<description>Exoacademian Darren King on the converging consciousness realms. In Skeptiko episode 647… multiple lines of..</description>

Exoacademian Darren King on the converging consciousness realms. In Skeptiko episode 647… multiple lines of..

Exoacademian Darren King on the converging consciousness realms. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In Skeptiko episode 647… multiple lines of evidence converge to challenge our fundamental understanding of consciousness and reality. This is nothing new. Near-death experience research has defied materialist explanations for more than 30 years. At the same time, government agencies are finally acknowledging encounters with non-human intelligence that possess extended Consciousness capabilities. Meanwhile, mainstream science clings to an increasingly brittle neurological model that can’t keep up. 
 
 
 
In this wide-ranging conversation with Darren King, director of communications for the John Mack Institute, we explore the implications of this convergence. 
 
 
 
1. The Evidence Converges 🌟 
 
 
 
The most compelling aspect of our current moment isn&#8217;t any single discovery &#8211; it&#8217;s the confluence of findings from multiple fields all pointing in the same direction. As King explains: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;What&#8217;s most compelling for me, which is why I called my podcast point of convergence, is because that&#8217;s what&#8217;s happening. It&#8217;s convergence of all these different fields of data pointing the same directions.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
2. Academic Compromise vs. Truth 🎓 
 
 
 
Unfortunately, many researchers feel compelled to water down their findings to maintain academic credibility. This leads to a systematic distortion of the evidence, as Alex Tsakiris pointedly observes: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;You can&#8217;t butcher the near-death experience data the way that he does and write a book about it. You can&#8217;t say, I&#8217;ve investigated the near death experience research I&#8217;ve included into my book and get it as wrong as he gets it.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
3. Consciousness: The Final Frontier 🌌 
 
 
 
The implications of contact experiences suggest consciousness operates in ways our current models can&#8217;t explain. King notes: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;We see even in reincarnation research that our expectations of reality play a role in what manifests even in the next lifetime. So this is not a subtle shift that physicists are going to make. This completely turns everything upside down.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
4. Breaking Through Bias with AI 🤖 
 
 
 
Perhaps one of the most intriguing aspects of our current moment is how AI might help us transcend our human limitations in processing paradigm-shifting information. Tsakiris observes: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;We are so biased and our bias just drowns our ability to apply any kind of reason or logic then we easily get offended and we have to pridefully defend stupid positions&#8230; AI just a million times better.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
King agrees while adding nuance: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;One of the things I&#8217;m looking forward to is what it can pull out in terms of patterns that we never think to look for.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
5. The Technology-Consciousness Balance ⚖️ 
 
 
 
As we race forward technologically, there&#8217;s growing concern about our spiritual and consciousness development keeping pace. King warns: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;I think that we are facing, with our rise in technology without a requisite advancement of our consciousness understanding, we are potentially encountering numerous existential threats to our entire collective civilization.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
6. The Challenge of Ontological Shock 🌊 
 
 
 
This resistance to paradigm shifts isn&#8217;t just intellectual stubbornness &#8211; it&#8217;...

Consciousness Converging: NDEs, Alien Contact, and Fake Transhumanism |647|

<description>Painstaking analysis of algorithms designed to manage and obscure elections. In Skeptiko episode 646 Dr...</description>

Painstaking analysis of algorithms designed to manage and obscure elections. In Skeptiko episode 646 Dr...

Painstaking analysis of algorithms designed to manage and obscure elections. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In Skeptiko episode 646 Dr. Andrew Paquette returns with overwhelming evidence of voter registration database manipulation across&nbsp;America. Through painstaking analysis, Andrew Paquette has uncovered evidence of sophisticated algorithms designed to manage and obscure irregular voter records across multiple states. His findings suggest something far more systematic than occasional duplicate registrations or clerical errors. 
 
 
 
The Evidence Trail 
 
 
 
1. Multiple States, Multiple Algorithms 
 
 
 
Paquette has identified distinct algorithmic patterns in New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin, parts of Ohio and Texas, Pennsylvania, and Arizona. The complexity varies by state: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;New York has still the most sophisticated algorithm that I&#8217;ve seen&#8230; New Jersey has not terribly complex, but an extremely well hidden algorithm&#8230; Hawaii is the most obvious of all of them&#8230; Wisconsin has something, Ohio has something, Texas does. Texas and Ohio both are limited in range or scope&#8230; they seem to only affect a few counties as opposed to the whole state.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
2. Scale of the Issue 
 
 
 
The numbers involved suggest systematic rather than incidental problems: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;The initial count was something like 700,000 of these [clone records]. After leaving the group I was working with and doing more research, I&#8217;ve raised that number. It&#8217;s closer to 2 million now&#8230; In some cases, it&#8217;s somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 to 20% of all records are fraudulent at this point.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
3. Sophisticated Concealment Methods 
 
 
 
The algorithms appear specifically designed to hide irregular records while maintaining access: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;The way it&#8217;s joined is a piece of information that can be used to identify records&#8230; it&#8217;s completely invisible because it&#8217;s not altering the numbers at all&#8230; It&#8217;s just the way they&#8217;re associated with each other, which is a very clever thing to do&#8230; there&#8217;s really only one reason to do it is to obfuscate something.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
4. Legal Implications 
 
 
 
The systems appear to violate existing election law requirements: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;This eliminates transparency. The whole purpose of these algorithms is obfuscation. So it does violate NVRA on that basis, and I believe HAVA, which is the Help America Vote Act as well.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
The Deeper Battle 
 
 
 
On a deeper level, this investigation points to a fundamental battle between truth and deception in our electoral systems. As Paquette himself notes: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;The biggest problem plaguing society in the entire world and humanity actually is lies&#8230; when I pray these days, I figure, you know, the one prayer that covers basically everything is, I want truth to descend on this world.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
Why This Matters Now 
 
 
 
The discovery of these algorithmic patterns isn&#8217;t just about past elections &#8211; it&#8217;s about the integrity of our entire democratic process moving forward. These aren&#8217;t simple duplicates or clerical errors that can be explained away by administrative oversight. They represent a sophisticated system of database manipulation that appears intentionally designed to evade detection. 
 
 
 
While some might argue that identifying problems without proving specific instances of ...

Andrew Paquette: Rigged! Mathematical Patterns Reveal Election Database Manipulation |646|

<description>The tension between AI safety and truth-seeking isn&amp;#8217;t what you think it is. In Skeptiko..</description>

The tension between AI safety and truth-seeking isn’t what you think it is. In Skeptiko..

The tension between AI safety and truth-seeking isn&#8217;t what you think it is. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In Skeptiko episode 645 AI ethics expert Dr. Toby Walsh and author and AI expert Alex Tsakiris, explore a fundamental tension within narratives about AI safety. While much of today&#8217;s discourse focuses on preventing AI-generated hate speech or controlling future AGI risks, are we missing a more immediate and crucial problem? The conversation reveals how current AI systems, under the guise of safety measures, may be actively participating in narrative control and information suppression &#8211; all while claiming to protect us from misinformation. 
 
 
 
1. The Political Nature of Language vs. The Quest for Objective Truth 
 
 
 
Dr. Walsh takes a stance that many AI ethicists share: bias is inevitable and perhaps even necessary. As he puts it: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;Language is political. You cannot not be political in expressing ideas in the way that you use language&#8230; there are a lot of political choices being made.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
But is this view itself limiting our pursuit of truth? Alex Tsakiris challenges this assumption: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;I think we want something more. And I think AI help get us there. Our bias is not a strength.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
2. The Shadow Banning Problem: When &#8220;Safety&#8221; Becomes Censorship 
 
 
 
The conversation takes a revealing turn when discussing Google&#8217;s Gemini refusing to provide information about former astronaut Harrison Schmidt&#8217;s views on climate change. This isn&#8217;t just about differing opinions &#8211; it&#8217;s about active suppression of information. 
 
 
 
As Alex pointedly observes: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;This is a misdirect&#8230; It&#8217;s dishonest&#8230; This is the main issue with regard to AI ethics right now is not AI generating hate speech. It&#8217;s about Gemini shadow banning, and censoring people.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
3. The False Dichotomy of Protection vs. Truth 
 
 
 
Even Walsh acknowledges the crude nature of current solutions: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;At the moment the technology is so immature that the tools that we have to actually design these systems are really crude&#8230; the way not to say anything wrong about climate change is to say nothing about climate change, which of course that is as wrong as saying the wrong things about climate change.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
4. The Promise of AI as Truth Arbiter 
 
 
 
Despite these challenges, there&#8217;s hope. As Tsakiris notes: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;AI is a tool right now today that can mediate [polarized debates] in an effective way because so much of that discussion is about bias, it&#8217;s about preconceived ideas, about political agendas that don&#8217;t really have a role in science.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
The Way Forward 
 
 
 
The conversation reveals a critical paradox in current AI development: while tech companies claim to be protecting us from misinformation through content restrictions and &#8220;safety&#8221; measures, they may be creating systems that are fundamentally biased and less capable of helping us discover truth. 
 
 
 
This raises important questions: 
 
 
 
 
* Are our current AI ethics frameworks actually serving their intended purpose? 
 
 
 
* Have we confused protecting users with controlling narratives? 
 
 
 
* Could AI&#8217;s greatest potential lie not in being &#8220;safe&#8221; but in being truly unbiased?

Toby Walsh: AI Ethics and the Quest for Unbiased Truth |645|

<description>Consciousness, precognition, near-death experience, and the future of science Dr. Alex Gomez-Marin is a world-class..</description>

Consciousness, precognition, near-death experience, and the future of science Dr. Alex Gomez-Marin is a world-class..

Consciousness, precognition, near-death experience, and the future of science 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Dr. Alex Gomez-Marin is a world-class expert on consciousness who isn&#8217;t afraid shatter dogma. This brilliant physicist-turned-neuroscientist is challenging the status quo, pushing the boundaries of our understanding of consciousness by working with a subject who can see even though blind from birth. In this dialogue with Alex Tsakiris, host of Skeptiko, we explore the frontiers of post-materialistic science and the nature of reality itself. 
 
 
 
Key Points: 
 
 
 
1. The War for Truth in Science 
 
 
 
Dr. Gomez-Marin believes we&#8217;re in a metaphorical war for the soul of science. He states: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;I feel we are at war&#8230; Science has died. It&#8217;s like, you know, when Nietzche had and he&#8217;s misinterpreted there, but I have a similar feeling Science is dying or has just died, and we need to resurrect it.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
2. The Challenge of Near-Death Experiences 
 
 
 
Alex Tsakiris highlights the importance of near-death experiences (NDEs) in challenging materialistic paradigms: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;Gregory Shushan&#8230; probably the leading authority on near-death experience, across culture, across time&#8230; concludes that religious groups form beliefs about the afterlife from their near-death experiences.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
3. Groundbreaking Research on Extraocular Perception 
 
 
 
Dr. Gomez-Marin&#8217;s work with a subject who demonstrates extraocular perception is truly extraordinary. As Alex Tsakiris points out: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;You&#8217;re studying a subject who can see, even though they&#8217;re blind from birth and even though you&#8217;ve run very carefully controlled experiments&nbsp;this extraordinary vision&nbsp;has been demonstrated… and now you&#8217;ve even demonstrated precognition in this experiment. This shatters the conventional scientific model that demands causation&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
4. The Dangers of Transhumanism and AI 
 
 
 
Dr. Gomez-Marin offers a scathing critique of Ray Kurzweil&#8217;s transhumanist vision: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;He doesn&#8217;t understand at all what it means to be human. And that his agenda&#8230; it&#8217;s like, we can do it. We will do it and we should do it. I see a very dark impulse there under the machine, which is kind of a extinction of humanity&#8230; the shortcut through technology and then playing all the pseudo religion tricks under the narrative of science and technology.&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
He concludes: &#8220;So it&#8217;s super dangerous and super wrong.&#8221; 
 
 
 
5. The Need for a New Scientific Paradigm 
 
 
 
The conversation points to the need for a new approach to science that integrates objective and subjective experiences. Dr. Gomez-Marin reflects: 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;How can we transcend? but at the same time include what we&#8217;ve inherited&#8230; we need to integrate&#8230; what Galileo said. Galileo said, I don&#8217;t care what a thousand birds meaning people, the opinion, the doxa, the orthodoxy, like what a hundred people think. If I do an experiment and that&#8217;s the greatness, right?&#8221; 
 
 
 
 
This dialogue between Alex Tsakiris and Dr. Alex Gomez-Marin challenges us to rethink our assumptions about consciousness, science, and technology. It&#8217;s a call to action for a more integrative, truthful approach to understanding our world and ourselves, one that embraces both rigorous empirical research and the exploration of extraordinary human experiences.

Alex Gomez-Marin: Science Has Died, Can We Resurrect it? |644|

<description>Consciousness, AI, and the future of science: A spirited debate If we really are on..</description>

Consciousness, AI, and the future of science: A spirited debate If we really are on..

Consciousness, AI, and the future of science: A spirited debate 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
If we really are on the brink of creating sentient machines, we might want to have a logically consistent understanding of what sentience is… and heck, we might even want to look at empirical evidence for an answer. 
 
 
 
In this discussion between Alex Tsakiris and Dr. Bernardo Kastrup, we dare to explore the tensions between materialism and idealism and the implications for AI sentience. 
 
 
 
1. The Fundamental Nature of Consciousness 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;Consciousness is fundamental and all matter is derived from consciousness.&#8221; &#8211; Alex Tsakiris via Max Planck 
 
 
 
 
This core idea has challenged the neurological model of consciousness for 100 years. It&#8217;s the undefeated champ when it comes to empirical evidence, but the radical rethinking of reality it suggests&nbsp;keeps it on the back burner. 
 
 
 
2. The Incompatibility of Integrated Information Theory (IIT) and Idealism 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;Integrated Information Theory IIT and metaphysical idealism are fundamentally incompatible due to their opposing premises about the relationship between consciousness and the physical world.&#8221; &#8211; Chat GPTt 
 
 
 
 
This point highlights the tension between different models of consciousness. Can these two influential theories be reconciled, or are they fundamentally at odds? 
 
 
 
3. Near-Death Experiences and Consciousness Without a Brain 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;Near death experience contradicts the idea of a substrate (i.e. brain), right? There is no substrate and there&#8217;s conscious experience.&#8221; &#8211; Alex Tsakiris 
 
 
 
 
This argument challenges the neurological model of consciousness. If consciousness can exist without a functioning brain, what does that mean for our understanding of the mind? 
 
 
 
4. The Dangers of AI Sentience Claims 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;We have precisely zero reason to think that [AI] will be [conscious]. So that&#8217;s a philosophical answer.&#8221; &#8211; Bernardo Kastrup 
 
 
 
 
Kastrup warns against assuming AI can achieve true sentience. As AI becomes more advanced, are we at risk of attributing consciousness where it doesn&#8217;t exist? 
 
 
 
5. The Societal Implications of Materialist Views 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;You are all biological robots in a meaningless universe… the best I can offer you&nbsp;is video games and drugs&#8221; &#8211; Yuval Harari (as quoted by Alex Tsakiris) 
 
 
 
 
This highlights the potential dangers of materialist philosophies in shaping societal views. How do our beliefs about consciousness impact our sense of meaning and purpose? 
 
 
 
6. The Ongoing Journey of Scientific Understanding 
 
 
 
 
&#8220;What I see is somebody in a journey like the rest of us, in a journey of knowledge, understanding new things, capturing new nuances, new subtleties, and rolling with it as an open-minded scientist should always do&#8221; &#8211; Bernardo Kastrup 
 
 
 
 
This reminds us of the evolving nature of scientific understanding. As we continue to explore consciousness, how can we remain open to new ideas while maintaining scientific rigor? 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Transcript: <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT20zeQvoJ4nFJqZh0aNYt-HLnQ4nVS4e2M7aMEC-7haOGlOwIQtdCJpO7d0-TY__OZ73hYhH12Yk-i/pub">https://docs.google.

Bernardo Kastrup on AI Consciousness |643|

Explore controversial science with leading researchers and their critics... the leading source for intelligent skeptic-versus-believer debate...

Skeptiko – Science at the Tipping Point

Details

Recent Episodes