the new level of, in a sense, invisibility, where they’re doing cloaking?”

I think this just all falls into those categories, and I think that they do a very good job of not allowing the public to worry. On the same token, when they’re not in check and there’s nobody to see what they’re doing, that becomes a problem also.

Jesse: Isn’t like how you said when you had a—the first 99% rise up and then it kind of all of a sudden just dissipated and died down and that was like remote influence or whatever?

Eric: I think there’s a lot of stuff done with remote influencing. I think the military trains its own people. I think they are able to identify people in the military and they screen them for their level of loyalty and how much [they can] shut their mouth, and they have to sign all sorts of stuff. I mean, who wouldn’t be interested in being involved with something like that?

I also think there’s a limit. You know, you’re not just going to join the military and they’re going to pick your out for it. I think it’s very minimalized, controlled.

Jesse: That would have an effect on how we’re thinking, even people going into this kind of thing, like psychic phenomena?

Eric: I guess I’m not terribly concerned about that because the human race is consistently, on many, many, many levels, manipulated. I see the patterns constantly in life, in society, in day-to-day life, and in bigger things. I also think that there’s levels where you can—

It’s like messing around with a piece of art. You think that you’ve got it really good but you want to just keep touching up a few things, until the point where you realize you’ve begun to ruin it now and there’s not going back.

I think in the game of politics and such, that also happens. We manipulate on different levels in the government and all of a sudden it becomes a problem, or it becomes toxic, rather than solving the problem.

Jesse: Hmm.

Eric: So, you’ve got to ask yourself, that majority of the time, do you solve more than not? It’s also the same thing we always joke about in HBI, that when one person tries to do something mentally or spiritually, that other people are doing the same thing. So, now you have this convoluted level of all these different minds and ideas of how it should be done that it ends up cancelling something out.

Jesse: Right.

Eric: So, I think by default, there’s a lot of that going on also.

Jesse: Yeah.

Eric: Ask yourself the million dollar question. Let’s say you were government. You needed to oversee and protect the wellbeing of a nation. You did a study where you bring in these paranormal people to see if they can influence a group effect on something. One out of 50 times, you’re just like, “Holy cow, this did happen!” The question is now, do you say, “We’re going to disband all of this because 49% of the time, nothing happened.” Or, do you say, “We need to figure out why that one time out of the 49 happened and can we figure out what happened? Was it coincidence? Was it luck? Was it just happenstance or did something we do have an effect and we’re not seeing it? If we could figure it out, can we switch the other 49 times to have a positive effect, like good results?”

The question is, would you dismiss it or would you not dismiss it. Would you tell the public?

Jesse: No.

Eric: I don’t think anybody would.

Jesse: No.

Eric: If you encourage this kind of thing, every organization that is metaphysical, from you name it, across the board, [they’re] all going to start focusing and organizing on that. If you think it’s not a concern for government when they do see people doing stuff like this, it’s a big problem too, but they’re not going to say that.

Jesse: Right.

Eric: They’re just going to deal with it as quietly as possible. He who has the power doesn’t want to lose the power.

Jesse: Right.

Eric: That’s the one thing we all have to remember. That’s just the way it is.

Jesse: It’s just another form of an ecosystem.

Eric: Well, damned if you do, damned if you don’t. If they don’t pursue it, then what happens when they can be manipulated?

Jesse: Right.

Eric: I can’t blame them. All I can say is, “I don’t want to be a part of something that completely remains unchecked.”

Jesse: Right.

Eric: If you join the military, you already signed up to do whatever they want you to do. You’re not really allowed to argue. If you do, they can put you away.

Jesse: Right.

Jamison: What’s your thoughts on the different main players as far as nation-states and psychic abilities go?

Eric: I think your two biggest, biggest contenders—Well, I think number one is going to be Russia. I think the second one is going to be China. I mean, these are your big players. I think that a lot of other countries will work within that confine. I think any developed country will. I think that undeveloped countries don’t really have the resources or organizational ability to really take it to the level that it needs to be brought to.

Nick: Do you think that these nations have a pretty good idea on why they got the results that they did, say the one time out of 50?

Eric: Oh, I think so. I think this has been worked on since probably the 40s and 50s. It began, I think, in the 60s and 70s with the whole psychedelic level. This was a real “boom” that took place and I think it’s been simply refined in the 80s and 90s. My personal experiences would indicate something like that. Of course, now, people are just getting smarter. Everything is getting smarter. Technology has gotten smarter. It’s better managed, better controlled, better hidden.

Again, it’s what I always say. If the government denies that aliens exist, you just have to ask yourself the question: do you believe they’re lying? If you believe they’re lying, the question is where do it begin and where does it end? It’s that simple. Why would they tell us that aliens don’t exist when we adamantly believe that that’s not the case. It’s control. It’s over fear. It’s over destabilization of the government. When people are afraid, they do stupid shit. I think that the number one reason why it’s controlled and I think they engage in [misinformation].

If you don’t believe that, there’s historic fact of [misinformation] on other political levels, consistently. Complete, complete fakery across the board.

Jamison: What’s your opinion on legitimate [misinformation] that’s not done by the government, it’s just out there—conspiracy theories, all this other stuff, because this broaches on it. You’re saying, “Well, the government’s being—”

Eric: I think that conspiracy theories [are] a double-edged sword. One, we look at conspiracy theorists and we just kind of shake our head, because it just gets crazy. They make accusations that harm people. On the same token, the reason why I don’t badger on them is because they are also the people out there who are trying to figure out what the hell is going on. They’re testing their ideas. They’re pushing the envelope.

If nobody’s out there consistently questioning stuff, there’s a problem. So, it’s a double-edged sword. On the same token, I think it goes back to the convoluted thing where you’ve got these different people all working on something. It becomes this hodge-podge if you don’t know what’s what anymore. So, it neutralizes itself.

Jamison: Do you see a direct impact of Russia then taking advantage of those people, seeing their ideas and thoughts with each other?

Eric: Sure, but does that mean they should just stop on that idea of fear that they are being seen? That’s not going to stop them. It wouldn’t stop me.

Jamison: How do one kind of sit through that stuff?

Eric: That’s why I say it becomes so convoluted, it becomes almost neutralized. It’s only the ones that can bring to the top the most sound information that’s applicable. That’s how it stands out and it does come from time to time. You’ve just got to accept that this is the way things are.

I think it’s perfectly natural. I think when you look at the laws of nature and chaos theory and everything else, that when I look at this kind of stuff, I think it’s perfectly how everything else operates in nature. It’s just an intellectual process versus a process of photogenics, if you will, or whatever. It’s just a matter of how you want to see it.

I think that it’s evolution, it’s just evolution on thought. You have different species that weaken out, some get stronger. Why do they get stronger? What was the reason behind it? I think ideas and thoughts are very similar.

Jesse: But…It’s all based on beliefs, much of which are completely made up.

Eric: Well, I think much of reality is made up, so what’s the difference? I think that it’s the same argument, it’s our morals and ethics across the world [which] are completely different. I always say, you can go to one state and gamble all you want, walk a hundred feet across the line, and for the same thing you go to prison. I mean, this is how we see as a society and how jacked up it is. It’s whether we can get along on an idea or not along. That’s what it comes down to. We’re constantly trying to work that out. That’s what society is trying to do.

Jesse: But…Isn’t it getting more chaos theory?

Eric: Well, I think that I like to look at the positive, but I also see the negative. I see where it’s hurting the environment at this point, but on the same token, it was working really well. We were starting to realize our problems. We were trying to make the world a better place. We were trying to solve environmental problems, and this is a bump in that road. Whether it takes or not is going on depend on everybody, particularly everybody who’s listening to what I’m saying now. You cannot become complacent and say “I’m just going to work on something spiritually.” You have to be vocal. You have to get active.

Jamison: Is there a responsibility for people that are interested in this kind of stuff, pursuing this kind of stuff, that they ask themselves, “Hey, how is this helping me? How is this helping me evolve?” When it becomes non-helpful, how do you know when that happens?

Eric: Well, I think you’ve just got to check yourself and ask how your wellbeing is. That’s about the most you can do. I mean, how do you realize when it’s not becoming healthy? You’re such in the thick of it, you can’t see out of it. I mean, some people, maybe, but…

Jamison: But…Is there a useful aspect to think about conspiracy and the different stuff that’s going on and reflecting on that? Is there a point where it becomes non-helpful?

Eric: Well, that’s like anything. You can become fanatical to the point where it makes you dysfunctional or it starts to affect the function of your life. I think that if you don’t look at stuff in a conspiracy-theory-way, then you’re doing yourself an injustice. I think that if you look at a conspiracy theorist, it starts to overtake you in certain way, and you may lose your sense of good judgement. It’s such a deep, deep thing. I think, proceed with caution and poke and prod and question everything very thoroughly. I think anybody who’s into conspiracies is going to say they did that.

So, you have people who disagree and you have people who agree. That’s going to be human nature. That’s just the way it is. I tend to try to stay away from it, to a certain degree, or to look at it and evaluate it within a reasonable level without getting too fully engaged, but that’s a tough decision.

I don’t think there’s a right or wrong and I don’t think that, as much as I have conspiracy theorists, people kind of make comments about me, I think [there are] different levels of conspiracy theorist people. I think there’s your A-level, your B-level, and your C-level, and your D-level.

I think your D-level are your quacks who just want to be angry and accuse you of stuff and you’re part of this or that.

Then, you have your intermediary ones that are religiously biased or their values want to be implied. It’s like wearing spectacles that are tinted. They see the world from a perspective and they bend the world to how they want it to be. That’s how they see it. They judge you by that and try to force you to that.

When you start to get into B and A, you have people actually who are doing the math. They’re adding the numbers. They’re doing, as in science, which is referred to [as] the ability to prove something over and over and over again, consistently, empirical data. That is going to be a good person that is investigating those things. They’re not just going to say, “Okay, this is the way it is because I think this way.” They’re going to say, “This is what all the evidence is saying and it locks up. I don’t have a missing piece anymore. I’ve looked for those missing pieces and I’ve found an answer.” I think that’s what it’s going to come down to and I think those people are out there.

Jamison: Yeah, I think they are too.

Eric: What are they supposed to do with that information? Do you sit silently? Or, now they have to decide, “Do I look like the nut trying to broadcast this and say, ‘Look, this is what is going on and it’s terrible?’” The ironic thing is—and it’s really not ironic—things have been proven through that process, that they were dead right.

It comes down to the person who’s doing the footwork. Are they seeing it through tinted glasses, their own perspective? The scary thing is, a lot of science research is done that way. They see it through a certain perspective, and that’s why you have to send it in for peer review. You have to have other scientists look at that who may not have tinted glasses on. You may have tinted glasses and you don’t even know you have them!

Jamison: What do you think would be the percentage of people out there, in the overall conspiracy theory community that are A’s, B’s, C’s, and D’s?

Eric: Oh, you’re really putting me on the hot seat here. You know what I think. I would say that the A-level is probably going to be the 3%. I think the B is going to be probably broader, about 10% maybe. The rest is going to be a larger magnitude. I think your C and D are like 99%, you know, 90% per se. That’s just because they’re just being irrational and they’re making opinions based emotionally.

Nick: When it comes to the governments and using their psychic influence—I guess, programs—do you think that they’re using it for good in certain way, or is it more for competitive advantage, in a sense?

Eric: Well, that’s a matter of opinion. This goes back to the old Star Wars argument I always make. There’s the rebellion and there’s the Empire, per se. I mean, do the people in the Empire feel like they’re doing something bad? I mean, they’ve got children. They’re got a life. They’ve got things that they have to feel like they’re more protected, yadda yadda. So, this is always perspective. It’s like you always pick your team. I think that people in government, of course they feel like they’re doing the right thing.

I think some might [be] selfish with it, or may become selfish over time, but I think the majority feel very strongly they’re doing the right thing. I do think in human nature, the majority of human nature, is good will. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have society today. We’d still be in a mongrel. We’d still be warring tribes constantly. Some quality dominated slowly over time that justice prevailed and protecting the weak and trying to etch out the best way to govern life for an enormous amount of civilization. It did bloom. This is where the world is compared to where it was just a thousand years ago or further back.

So, some quality that I would say is good, [it] definitely is a quality in the human race and I believe in that. I believe in that more than anything else. I do believe that there are bad things and bad people out there, but I do believe that the majority [are] good. Despite our differences, I think that there’s a level of compatibility that takes place.

I like to say you look at a forest and you can have different species of trees. Some are aggressive, some roots become aggressive, but the majority tend to get along fine. That’s how I see the human race, but a bad idea can also blossom. You know, look at what happened with Hitler and stuff. It is what it is, but I see the same patterns in nature. I see a bloom of algae that expands so big it covers a massive area of death in the ocean.

I can say that I see things happen with beetle stuff that we were talking the other day with Jamison, about all these trees getting wiped out. If you look at the whole pattern of why that happened or what could have prevented it—I see society as not much different. This is all numbers, this is all math in the end. This always goes back to either you believe in the paranormal/metaphysical aspect or you don’t. It’s that simple, but it always goes back to this whole thing about where they’re dropping balls from the very top and the balls are bouncing around. The job for the person is to sit in front  of that and will that they go to a higher margin on one side or the other. So, they run it a hundred times and it always comes out 50/50ish, a little more, little less sometimes, but you about 50/50.

You have somebody willing constantly for it to move over to one direction. Now, statistically, you have something that may be not huge but instead of saying it’s on average 50/50, it’s averaging now 60/40. That may not seem like a lot, but if you ask me that’s fucking huge.

If that is thought affecting reality—and they do this with water, they do this with other stuff. It’s arguable who controlled the test, how it was done, I get all that. Let’s say theoretically that this is true, and I believe it is, this goes right back to affecting reality and society. It’s no different.

If you look at the human race as the balls dropping down, randomly, and you try to will those balls in a certain direction to affect a decision…Now, here’s another thing. You could say, which is something that will become “old school” in ten years, less relevant, but if you look at the election that disturbed most of us, and say Russia did interfere, what if their interference was like a placebo effect and the placebo effect of consciousness if you can—that’s the most powerful, by the way. That’s what we teach. When you will something and you don’t know you’re willing it, it has a much more profound effect.

This goes to the double split test in science. What happens now if people all of sudden start to have a collective thought, [which] I always talk about? What if the Russians knew that by manipulating the few, [they] could affect the many, strategically, in the right locations? I think that, if you really want me to say what I think, that’s what I think. I think it was a strategic part, but it was a collective consciousness and they knew exactly what they were doing. I think they’re still doing it.

Jesse: That could be like conspiracy circles.

Eric: Mhm! Well, we’re joining the club now evidently. We’re in! We’re in, just when we thought we were getting out! (laughter)

Jamison: I guess we’re on the other side. So, the Russians influence a conspiracy circle for a certain outcome and utilize there the F- and D- and C-level people to kind of promote their thing.

Jesse: They have such strong emotion that they pour into what they’re obsessing about all the time.

Eric: Well, yeah, and they’re triggering those people. Thought is a very powerful thing. We know, psychologically, we can be affected by repeating things over and over. We know sociologically that we can be affected by just human nature, so it’s just another level mentally.

Jesse: That’s brilliant.

Eric: I think governments have exploited that for a very long time. I just think it’s getting better and better and better at how they do it, and cleaner and more [strategically] done. Nobody wants to think of themselves being manipulated. Who wants that? I guarantee everybody’s been manipulated someway, somehow in life.

Jesse: Right.

Jamison: It’s just funny how they say history repeats itself, but a little period of complacency and everybody forgets how propaganda works.

Eric: Yup.

Jamison: We were on it for a long time in America. In other places, people were on it. They were like, “Propaganda is bullshit, don’t let it affect you,” and stuff like that. Then it loses its effect.

Eric: You can bet that governments have the smartest people that they can find. In the CIA and FBI, they’re very intelligent people and they learn all of this. This is like common knowledge for them to be trained in, in certain ways. Therefore, I think they rely on the fact that people forget.

Jesse: Yeah, it’s crazy how much people forget stuff, it’s like…

Eric: Well, you know, it’s like when we’re watching—What is that political show on Netflix?

Jesse: Oh, House of Cards?

Eric: House of Cards. It’s the same thing. People are like naïve sheep. They’re not willing to think things out. They’re scared of everything. You basically just have to lead them in a certain way and they follow. As much as we don’t want [that and] we want to be like, “Fuck, that’s not true! I’m not a sheep. I’m not—” The truth is the majority are. In whatever way that you think you’re not, you are affected. The question is making those right choices.

This also gets down to politics in the sense where you go right back to Hillary Clinton and Trump. You’ve got the Bernie voters who didn’t get Bernie, so they had a temper tantrum and said, “Well, I’m not going to vote at all.” Then, we got stuck with Trump, which I think was much worse than Hillary. So, they had a little fit of denial. They should’ve just said, “Okay, well I have to do this for the greater good. I have to weigh it out and make a choice.”

Jesse: So, it’s like…How do you even know where to begin with that? You could be hitting things from an angle.

Eric: I’ve given some thought as to what my message would be right now. You guys were saying last night was kind of bleak, the message that I kind of put across on there. Here’s my message:

If you want to do something, meditate on the world meditating. That’s my message.

Jesse: Okay, that’s good.

Nick: I think that’s brilliant because I think as an individual, when you’re given all this information, it’s a bit overwhelming.

Eric: It is overwhelming!

Nick: It’s like, “What can I do?” and you naturally dismiss it.

Eric: I think that when you meditate, you naturally right yourself. You naturally, all of a sudden the chaos just settles. Everything kind of settles down, it’s like murky water settling, and you get a level of clarity. I think when people can think clearly and remove themselves from emotional thinking, emotionally-impacted emotional frustration, all these things, [they’re] going to make better decisions. If we’re going to do anything to help the world, and something that’s universally understood—I don’t care what form of meditation they practice. What I care about is that they step into the arena of calming their mind and think and start to act more clearly. So, when I say “meditate on the world meditating,” that is the greatest influence of all. Just talking has an effect. Just me bringing it up begins to have an effect. I think that if there is a message, that’s my message, but I think if the world meditates on meditating, even temporarily, it could reset. We don’t need everybody to do it. We just need enough people to do it.