AB (Art Bell): From the high desert in the great American southwest, I bid you
all good evening, good morning, good afternoon – as the time zone
may dictate – all of them covered like a blanket by this program,
Coast to Coast AM. I’m Art Bell. It’s the weekend, and I am honored
to be with you on a Saturday night going into Sunday morning, and of
course tomorrow night as well.
I have some shocking and tragic news for you at the top of the
program and I’m sure Richard’s gonna have a lot to say about this
and will probably fill me in on details I don’t yet have. But what
it boils down to is that
Dr Eugene Mallove is dead. And it is indeed
with great sadness that we report the passing of Gene Mallove who
died, no, correction, was killed, on May 14th apparently due to some
sort of – we don’t know about this – allegedly, some are saying
“some kind of property dispute”. It is considered by the police to
be a homicide and an investigation is under way now.
Gene is survived by his wife
Joanne, son Ethan, and daughter Kim. No
funeral arrangements are known at this time. Gene Mallove who in
1991, wrote the book “Fire from Ice: “ – now, maybe you know him, if
you didn’t -- “Searching for the Truth behind the Cold Fusion
Furor”. [He] was the first to courageously and boldly express the
truth behind cold fusion long before any science journalist ever
dared to. He maintained the cold fusion [crusade] at great personal
sacrifice, which initially drew many to learn the truth behind cold
fusion. Gene’s generosity and commitment to a better world will be
forever appreciated.” That was written by Steven B. Krivet.
There were, you know, a hundred emails in my inbox about the
apparent bludgeoning death of Dr Mallove and I just don’t know what
to say about this except the number of scientists, and research
biologists, and astronomers who have met their death prematurely, in
so many cases, is beginning to add up to a fairly large number.
Briefly in the world, the US military said Saturday it killed 18
gunmen believed loyal to radical cleric Al Sadhir in Baghdad, and
jet fighters bombarded militia positions on the capitol’s outskirts.
“Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfield authorized the expansion of a
secret program that encouraged physical coercion and sexual
humiliation of Iraqi prisoners to obtain intelligence about the
growing insurgency in Iraq.”
The New Yorker is reporting this. That
would be certainly a bombshell if true. The Defense Department
strongly denied the claims made in that report, which cited unnamed
current and former intelligence officials and was published on the
magazine’s website. Pentagon’s spokesperson Laurence Durita [sp?]
issued a statement calling the claims,
“Outlandish, conspiratorial
and filled with error and anonymous conjecture.”
Meanwhile, the President’s approval ratings have hit the lowest
levels of his tenure -- presently 42%. Overall job approval at 42%.
That’s a Newsweek poll.
So that’s the world news. Of course the real shocking news is about
Eugene Mallove, and we’re about to, I’m sure, hear more from
Richard
C. Hoagland. We are also going to be joined shortly by David Wilcock,
assuming he can find [a proper telephone], perhaps at the bottom of
the hour, and he’s on a mad dash trying to find a telephone.
But Richard C. Hoagland you all know. A former space science museum
curator, a former NASA consultant, and -- during the historic
Apollo
missions to the moon -- was science advisor to Walter Cronkite, and
of course CBS News. For the last 19 years Hoagland has been leading
an outside scientific team in a critically acclaimed independent
analysis of possible intelligently designed artifacts on Mars. In
the past four years he and his team’s investigators have been
quietly extended, or the investigation itself, to include over 30
years of previously hidden data from NASA, Soviet, and
Pentagon
missions to the Moon.
As I mentioned, as soon as we’re able, perhaps shortly, we’ll have a
conversation simultaneously with David Wilcock. All of that coming
right up.
(Commercial break)
Good evening. I think we’re gonna luck out and get
David online
right away. I’ll tell you about that in a moment.
There is one other thing that I’d like to mention.
As you know “the Movie” coming up, the big blockbuster movie,
The
Day After Tomorrow, is causing a firestorm, I mean a literal
firestorm of publicity. Which I guess in a way is probably good for
a movie. From the moment when NASA said that they weren’t gonna let
their scientists comment on the whole thing, to the next moment,
when all of a sudden they decided they would, to stories from
Britain – the highest officials in the government in Britain saying
that it’s realistic --to others saying it’s not … to this simple
email that I think says, well, says it all -- just about. “I read
your book Art, and loved it.” He refers there to “The Coming Global Superstorm,” which, of course, in part was the basis for the
Day
After Tomorrow movie, which is about to break over our heads in more
ways than one.
He writes,
“Art I read your book and I’m looking forward to seeing
the movie. However, both the left and right wings of this country
are misrepresenting your book. Unless I misread the book, it is not
an indictment of global warming. It was however a description of a
natural geological process which may or may not have been pushed
along by pollution.” Thank you. “In your book to me you pointed
[out] that this geological process happens about every twelve
thousand years, and you tie it to the zodiac as a possible device
the ancients used to warn the future people of Earth. Or, did I miss
the point?”
No, my friend, that’s from atocha,
atocha is it? [Art spells out]
a-t-o-c-h-a. You didn’t miss the point at all. You have the point
dead on my friend. And I’ve been trying to make it and make it and
remake it and the left, of course, is using this as a sort of, “this
is going to be your tomorrow and you better get on the Bush
administration and knock some sense into them.” The right, of
course, dismisses the whole thing as ridiculous and impossible. Bear
in mind this is a science fiction movie, it’s not a documentary.
It’s a science fiction movie. [It is] based though, I’m afraid, on
what may be a rather accurate forecast of what is going to come --
because it has been here before. We have archeological evidence that
mostly we try to bury and not think about with respect to this, but
this e-mailer hit it right on the head. I mean, both sides have this
totally wrong. And in the end, it doesn’t matter whether it’s a
natural occurrence, one done by the hand of man, or the hand of man
was helping it along … or any of the above; we should all be past
that. And if you look at what happened to Europe this last year and
all the dead there, it’s only the beginning. Our weather is
changing, and it’s going to change, and we think rather radically.
So, I think we should be looking at alternative energy sources. We
had a little tip of the hat during the Carter administration for
that, remember? And nothing since, by any administration … so we
ought to be looking at ways that we could prolong our energy
independence. After all, we’re over there – many believe – fighting
a war for exactly all of that right now. And so it’s fitting, in a
way I guess, that tonight we will discuss the murder of somebody
that’s at the forefront of energy research and ultimate independence
for the United States. I’m so sorry to have to have been the voice,
probably, to bring you that news. Dr Eugene Mallove [has been]
murdered and here with what may be more details would be Richard C.
Hoagland. Hey buddy.
RH: Hi Art.
AB: Welcome to the program.
RH: You know, we’ve done a lot of shows over the years and this is
gonna be one of the more difficult ones, because Gene and I go way
back, and I had talked to him just a couple days ago. Some of the
things that we’re gonna talk about tonight, you know, that we’ve
never talked about before, were part of that conversation. Robin and
I were planning to go to New Hampshire next week to meet with him
and the people at his lab, the New Energy Foundation, and discuss
some very important political and technical developments relating to
new energy, hyper-dimensional physics, cold fusion,
anti-gravity [!]
-- if you want to even use that term. There are some extraordinary
breakthroughs waiting in the wings – and when we got a call early
afternoon today, from a very close friend so that I knew that it was
not a hoax, and he relayed that he had had a call from someone that
he believed about this shocking, absolutely incomprehensible thing,
I spent the rest of the day trying to track down if this was real.
And unfortunately, as of about an hour ago, we talked with the
police in Connecticut where the murder occurred, and although
they’re being very circumspect and there are rules about not
acknowledging victims until the family has been able to come and
view the body and make a positive ID, the local media in
Connecticut, particularly my old station, Channel 3, which is WFSB
now, used to be WTIC, have confirmed that Gene was found about 11pm
in southern Connecticut at his mother’s home, we believe. He was
robbed, apparently.
AB: At his mother’s home. In Connecticut.
RH: In southern Connecticut. He lived in New Hampshire.
AB: Right. In Concord.
RH: Right. But in Norwich Connecticut, which is just a couple towns
up from where I used to live in Norwalk, so I know the neighborhood
very well, there has been some discussion on the net about a
property dispute with a tenant and all that. I have no idea where
that story came from. We have no confirmation of any of that.
Apparently he was found, his body was found in the yard of his
family home.
AB: Bludgeoned?
RH: Bludgeoned to death. He was beaten to death.
AB: My God. How old was he, Richard, do you know?
RH: He was about my age and your age. We’re all the same age. You
know, the folks who are trying to make the world better are just
about the same age.
And it’s so shocking to have talked to somebody who was so vibrant
and had so many exciting things going on. Tonight I’m hoping that
this show can become a kind of living memorial to Gene’s work. You
know, they talk about people who will change the world? Well, Gene
was changing the world. And I have this awful sinking feeling that
that’s the reason he’s no longer with us tonight; that this
rearguard action [is] to prevent the future from coming, to prevent
a new day from dawning. A few Neanderthals are running around out
there doing despicable things, in a desperate last minute attempt to
keep the inevitable from happening.
And the reason I say that is because the coincidence of what we
talked about and me talking to him at all, because we hadn’t talked
on the phone for two years.
AB: What is it that brought you back together,
Richard?
RH: Well, as I said on George’s show the other night, when we were
in Washington at the X-Conference, we had some extremely interesting
meetings on Capitol Hill with Senators -- not Senators –
Congressmen, and staff. And in particular, we’ve got some people on
the inside who are so enamored with what our message is and what we
have to offer in the way of data and research and contacts, through
other data, that they have basically offered me a briefing on
Capitol Hill, more than one, at my discretion. The room actually,
one room has already been reserved, and I was calling Gene to
specifically invite him to discuss it with me when we got together
next week … to be a part of this extraordinary opportunity.
Gene was at the center of the spider web of all of the credible
scientists and technologists and engineers who have labored for so
many years in the vineyards to bring forth this so-called “free
energy” and new energy physics and technology which this planet so
desperately, desperately needs.
AB: It certainly does.
Richard, so, he was a leader in Cold Fusion.
Now, Cold Fusion in America was a very controversial thing. As you
know some institutions of higher learning were able to duplicate the
experiments while others were not. It was kind of quietly dropped.
Pons and Fleischman moved to Europe, got fed up with the way it was
being treated in this country. Where did Dr Eugene Mallove fit in,
in the scheme of things?
RH: Well, Gene started out like we all started out … very squeaky
clean mainstream. You know my background was Cronkite/NASA, his
background was MIT; he had two or three PhD’s, I kind of lost track.
He was a nuclear physicist, he was an environmental scientist. He
knew the bad – [the] “down side” -- of nuclear physics and
nuclear
fission, and the myth of hot fusion, which we’ve always been
promised would happen, and it hasn’t happened for thirty, forty
years. It’s almost like the quote from Alice in Wonderland, “Jam
tomorrow, jam yesterday, but never jam today.”
AB: He was still an advocate of it.
RH: Not hot fusion -- not at all!
AB: No.
RH: What turned him into an activist in the new energy frontier was
when he was [the] science writer, [the] head science writer at
MIT,
which is a very prestigious position. He found scientists on the
payroll of the department of energy at MIT faking data against cold
fusion experiments!
AB: I’ve heard this.
RH: It’s not rumor -- it’s fact.
AB: Actually, altering.
RH: Altering the data.
AB: In other words to show…
RH: …Making it appear that their experiment, which received a
positive result, actually perceived a negative result. And he was so
incensed when his department would do nothing about this, this
egregious violation of every science ethic if not moral ethic one
can imagine…
AB: He resigned over that?
RH: He resigned over that, specifically. And then he went into a
period where, you know when you kind of blow the whistle on the
in-crowd, you get blacklisted?
AB: Yes.
RH: And you can’t get a job. And he tried to launch an independent
laboratory and journal devoted to cold fusion. He had done his
homework. He had written the book “Fire from Ice”. If you read the
book, you’ll see there was a multitude of data even back in 1989
showing that this was a real, if completely mysterious, phenomenon.
But he spent a tremendous number of years, Art, basically paying the
price of being a man of integrity. And that’s one of the wonderful
things that I loved about him. Because he was unstoppable, he was
determined to get at the truth, whatever the truth was, make it
public, and bring this paradigm, this new age, where this planet no
longer has to suffer from the want and privation of the oil economy
and the control of limited resources, which we’re seeing the bitter,
bitter fruits of now in the Middle East and on our TV screens every
single night.
AB: Yes, yes.
RH: He was looking to a different day, a different path, a different
dawning of the real human age. And on the eve of potentially some
breakthroughs in that direction, he has been brutally murdered.
AB: It was made to look like, or appears to be, robbery [as an]
initial motive, or at least [that] he was robbed. That doesn’t mean
that’s why he was killed.
RH: We don’t know really anything. We’ve got the names of the
detectives, you know, from the police department. We’re gonna talk
with them tomorrow. We’re putting other people in touch with them
that may have information. I just find the coincidence, given the
breakthrough that he described to me on the phone, which I can talk
about, and given what I was going to be able to bring him to in the
way of conversations at the center of power, you know, in Washington
with the peoples’ representatives. You know the White House may be
out of bounds…
AB: Richard, how much do you know about this, in quotes,
“breakthrough” that he had told you about? Would it be so big that
it might be a motive for murder?
RH: Well there are several levels. There are the technical
breakthroughs which I can talk about. This was a political
breakthrough. Because remember Art, the problem has always been,
once you solve the science, how do you get it before the American
people.
AB: Of course. So you’re saying he had achieved a breakthrough in
that arena?
RH: He felt he had achieved a breakthrough. It was supposed to be
moving forward in the next few weeks. It was one of the things we
were going to discuss. I was actually quite skeptical because I know
how Washington can grind important things into dust just by dragging
them out interminably. And then you just quit. People just, they
have to go on with their lives. He felt this was a political
breakthrough. Well, let me tell you in a nutshell what he said it
was.
Many years ago, back in 1989, there was a very stinging,
negative Department of Energy report which basically put the nails in the
coffin of cold fusion. When the New York Times writes about cold
fusion, or Popular Science, or The Washington Post, or
Science
Magazine, they’re basically quoting from the conclusions of this
panel of eminent scientists/physicists.
AB: In a nutshell
Richard, time’s almost up here in the half hour--
RH: Yep. But basically [the DOE Report] said there was nothing
there.
RH: What Gene told me two day ago, is [that] the
Department of
Defense, the DOD -- because of a sudden new perceived, get this,
“terrorist angle on cold fusion and new energy”…
AB: Terrorist angle, yes.
RH: We’ll get to the details after the break. But he said that they
[the DOD] were going to completely overturn the DOE 1989 negative
Report!
AB: Alright. Richard C. Hoagland, hold tight. When we come back
we’ll be joined, incidentally, by David Wilcock. I’m Art Bell from
the high desert, this is Coast to Coast AM.
(commercial break)
AB: If you’re just joining us, Richard C. Hoagland is here, [and]
we’re about to be joined by David Wilcock. We’re discussing the
bludgeoning murder of Dr Eugene Mallove, just announced tonight.
Now, Dr Mallove has been a guest on this program many number of
times. He was a leader, a proponent of cold fusion, and we’re
discussing his life, what he did, what he may have been onto with
Richard C. Hoagland. Shortly [we’ll hear from] David Wilcock [as
well.] Stay right where you are.
(commercial continues)
AB: By the way, what I read at the beginning about Dr Mallove’s
death was written by Steven B Krivet, I believe that, I hope that’s
correct, Steven at the New Energy Times. So it’s a somber moment.
There’s no question about it – a really solemn moment. And Annabel
in Los Angeles writes,
“Do you ever worry about your own safety? If
all our brilliant scientists keep dying under mysterious
circumstances, and you’re one who brings us some of that
information, I hope you’re safe.”
Well, I don’t know. I’ve wondered about that over the years,
Richard, and I’m sure there have been a few times when you have too.
When you deal in this kind of information, somebody’s going to be
unhappy with you, inevitably. And I suppose it’s a risk of life but
I never gave it a whole lot of thought. I just… how ‘bout you?
RH: As you know, I’ve had some interesting experiences. Back in ‘99,
the heart attack [occurred] under very mysterious circumstances.
AB: Yes.
RH: George had Robin on the other night, and he wanted to go into
that, so we did a bit. But no, this is certainly not something that
you wake up every morning frozen in indecision [about], and Gene, if
he had known this was part of the landscape, I don’t think he would
have changed one thing he was doing. It’s too important. Too many
peoples’ lives hang in the balance for the better.
Let me make one small correction. I’m now going back to that
conversation trying to remember every nuance, as you do when it’s
your last conversation.
AB: Of course.
RH: And he -- the reason the
DOD is now involved [in reassessing the
1989 DOE Report] -- is because there is a quote, “terrorist
connection to cold fusion”, which is bizarre … it’s because it’s
linked through the DOE -- and their nuclear weapons mandate.
AB: The Department of Energy.
RH: What you may not know is, the Department of Energy—
AB: Richard, can you give me any, and the audience, any idea of what
possible application cold fusion could have in terrorism?
RH: Oh yeah. It’s elementary… Simple. In fact, it was so obvious
that I remember during the conversation several times saying, in a
very acerbic tone, “Well, of course they’ll get interested now --
because they’ve got the fear factor.”
AB: Well, help me to understand the
fear factor. I don’t quite get…
we need to bring David on here so hit me with this first though, if
you would please, and the audience, how…
RH: All right, I have to do a thirty second backgrounder…
AB: [Disappointed-sounding] Okay.
RH: You know
Art, we gotta do it that way.
AB: Alright.
RH: One of the things that was serendipitously discovered in the
Pons and Fleischman post-era, which Gene was heavily involved [in,]
in terms of monitoring the efforts to replicate Pons and Fleischman
and the cold fusion and the bottle on the desk, that kind of thing,
was the mysterious appearance of isotopes … nuclear materials in the
experiments, that were not there in the beginning. And they
discovered that what was happening, this went all the way from the
University of Texas, to Los Alamos, to France, to Japan, that they
were getting nuclear transmutation.
AB: Got it.
RH: The typical, you know, alchemy dream …
AB: The bubbles. The bubbles gave off what appeared to be a
reaction.
RH: Well, it was a variety of experiments, but they all have this
common thread that, in addition to the energy -- the heat that
appeared -- you got these bizarre transmutations of elements … that
shouldn’t have occurred under any circumstances.
AB: However, it’s my understanding that it was rather subtle, at
that.
RH: Well, in the beginning it was subtle. But here’s where the
breakthrough came. [It was] apparently published in the open
literature, meaning any scientist in the world can read it, or
anybody working for Bin Laden. In the major physical journal, the
Japanese physics journal, a group of scientists at Mitsubishi --
which is one of the heavy-hitter corporations in Japan -- conducted
some extraordinarily simple experiments. And I won’t bore people
with what they are. Gene described them to me and they’re incredibly
simple.
AB: You can bore me with that if you want.
RH: Okay, all right, all right … tell me where you wanna go.
AB: I wanna understand the process that…
RH: All right, you basically have a container. A closed container.
Like a vacuum tube, all right -- it can be big or small. You have a
membrane down the middle, which separates one side with a deuterium
gas – which is heavy hydrogen – from the other side, which is
basically a good vacuum. And on the membrane, which can be
Palladium, which is one of the cold fusion active elements .…
AB: Or nickel ….
RH: Well, what he described was
Palladium. That’s right [nickel was
also used]. You plate some other material [on the Palladium
membrane]. Some other metal. And, depending upon what metal you
chose, when you basically observe what was coming through the
membrane, into the vacuum side, it had changed elemental composition
-- and was a heavier isotope! And, he lead me through the
parent/daughter product series and he said, “Guess what you need to
put on the membrane to get U-235 in the empty chamber?”
AB: What?
RH: Well, he didn’t [say]. But, I mean you can just do the nucleon
calculation yourself. It’s a common metal … it’s vacuum deposition.
Any high school lab, any high school physics lab, can make this up.
AB: Is the suggestion through all of this, Richard, that this
element could then be used in some catastrophic bomb?
RH: If you had a
Bid Laden type who wanted to make U-235, who wanted
to make a lot of U-235 to make a fission bomb…
AB: Yes.
RH: … like the old Oak Ridge.
AB: You’re saying you could manufacture…
RH: In a garage, in a basement, in a chemlab. Anywhere on Earth,
with trivial expenditure of resources, money, equipment. That’s way
the DOD and the DOE are suddenly interested in
cold fusion… because
it can kill people.
AB: All right. I’ve got it. Anything that could kill people,
certainly.
All right, time to bring David, he’s been patient, in on the
conversation. We’ll continue. David Wilcock is a professional
intuitive consultant who, since reading Richard C. Hoagland’s
Monuments of Mars, in 1993, has intensively jumped into the middle
of UFOlogy, ancient civilizations, consciousness, science, and new
paradigms of matter and energy. He’s the author of a trilogy of
scientific research works known as the Convergence series, which
gives definitive support to the idea that a change of matter,
energy, and consciousness is actually now occurring on the Earth and
throughout the solar system. So I wanted to bring him into the
conversation and if luck is with us here he is. David?
DW: Hello
Art, how are you doing?
AB: Hi. I take it you’ve been following closely the conversation to
this point. I apologize for keeping you on this long without
bringing you on but, this was breaking news that really did have to
be covered. I hope you understand.
DW: Absolutely, it’s not a problem.
AB: All right, you’re gonna have to get good and close to that…
RH: Yeah, I can barely hear David.
DW: Okay.
AB: Yeah, good and close to that phone and yell at us. If your lips
are touching, then you’re in the right place, David.
DW: Okay, how do I sound now?
AB/RH: Much better.
AB: Much better. All right.
David, I’d like to give you the
opportunity to comment on what you’ve heard so far and/or add or
subtract anything you would like to.
DW: Well, in the course of my work I’ve been affiliated with people
who are involved in the free energy field, quite directly in some
cases. I was invited to speak at the 2002 US Psychotronics
Association Conference. I’m actually going to be speaking at the one
that’s going on this year, as well. The website for that is
www.psychotronics.org
And I have seen evidence of people having threats or being
assassinated. One example would be [from when] I spoke with Dale
Pond. He had made a breakthrough [in free energy], and then came
home and found a burnt match in the middle of the carpet of his
living room. Another example, which is even more bizarre, occurred
with somebody who I actually spoke on the same stage with, and I
guess I won’t say his name right now. This particular guy had made a
breakthrough in free energy [achieving an over-unity effect], and
the first time it happened -- the very next morning when he came
back to his lab -- everything related to the experiment was missing
… including all the paperwork, all the prototypes, et cetera.
Then, later on, he made another breakthrough. This time it was in
his own private apartment. And he goes out for his son’s baseball
game, which takes about four hours of time, and he comes back to his
apartment, and there’s no carpets, there’s no shower curtain,
there’s no shower curtain rod, there’s no furniture, there’s nothing
in the cabinets. The entire apartment was literally gutted
head-to-toe. That’s sounds pretty outrageous, I don’t know how
somebody could move that quickly in four hours, but I suppose it’s
possible. And I believe he was telling me the truth.
AB: As most of my audience knows,
David, there have been a bevy, I
guess you’d say, of research biologists, people working on all kinds
of little bugs, other scientists working on, you know, leading edge,
cutting edge science in a number of fields that have met very
mysterious deaths in the last few years. I mean, this is just one
more.
DW: Yeah, the literature on this is pretty solid. I guess as far as
the personal angle, which is a question had Richard also answered
recently, I am reminded of a quote from Abraham Lincoln where he
says, “I would rather die once at the hands of an assassin than die
every day in fear of assassination.”
AB: That’s right. And that’s really the answer to the danger
question. You just can’t live your life that way. Yes, some lines of
work are more dangerous than others, for obvious reasons.
RH: What is so ironic is that, in [my] conversation [with
Gene,] we
were talking about [how] the dam appears to be about to break. It’s
been fifteen years -- coming up on fifteen years -- since Pons and
Fleischman, and the negative DOE Report … which basically
killed all
official scientific interest, you know, by the [scientific]
journals, by Nature, by Science, by the DOE itself, as a source of
[research] funding. Most scientists basically have to chase after
grants to stay alive and keep publishing. But Gene held the torch
very high, and he was able to marshal some very prestigious people
on the Board of the [Infinite Energy] Magazine, and the Board of the
[New Energy] Foundation. And I am confident tonight that this
[research] will go on -- that this [murder] is [just] a desperate,
stupid, insane act of “something” [to try to stop this research] –
but, I can’t believe it’s just “coincidence.”
AB: Do either one of the two of you care to comment on the dire,
dire situation the world is in and how really important an
alternative energy source is right now? How really important and how
critical it is?
DW: I would say it’s of ultimate importance. If we don’t change the
way things are going, we’re not going to have a planet. What could
be more important than that?
AB: One of the government officials in Britain said, “It’s a bigger
problem for the world than terrorism.”
DW: Oh, by far.
AB: So that’s how big a deal that we’re talking about here.
Everything, literally … your life style, your life, the life of
those people in the world … all of it rests on the ability of this
world to figure out a way to stop doing some of what we’re doing
right now, and find a new way to do it … or else.
DW: Hypothetically, let’s say that part of the reason -- or maybe
the main reason -- for the extinguishing of these free energy
scientists (of which I’m aware of more examples than I’ve given),
has to do with money. Well, the bottom line is, how can you make
money when there’s nobody there? How can you make money when the
world itself has been irreversibly damaged by the continuing abuse
of these of fossil fuels? If there is any truth to the idea of Peak
Oil, then we don’t really have much more. And that’s why gas is two
dollars a gallon.
AB: Actually, it hit three bucks a gallon in Santa Barbara… $3.09.
DW: Totally unreasonable.
AB: Or something horrible like that in Santa Barbara. I knew we’d
hit three dollar gas.
RH: And for full service it went over $4.07 last night.
AB: Yeah, I heard that. I forget where that was. Was it California
somewhere?
RH: It was Los Angeles.
AB: LA. Over four dollars. Well, it’s gonna get worse, and it’s
gonna get worse, and it’s gonna get a lot worse. And people, I don’t
think all of them grasp the real place this is gonna go. I mean,
this country runs on oil. All the things you buy, just about all of
them are transported by vehicles that burn fossil fuels to get them
from here to there.
DW: That’s correct.
AB: Our whole economy is based on this. I understand what’s at
stake. Or, at least I think I understand part of it. This is the
most serious issue in the world and we have people -- of course, we
have no reason to say that Dr Mallove was murdered because of his
research -- but you also can’t dismiss that as one very strong
possibility.
RH: Art, I just look at this coincidence, and I can not believe it’s
“coincidence.” Because, when we were going to get together, we were
going to share some critical information on both sides and then I
was going to take him to Washington to meet with people that we met
with, and many many others, in a setting where his three PhD’s and
all the people that he talks to, and the technology he could bring
with him…
Remember how, Art, you’ve always wanted a gadget to stick on your
desk?
AB: Well, that’s what I’ve always said, just give me a, even a toy –
something!
RH: Well, Gene has that. He had that. And I wanted that for my
Washington presentations. And I’m still going to get that, because
it wasn’t just that he had it, he had access to it through other
people who have done the actual research. So this is incredibly
stupid, and all this has done is to alert everyone what the stakes
really are tonight. I mean, just watch your TV screen and imagine a
world where all we have to look forward to is more terrorism, higher
prices, more American kids dying in places where we don’t want them
dying.
AB: Deterioration of the environment.
RH: The environment going to hell in a handbasket. The oceans, the
atmosphere, larger cases of greenhouse warming as we pour the last
gasp of fossil fuel into the air in an effort to keep us at some
“standard of living.” That is the resource downward spiral I
discussed the other night with George. And [it is] the reason that I
wanted this audience to reach out and get me to a position to
testify in front of the President’s Space Commission.
Well, one of the things that is happening, as part of our
East Coast
trip in the next few weeks, [is that] I have set up a personal
meeting and discussion with a key individual on the President’s
Space Commission. And what struck me in our conversation, (this was
before I actually talked to Gene, and the reason I called Gene is
because I thought, okay, let’s do this as a one-two punch -- let’s
bring these conversations into the same arena), when I talked with
the Commissioner, what struck me was how he was more apocalyptic
than I had been on the air the other night, when I talked about “the
resource box,” and how the President’s space vision is our “last,
best hope” – provided, we reach out and do it the smart way, the
intelligent way, which involves some of the technologies and physics
that Mallove had access to.
And, when this Commissioner was talking to me, he said,
“Dick, I
think this is our last chance. If we don’t do it this time, we will
never do it -- because the resources won’t be there, the ‘political
will’ will not be there, we will be swallowed by this monster of
‘everybody stuck in the same room, firing in the dark at each other
over a few scraps of food’ ….”
I mean, [he brought up] my basic metaphor that I used on the air the
other night. And that’s what was going to bring us together [Gene
and myself] in that meeting. It was based on that [space commission]
meeting, that I called up Gene, and I said,
“Let us think of a way
to bring what you know is possible now to Washington, to show people
who are honest, but ignorant, that there is a way out of this trap.
There’s a way out of this box … while we have time.”
And tonight, he’s not with us anymore ….
AB: And you were going to go? Are you going to actually have a
demonstration available for me? You’re going to have a real
over-unity device?
RH: Now that I don’t have Gene to act as a go-between, it will be
more difficult to get to the principles. But I’m gonna make one hell
of a try, and I’m gonna try to do that. I don’t know the timeframe
yet.
AB: But you’re saying you have this device?
RH: I know I--
AB: Or, you can lay your hands on it?
RH: I know that
Gene personally saw it, witnessed it, wrote about it
… gave testimonials.
AB: All right, well you see… Hold on
Richard, hold on David, we’re
approaching the top of the hour. If all of that is true, then that
would potentially be a motive for murder. If you really had that,
that would certainly be a motive for murder, and that’s not to say
that’s why he was just murdered, bludgeoned to death. But if you
really had what we just talked about, that would be a motive … no
question about it.
From the high desert in the middle of the night. On the weekend,
this is Coast to Coast AM, rockin’ along.
(Commercial break)
AB: Indeed, so Richard Hoagland, David Wilcock are both here. We, to
this moment, have been discussing the world’s oil situation.
Actually, we’ve been talking about the alternative to that. What
you’re really talking about [is] the oil situation, the desperate
situation [that] has people after us, and us after them, as in a
war. And it’s gonna get a lot worse before it gets better. As you
see that price at the pump go up … and up … and up … and up, you’re
soon going to see our economy going down, and down, and down, and
down. That’s what’s at stake. Nothing less than ultimately our
survival. And a leader in the alternative field of energy, Dr Eugene Mallove, has been bludgeoned to death, and that’s news this night,
so we’ve been discussing it.
Listen, a programming note. I am not going to be here next weekend.
Ramona and myself are going to New York where we have been invited
to see the premiere of the movie The Day After Tomorrow. In case
you’ve never seen what an invitation to a 125-million dollar movie
looks like, I thought I’d share it with you, so I scanned it,
omitting, blacking out a little bit of the RSVP number, telephone
number, which I don’t think you could have read anyway, but I
thought you’d be interested to see what an invitation of that sort
would look like. That’s what’s up on the webcam tonight. So we’ll be
attending that next weekend on the 24th, actually in New York,
instead of being here. So this time next week, I’ll be well on my
way to New York City for that event.
[It’s] a once in a lifetime kind of deal, really, so I wanted you to
know that next week, I believe that we’ll have one replay and
Barbara Simpson will be here for the other evening. All right, in a
moment, back to our guests: Richard C. Hoagland and David Wilcock.
Stay right there.
(commercial continues)
AB: Once again my guests,
Richard C. Hoagland and David Wilcock.
Gentlemen, welcome back to the program. Alright, look, I do want to
get off a little bit on what we had, what we were going to discuss.
Strangely, in a lot of ways it doesn’t, it’s not that far off the
mark anyway…
RH: Well no, it’s absolutely, incredibly on-point, because—
AB: It really is. Yeah, here’s what I want, Richard. Look, we’ve got
a neighborhood. We’re Earth. We can look at Mars and we’re looking
very hard at Mars now. You know what, Richard, there’s something
else I wanted to settle just before we even get into all of this and
that is, for a few weeks or months now, the audience has featured or
believes that we have a feud going on…
RH: (Laughs)
AB: And it’s not true. At least I don’t think it’s true, not on my
part.
RH: Not mine either.
AB: What I did do, I went on the air and said with regard to some
photographs that had gone up that, “You know, I’m sorry, I see
rocks.” Then, I hadn’t heard from you in a while and, you know, two
dimensional me, I’m not changing that, some of the things that you
pointed out as possibly, I don’t know, in the various different…
RH: Artifacts, junk.
AB: Artifacts that you see. I don’t see the same junk. I see rocks.
And I still just see rocks. But we have had no feud that I’m aware
of going on. I’m sure word of my saying that reached you…
RH: Yes, it did.
AB: But then again that’s not really anything new between us.
RH: But Art, Art, just because you … remember what you told me the
night the first image of the Face on Mars, whole Face, came in 2001?
AB: Yes. I’m not talking about the Face now.
RH: I know, but remember what you told me? You said “hang it up, get
another job, go do storm windows, it’s over ….”
AB: Well, you mean the cat box picture?
RH: No, no, this was the one in 2001, the full Face image.
AB: (thinking) mmmmm…
RH: I can play the tape.
AB: Well, okay. That may well be too.
RH: In a reasoned reconsideration, going back and looking and
thinking, you came around … to the other night, I heard you say,
“the damn thing is cat-like on the one side and monkey-like on the
other."
AB: It is. Yeah, that’s right, that’s right.
RH: Well, it “only” took you three years, Art. So I’m a very patient person. I figure if you can’t see what I see
as soon as I see it … just give you time.
AB: (Laughs) Anyway, anyway, just so they know, there was no feud.
RH: There are people out there that I’m sure would love to create a
“feud.”
AB: Yeah, they always do that.
RH: And when
David and I cooked up this little thing we’re gonna do
tonight, the first person I picked up the phone and called was you
-- because you and I started this [discussion about alternative
energy and Physics] on the air many, many years ago, discussing the
backdrop to the new physics that Gene Mallove gave his life for. It
is a complete revolution in the paradigm, which is not being
discussed in any mainstream halls, in any mainstream venues ….
In fact, what I’d like to do to -- kind of -- intro this section of
the program tonight, is to read a short section. And I know you hate
reading, but--
AB: Yeah, I do. You know I just want to set this up. And I started
to …
RH: Well, let me tell you what I wanted to read and then you can
decide.
AB: Yes.
RH: This is Gene’s last editorial, which is so incredibly prescient.
It’s almost like he knew he wasn’t going to be with us.
AB: Read it.
RH: I’m sitting here, holding it in my lap, reading it again.
AB: Go ahead and read it.
RH: For the second time…
AB: Right, just do it.
RH: Okay. He calls it, “Breakthrough: Science Censorship, the
Invisible Evil”.
“The Spirits and Opportunity
rovers on Mars have left their landing
cocoons, and are exploring the surface of an alien world that has
been long captivating the human imagination. The robotic
laboratories are sending back spectacular imagery and other data
which, thanks to the Internet, gives scientists and laypeople around
the world an unprecedented chance to explore, vicariously, another
planet. There is no doubt that this is a huge accomplishment. It
demonstrates progress in technological sophistication, in
astronautics, communications, computer technology, and robotics,
applied towards valuable ends to learn about another world by
touching it from afar.
The success of the latest Martian initiative might suggest to some
that all is well in the halls of science. Everything is working as
planned. New vistas are opening up. We may soon be confronted with
further evidence that Mars harbors some kind of life or perhaps once
had living things that left remains. Science has triumphed. We are
collectively experiencing the fruits of over four centuries of
revolutionary scientific progress. There appears to be no obvious
evidence of science censorship in these missions; everyone gets to
see pretty much all the data, all at once, in nearly real time.
Wonderful.
But beneath this triumph of the extension of human exploration
stands another reality of that science, one that is not pleasant to
contemplate. Just at this moment of success, for those of us who
most of our lives have dreamed of Martian vistas opening up, we are
now all too aware of how much more human beings would be
accomplishing at this time, and how fantastically better off
civilization would be, were we allowed to use collectively all of
our faculties and powers of reason.
But isn’t science supposed to be
one of the most liberating
endeavors? How can I claim that we are not being allowed to use all
our faculties and powers towards making a better world? Easy. If
there is even one choke-point at which such appropriate information
about scientific discoveries is withheld or diminished, the
community of scientists and the supportive citizenry who fund their
work publicly and privately are defrauded. Sadly, today, such a
choke-point exists. It is the routine censoring of scientific
information that does not conform to dominant scientific paradigms
of the day.”
AB: Now, that’s Eugene Mallove, brutally--
RH: And then, he went on to detail what exactly he was talking
about.
AB: Brutally murdered today in Connecticut.
All right
Richard, we are exploring Mars. We ultimately will explore
our other planets. We have neighbors, they are these planets that we
can look to. If we are trying to figure out what might happen to
Earth, or what has happened to Earth, or even how we got here, the
whole mess, we’ve got to study our neighbors. And as we study our
neighbors, we come to certain conclusions. And I think that’s kind
of the center of where we are tonight. What is it that we know about
Mars or any of our other planets or close neighbors that gives us
clues about our own situation?
RH: Well, the thing that brought
Gene and me together, and David Wilcock, is a kind of a common thread -- which is exploration on the
cutting edge of the unknown. When we tripped over the Cydonia
problem, you know, decades ago now … two decades ago … and tried to
unravel, you know, if it was real, and then what did it mean, one of
the key things that I’ve figured out with the help of Erol Torun is
that there appears to be a “Message” left in the ruins of an
ancient
Martian civilization, at a place called Cydonia on Mars. That
message had to do with the underpinnings of Reality; how Physics
really works … what relates us -- as conscious beings on this planet
-- to stars, the galaxy, energy processes, possible technologies
that don’t use oil ….
The whole nine yards appear[ed] to be in those geometric formations
[at Cydonia].
AB: How do you get that out of that? How do you get from there to
there? If you would.
RH: Well, in the simplest possible nutshell, we found that the
structures around the Face on Mars were not in random order. They
appear to have a very precise geometric pattern.
AB: Meaning?
RH: Meaning they were laid out…
AB: No no no, I understand that. Meaning what though?
RH: Well, we then discovered that this geometry was not just “any
old geometry,” but appeared to be a geometry that was the
underpinnings of physics in the nineteenth century. And that physics
talked not about quanta, and zero-point energy, and “things that go
bump in the night” that can’t be measured. Like, you know, “x-teenth
number of dimensions” that can never be tested. It talked about
higher dimensions that could be tested. Where energy could flow from
“higher dimensions” into our dimension … and literally create all of
the Reality that we see.
AB: Well, that’s pretty wild, but I don’t understand what in the
geometry tells you that story.
RH: That’s where things get complicated. And that’s where websites
come in, and books, and twenty years of teaching people -- so I
don’t want to—
We can do that as we go through this set of examples of things we’re
finding in the solar system now. But I don’t want to bog down people
with a tutorial, all right? I want to get to the good stuff.
AB: But that’s an incredible statement to make, on this
Face.
RH: The incredible part of the statement is that the same geometry
that mathematicians and physicists were working with, leading to
higher dimensional possibilities -- people like Reimann, back in the
nineteenth century -- is the same geometry we found apparently
encoded in the set of ruins on the planet Mars!
AB:
David, how do you fit into this at this point. I mean, where do
you fit in here?
DW: Well, here’s a kid nineteen years old who reads
Monuments of
Mars and has his world completely turned upside down -- because
everything he had taken to be reality is suddenly called into
question. There is a series of relationships between clearly
artificial monuments on the Cydonia plateau, which demonstrate
angular relationships, certain specific angles such as 19.5 degrees,
and those angles correspond to a particular form of geometry. So, I
spent years and years of my life with – at the forefront of my mind
– Hoagland’s model, thinking about how geometry could be affecting
planets, because the basic bottom line …
AB: Let’s tell everybody about
19.5. There is something that anybody
can demonstrate to themselves, and that is that at about 19.5 degree
point [above or below the equator] of a planet, you can observe very
unusual things, evidence of energy within the planets at that 19.5
degree point. Is that accurate?
DW: Absolutely.
RH: It goes all the way from the sun through all the solid planets,
like Earth that we live on or Mars, to the big gas giant planets,
Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus,
Neptune, you find the largest energy
upwelling on these planets at 19.5 degrees.
AB: Which is this hyper-dimensional point that you’re always telling
us about, and you believe a source of energy for not just our planet
but all planets, right?
RH: It wasn’t a matter of belief. It was when we saw this geometry,
this pattern … remember all science starts with just seeing a
pattern--
AB: Yes.
RH: Then we starting asking questions of people that I knew –
experts in various fields – what did this pattern mean? Did anybody
every notice this pattern anywhere before? And it was my friend Stan Tenen, at the
Meru Foundation, you know, who’s been working on
Biblical texts for years and years and years…
AB: Yes, yes, yes.
RH: …who said, “oh, that pattern is found in Coxiter and several
other eminent mathematicians, and it relates to hyper-dimensional
models." Models of higher state spaces, higher realities that can not
be seen, or touched or tasted -- but can be modeled mathematically
as an abstract of theory and, had been used as part of the
cornerstone of nineteenth century physics … when physics was just
being born .. by people – [scientific] giants -- people like
Faraday
and others.
AB: Is it your position, Richard, that the energy at this point,
this hyper-dimensional point that you’re always talking about, is
the source energy of much of the so-called “free energy?”
RH: That’s what brought us and
Gene together. Because, when I laid
out my take on this and he came at it from twentieth century physics
and he began to see more and more anomalies, that was the beginning
of our conversation. What I said to him point blank one day was,
“Gene, I don’t think ‘cold fusion’
is fusion at all. I think it is
something different, something more fundamental, something
revolutionary -- something potentially hyper-dimensional, something
that is transmitted from another dimension and appears in our
dimension as an anomalous energy source … under certain conditions
.…”
AB: But, people can see this… [that’s] what I’m trying to get
through to them. If you look at the 19.5 place on a planet, that
much is obvious.
RH: Oh yeah, just go look at a map of the planets. Go to
NASA’s
website and download some of those stunning globes.
AB: Right. I take it this hit you as well,
David.
DW: Oh yeah, you look on Venus and you have these two volcanoes at
19.5. You look on Mars and you’ve got Olympus Mons, three times the
size of Mt. Everest -- which is not only at 19.5, but is precisely
120 degrees west of the Face, and a hundred twenty degrees is
exactly where the other tip of the [inscribed, 19.5-degree]
tetrahedron would be.
RH: It’s more of the same geometry.
DW: Yep, then it goes on to the Great Red Spot on
Jupiter, which has
been stable for at least three hundred years. Uranus has a
Great
Dark Spot.
AB: All of this is true folks. Check it out yourselves. There is
something special about that .…
RH: And in the solar cycle, the eleven year solar cycle that you’re
so in love with, Art.
AB: Well, it’s a love/hate relationship--
RH: That’s right.
DW: (Laughs)
RH: Okay, I found years ago in an old Scientific American, one of
the key solar experts, a guy named Parker, published that the
peak
latitude of sunspots, when the cycle peaks every eleven years, is
plus or minus 19.5 degrees. Then I found people, when I started
talking about this on the air, you know, on your show and other
shows, sending me little technical papers -- like we have an
“electro-jet phenomenon” that atmospheric scientists, upper
atmosphere scientists at NASA Goddard, have been watching for years.
Guess where the electro-jets are marking? They’re like
super-altitude jet streams, except they’re electrified. 19.5 degrees
north and south!
More and more and more examples of this kept coming up, over and
over again -- to where I finally said, “Okay, this has got to be
where we went wrong.” Nineteenth century physics somehow got
suborned, we took the wrong path and we went down the left road in
the canyon instead of the right road out to the plain. If the
nineteenth century physicists had stayed on course, “stayed the
course” as George Bush Sr. would say, we would have free energy
today! We would not have our guys and women dying in Iraq. We would
not have Bin Laden at our doorstep. The World Trade Towers would
still exist. They might be five times taller, and made out of
amazing materials – because, with this kind of energy, you can do
astonishing technological things.
We would probably have a garden on
Earth. We would probably, you
know, be able to feed everybody that’s here … and those that are
coming.
In other words, it’s the kind of vision that Mallove had. The
New
Energy Age -- when people embrace the real Physics, and apply it to
a Real technology, [which] will liberate us from this albatross of
oil. [It a vision that Gene] could give to every human being on this
planet. And what astonished me, and you know, was part of our
discussion for years and years and years, as he fought me [was],
that we had found the keys to this “in a bunch of ruins on another
planet!”
To my intense gratification, the day that I talked to
Gene -- two or
three days before he died -- he acknowledged to me that “Cydonia is
real,” “they’re about to announce life on Mars,” and the
[hyperdimensional] Physics that I’ve been talking about as [being]
behind the free energy technologies that he has on tap, “is probably
what’s causing it to work ….”
AB: Alright. Both of you hold on. God knows the world does need a
very fast change, doesn’t it? I think everybody out there certainly
knows that in the pit of their stomach, in your gut, you know it,
right? That we’ve got to initiate a change, and that it’s gotta come
very, very soon. I’m Art Bell. This is Coast to Coast AM.
