Politics Papers

How I think: Focusing on the words… Reality and [Psychological] Freedom


Paul Budding


My starting Point is Progressive… solution based with reality firmly in mind. And its all about health. I can’t change the world so I have to think… is it heading in a progressive direction? Yes it is. I know that Westminster Politics is dying but that is irrelevant. That’s THEIR demise. It is their problem.

So let me list some key words concerning how I think. The key words are linked to how I think:




  1. Trends


  1. Health*


  1. Technology


  1. Progressive/Solutions orientated


  1. [Psychological] Freedom


I want to focus on the word ‘REALITY’. How do people who do not focus on Reality think? The answer to that is through Prejudices. It is not thinking. It is not progressive. It is not solutions orientated. Its therefore irrelevant. I cannot listen to meaningless prejudices that do not care about anything really. Its all fake with them. I don’t know why they bother. They collectively keep the world in a state of “illness”. If one side of a dialogue does not think in terms of reality then the other person cannot dialogue properly with him or her because they think the other person does not think in terms of reality. That is bad for psychosocial health.


* Health… i.e., psychological and physical health. If you are not physically healthy then you are not psychologically healthy. Thus you do not experience psychological freedom.


Freedom is Psychological. So the state’s job is to enable freedom. Of course, genetics, bad choices etc can still hamper and destroy your freedom. On the other hand technological innovations could potentially bail you out. E.g., new innovations may enable someone to walk who would have been confined to a wheel chair in the previous decade. The more we live online in VR communities the more irrelevant the state will become. The states role to ‘enable’ will be weakened because it will no longer be necessary as technology will have achieved what the state had no chance of achieving. For example, those who cannot walk in the physical world will be able to walk in the VR environment. Therefore it will be technology (not the state) that ultimately enables people to be free. (positive freedom). Another example of technology enabling freedom will be that everything in VR will be free. (afterall whatever is being purchased is not really real). That will solve a trillion problems.


Brian Clough, in the context of describing his positive ideas about socialism, once said “I’ve had a nice car, I’ve got a nice house. And I don’t see any reason why everybody shouldn’t have that”. https://twitter.com/i/status/868469800762265602 Well in full immersion virtual reality everything will be limitless. Hence, everybody who wants that will have that.


Lets go over a few things I have said above. The ‘limitless’ characteristic of full immersion (globally connected VR) will mean that Cloughs idea will become reality. Afterall it can all be switched on and off like a light switch. It will mean whither the state. Technology will enable psychological freedom as opposed to the state. Cash will be irrelevant in the sense of it will make no difference (in globally connected VR) whether it exists or not. If it exists its limitless which takes away its point. Cash exists to ‘limit’. If its limitless then everything is free. Hence cash becomes irrelevant and that will solve a trillion problems. (just think about poverty and all the problems for those suffering from it that poverty causes them to experience). Labels may decline. E.g., Once socialism is achieved then who needs a label. It just becomes everyday normal. Age will become irrelevant. People will be able to be whoever they want to be. I think the majority will opt for a young adult look thus eternal youth in VR.



Mental Health is linked to almost every policy of mine


Paul Budding


Mental Health: I hear the words ‘Mental Health’ a lot. I hear the words ‘Mental Health Awareness’ and positive claims about ‘funding’. But I think I am a lot clearer in this paper about what I mean by Mental Health. Everything I refer to in this mini paper is linked to Mental Health… some of my ideas will help many people… some of my ideas will only be beneficial to a few. But taken as a whole, I think my ideas are highly pro Mental Health.

Universal Basic Income (UBI) and Mental Health: Think about having to choose between heating and eating. Think about the anxiety of not being able to pay a bill. Think about not being able to participate in any consumer culture. Think about not being able to provide for your family. Clearly progressive and generous UBI will help millions of people.

Technology and Mental Health: Immersive realistic looking yet fantasy world (virtual) experiences can already (or at least… will be able to) have a profound impact on people’s mental health. I think these experiences will benefit people who exaggerate their psychological problems to themselves (but by doing that, bring about a self-fulfilling prophecy concerning their state of mind). These immersive experiences can constantly remind them that life is good, exciting, enjoyable and they are lucky to be able to be alive to experience these things. Also, empathy with other human beings can be enhanced through virtual experiences showing realistic looking scenarios whereby any negative discriminatory situation is experienced. The more realistic the more we reduce these ugly experiences as people become consciously aware that they are immoral and criminal.

Oppose Post-Truth Politics for psychosocial health: Post-Truth Politics makes it impossible (or at least more difficult) to educate, reach consensus, solve problems. If someone possesses an absolute post-truth mindset then it’s an absolute block on dialogue. I think opposition to truth (in favour of prejudices, negative emotion etc) has always existed. Now it’s considered as stronger than ever. Reality and truth are very psychosocially important. People should not be proud of being in psychological denial and should not be proud of being deceitful. I also view people that are Post-Truth in their mindset as often on the side of those who actually want (and aim for) conflict in society.

Climate Change and Mental Health: Parts of the UK are flood-risk areas. Following the Somerset floods lots of homes were raised onto higher ground. People in areas of flood risk should be able to obtain grants to do this. Having your home destroyed is something that impacts a persons mental health very negatively.

National Unity and Mental Health: All of the above policies (especially UBI) would dilute the support for anarchism in society. We need to placate working class England on Brexit, and we need to placate Scotland and London on Brexit. The Norway option is the only option that can do this. Because then we can say we have political sovereignty. And we can say that economic ties (in the Single Market) remain as before. This could establish a settlement on Britain’s relationship with the EU… especially if the other policies were put into practice. Personal relationships have come to an end over the Brexit issue. This issue was crying out for a national unity compromise before the referendum result. Now (if possible) that is even more urgent.

I also think its time to turbo-charge the creation of fully immersive virtual communities so as to take much of the heat out of outer world politics as people can form their own identities in the virtual world.





Focus on the Idea without emotionally identifying with it


Paul Budding


This is a paper about individual freedom. Individual freedom is not just freedom from harm (although it is that). Its also freedom to be able to freely think and freedom to do what you want within the law. I think the idea of Universal Basic Income is important and can boost millions of peoples mental health. Firstly though I want to focus here on ideas and mental health. Many people’s psychology is one in which they feel like they possess an idea. I see this on social media. Its unhealthy for that individual. Their mind is suffocated and they are now at the mercy of the success of the idea in question. We do not possess ideas. But they can possess us if we let them do so. We need to divorce ideas from ourselves. Ideas are healthy when we are

(1) not the idea. Our mental health does not depend on them. And

(2) the idea put into practice improves the physical and mental health of the individual.

Universal Basic Income (UBI) will do that. On another issue putting as many high flood risk homes as possible onto higher ground will do that. (i.e., raising them like the wealthy did in Somerset following their historic floods). Getting nanobots into the bloodstream will do that. Returning to my number 1 policy idea, UBI, its progressive as opposed to utopian. It will increase peoples freedom to do what they want within the law. It will reduce anxiety about paying bills and about paying for essentials such as heating and eating. But it will not enable people at the bottom to just jet off on a holiday abroad. The reason why my main idea is progressive (an improvement) but not utopian is not because I am opposed to utopia. Its because I do not know how to attain utopia. Meanwhile UBI’s time has either arrived or is very near. Two entangled reasons for this come to mind:

  • Middle class insecurity has increased and they are more supportive of UBI than ever before.


  • The UK’s feverish politics. Brits are more open to voting for big changes than ever before.


The above is not to say that my mind is closed to the possibility of losing. I am supportive of ~ but not possessed by the idea of UBI. In a passionate general election who knows for certain whether UBI would be a vote winner or vote loser. All I will say is that it would do better now than in the past. The more technological our society gets the more support UBI gets. But I am aware that it would be met with a ton of hostility from economic right wing commentators. It would be history repeating itself as it would be reminiscent of 1945 when the NHS was popular and a vote winner yet the Conservatives were saying it (alongside the welfare state) would turn Britain into a Communist country. I am not saying that the outcome would definitely be the same as in 1945. But the similarity is clear. Of course UBI is not communist. The free market capitalist economy creates vast wealth. It is commendable for that. It distributes goods very effectively. I think there is some market failure at the bottom where people want to buy things but can’t due to lack of money and thus shops needlessly get boarded up. So what I say there is that market capitalism is great at creating wealth but terrible at distributing it. UBI solves that problem to a large extent (albeit as said, not to a utopian extent).

So am I opposed to Soviet Communism? Because I implied so above. I want to empower the individual because that is the best for the individuals health. My mind is open and I only want what is best for the individuals physical and mental health. Universal healthcare, Universal Basic Income, medicine going within the human body as prevention (nanobots)… these things seem sensible to me. Soviet Communism strikes me as imitating the market and that strikes me as impossible. Market Capitalism is the only way we know of to create wealth and distribute goods over a wide area. But capitalism is serving less and less people. It is narrowing in terms of its already terrible record on income distribution. UBI is the policy lever that needs pulling.

Psychology seems most difficult for people to grasp. So I want to again move on to discussing that.

If an idea possesses a person and they could not possibly imagine thinking differently then it is damaging their mental health. Their health is being determined by the success or failure of the idea. Take human caused climate change as an example. I think its scientific and therefore I do think that human caused climate change is real. But should new information become apparent that contradicts this, then I would be willing to change with the science. An idea must not possess me. Then I am better able to trust myself.

Now lets take a moment or two to look at the Conservative Party and Brexit. Because they illustrate why my emphasis on ‘psychology’/ ‘mental health’ is important. The reason why the Conservatives have gone all anarchist is because of Brexit. But it’s a negative (i.e., mentally unhealthy) tribal anarchism based on emotionally lashing out at opposition. Some or many Brexiteers already were anarchist in 2016: “Blow up the state” was a common rallying call online during the referendum. They now appear to be putting it into action. Its ironic. They have been forced to be precisely what they want to be. It’s the + in Brexit+. To destroy everything in the name of Brexit is exactly what the Brexit Party crave to do. The label of “Anarchism” is perfect. We need no other label. Incredibly the Tories success for as far ahead as I can see is dependent on their anarchist credentials. The more they stick it to the man the greater their success will be. The more they conform, respect norms, seem content with the rule of law, the more they will shed voters akin to a moulting dog shedding his hair. The Tories are now Brexiteers/Anarchists. So I am crystal clear in where the Tories stand… what their position is politically/ideologically. So what has this to do with the title of the paper? It’s part of the tribal identity issue politics. That is where most people (in the UK at least) are at in their political evolution. They are at the level of ‘tribalism’… although 50% of the public are on one side (Brexit tribe) and 50% on the other (Remain tribe). I do not know where the Norway Soft Brexiteers are these days: i.e., do they get categorised as Brexiteers or Remainers? The goalposts have moved so much. Britain has realigned. Therefore the answer depends on who you ask. Jo Swinson would say they are Brexiteers. Nigel Farage would say they are Remainers. Not identifying with Brexit or Remain means that I just want as much national unity as possible. This is a confession that most people do identify with either Leave or Remain. Brexit is an identity issue which is precisely why it evokes so much passion and hostility. Its precisely the Soft Brexit option (or Soft Remain as Farage calls it) that we need to calm the flames. We will fail to put those flames out because the Brexit Party and Lib Dems are here to stay. The aim (for me) is to contain them. That is quite a challenge in this frenzied political climate.

In the U.S. Andrew Yang says that his Universal Basic Income policy is what matters. He says Universal Basic Income will win. He says he (himself) might lose. Usually, in politics, when we refer to playing the ball, not the man… we are referring to our attitude towards our opponents. But here, Yang uses this logic to refer to himself. Universal Basic Income is the idea. Yang is the Man. He says its the idea that is important. And of course he is right. Universal Basic Income is growing and growing and it would be absurd to say that UBI’s success all depends on him. I don’t support Andrew Yang. I support Universal Basic Income. Two more Democratic candidates for President are supporting UBI. They are Gabbard and Williamson. Likewise its not them that I am supporting. I support UBI. There are so many plus points to UBI. Those plus points include:

  1. It decentralises power (in the form of income) to the individual themselves thus empowering the individual who will feel more free and included in society. I think that it will reduce governmental authority so much that people will be depoliticized. This will mean that not only extremists (or potential extremists) will be depoliticized but also people who are just political animals (whether they were radical or otherwise) will feel less passionate about politics. With regards to reduction in political extremism, this would lessen threats to politicians and reporters, and re-establish some level of trust with them.


  1. Abolishes income poverty. And the ‘Universal’ aspect means that an economically right wing government would find it impossible to abolish UBI. (abolition seems impossible if its set at, e.g., £220 per week. However If set too low then it would be a realistic aim of the right wing to abolish it).


  1. Linked to point 2, the abolition of poverty means the reduction of anxiety, depression, stress etc related to inability to pay bills. Linked to point 1, individual empowerment also means that there is an improvement in mental health.


  1. Increases ‘demand’ at the bottom end of the capitalist economy. That is where there is market failure. Hence UBI will lessen market failure.


  1. Compensates for increased economic insecurity among the middle class. Thus its time has come. There is a narrowing of capitalism, i.e., a narrowing of who capitalism serves. UBI will mean that a transformed UBI capitalism serves everyone.



There’s so much tribalism these days based around identity issues. This means they are not thinking through ideas so much. They are not thinking much at all in some cases. They identify. Identifying never ends well. Indeed, it is neurotic at all times.


I want more of this… focus on the ball not the man attitude. i.e., focus on the idea approach. Otherwise I cannot help but conclude that the focus on the man (or woman of course) is due to prejudice. If two people who could be PM or President share the exact same idea then the outcome is exactly the same because it is not them that implement it. It’s the civil service and Inland Revenue. i.e., it’s a collective endeavour that involves thousands of bureaucrats and tax collectors. There is nothing illegal about focusing on the Man as opposed to the idea. But I think it serves no ones interest. It is not the best idea for the individual concerned as it sells him or herself out to non-think that way. Its group think. Its also often associated with lashing out at the opposition and ends up (in that sense) as mob-rule, abuse. We see this online everyday. Its easy to see when someone is more interested in playing the Man not the Ball. However, some of those group-thinkers simply heil their own side while some lash out at the other side in a personal manner. I see very little focus on what the other side actually say. Todays tribal politics has almost no interest in the good points of the other side. That would be too balanced for a tribalist!

A lot of Brexiteers are so obsessed with Nigel Farage that he is their fantasy mate. This partly explains why the Brexit Party have managed to maintain 14% support despite Boris nicking all their policies. However, I do admit another (more important) reason. That more important reason is because the Brexit Party’s role is (at this minute in time) to keep the Tory government honest. It’s a case of telling the Tories to stick to the plan or we will take ALL of your voters for ourselves. If the Brexit Party ceased to exist Boris would soften his Brexit policy in a millisecond. He would probably delay Brexit and then seek compromise. So we can say that the Brexit Party are in charge of the Tory Party and that their instructions to the Tories are:

  • Deliver a No Deal Brexit.


  • Keep up the Anarchism so as to destroy the State.


I am no Brexit Party fan. They are the Kings of Identity Issue Politics. The Kings of Tribalism. TheKings of Prejudice, and the Kings of Anarchism. They want to blow up the State. The Brexit Party want people to be tribal and to lash out. This anarchism is based on prejudice and hate. It wants conflict so that these negative emotions can be unleashed. While, what I want is an ideas or solutions based thinking that does not possess the mind. Thus I divorce the idea from myself. I am not the idea. It does not possess me. I do not feel identification with it. I would bin it in an instant if I thought it did nothing for human health. Thus if I imagine being a member of a political party… even imagine being at their conference… I would just so happen to (as an individual) agree with the gist of what they are saying. But I would not be tied to them because I do not identify with ideas. There can be no tribal loyalty from me to them. They therefore genuinely have to win my vote. And even if they did, I would not get sucked into a tribal mindset.

Moreover I think that identity issue politics is inconsistent with solution based politics. Of course, this is a controversial thing to say. It would mean that not only is the Brexit/Remain conflict being criticised, but so too is Scottish Independence, Welsh Independence, and the Spain/Catalonian identity issue too. I think the growth for Welsh nationalism is not a right wing thing. It’s a reaction to English nationalism. Generally speaking Welsh people are left of centre. However, I also accept its very much part of a trend towards a more and more demanding political assertiveness in people. And there is tribalism among the UK regions irrespective of whether its right or left wing.

Personally, I would be less interested in politics if it placated me. That would require generous UBI, NHS funded at average level of western Europe, Brexit settlement with those on the extremes contained, PR to be fair. That would be one hell of a settlement and would depoliticize many. I think it would last along time, and the only thing that would weaken the settlement is the natural withering of the state… i.e., if people went off (in the 2030s) into virtual worlds and their communities. That would be beyond depoliticalization. It would be as said, wither the state. But you can have all of those things and still be possessed by ideas. Individual empowerment does not just mean UBI and nanobots in the bloodstream. Individual empowerment also means that you are not possessed by ideas that are not you. If your mind is possessed… if your mind is not free… then all of those healthy empowering policies do not equate to mental health… because you are possessed by an idea or ideas. Indeed, your mental health is then determined by the success or failure of the idea. Therefore it is essential to be distant from ideas. This means for mental health reasons it is important you do not identify with an idea, with a tribe etc. i.e., do not group-think. Group thinking is non-thinking. Its tribal thinking.

Tribalists can be educated and can be uneducated. All of them sell out their intelligence for tribalism. In September 2019 the BBCs Laura Kuenssberg tweeted a video of a man challenging Boris Johnson in a hospital concerning the care of his son. She followed this by pointing out that the man is a Labour Party activist. Kuenssberg was then subjected to a barrage of twitter attacks from people on the left. However, she had simply done her job. Her job is to give both sides which she did… by posting both the video of the incident and then the point about him being a Labour Party activist. Even the man involved defended the reporter. If it had been someone heckling or challenging Jeremy Corbyn and the person doing the challenging was a Conservative Party activist then I am sure that the left would want not only the challenge to be reported but also the fact that the person challenging Corbyn is a Conservative Party activist. Incidentally Brexiteers are frequently involved in online abuse. Arron Banks has a list of MPs he wants to F*** off. Anyway, when I see incidents like the Kuenssberg incident, I can see exactly what is going on. It’s a deliberate attempt to scare the reporter individually and at the level of BBC (or if its Sky, at level of Sky News). It’s a deliberate attempt to scare her and the BBC into thinking twice about how they report on Labour. Its psychological warfare. (It happens the other way round of course. There’s a ton of abuse of the BBC from Brexit supporting anarchists). This attack on reporters is a classic example of playing the reporter not the ball. Reporters have to be balanced. Attacking them is an attempt to blow up impartiality.


More on UBI) UBI is VERY solution based… I regard my general philosophy as being solution based… although I take the free market capitalism side of it as a ‘given’. I am a social democrat because free market capitalism is great at creating vast wealth but terrible at distributing it fairly. I would preface “social democrat” with “modern” (modern social democrat) because I am more of a Universal Basic Income social democrat as opposed to welfare state social democrat. The principle of universality is very important. It makes freedom from poverty a ‘right’ that would be impossible to reverse. UBI really will be a solution that gets implemented if middle class insecurity continues to grow. The threat from automation suggests it will grow.




I’m not perfect. This is evolution for me and I found writing this paper more difficult than usual. It wasn’t the writing that I found difficult but the psychology. It was challenging. I was challenging myself, challenging my psychological flaws. Perfection does not need to evolve. I think that slanting towards thinking as an individual requires:

  1. Not identifying with the idea. Healthy Individual thinking is non-attachment. Hence, not tribal. You may find that tribal minded people agree with what you are saying. However, if you are thinking as an individual then your psychology is different to theirs and your mental health will be healthier than it would be if you gave up your individuality in favour of identifying.


  1. Focusing on the idea, the solution and not on the man or woman) is more intelligent than tribal group thinking. (i.e., non-thinking). Tribal thinking is just rubber stamping and lashing out at the opposition’s figure heads. I do not deny that tribalism can win votes. I predicted the Brexit Party would eat Theresa Mays support and they did as the Tories went down to their lowest level of support in their 185 year history. With Boris Johnson in charge, they have predictably won most of that support they lost back. (due to their tribal approach to Brexit and No Deal). At time of writing the Lib Dems have almost done the same thing to Labour that the Brexit Party did to Theresa May’s Conservatives. The Lib Dems are interesting and I want to write a paper on them comparing their approach to mine. Because they are supposed to be individual in their thinking to a significant extent. Yet they are the flip side of the same coin as the Brexit Party. Very tribally Pro Remain and now promising to cancel Brexit altogether.


Note above, that point 2 emphasised ‘focusing on the idea’ yet point 1 emphasised ‘not identifying with the idea’. Its important to point out here that putting point 1 and 2 together means that the healthy thing to do is to focus on the idea without emotionally identifying with it.


The problem (for the individual) concerning tribal thinking is:


  • Its sells themselves out to group-think.


  • It results in prejudice and even hate.


  • Its inauthentic.


  • Its bad for mental health


Splits… Splits… and more Splits… as Britain becomes a nation of political tribes

Paul Budding 


There is not just a split between Brexiteers and Remainers anymore. There are splits within the two tribes themselves.

On Pro Brexit side split between No Deal and a Deal.

On Pro Remain side split between a referendum and Revoke.


I know some Brexiteers claim a Deal = Remain. But I don’t buy that. Maybe you can call it an establishment Brexit. Hence there is even a split on the issue of categorisation.


I would be happy with a referendum that was between a Norway style Soft Brexit and No Deal. I think the former would win (although No Deal would score better than the vast majority would predict and give Soft Brexiteers like myself a scare). If I am right and Soft Brexit won, then we would have attained as much unity in our split society as possible… and as I always say, that isn’t much unity. Hence, I am for the least bad option and there only are bad options.


During the 2016 Referendum I understood with 100% certainty that the genie was out the bottle and this new vitriolic political culture was here to stay (i.e., a loud, demanding, hateful, conflict culture). And national unity attempts had to therefore be made irrespective of the result. I have not budged a millimetre since then. The conflict will go on until its resolved. I think Universal Basic Income will put some of the fires flames out. But UBI is years away.

In 2016 I was also predicting some kind of radical decentralisation (in the UK) that would eventually reach the individual level. Well I think I was on the right track. 3 years later I see decentralisation from the centralised level of a nation to the regions. i.e., we see English Brexiteers (some of whom I view as anarchists), we see the most predictable London internationalists, Scottish Pro EU/pro SNP Independence position, and now we see the rise of Welsh nationalism that has the same logic as the reason why Scottish independence is so strong. They don’t want anything to do with Boris’ lot. Ever since the 1980s complaints from the Scottish public have become louder in response to perceived neglect from England. Labour introduced devolution but that just acted as a stepping stone. Now, Boris’ government are seen as alien to the Scots… ditto alien for many Welsh people with support for Welsh independence up from 10% to 40% in 3 years. So in other words the decentralisation equates to a breaking up of the whole… into tribal groups. The Conservatives used to be the Unionist party but are now the Anarchist party… hence they don’t care because all they think about is sacrificing anything and everything (including the rule of law) for Brexit. I just think that sets a dangerous long-term precedent. I also think the breaking up of the whole is accelerating hence I was definitely on the right track. I understood (during the referendum) that people will not take defeat anymore. They consider democracy like fast food. They think it’s a democracy therefore if I demand it then I should receive it. But people think  “Ahh, that lot won’t give me what I demand, but my own tribe will”. And people have clicked on who their own are. E.g., Hard Remainers know the Lib Dems are for them (or the SNP in Scotland). Hard Brexiteers watch the Tories like a hawk and demand they heel otherwise they’ll collectively vote for Nigel Farages Brexit Party. And now Welsh people are giving up on England and looking on approvingly at Plaid. At this rate, my own region, the northeast will be demanding independence. I’m not sure what Mackems would think of being ruled from Newcastle though.









Sponsored Post Learn from the experts: Create a successful blog with our brand new courseThe WordPress.com Blog

Are you new to blogging, and do you want step-by-step guidance on how to publish and grow your blog? Learn more about our new Blogging for Beginners course and get 50% off through December 10th.

WordPress.com is excited to announce our newest offering: a course just for beginning bloggers where you’ll learn everything you need to know about blogging from the most trusted experts in the industry. We have helped millions of blogs get up and running, we know what works, and we want you to to know everything we know. This course provides all the fundamental skills and inspiration you need to get your blog started, an interactive community forum, and content updated annually.

August 24th 2019

Bad Person/Bad Idea

It is often said in politics that you should play the ball, not the man. 

i.e., criticise the idea as opposed to the person.

But sometimes the two go together. Think Trump! Bad idea/bad person. Therefore, inside my mind there is a circle of ‘acceptability’ and ‘respectability’ and those political stances within the circle are acceptable and respectful. I accept and respect the political positions inside the circle. The circle contains positions I agree with and disagree with. The latter = acceptable and respectful opposition. So for me, liberal Conservatives would be acceptable and respectful opposition thus inside the circle. (I take it they currently oppose UBI. I will return to this point in a moment). Donald Trump on the other hand, is well outside the circle as he is a criminal child.

Liberal Conservatives are fine on important issues like being free of prejudice concerning LGBT, they are anti racist, and at least regard climate change as real. Moreover I think they will convert to UBI due to their concern for societal stability. But I don’t think Trump gives a damn about societal stability hence I wouldn’t even trust him to introduce UBI if society was collapsing. This attitude of his is already evident concerning climate change.

With regards to members of the general public… EDL style racists and homophobes are outside of the circle. They are bullies. There is a danger of extremist political radicalisation the longer that politicians take to make UBI a reality. (thus increasing the number of bullies in the country). For those people who consider themselves ‘Hard Remainers’, I would suggest that at least some of the support for Brexit derived from people who felt politically left out/ignored/forgotten about etc. The technological revolution will massively increase the number of such people as more and more of them witness their livelihoods being stripped away from them. Thus there will come a point in time (definitely in the 2020s) when liberal Conservatives (whom are currently in my circle) have to decide whether they want to be part of society (inside the circle) or join Trump style maniacs (outside of the civilized circle). Almost all of them (or all of them) will convert to UBI as will those who are currently self-defined progressives but whom, for whatever reason, have failed to see the obviously huge AI iceberg right ahead.


Are people economically selfish or do they possess a social conscience?

I am a supporter of generous level Universal Basic Income. (UBI) Hence, in part, I will look at this question in terms of UBI policy.

At times its difficult to disentangle self-interest and social conscience even though they are often discussed as opposites. Hence I think its important to state the following… I think that almost all of us are economically selfish to a certain extent (materialistic). When I refer to “social conscience” I am meaning empathy and understanding for those on low incomes and high anxiety due to low income and poverty. Social Conscience therefore means an understanding and relative or strong empathy.

So I have already stated that I think people are economically self-interested. Some also possess a social conscience. Let’s now look at this issue in relation to UBI. I think UBI will probably become a reality due to the technological revolution. I am certain it will become a reality if the tech revolution becomes a reality to the extent I think it will. i.e., Strong AI taking vast swathes of the jobs previously carried out by people who were economically comfortably off. So I have implied that the comfortably off will get more and more economically insecure and develop the attitudes of the traditional working class as they come to understand and empathise with the plight of the economically deprived. This is a case of the previously comfortably off realising that the capitalist system no longer works for them. Some of the previously comfortably off will have to fully experience the anxiety that goes with low income… e.g., struggle over paying the bills… before they fully understand. Suffering is a powerful educator in this regard. Indeed, UBI will not happen if middle class suffering does not happen. If the vast majority of the comfortably off remain comfortably off then that demographic will not vote for UBI.

You could argue that this is ‘all’ just self-interest. To show that there is some reality to ‘social conscience’ we must look at those who started off in the working class but came into money. (e.g., career advancement, winning a million on the lottery). Some of those change their attitude and become economically right wing. Thus they were always economically self-interested and would probably admit it. Others take an attitude of “I’ll never forget my roots” and they maintain support for eliminating economic suffering. This is because they continue to understand the suffering. (Human empathy).


I think if you experience economic hardship you understand the suffering and therefore you are egalitarian. However, you may be purely self-interested and this may be demonstrated if you come into money. So all I’m saying here is…

… you are far more likely to be egalitarian if you have experienced the suffering associated with poverty. It develops understanding. It is learned. (that can of course lead to psychological conditioning that will not just go away for some people as easily as it will for others). So the words ‘more likely’ are relevant here. Because some people, once out of a the suffering, easily forget about it… = self-interest. They are like those guys who can finish a long term relationship with a woman and then get a new one without any period of mourning for the ending of the previous relationship. While others will go months or years without being able to even consider a relationship with another woman. However, in terms of economic self-interest and social conscience I am saying that almost all (even those with social conscience) are economically selfish/materialistic.

If you are born into privilege and you feel confident, you do not suffer anxiety, you have no experience of economic poverty, and you are of high status… then I find it very unlikely that you will be possessed with a social conscience. You will be highly likely to be purely self-interested. There will be one or two exceptions who make the effort to learn about the life of millions of others who live in the same country as themselves. But the vast majority of those who are born into privilege will never develop understanding concerning this issue.


August 22nd 2019

In the U.S. there are now three Democrat Party Presidential candidates pursuing a policy of $250 per week/$1000 per month Universal Basic Income. Andrew Yang is the most well known for this policy. But Marianne Williamson, who also endorses this policy, is no unknown. She has 2.8 million twitter followers. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/21/candidate-marianne-williamsons-plan-to-give-adults-1000-per-month.html Tulsi Gabbard also supports UBI.

Universal Basic Income (U.S./UK)

Alternatively contact me (Paul Budding) by email. My email address is paulbudding@yahoo.co.uk 


“Polling data demonstrates the Democratic Party’s base of voters are ready for a more progressive agenda. Though the party elites may be ‘divided’ the base is not; they are ready for unabashed progressive politicians.”



August 15th 2019 (updated Sept 28th)


NOTE: I am accepting $1 contributions up until (and including) 1st October 2019. The reason for this is because I am determined to get this project off the ground and ultimately make our UBI video go viral.

Brits will be interested to know that when the video is published I will make sure that many progressive members of the the Lib Dems and Labour get to see it.

Help me to help the cause of Universal Basic Income internationally. Lets make this go viral.
My Project idea concerns Universal Basic Income (UBI). i.e., All adults receive this payment. In the U.S. Andrew Yang (and two other Democrat Presidential candidates) are pushing a $250 a week UBI. ($1000 a month). 


I am asking for $20 (£16) contributions. This will pay for professional online videos that  will go viral. I will hire former ITV and BBC News reporter, Anna Brees to put these videos together. Anna has gone freelance and that is very convenient for this Project. Having been quoted a price by Anna for the video (£500)… I am now asking the wealthy (Silicon Valley millionaires, to pay more than the $20. I am asking them to cover the costs of the video as much as they are willing to do so). My determination to make this work is crystal clear. I want the UBI video to go viral. This issue has still not got off the ground in the UK. And yet, generous UBI will be one of the most progressive policies in history.

Anna Brees, former ITV and BBC Presenter and Reporter

Once I have received sufficient level of contributions towards this project, I will work on the wording concerning the type of things I want Anna to mention in the report. I am not going to write the report here but Andrew Yang and Scott Santens will be mentioned because they are the key people making the UBI idea entirely mainstream. Others who will be discussed in the video include Ray Kurzweil, Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and Richard Branson. But my main focus will be Andrew Yang as he (above all else) is putting UBI on the map. Once we have a slick, professional video online then the #YangGang and other UBI supporters around the world, will make it go viral. And as we get closer to UBI becoming a reality I will hire Anna to put together another video as the idea of UBI is only going to get bigger and bigger. Its time has come.

Note that I think the progressive left in both the U.S. and UK will embrace UBI. Because technology is changing capitalism. Capitalism is transforming itself, becoming narrower and narrower. It is inevitable that progressives will pull the UBI lever in order to eradicate income poverty once and for all. Hence, I am convinced that this is going to appeal to the left of the Democratic Party in the U.S., and appeal to the left of the Lib Dems in the UK and also to the Labour Party in the UK. Hence, while Andrew Yang is the figure that I think is currently investing the most time and energy in advocating the UBI policy, I am also very interested in the two other Democrats who are pursuing it (Williamson and Gabbard) and I am also very interested in the ideas of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and those closely associated with her.


Andrew Yang (see @AndrewYang on twitter)

Yang focuses on automation as making the UBI policy imperative. As more and more jobs are lost to strong Artificial Intelligence, capitalism narrows in only serving a smaller amount of people. In general, people have always worked for the system. Yang rightly thinks the system should work for us and then physical and psychological illness is reduced and quality of life increased. Yang rejects looking at economic growth as a measurement of how well we are doing because economic growth only tells us how well the rich are doing.

I was following Yang on Twitter when he only had a few thousand followers. Now he has more than 755,000 followers.

Andrew Yang on Twitter

My one communication with Andrew Yang himself was back in March 2018 (when he had hundreds of thousands less followers than he does now). See here: https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/969584520054951936?s=20


Are you interested?  

If interested in being one of the heroes who gets this idea to go viral then please make a $20 (or £16) paypal payment to paulbudding@yahoo.co.uk

And of course, you should also email me (or fill out the form above) and then I will definitely keep you updated on progress. My email address is the same as my paypal account address.



It might not look great but could you imagine Trump doing this???? https://twitter.com/i/status/1162200202201030658


If we can have 5000 people vote on a twitter poll in favour of @AndrewYang then we can have 5000 people retweet this video. Get on it , this is how we win. https://twitter.com/CNNTonight/status/1161497594532638720 

CNN Tonight


Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang says his “freedom dividend” plan of $1,000 a month is “about everything but the money” https://cnn.it/2H5Cs9k 

Embedded video

One of the things I like about the idea of Universal Basic Income is that it would be impossible for a future Thatcherite (or Republican in the U.S.) government to get rid of it (as with Universal Health and Universal Education). I also (rightly or wrongly) think the middle class are getting more insecure.



Mrs Yvonne Chamberlain

17 February 2017

Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase

Lucy Brazier

13 February 2017

Format: Paperback


29 December 2010

Format: Paperback

Nell Byron

24 June 2009

Format: Paperback


10 May 2012

Format: Kindle Edition

The Journey Begins


August 15th 2019 (edited August 20th)

Help me to help the cause of Universal Basic Income in the U.S. and UK.

My Project idea concerns Universal Basic Income (UBI). i.e., all adults receive a generous weekly sum of money. I am going to try and push a policy motion at the UK’s Liberal Democrat Party conference. (To be precise I am going to get someone else to do the standing up at Conference bit of it as I am an introvert). The Liberal Democrats are ideologically similar to the U.S. Democrats. I am using them in a respectful way to get the idea of UBI turned into reality. I am thinking in terms of ‘generous’ UBI of over £200 per week. (Basically, the same level in UK pounds as Andrew Yang’s $250 U.S. UBI Policy). Indeed, on the issue of Yang, for every $500 I make I will (despite being British and living in the UK) contribute $50 to some unofficial side of his campaign. I can’t contribute directly to his campaign in an official capacity due to the fact I am British, not American.  But this is a UK/U.S. Project.

I am asking for $15 contributions. What does the $15 you pay me get you? You receive fortnightly email updates and video updates. The video updates will equate to reports by former ITV and BBC News reporter, Anna Brees. One of the videos she will do will be a final video report on the actual Liberal Democrat conference motion. Other reports will be as much U.S. orientated as UK… focusing on Andrew Yang’s campaign. So your $15 payments will not just be for me. They will also go towards paying for the video reports (and I have already mentioned contributing towards Andrew Yang’s campaign above).

Anna Brees, former ITV and BBC Presenter and Reporter

A note on the UK Liberal Democrats  

In the UK Liberal Democrat Party it is the members who make policy hence the emphasis is on the motion, as opposed to the emphasis being on their leader, Jo Swinson.

Remember the aim is to pass a UBI Liberal Democrat Policy Motion so that Universal Basic Income becomes reality: How to write a Motion

Andrew Yang

In the U.S., New York based Democrat Presidential hopeful, Andrew Yang (See on twitter: @AndrewYang) is pushing for a $250 a week UBI. He focuses on automation as making this policy imperative. He is articulate and definitely worth checking out. I refer to Yang here because if this is gaining attention in the U.S. (where they are traditionally behind the UK on alleviating poverty) then UBI can garner attention, support and respect here in the UK. Also of course, I am a British supporter of the Yang Gang. Indeed, I was following him on Twitter when he only had a few thousand followers. Now he has more than 700,000 followers.

Andrew Yang on Twitter

My one communication with Andrew Yang himself was back in March 2018 (when he had hundreds of thousands less followers than he does now). See here: https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/969584520054951936?s=20

How long do you stay updated for? 

Your $15 lasts until the next Presidential Election. But given that UBI will not be in everyone’s pockets straight after the election… I am certain that I will be continuing this project in a similar manner.

Are you interested?  

If interested in contributing, receiving email and video updates, and in helping me support and contribute (from the UK) to the Yang campaign (as well as to UK efforts to make UBI a reality), please provide me with your email address and also make a $15 paypal payment to paulbudding@yahoo.co.uk

Best Wishes,

Paul Budding.


It might not look great but could you imagine Trump doing this???? https://twitter.com/i/status/1162200202201030658


August 12th 2019


I’m confident that when the body and brain dies consciousness continues. Because:

  1. We get the nature of time and space wrong. Otherwise precognition would be impossible yet precognition does occur. Hence time is somehow linked to our consciousness.
  2. Missing time is highly common in altered states of consciousness.
  3. I experienced the Void as a child. So have other people. This isn’t a normal dream. Its archetypal and makes you realize how tiny your ego is in the (profoundly) wider scheme of things.
  4. In the NDE if someone asks an experiencer of the  ‘Life Review’ if they were judged… the experiencer always says, “No”, they judged themselves. If it were a dream then some people would say they were judged. (because some people have religious views telling them that at death they shall be judged while others possess right wing views on judgement).
  5. In the NDE the blind see.
  6. In the NDE, during the early part of the experience where the experiencer sees what is going on around their dead body, the experiencer reports accurate information later on. (often reducing medical professionals to tears or otherwise, converts those medical professionals). When studies use a control group to guess what would be going on in these situations, the NDErs are always much more accurate as they say exactly what was said and done… whereas the other control group merely take wild hopeless guesses.
  7. A 3 year study found that meditating Buddhist monks were able to access the world of the NDE. See here: http://bit.ly/2MBTC1N The sections of the paper that I found to be most informative and educating include Identification with the Elements, Altered Perception of Time and Space, Non-Worldly Encounters, and Emptiness. For example, in the section titled “Altered Perception of Time and Space” one of the participants says that “When I’m not meditating, I know that time and space don’t exist. I know it and I remember it, but I don’t experience it. But the [MI-NDE] allows me to experience it directly. I am nowhere and I am everywhere. The past, present, and future merge into one”. (participant 7)
  8. The NDE is experienced as more real than real. In NDE’s what is it that causes the individual to experience it as more real than real? I think its the ego’s experience of being reduced to a tiny dot and thus overwhelmed by reality which is infinitely magnified. Whereas in the earthly world our ego dominates. Thus in the NDE we experience infinitely more than our ego reality. We are not at the center of the universe and we discover that in the NDE.

August 6th 2019

I’m an anti establishment Liberal. I do not mean that I am a Clegg/Swinson et al Lib Dem. I am closer to Andrew Yang’s politics. See on twitter @AndrewYang


No UK-wide Political Party


1) is addressing The Technological Revolution (AI and VR) that we are living through.


2) is advocating Universal Basic Income as a definite policy. (this links to points 1 and 3).


3) is coming up with linked solutions to physical and mental health suffering. ‘Linked solutions’ means these 4 points. They all link to one another. For example look at this simulation and imagine how  we could apply this sort of thing in VR to overcoming psychological illness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMxeDMPvSnI&feature=youtu.be

Moreover, concerning physical illness there are genius technologists who work at the heart of Google, Microsoft, Silicon Valley, who are saying that we a whisker away from being able to eradicate all physical illness. Yet we never hear a word of this in UK politics. You can see why I am not a Lib Dem. They are just the same as the others on all of this. Meanwhile, generous UBI would eliminate all of the suffering that goes with being on low income.


4) is as much as uttering the word “UFO”. Yet there are people in U.S. Intelligence that say that this Phenomenon is real beyond any doubt. In other words there are highly frequent incursions into U.S. airspace by a technology that runs rings around the U.S.’ F18 jets and even shadows them over long distances. This is not as urgent as physical and mental health issues but it is still staggering that we (in the UK) simply ignore this type of news. I admit the curiosity feeling concerning this issue but there are also potential technological implications that I do not understand, that could further revolutionize medical technology beyond our wildest dreams.


July 14th 2019

In Tom Delonge’s statement (see tweet 7) he compares how Senators are feeling about being briefed to how he himself felt when he was “brought into all this”. That was three years ago. And if a rock star is “brought into all this” then you would think that the plan was to eventually bring everyone onboard. Well, now multiple Senators have been briefed. Hence the Senators possess the same knowledge as the likes of Delonge, Mellon, Elizondo. And now they are all working together. Disclosure is just a matter of getting organized. And the Senate is “ENERGIZED” (tweet 7) so is clearly passionate about Disclosure. In the final minute of the final episode of ‘Unidentified’, Delonge’s colleague, Lue Elizondo, stated what is required before Disclosure can occur. He said that we will make the case “air-tight” and “irrefeutable”. So maybe that is what the Senate is doing now. Maybe that is what Delonge means by “organizing” (tweet 7).

So here’s what we know. We know that UFO Disclosure is going to happen. We know they will say its real. And we know this is being organized right now. And one final point about what we know. Note tweet 6: This is going to be a TTSA Disclosure as TTSA are the ones doing the briefing.

July 14th 2019

Tom Delonge recently posted a series of tweets that he later deleted. Fortunately some people in the eagle-eyed UFO community observed and recorded the tweets before they were deleted. Here is what he posted:

July 11th 2019

Just like there’s always been a pattern in the data concerning UFOs there’s a pattern in the data concerning the NDE. The reason why the former is making more acceptance progress than the latter is due to there being a physical side to the UFO Phenomenon. (trace evidence, radar etc).

July 9th 2019

I have started to make my own contribution to raising UFO reality awareness with the aim being to do my bit towards UFO reality acceptance by academia. I am doing this by trying to inform UK Universities of some of the progress made in the U.S. and thus suggesting to them that UFO Studies should be taught in British Universities.

Inline image

Inline image

Inline image

Inline image

Inline image

Inline image

Inline image

Inline image

Inline image

July 9th 2019

Less than 2 weeks after the most incredible tweet I have ever seen (i.e., Tom Delonges late June tweet saying that everyone will know about UFO Reality soon)… now I have stumbled upon a second incredible Disclosure tweet, posted yesterday, July 8th, by Deep Prasad.

Deep Prasad

I apologize for the cryptic tweet ahead of time: A very accomplished journalist from a mainstream media outlet reached out to me and provided truth bombs + evidence I never believed could exist. We are collaborating now, if our project works, we might force disclosure overnight.

July 6th 2019

The UFO field has to get organised. Experts in different branches of Ufology. For example metamaterials, experiencers, history. It must be an organised complex science. For example Richard Dolan’s area of expertise is ‘history’.

Academia: As a comparison, I have read (at length) conversations between Jungian academics who have complained to one another that Jungian Psych is not embraced by academia (in the University) as much as they think it should be. There are exceptions: e.g., Essex comes to mind. And as those Jungian thinkers themselves would say, Jungian psych is often treated (by Universities) as a branch of Freudian Psychoanalysis. Nevertheless, I think that Ufology can climb the political issue importance ladder and as a consequence of that – get into academia.

Politics: ATTIP and then To the Stars Academy (TTSA) have done an amazing job at getting Ufology the recognition it merits in the political world. (in the U.S. at least).

So… if Ufology is seen to be a complex science, firmly established on the political agenda, then it will also be studied academically.

July 4th 2019


Paul Budding

To think in terms of ‘One Whole’ (defined as all of humanity) is to think individually and collectively psychologically healthily. It is good for individual and collective mental health.

There is a Golden Rule: Don’t apply blame. Do apply solution.

Note: When I say “think as a whole” it’s not my job to know everything. It’s just my responsibility to think about what would benefit humanity as a whole. This is not about intelligence level. Everyone, whatever their intelligence level can do this. There are millions of people more, less, and about the same intelligence level as myself. Intelligence level is irrelevant. So an example of thinking in terms of One Whole, that even a child can understand, is a medical breakthrough cure for cancer. That breakthrough is for everyone.

When the Other person expresses an attitude of divisiveness, my response is to remind the other to think in terms of One Whole (all of humanity).

Example of my ‘One Whole’ thinking and how corrections to my thinking can be made: One Whole thinking does not mean that we would never make a necessary correction. I can see how someone might think it would go wrong here because they think no one would be in conflict with anyone else. So let me clarify by using my own most important ‘One Whole’ thought about eternal life. One of my demands is Nanotech in the bloodstream in order to bring about eternal life for myself and for all of humanity. This does not mean that someone who has experienced an NDE and now embraces the ‘indestructibility of consciousness ‘ is in opposition to me. As long as that person is genuinely thinking that the Near Death Experience is healthy for him or herself and healthy for all of humanity… then that is healthy thinking. So why do I not embrace it? Well, I hope that the indestructibility of consciousness is reality. The feeling I get from reading about NDEs is that, while many of the experiences are wonderful and definitely very healthy, many are not. I worry about disorientation. Indeed, the Tibetan Book of the Dead agrees with this. It may be due to a lack of training in preparation for death. If so, there is a huge risk of the complete dissociation of the individuals consciousness and psychotic experiences. Thus the risk, I fear, is that modern day people are radically unprepared. Now you can say that is precisely due to our splitting ourselves off from a One Whole approach. Indeed, it is but if I think that (at the present time) we are better prepared for a technological eternal life as opposed to NDE style experience, then that is where we are at right now. But of course I would be prepared to switch from a technological solution to consciousness solution if it could be demonstrated that the latter is healthier than the former. Thus I would welcome it if great healthy progress was made in the field of indestructible consciousness and health. Similarly, I support a high level Universal Basic Income because it is the only lever I know of that can be pulled to destroy income poverty. I am thinking in terms of myself and all of humanity when I say I support UBI. It can contribute to a reduction in suffering brought about by low income and the anxieties and depression that comes with poverty. Ironically UBI is even for people that are against it. But thinking in terms of One Whole is to be ‘for’ things… not against things. Let’s work as One. Let’s not be deflected by petty party politics and all those neurotic things associated with party politics. I must not poison the pond. My responsibility is to think about what would improve life for myself and for people per se. Nanobots in the bloodstream and UBI would do this. This is the same value system as is used by medical science… i.e., they think in terms of what would be healthiest for absolutely everyone. That is exactly what I think psychology and mental health are all about as well. I have applied the Golden Rule in my two examples. I have not applied blame. I have thought in terms of solution concerning death and income poverty. In doing so, I have experienced healthy thought.

July 1st 2019

My transition from Confirmation to Disclosure: My starting point concerning UFO reality remains the same as before. However I go further now.

Starting Point: There’s a pattern in the data, going back at least 72 years. (The fact that its probably an ancient phenomenon is likely true but we can more easily deal with the modern era). The pattern in the data equates to an intelligence that (in close encounters) proves that it is intelligent to the bewildered witnesses. The movements of the craft whereby it zips from one point to another in the blink of an eye, the hovering, the showing off… plus the marks on the grounds, the burning vegetation, the close encounter experiencers nausea, vomiting, temporary blindness. They are the type of things I mean by pattern in the data with the emphasis on the characteristics that demonstrate intelligence. So it is the pattern that exposes the reality of the phenomenon. It is not an individual case. However, there is now two huge exceptions to my rule. Because the U.S. Navy can point to their Tic Tac cases and their Cubes in Spheres cases… and to be quite honest, I am shocked that the phenomenon has progressed this far. Before the exceptions to my rule came to light, I was unaware whether or not sufficient knowledge had been attained that would make Disclosure an option. I thought that maybe the intelligence behind the UFOs fails to make contact and perhaps deliberately controls the situation to such an extent that authorities would never be able to shed light on what the origins of the intelligence is. However, we are clearly alot more aware of what is going on than I thought. Tom Delonge, Elizondo, Justice, Mellon, McCasland, U.S. Navy pilots, the list goes on and on concerning those whom have inundated me with so much evidence that I would have to be brain-dead to remain a Confirmation guy. I do not feel like I have made a choice to become a Disclosure guy. I feel like a mountain of undeniable material has been presented. Its similar to saying I have not made a choice to believe in Australia. Australia’s existence has been Disclosed to me.

Lets return to the individual cases issue. My starting point is that its the mountain of cases that fit the pattern that convinces me of UFO reality. But to the Stars Academy (TTSA) have provided everyone with the awareness of Cubes in Spheres cases that went on and on and on and on for months. Hence, if that counts as one case then ok, I take a single case and say that it is legit in its own right with or without supporting evidence from the 72 year (modern era) phenomenon. When a pilot would take off he would see cubes in spheres and then when he would land and his mate would take of he too would see cubes in spheres. And this continued daily, weekly, for several months. A similar situation exists with the Navy Tic Tac cases. And of course, the U.S. Navy possesses technology (e.g., radar) that verifies these wonders in the sky. They are also wonders in the Sea as they can navigate water as well. When I was a ‘Confirmation’ guy, there was no best case. Now there is. Now I point to the Cubes in Spheres case(s).

When I take into account all of the above… and then add all of what I say in the rest of this article together ~ then you will understand why I am now a Disclosure guy —- Chris Mellon informs us “we have the proof” (you hear Mellon say that 1 minute 30 into this Unidentified episode here: https://vimeo.com/339738815  And don’t forget back in 2016/2017 when Delonge first came to national and international attention concerning his contacts at the highest level of open world politics (John Podesta), and secret world defense intelligence contacts (Weiss, McCasland, Carey etc). Delonge was emailing Podesta about his meetings with McCasland and saying that McCasland says publicly that he doesnt believe in UFO’s. But privately McCasland knows they exist. He knows all about Roswell and the related ET bodies. The highly impressive teams Delonge keeps assembling are undeniable. And then they come out with revolutionary statements. Mellons statement of “we have the proof” is revolutionary. Elizondo answering “Yes” to a question on Fox News about whether we have debri from UFOs is revolutionary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDRJWrDWr0o Elizondo cannot provide the proof that Mellon refers to because of his NDA. But it would appear that his fellow team member, Tom Delonge speaks for him. As I tweeted alittle earlier today: “Delonge says what Elizondo almost says because the former does not have an NDA to worry about”. (@Paulxxxxx 1st July 2019). So Elizondo says the U.S. possesses debri from UFOs but he cannot provide the proof because of his NDA. Elizondo says that the cubes in spheres and tic tac UFOs are not Russian or Chinese. But he cannot provide the proof because of his NDA. But Delonge does speak and they say they are on the same page as each other on all of these things. And here again is Delonges historical tweet: “Everyone will know the reality soon, and unfortunately it’s just not something to laugh at. It’s pretty unnerving, with some bad news, some good news, and with that in mind- all we can do is deal with it honestly and openly”. And here is Elizondo talking about ET reality, carefully using the word “maybe” in order not to break his NDA. https://twitter.com/i/status/1145283882943700992 But we are already aware that Elizondo knows the truth. He’s speaking in code that a 12 year old could crack in an instant. Putting Elizondo’s statements (and Delonges statements) together, we can say the following… and note this is a minimum of what we can say… The U.S. has UFO debris from crashed UFOs in its possession. These UFOs are not Russian or Chinese. They are extraterrestrial.

Delonge adds that Disclosure is going to happen soon. But the word “soon” is vague. Does it mean 1 week? 1 year? Chris Mellon says “We have the proof”. Therefore it should be this summer! Delonge adds some information about how Disclosure will feel: “unnerving”. The only thing that is standing in the way of a Proof Disclosure is Non Disclosure Agreements (NDA’s). However, Delonge does not tweet on a whim. He does not tweet out of boredom… not on this issue anyway. He is surrounded by U.S. Pentagon Intelligence officials. Remember it wasn’t Delonge that outed General McCasland as someone who knows the truth about ET intelligence. It was Wikileaks. Delonge has said that not only will we know the reality soon… we will also need to respond to it “honestly and openly”. Thus, on this gigantic historical issue, there must have been a change in policy at the top of the Pentagon. Otherwise Delonge would not have been given the green light to say that everyone will know the reality soon. Its likely all coordinated with the Navys new found openness a planned precursor to Disclosure. The Navy’s openness equates to a position of Confirmation that the UFO Phenomenon is real.

In conclusion I have moved from a position of Confirmation to Disclosure. This is due to being inundated with evidence. Ditto, I have moved from not knowing what the intelligence behind the UFOs are to thinking that at a minimum, some of it is extraterrestrial. I take Delonges historical tweet literally. His use of the word “soon” frustrates me. But he is an impeccable and reliable source.

June 29th 2019

Disclosure: Over the last 30 days or so we have seen the Wilson document about reverse engineering UFO’s — Elizondo saying the U.S. has crashed UFO debri in its possession — Delonge saying he has the full answer & big ‘D’ UFO Disclosure will be told to everyone soon — Unidentified about to make a massive revelation – – –  and cubes in spheres witnessed every time Navy pilots flew! (witnessed for months) ~ AND… we were already aware of the tic-tacs. 

June 28th 2019

Yesterday, Tom Delonge tweeted the most astonishing words in history. He tweeted the following:

“Everyone will know the reality soon, and unfortunately it’s just not something to laugh at. Its pretty unnerving, with some bad news, some good news, and with that in mind – all we can do is deal with it honestly and openly”.

This Delonge tweet made me feel much empathy with the John Lennon statement (above). I could feel the side of me that gets upset at petty trivial things. And I could feel the side of me that is ready for the seriousness of what I call ‘Big ‘D’ Disclosure’. It really is time that we, as individuals, and collectively, evolved in the way that Lennon (and myself) think we will now that Disclosure really is, at long last, imminent.

My reaction to the Delonge tweet was one of astonishment, shock, and I was buzzing. And I am ok with that reaction. Its not surprising especially as I have been a Confirmation guy… not a Disclosure guy. I always wanted Disclosure though. I just did not think it would ever happen. Now, into the next day, I am looking forward to Disclosure but as said above, I am thinking about the serious implications for myself and for people in general. An hour or two ago I went over Delonges tweet in a forensic style. I mean, its not difficult is it considering he practically spells it out for everyone. So on one side of a piece of paper I penned Delonges opening words of his tweet “Everyone will know the reality soon”. Then I scribbled an arrow to the right hand side of the piece of paper and I wrote “Disclosure Imminent”. Focusing on the final words of Delonges tweet: “all we can do is deal with it honestly and openly”. I penned “Post Disclosure”. The other parts of his tweet were all “Disclosure”. Of course, part of me is unnerved due to Delonge saying that it is “unnerving”. Delonges words imply ‘Contact’. Contact with a higher intelligence. Nothing else would unnerve us. Nothing else would be “bad news”. Nothing else would make Delonge say “unfortunately its just not something to laugh at”. There’s a negative slant to Delonges tweet but its not absolutely negative because he also writes that there’s “some good news”. When it comes to Delonges track record on truth – we can say it is excellent. When I first came across his UFO interest it was him proving to specific reporters that he really was in contact with U.S. intelligence. Later, in his communications with John Podesta, Delonge discussed his communication with General McCasland, saying that in public McCasland doesnt believe in UFO’s. But in private he knows they are real. This was Delonge positioned inbetween the Democratic Party leadership and U.S. Intelligence. Delonge as a trusted individual who could reach parts of the population that neither politicians or U.S. intelligence officials could reach. Delonge’s emails to Podesta (including the emails referring to General McCasland) were exposed when Wikileaks made all of Podesta’s emails public. I did my own mini research on McCasland and discovered that he was responsible for billions of dollars of public spending within the Dept of Defense. Delonge had been shown to be the real deal so I was certain that something important concerning the UFO Phenomenon was about to be revealed when on 13th December 2017 DeLonge tweeted “Something’s coming, and everyday they tell me “one more day.” Ugh… but I will look back at it as one of my life’s greatest accomplishments”. A few days later the New York Times report about AATIP was revealed to the world. Not surprisingly the UFO community responded by saying that we were always told that the government did not investigate UFO’s. Well, investigating UFOs was precisely what they had been doing. Now, skip forward in time from December 2017 to July 2018. Lue Elizondo, who resigned from his position as Under Secretary of the Defense for Intelligence in order to be more open about the reality of the UFO Phenomenon, said that in July 2019 the conversation around UFO’s would be very different to how it is now. Well, that is very true. Earlier in 2019 the U.S. Navy confirmed that the UFO Phenomenon is real. The History Channel is currently showing ‘Unidentified’ and Elizondo and Delonge (and others such as Justice, Mellon) are seen discussing the Navy Pilots sightings and talking to Navy personnel witnesses. Just the other week I watched the 4th episode and learned that cubes in spheres UFOs were sighted by navy pilots for months. They were seen every single time a pilot would set off. And when he landed and his mate then took off, his mate would see the cubes in spheres too. And now, on 27th June 2019 we get that tweet from Delonge. Its time we stopped being children and matured. Because we are about to go through the most important paradigm shift in history.

June 23rd 2019

I think, for those who are (understandably) curious about the UFO issue… understanding the message of the UFO intelligence is the best (most interesting thing) we can do.

June 13th 2019

I can see why Jacques Vallee says the social/cultural aspect of the UFO Phenomenon is more important than the origins of the intelligence behind the UFO. Because the social/cultural aspect = the impact on ourselves. i.e., how the intelligence behind UFOs changes human beings, how it evolves our concepts, changes our worldview, advances our technology, transforms our religions, impacts our politics, impacts our health, etc.

The answer to the origins question (What are they?) would be historical news. It would be huge. I don’t doubt that for 1 milisecond. But the consequences for ourselves are of far greater significance.

Moreover, given that I do not believe there ever will be a big ‘D’ Origins Disclosure… well then it becomes all about the social/cultural side of the phenomenon. True, I cannot say for certain that there never will be big ‘D’ Disclosure… but (personally) I do not expect it to happen.


  • Origins = Unknown.
  • My Projection = Simulators (no one else has to respect this. I acknowledge its cultural and hence strong probability of being a myth just like all the other theories).
  • Function = to transform humanity. (see above)

June 12th 2019

Absolute Projection/Relative Projection) With reference to my paper below.. it is the amount of thought that goes into a theory that relativizes a projection. The more thoughtful it is the less myth based it is. However, unless someone has absolute proof of the correct interpretation then he or she is still projecting onto the unknown = myth projection. Hence my Simulators projection is a myth projection. I base it on the fact that the intelligence behind the UFO toys with reality. However, I accept that biological ET’s, and time-travelers may be able to do that. It seems to me that when we discuss the nature of reality we are inevitably projecting myth.

If someone lazily projects the time/place specific dominant cultural interpretation onto the things seen in the skies then that is fine (maybe he or she is healthier for doing so) but its absolute myth projection… even if it later became know (coincidentally) to be the correct interpretation.

It is of course worth noting the potential entangling of hypotheses. For example, if biological ETs can and do time travel, and if they also created our simulated universe ~ then three UFO hypotheses are correct: (1) The ETH (2) Time Travelers (3) Simulators.

June 12th 2019

The UFO Paradigm Shift has already happened. But there is a gap for people to project their myth onto the unknown intelligence

How mythological a projection is… is just a matter of degree


Paul Budding


Humans project myth onto the nature of reality. Even those of us who ‘observe’ patterns to make our interpretation more accurate… even we are relatively mythological in our so-called interpretations. Its always a case of relative projection. It’s just a matter of degree. Intelligent myth is approximation. The person who observes patterns in the data (concerning the UFO Phenomenon and/or the NDE) can only approximate their interpretation. The alternative is agnosticism.  But it is quite clear to me that the intelligence behind the UFO possesses extraordinary technological intelligence. I entirely agree with the statement of Jacques Vallee that UFOs and related phenomena are “the means through which man’s concepts are being rearranged”.1 The intelligence behind UFO’s is called the “Control System”2 by Vallee and “Evolutionary Primers”3 by Ryan Robbins. Well, I agree as it changes our worldview, thus its impact on humanity is to develop and evolve our intelligence. The Evolutionary Primers do not let our minds go stale on the nature of reality. They enable us to break down previously powerful brick walls and create afresh. In that sense they are our archetypal gods. But what happens here is that the projection (I just projected ‘gods’ onto them as that is the traditional projection over millennia) is updated. Hence the 20th century projection was Extraterrestrial. The dominant 21st century projection is still Extraterrestrial however it is being challenged. For example the biological nature of the ETs is underfire considering our own progress on AI. Our technological progress has resulted in some people going completely beyond Extraterrestrial and referring to human time-travelers. Others argue they are our Simulators. Simulators is understandable. Because whatever they are… they can play with reality like a toy. They can blink out of existence and that raises the question… where are they when they do that? Where are they hiding? Where have they gone? They can shapeshift. A giant craft (the size of a navy carrier ship) can move from one point in the sky to another in the blink of an eye. And this is the unresolvable problem for supporters of Big ‘D’ Disclosure. The circus this would create if it was Disclosed in a huge world media event is just ridiculous to the point of absurdity. In other words, government would lose control. The governments message would be “We do not have control of our skies. Therefore let’s really hope the other intelligence is nice. Fingers crossed”. Therefore what the U.S. Defense Intelligence is doing instead is giving all of the information to the public so that it becomes a problem for professionals, academics, those who are curious, private scientists etc. The U.S. Defense Intelligence no longer deny the UFO Phenomenon. On the contrary they say its real. But it appears like it is too hot a potato for them to handle. Hence, they say “Here you want it, you have it”. Hence, the Control System (or Evolutionary Primers) force this evolution and humans decide how to deal with it to some extent as well. In this case, its like the UFO Phenomenon is being privatised. I can imagine future academic courses called ‘UFO Studies’… and questions like ‘How in the mid to late 20th century (and early 21st century) was the UFO Phenomenon kept secret  and why could the public not see what the truth was for themselves?’  But now, in 2019 millions more people than just 1 and a half years ago, can see the truth. There has not been big ‘D’ Disclosure. i.e., no public world media event Presidential statement disclosing the origins of the Others. However, there has been ‘Capabilities’ disclosure. (i.e, disclosure concerning the pattern in the data, the capabilities and effects of UFO’s). This will mean that people will project ‘gods’ onto the god-like intelligence. i.e., if people accept Capabilities disclosure but are given no information concerning Origins… then they will project gods onto the unknown gap. Of course, people who are more techie minded might project their updated version of ‘gods’ and that could be ‘Simulators’… i.e., the evolutionary Primers play with reality hence they are our Simulators. Because if you believe in the Simulated Universe you might think, ergo, UFO Intelligence plays with reality like a toy… only the creators of the Simulation could do that. Some people might dispute the Simulation answer. They might argue that ET’s might crack the Simulation. Afterall, there are people at Silicon Valley today, who are working on breaking free of the Simulation.

Finally, one of the oddities about this subject is the insistence on this being a phenomenon that started in 1947. (making it 72 years old at time of writing). Jacques Vallee’s research demonstrates that it is an ancient phenomenon. If there is a time-travel aspect to it then the ancient label is hardly surprising as it would appear at any place at any time. If it is our Simulators then they too would be able to insert themselves into any place at any time. If it is an intelligence that has attained the ability to play with reality like a toy, then it too would be able to appear at any place at any time. Still, if we just take the previous 72 years for convenience (as it is easier to accept witness testimony from our own modern western culture) then I can understand the logic of doing that too. Indeed I do that myself. (including below, for the pattern in the data).

Some key aspects that when put together demonstrate a pattern in the data. Remember the pattern in the data equates to a 70+ year pattern that can be seen in multiple witness close encounters. There is a pattern precisely because the intelligence behind the UFO is intelligent. i.e., if UFO’s were mundane then the pattern (below) would not exist.

  • Zig-Zag movements (of the UFO, going from one point in the sky to another. Or moving from point A to point Z in the blink of an eye).
  • UFO’s knowing where the witnesses are going. i.e., the witness saying “when we got to our destination the UFO was there, as if it were telling us that it knew we would be coming here”.


  • Impacting Time (Missing time).


  • Blinking in and out of Existence. (making the bewildered witnesses think “Where did it come from”? and “Where has it gone to???”


  • Separating into multiple UFOs and then reuniting to form a Whole UFO.


Also note impact on the witnesses other than bewilderment. E.g.:

  • Radiation injuries
  • Temporary blindness
  • Nausea
  • Becoming telepathic, precognitive



  1. J. quoted by Encyclopedia.com: Unidentified Flying Objects https://www.encyclopedia.com/science-and-technology/technology/aviation-general/ufo
  1. Vallee, J, (2014) The Invisible College: What a Group of Scientists has discovered about UFO Influence on the Human Race (Anomalist Books)
  1. Ryan Robbins social media name is UFO Jesus. Here is just one example of him referring to UFO’s as ‘Evolutionary Primers’: https://twitter.com/PostDisclosure/status/1096346368426283009?s=20 I also like Dan Ely’s response to that video clip. Ely’s response is “Evolutionary primers. I like that. Our progression hinges on the unknown, and it could be that in our search to understand the phenomenon we are exposed to new concepts that we may have otherwise placed little value on and will ultimately need”. https://twitter.com/Enttiis/status/1096479702397505536?s=20



 June 11th 2019

A Capabilities Disclosure minus An Origins Disclosure = projection of gods onto UFOs (i.e., Religion). I am aware this already happens… but what I mean is that it will become a large religion if the volume keeps being turned up. It seems like an inevitability at this rate. Is this what the Control System (or Evolutionary Primers) want?

UFO’s and related phenomena are “the means through which man’s concepts are being rearranged”. (Jacques Vallee). I would add that UFO’s also enable us to see through mythology that has been literalized. (some would word this as seeing through BS).

“Dr. Vallee is still looking for samples of materials from UFO cases for analysis (which he pointed out has been going on for over 30 years) because we now have “new instruments and new methodologies to study it.” Thus proving this is seriously highly advanced material.

Above statement is extracted from https://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2019/05/26

The likes of TTSA and other Investigative UFO Programs (which includes scientists within them) are saving science because if the phenomenon came to be seen as true (and science had played no part other than role of debunker) then how embarrassing for science would that be???

June 10th 2019

Its all happening so fast now. UFO Disclosure is happening every single day. Here is a recent video of Elizondo telling answering ‘Yes’ to Tucker Carlson that the U.S. has UFO debri in its possession.

Inline image

My approach (i.e., why I have never had a problem nor doubt about accepting UFO reality) is easy to explain. First of all I should say that by “reality” I mean intelligently controlled UFOs as opposed to a mundane explanation.

To answer the question about why I have not had a doubt about UFO reality….   The pattern in the data (stretching back at least to the late 1940s) seen in countless multiple witness close encounters. Thats the answer! Over the decades… there’s been thousands of these cases with hundreds of thousands of witnesses.

The UFO Phenomenon’s reality is undeniable.

My approach is the same as a detective investigating a serial killer. Where I say “Pattern in the data” the detective says “Pattern of behavior” or “MO”. In UFO cases going back 70+ years – the pattern is very easy to see.

There is new evidence I need to acknowledge though. News about UFO debri in the U.S.’ possession (Elizondo, Davies) and news provided by the doc (leak of the century) that discusses UFO reverse engineering… well these revelations equate to a ‘cover-up’ by a clique. And when I am presented with new evidence I have to change my view otherwise wha is the point of evidence??? Well my old view (concerning cover-up) was that U.S. power was targeted by UFOs hence they were victims. This is evident from all of the military cases/airforce/nuclear weapons sites/Navy. And of course 99.9999999% of the personnel there are baffled by what they see. But given that I now understand that there’s been all of these UFO Programs going back years and years… and programs that even include UFO reverse engineering… well now I (of course) accept that there’s been a cover-up by a clique.

Inline image


George Knapp @g_knapp (9th June tweet)

“Compartmentalization. I think there is recovered tech, plus scraps, in the hands of a very small group (civilians). They have not yet figured out how to replicate the tech. Very few in govt. know about it, just as few knew about AAWSAP and AATIP…” 

“Its out. The most significant leak of UFO related documents in many years ~ perhaps of the century […] People are beginning to talk about it. Some have even called this the most significant leak in UFO history ever”.

  • -Richard Dolan.

Inline image

The document that Richard Dolan is referring to can be found and read here: https://imgur.com/a/ggIFTfQ Pages 12 and 13 are a damn good read!

My June 10th tweet to UFO Jesus: @PostDisclosure: If they are ‘Evolutionary Primers’ then they will understand that at this rate they are turning themselves into gods. Mysterious Origins… but we are fast becoming aware that they can play with reality, Superpowers beyond Superman/Supergirl, i.e. god-like powers.

June 6th 2019



Paul Budding

The openness and transparency that we are witnessing in the UFO field is outstanding. The UFO field has very speedily scored ‘Acceptance’ and ‘Respect’ goals. I am writing this on the morning of 6th June 2019 and I feel like every day there are news media examples of this newly won acceptance and respect. For example yesterday on CNN Fareed Zakaria discussed progress (e.g., the Navy’s new policy concerning sightings) and he concluded his report by saying “I for one welcome our new openness”.  https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/bx8ycw/cnn_ufo_coverage_june_2019/?utm_source=ifttt

Those people who are passionate about UFOs now possess the right to accuse debunkers of being conspiracy theorists. However, they perhaps lose this right if they simultaneously declare that there is a government cover-up. Hence advocating Big ‘D’ Disclosure means that you think there is still a cover-up. It means you think there is a clique within the U.S. military intelligence establishment who know the exact origins concerning the intelligence behind UFO’s.

Personally I think there’s a double mythological projection onto the unknown:

  • UFO buffs project their pet theory onto the intelligence behind the UFO’s. (most often, albeit not always, this is the biological ETH).
  • Many people accept the mythological projection concerning the nature of reality that they were born into. i.e., Big Bang came from nothing. It just popped into existence and then everything = dead matter, which you yourself will eventually become.

Those two are powerful mythological projections. They possess hegemony. In other words, people do not need to think as much about them because they are spoon-fed these hypotheses in school, through the media, in pop culture etc.

The appearance of UFO’s and their actions are enabling us to progress. They do what they do for our benefit. Thus they are the higher intelligence as they move us. We do not move them. But they also enable us to use our individual responsibility in determining what the implications of these wonders are. Hence, to a large extent, we all need to project a mythology. But some people are more thoughtful about their projection than others. Its merely a case of degree/relativity. Let’s look at a crystal clear example of what I mean. In David Huffords Foreword to Vallee/Aubeck’s Wonders in the Sky… Hufford demonstrates that Vallee does not just unthinkingly adopt the time/place specific mythological cultural projection as the answer to the intelligence behind UFO’s. Hufford writes:

“The work of Jacques Vallee and Chris Aubeck is especially steadfast and courageous in two respects. While seeking a core phenomenology that requires the stripping away of layers of cultural elaboration, they nonetheless systematically attend to the data. After they have removed “spaceship” as a core feature of an observation, they do not proceed to remove all anomalous features. The problem with “spaceship” is not that it is anomalous: it is that it is an interpretation rather than an observation. This is true open-mindedness, and it suggests that we are seeking to understand aspects of the world that are deeply strange”.

(Hufford in Vallee and Aubeck, 2010, p5).

But there are patterns that Vallee does accept such as the remarkable ability to hover and go from point A to point Z in the blink of an eye. But that is a pattern of observation. It is not a culturally projected interpretation onto what is seen.

The tweet below from Andreas Freeman Stahl does not actually require the Nimitz case as there is a pattern of UFO’s doing such movements throughout at least the last 70 years.

Andreas Freeman Stahl


Replying to


Pretty much. But I mean how significant is a craft that can travel 15 miles a second vertically from 80’000 feet to 50 feet that looks like a giant ‘tictac’.

10:17 AM · Jun 6, 2019 · Twitter for iPhone

I am sure that Andreas would agree with my point about the UFO Phenomenon being a reality even without the Nimitz case. So the following is not directed at him… I think that other people (not me/not Andreas and certainly not Jacques Vallee!) failed to click onto the reality of the UFO Phenomenon merely because powerful authorities did not click onto the reality of the UFO Phenomenon. That’s quite sad really. Eye witness accounts can be faulty but a 70 year pattern of eye witness accounts saying the same thing… well that is going to get around the problem of faulty sightings. Infact patterns become crystal clear a lot sooner than 70 years! A pattern in the data is the methodology used in basic detective work. It’s the MO of the perpetrator. When it covers hundreds of thousands of instances then it takes a plank of a brain to ignore it. Yet debunkers did that because it was not the mythology that they had been born into. Its not that they disbelieved in patterns as-such. Rather they closed their eyes so they could not see, and pressed their hands over their ears so they could not hear, and then started shouting so they definitely couldn’t hear. I can proudly say that I never did that unthinking debunker nonsense!

Hufford writes that in “true science” the scientific thinker adopts the following approach: “to follow the data wherever they lead, and to move away from established theory when it fails to deal adequately with the data”. (ibid). Vallee/Hufford/Aubeck certainly win my admiration for their scientific approach. However, there is also a requirement for psychosocial orientation, for thinking that we understand. I am aware here, that this orientation (in the vast majority of cases) will be illusory. It’s the mythology that all people from all times and all places are born into. (although as we have seen in Ufology, some will choose their own mythology, hence the ‘double mythology’ title of this paper). So I merely claim to have done more thinking than most people in reaching my orientation. (see the first mini paper I have written concerning my new found orientation, here:  https://thesimulatedneardeathexperienceproject.com/2018/12/06/the-journey-begins/ )(Note: It’s the June 5th 2019 mini paper titled ‘WTF are they’? that I am linking to there. The further away you are from that date the more scrolling down you will need to do).

We are immersed in mythology. We all have to enact our own mythological projections that we hope are a-little closer to the truth than other mythological projections. Even Jacques Vallee projects his own mythology with his interdimensional hypothesis. So all I am saying is I try to get closer to the truth by way of thinking. But I do not mean that there is a sharp distinction concerning those who think (despite the obvious investment in time and energy) and those who simply sign up to pre-existing powerful mythologies. Thus the UFO Phenomenon is real (the pattern in the data has always been proof of that) but the interpretation of it is your own individual responsibility. Personally I think the UFO intelligence demonstrates that our reality is a myth itself. (See my WTF are they paper).


Vallee, J, & Aubeck, C, 2010, Wonders in the Sky: Unexplained Aerial Objects from Antiquity to Modern times (Penguin Group Publishers)

June 5th 2019

I do not think there will ever be a spoon-fed Disclosure on the origins of the intelligence behind UFOs. No Presidential Disclosure. Therefore there is still a large amount of individual responsibility for what the individual thinks about the origins of UFOs.

June 5th 2019

WTF are they?

Image result for tic tac ufo



According to Tom DeLonge, the final two episodes of ‘Unidentified’ will awaken the world to the UFO Phenomenon. I infer from this, that he expects Unidentified to get enough online buzz and mainstream news media coverage to convert the hardest to reach sceptics. The UFO Phenomenon has already gone relatively mainstream (certainly that is the case in the news media). But now DeLonge seems to think we can get it to go more global (beyond the U.S.) and convert sceptical scientists and cause a paradigm shift in science. One can almost imagine a party political manifesto and the contents page list ‘NHS, Education, Welfare State, Environment, UFO’s’.Image

On 13 December 2017 Tom DeLonge tweeted:

Tom DeLonge‏Verified account @tomdelonge

Something’s coming, and everyday they tell me “one more day.” Ugh… but I will look back at it as one of my life’s greatest accomplishments.

DeLonge has been proven right about what he is doing from the start. His Big Things are Coming messages were always said knowing that he had made the big time on this issue and that he could therefore deliver. It was never just words. So credit where its due to DeLonge. But despite DeLonge’s upbeat message, the origins of the UFO remain unknown. UFO Jesus (@PostDisclosure) calls them “Evolutionary Primers” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4eww7A6AA4&feature=youtu.be

UFO Jesus is answering the question of their function as opposed to their origin. Their evolutionary function is one of enabling humanity to reach the next level of their development. UFO’s as Enablers. Thus UFOs possess god-like powers. Indeed on 6th July 2018 Garry Nolan replied to a tweet of mine by saying “For them… reality is negotiable”.

Garry P. Nolan

Replying to

For them… Reality is Negotiable.
5:56 PM · Jul 6, 2018 · Twitter Web Client

When Nolan said that, he was paraphrasing Vallee who in his foreword to DeLonge writes “If UFO’s and physical reality are incompatible maybe the time has come to re-negotiate physical reality”. https://tothestars.media/blogs/news/read-jacques-vallees-foreword-for-sekret-machines-gods-non-fiction

UFOs appear to us in a way that will enable us to potentially understand them. They appear in a way conducive to our specific time/place culture. They  appear (and act) as they do not because they have to look and act like that but because of their plan for humanity.

What we perceive as reality, is created by something else. We can think of it within a consciousness context, or within a simulated universe context, or as consciousness existing within a technological simulation etc. Any of these surely advances us beyond the woeful dead matter worldview… i.e., the view that dead matter just popped into existence out of nothing.

Reality is a toy to these simulators with a plan. Its their play-thing. That proves that reality isn’t fixed. Its not absolute. Rather its negotiable, changeable, transformable… to the extent of being a toy. What we call Reality… is artificial. By viewing it as a simulation we get closer to the truth. Because simulators could insert themselves into the simulation and could change the program. They could appear at any place at any time and move around in ways that defy logic. For example they could go from point A to point Z in the blink of an eye.

Now do I want to be with them or with clueless humans? Well that would be an easy answer. Better still, I would prefer humans to understand the nature of reality like they do and to possess the same powers as they do.

In conclusion:

Origin: Simulator Gods.

Function: Evolutionary Primers.

Personal: I want ‘In’.

June 4th 2019

Read the Concept of a Paradigm below, and as a consequence you will gain a basic understanding of the obvious link between Kuhn’s paradigm concept and the UFO revelations discussed in typically brilliant fashion by UFO Jesus in this video.

June 4th 2019

Extracted from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/#ConcPara

The Concept of a Paradigm

A mature science, according to Kuhn, experiences alternating phases of normal science and revolutions. In normal science the key theories, instruments, values and metaphysical assumptions that comprise the disciplinary matrix are kept fixed, permitting the cumulative generation of puzzle-solutions, whereas in a scientific revolution the disciplinary matrix undergoes revision, in order to permit the solution of the more serious anomalous puzzles that disturbed the preceding period of normal science.

A particularly important part of Kuhn’s thesis in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions focuses upon one specific component of the disciplinary matrix. This is the consensus on exemplary instances of scientific research. These exemplars of good science are what Kuhn refers to when he uses the term ‘paradigm’ in a narrower sense. He cites Aristotle’s analysis of motion, Ptolemy’s computations of plantery positions, Lavoisier’s application of the balance, and Maxwell’s mathematization of the electromagnetic field as paradigms (1962/1970a, 23). Exemplary instances of science are typically to be found in books and papers, and so Kuhn often also describes great texts as paradigms—Ptolemy’s Almagest, Lavoisier’s Traité élémentaire de chimie, and Newton’s Principia Mathematica and Opticks (1962/1970a, 12). Such texts contain not only the key theories and laws, but also—and this is what makes them paradigms—the applications of those theories in the solution of important problems, along with the new experimental or mathematical techniques (such as the chemical balance in Traité élémentaire de chimie and the calculus in Principia Mathematica) employed in those applications.

In the postscript to the second edition of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions Kuhn says of paradigms in this sense that they are “the most novel and least understood aspect of this book” (1962/1970a, 187). The claim that the consensus of a disciplinary matrix is primarily agreement on paradigms-as-exemplars is intended to explain the nature of normal science and the process of crisis, revolution, and renewal of normal science. It also explains the birth of a mature science. Kuhn describes an immature science, in what he sometimes calls its ‘pre-paradigm’ period, as lacking consensus. Competing schools of thought possess differing procedures, theories, even metaphysical presuppositions. Consequently there is little opportunity for collective progress. Even localized progress by a particular school is made difficult, since much intellectual energy is put into arguing over the fundamentals with other schools instead of developing a research tradition. However, progress is not impossible, and one school may make a breakthrough whereby the shared problems of the competing schools are solved in a particularly impressive fashion. This success draws away adherents from the other schools, and a widespread consensus is formed around the new puzzle-solutions.

This widespread consensus now permits agreement on fundamentals. For a problem-solution will embody particular theories, procedures and instrumentation, scientific language, metaphysics, and so forth. Consensus on the puzzle-solution will thus bring consensus on these other aspects of a disciplinary matrix also. The successful puzzle-solution, now a paradigm puzzle-solution, will not solve all problems. Indeed, it will probably raise new puzzles. For example, the theories it employs may involve a constant whose value is not known with precision; the paradigm puzzle-solution may employ approximations that could be improved; it may suggest other puzzles of the same kind; it may suggest new areas for investigation. Generating new puzzles is one thing that the paradigm puzzle-solution does; helping solve them is another. In the most favourable scenario, the new puzzles raised by the paradigm puzzle-solution can be addressed and answered using precisely the techniques that the paradigm puzzle-solution employs. And since the paradigm puzzle-solution is accepted as a great achievement, these very similar puzzle-solutions will be accepted as successful solutions also. This is why Kuhn uses the terms ‘exemplar’ and ‘paradigm’. For the novel puzzle-solution which crystallizes consensus is regarded and used as a model of exemplary science. In the research tradition it inaugurates, a paradigm-as-exemplar fulfils three functions: (i) it suggests new puzzles; (ii) it suggests approaches to solving those puzzles; (iii) it is the standard by which the quality of a proposed puzzle-solution can be measured (1962/1970a, 38–9). In each case it is similarity to the exemplar that is the scientists’ guide.

That normal science proceeds on the basis of perceived similarity to exemplars is an important and distinctive feature of Kuhn’s new picture of scientific development. The standard view explained the cumulative addition of new knowledge in terms of the application of the scientific method. Allegedly, the scientific method encapsulates the rules of scientific rationality. It may be that those rules could not account for the creative side of science—the generation of new hypotheses. The latter was thus designated ‘the context of discovery’, leaving the rules of rationality to decide in the ‘context of justification’ whether a new hypothesis should, in the light of the evidence, be added to the stock of accepted theories.

Kuhn rejected the distinction between the context of discovery and the context of justification (1962/1970a, 8), and correspondingly rejected the standard account of each. As regards the context of discovery, the standard view held that the philosophy of science had nothing to say on the issue of the functioning of the creative imagination. But Kuhn’s paradigms do provide a partial explanation, since training with exemplars enables scientists to see new puzzle-situations in terms of familiar puzzles and hence enables them to see potential solutions to their new puzzles.

More important for Kuhn was the way his account of the context of justification diverged from the standard picture. The functioning of exemplars is intended explicitly to contrast with the operation of rules. The key determinant in the acceptability of a proposed puzzle-solution is its similarity to the paradigmatic puzzle-solutions. Perception of similarity cannot be reduced to rules, and a fortiori cannot be reduced to rules of rationality. This rejection of rules of rationality was one of the factors that led Kuhn’s critics to accuse him of irrationalism—regarding science as irrational. In this respect at least the accusation is wide of the mark. For to deny that some cognitive process is the outcome of applying rules of rationality is not to imply that it is an irrational process: the perception of similarity in appearance between two members of the same family also cannot be reduced to the application of rules of rationality. Kuhn’s innovation in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions was to suggest that a key element in cognition in science operates in the same fashion.

 May 31st 2019

Maybe Ufology is evolving into accepting an exotic explanation for the origins of the intelligence behind what is seen. Thus something akin to local SETI within that context. Note this only rules out mundane & human origins (unless time travelers) ~ it does not imply biological ET.
I tweeted the above following alittle reflection on the current climate and following receiving this tweet (in response to a question from myself) from Andreas Freeman Stahl.

Replying to

I think they can prove the human origin theory as false only by the reported meta-material coming from the objects. I think this is the reasoning behind the ADAM project, it shows physical trace evidence that the material is beyond human manufacturing.

May 30th 2019

The Holy Grail

Unifying the individual and collective Human Psyche


Our Culture is a Neurotic Mess. However, the cure is inevitable


The Modern world with its “Impossibilist” approach has failed people spiritually. It mentally cripples people, sends people into trauma when loved ones die (especially if they die early) and burdens all people with unnecessary psychological suffering at multiple points of their life. It’s a Pro Suffering philosophy. It was therefore an inevitability that the cause of ‘Mental Health’ would become a more prominent issue to be tackled. But while more public funds are surely welcome, it is our cultural internalizations that are the root problem. As said I call this ‘Impossibilist’ culture that has suffering as one of its ingredients. Its crazy! Only a complete transformation away from Impossibilism and its accompanying suffering will suffice. Such a paradigm shift will not only improve the quality of life for everyone… it will also literally save lives.

Our internalizations are a sick joke. We tell ourselves that whatever we have achieved now is all we will ever achieve. i.e., there will never be a changed worldview. We already got it right. Yeah, well, the amazing Victorians said that… then 4 or 5 years after the end of the Victorian era, Einstein proved them wrong.

I am not going to promote Jungian Psychology. But Jung was right in his condemnation of modern culture. He realised that it was the key factor concerning the growth in neurosis.

The UK is descending into a culture of rampant out of control abuse… that is condemned on one hand but practiced by the majority at the same time. Its not niche, its not minority sport. Its rife. The UK seems ready to explode… all over the EU Brexit issue.  Many people possess the exact mindstate required to execute terrorist attacks on the other side. Well, for some people, the only ingredient missing is the crazy guts to carry it out. i.e., if only they could get away with it they would do it. In the United States their culture war is perhaps even worse given that party political motivated attacks have been carried out. i.e., the letter and parcel bomb terrorist attacks against the Democrats on behalf of the Republican Party. This obsessive identity politics that is sweeping the modern world is incredibly divisive and it isn’t going to go away in a hurry. One side wants to annihilate the other side in the most divisive domestic cultural war in modern UK history. People are embracing vicious hostility to the other side of the Brexit/Remain argument… no such hatred exists concerning any foreign agent. This is psychological civil war. Thus many people must possess horrendously split psyches. Indeed, many friendships and relationships have broken down over Brexit. Britain could certainly see its own Brexit or Remain orientated terrorism. You could bet your life that the side that was the victim would condemn the other side per se… while the side that was condemned would say that the perpetrator does not speak for them.

Of course, the pro Brexit side claims that they merely respect democracy. Yet it was them demanding a second referendum in event of a Remain victory. It was remainers saying No. David Cameron said “Its not a neverrendum”. Polly Toynbee got it right when she said The anti establishment genie is out of the bottle and it is never going back in. She said that during the EU referendum and I thought (at the time) that she was on the money. All hell has since broke loose with Leaver politicians telling Remainers to “F**k off” and Lib Dem Remainers shouting “Bollocks to Brexit”. Luckily, in 2019, only a milk shake has been aimed at an opponent. But next time it could be acid. So is this what Brits are living for? An identity based around whether we are in the European Union or not? Because it appears that the majority of people now think it’s the most important domestic issue since the Irish Famine! It’s a sad reflection on the UK, and it looks like its going to get worse. I certainly think we are heading towards a government of Brexiteers that are more than willing to tell the Lib Dems to “F*** off’ when they wave their “Bollocks to Brexit” manifesto in their face. How much more petrol can be poured on the Brexit flames? Probably a hell of a lot!  Indeed, I think the Liberal Democrats will be the official opposition to the Brexit Party. And that will not calm anything down whatsoever! Politicians have completely failed to handle this situation effectively. Indeed, it would have required a Churchillian coming together in the immediate aftermath of the referendum. But Theresa May rejected that approach only to embrace it 3 years later when it was too late. We are now in a cultural crisis concerning Identity wars. Just go on Leave EU’s official Twitter page. Every hour of every day is a torrent of abuse aimed at Remainers (and soft Brexiteers).

Ok, lets go beyond all that identity issue neurosis…  contrast it with the culture I want to see happen! … … The Inevitable future! ~ i.e., Simulated Universe. Lets simulate the afterlife. It won’t be as good at first as it will be in the future when VR gets more and more immersive. However, we can make it an amazing experience from the start. Simulated Fantasy worlds can bring people together. And Simulated Fantasy worlds can cure depression and unify the psyche of the individual. Unified minds don’t lash out and project as they do in our current identity issue obsessed culture. These fantasy worlds (and also familiar VR worlds) will transform our state of mind for the better. And we will be able to time travel back in these worlds to previous years, decades and centuries. Full immersion virtual reality will not only be Google earthed. Its fantasy worlds will be just as prominent and there to experience. And all other times (not just all other places) will be there to experience as well. And other planets such as Mars! Again, the psychological health benefit is profound. And with power decentralised to within the individual body and mind, you will be completely free. This is beyond the Matrix because in the Matrix movie people were stuck within one Simulation. They did not know they were in it. They could not visit fantasy worlds. They could not time travel within the Simulation. They could not be in Paris at the flick of a switch. They still feared death…

… We need to get those nanobots in the bloodstream to alleviate subconscious (and sometimes conscious) worry about literal death.

But the key is to decentralise to within the individual… giving him or her god-like powers over reality from within the Simulated Universe. Free to travel to anywhere, real or imagined, and free to travel to anytime. Thus what this amounts to is a profound increase in psychological well-being. It’s the Holy Grail. BRING-IT-ON!

Conclusion: Unified and Free Psyche. Neurosis vanquished. Physical ailments and death vanquished.

May 30th 2019

Nigel Farage exploits technological cultural change. He is intelligent and lucky

 “What have we learned from those European Election results? […] The first thing I have learnt is that in the modern world politics can change incredibly quickly. […] Social Media, the use of video imaging has changed absolutely everything. So don’t be surprised if you see further big changes in politics in years to come”.

  • Nigel Farage


Nigel Farage is doing an amazing job.

Farage credits his Brexit Party’s digital social media campaign as the Number 1 reason for the Brexit Party winning the 2019 European Election. See above quote or on video in the first minute of his LBC Show here: https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1133056687735234572?s=20

The Brexit Party’s social media campaigning is stellar. The best ever according to Sky News’ Lewis Goodall. Stellar social media campaigning is not something that the bulk of Farage’s supporters would have come up with as the number 1 reason for the Brexit Party’s 2019 European Election success. Yet that was the number 1 reason that Farage gave to explain the Brexit Party’s European Election success. He then invited his supporters to phone in and give their view. None of them even mentioned the digital campaign. This is because they are not anywhere near as politically intelligent as he is. They cannot read the world as well as he can. Technological cultural trends are over their head. Yet Farage has them in the palm of his hand and has them eating out of it. They are so easy for Farage. Farage is playing an absolute blindingly brilliant power game. I am going to use a swear word to emphasise how brilliant a game he is playing. The Tory Party are a bag of shite compared to him. They are a dumb dead corpse, absolutely definitely clueless and a complete mess. Worse than shite, they are irrelevant. This is Giant Haystacks vs a corpse. This is why Farage says that Labour are more interesting. They are more interesting because the Labour Brexit voters play hard to get relative to Tory Brexit voters. The Tory Brexit voters are low hanging fruit. Nevertheless, given that Labour are now becoming a second referendum party, I think the red flag has been replaced by a white flag and thus the Brexit Party will win the largest vote share in a UK General Election.

Farage has technological trends on his side. (Technology is highly decentralising and impacts on everything). It’s a destroyer of everything while it simultaneously empowers the individual. Thus Farage rides that wave. He’s an outstanding political surfer. For example Farage acts like he is going to destroy the traditional media. But rather, as he well knows, he rides the technological wave that destroys the traditional media and he embraces modern online social media. Thus social media is more relevant than traditional media. And that last sentence gets more and more true the more time moves on. It will be even more true in 2025 than it is in 2019. Farage uses modern media to enhance his power. The victims of this equate to existing power. So the EU is the first victim. Tory Party is the second victim. The Labour Party is the third victim. Other potential victims are NATO, Parliament, the power of the Prime Minister. And yes, traditional media but as said, I think that Farage is social media savvy but it is not him who is destroying traditional media. Traditional media is simply becoming old fashioned, weaker. Farage deliberately and intelligently exploits that fact.

Farage exploits his supporters by making out that its all for them. Well, unless he provides them with not only Hard Brexit but also Hard Cash, then I think not. Farage has not yet signalled any intention to convert to some kind of social democrat or socialist. He has said nothing about Universal Basic Income and this is despite his knowledge of technological trends. But I suppose I cannot rule out a conversion because I credit him with understanding tech trends and they are linked to the rise in popular support for Universal Basic Income. Moreover, his Italian friends… the Italian 5 Star Movement, who also credited their online social media campaign for their election victory… well they implemented a Negative Income Tax which equates to a stepping stone on the path to a Universal Basic Income. Farage will have to do the same, lest he ends up being seen through by his own working class supporters. How many of his working class supporters know that he was not only an ex card carrying Tory but also a Thatcher fan? Of course, he now wants to tear the Tory Party “limb from limb”1 and has succeeded in doing so. But has he equally torn out his own Thatcherite limbs and replaced them with socially conscious limbs? Most of his supporters think he is someone who supports a massive socialist redistribution of wealth and income. We shall see. So far I only see anarchism. i.e., the deliberate destruction of British and European institutions. (Destruction of the Tory Party, Labour Party, EU, Nato, traditional media, Parliament and power of the PM). Farage could argue back that he will therefore have very little power as PM and the Brexit Party MPs will have very little power in Parliament. Bring on Direct Democracy and its referendums! But I accuse Farage of ultimately exploiting his less intelligent supporters if he doesn’t stump up the Hard Cash to go alongside the Hard Brexit.

Farage is also lucky. The timing of the tech trends, the abysmal failure of Theresa May who Farage says is “the worst Prime Minister in history”2, and Labour moving towards a second referendum. He warned Theresa May what would happen if she failed to take Britain out the EU. She failed. And now the result is the Brexit Party at 32% in the European Election and the Tories got 9%. And more importantly the Brexit Party clearly ahead of the Tories in the polls for a General Election. So it’s a mixture of things that make the Brexit Party so successful:

  • Nigel Farage being excellent at exploiting all factors (see below).
  • Useless Theresa May and her failure to take UK out of the EU.
  • Exploiting technological change/savvy online campaigning.
  • Labour moving towards a second referendum.

Thus it’s a mix of skill and luck.

Having destroyed the Tories already the Brexit Party now intend to wipe the floor with Labour in the North of England, the Midlands and Wales. Given some of the 3% results (for the Tories) I observed in some Welsh constituencies and given the sky high Brexit Party scores I observed in the North, Midlands and Wales… I am 100% certain of their future success. In other words Labour are handing the Brexit Party their heartlands on a plate. Nigel Farage will have to put Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn on his Christmas card list… although a card would seem a very scrooge-like return for the fantastic presents that they have given him. (analogous to being given a BMW as a present and saying thanks with a go-kart).

In a typical English Leave constituency about 44% of the population are Remainers. Labour will be competing against the Lib Dems and Greens for those voters. Even if Labour win the contest against the Lib Dems and Greens they will come second to the Brexit Party. I can see Labour getting a lot of 20+% scores. (i.e., 20 -25% share of the vote in those English leave constituencies).

As for the Tories, they are completely dead. (RIP). Again and again and again, I hear it said, to tweak Thatcher’s famous statement… their voters are not for returning.

With so many errors by the Tories its tempting to think that Ukip would have done as well as the Brexit Party if Farage and the Brexit Party had never existed. However, they are much lower profile, and considered extremist by almost everyone. Farage thinks they would have got 8 to 10% support in the European Election. Farage’s Brexit Party can reach more people than a party that blatantly runs on a Far Right Fascist programme. Farage is far superior at tapping into public frustration. He is ruthlessly ambitious and sincerely believes he is on course to be the next elected Prime Minister in a General Election. A truly Peoples Prime Minister? Well… there is one huge class split here. The Middle Class reject the People’s Prime Minister. The People’s Prime Minister would get in on about 30 – 35% of the vote. If that resulted in a landslide it would be due to the unique weakness of all the other parties. Yet it will happen.

However, I do not personally think the Brexit Party is much of a vehicle for a progressive future. Rather it implements a democratic referendum result (which is important) and is one example of a trillion other examples concerning the future being online, digital and decentralised. Indeed, Nigel Farage and his Brexit Party are contextualised by me, they are an example of the consequence of the technological revolution. The technological revolution is the context for their success.


  1. On 20 March 2019 Farage tweeted “If @Theresa May buckles and delays Brexit, I will do my best to tear @Conservatives limb from limb. They will deserve no better”. Farage also penned an article in the Telegraph with almost the same headline as the “limb from limb” tweet.
  1. Farage has stated that Theresa May is “the worst Prime Minister in history” like a mantra. https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/1132247621224009729?s=20

May 27th 2019

Comment on the Nature of Reality

The smartest people have gone beyond old fashioned materialism

Paul Budding

Our time/place culture is brainwashed by materialism. And that materialism worldview is all ‘assumption’. It’s not science. Assumption is like faith. And therefore the price for this is ‘truth’. We see this with ‘Confirmation Deniers’ concerning UFOs. We see this in the ignoring of the 70 year pattern in the data concerning UFOs. We see this in the ignoring of the 45 year pattern in the data concerning NDEs. In both of those fields there are those people who say you could look at the pattern in the data going back millennia rather than just 70/45 years. But to be fair, its easier to look at more recent patterns especially as the witnesses and experiencers are still alive in many of those cases but I hear what they say and take the point that our culture’s error is profound. Anyway, the wrong-headed assumption is always about what’s possible/impossible. So naïve. So hypnotised. So brainwashed. So internalized. So unconscious. I’m not saying I have the answers to the ultimate nature of reality but that’s no excuse to ignore evidence that challenges assumptions that are clearly beaten. Those assumptions are dead. There’s a lot of mediocre scientists going around sticking to the old worldview. (e.g., people with very specific knowledge of this or that specialized area of science… and typical science school teachers are almost certainly stuck in the past). Yet the genius’ within Silicon Valley, and the Ray Kurzweil types, and the Elon Musk types… they are well beyond the old worldview.  Because they espouse the Simulated Universe Theory.* Given that I do not believe the universe came from nothing, I too think that its more likely that something created it. And given evidence from the pattern in the data in NDE’s, I think reality is very different to the dead matter materialist worldview. Also I experience precognitive dreams on a regular basis so I favour a revolutionary view concerning time and space. I even claim to have foreseen a terrorist attack before it happened and told my family that a terror attack on a train near a small train station very near to one of the worlds great western cities was imminent.

Simulation Theory is itself fitting with our time/place specific culture. I do not deny that. But I’m not saying it’s the ultimate answer to the nature of reality. It might be a Russian doll. i.e., we are in a simulation but who created the simulators? Are they too from a Simulation? How does consciousness fit in here? Is the NDE part of the Simulation? All I am claiming is a superior hypothesis to old fashioned materialism. I am not claiming to understand the ultimate nature of reality. Simulation is a decent way of looking at it.

I always like to remind myself when I write (and remind anyone else who is reading) that the human quest is about overcoming suffering. Nothing is more important than that. I always like to think that whatever issue or phenomenon I am focusing on can contribute to that ultimate goal. For me, suffering and overcoming suffering (relief!) are the two key archetypes. i.e., because of their universality characteristic.



* This does not contradict the first sentence in this mini paper. The masses are brainwashed by the old worldview. However, tech leaders are evolving us out of it, changing the masses worldview.

May 26th 2019

Overcoming Suffering

Constructive Self Criticism: I have gone from the common sense view of viewing attachments as being to material things… onto attachments being to identity issues… onto attachments being to ‘ideas’ &/or ‘thoughts’.

So it’s important to not get an ego buzz out of ideas/thoughts. When it is a health benefit (vanquishing of human suffering idea) then imagine the sufferer of the ailment feeling/experiencing the suffering going away (i.e., feel the relief) as opposed to getting a thought attachment buzz to the idea.

I do not gain anything from such a psychological mindset. Rather I lose anxiety, worry, stress, depression.

Growth in consciousness equates to vanquishing needless suffering.

Only I can psychologically discipline myself. Any other source is control.

So I imagine an individual person’s suffering and I imagine their relief from overcoming suffering.

May 24th 2019

Psychology: Mental Health

Becoming more Psychologically Conscious

Paul Budding


Q: What value in becoming more conscious is there for mental health if you are never fully psychologically conscious?

A: The value is in the specific issue that is otherwise psychologically troubling for you. You become conscious of the neurosis in you concerning that specific issue. Moreover, if over time you become conscious of a number of issues that contain neurosis in you, then your day to day mental health greatly improves.

Q: Is there any value in seeing through others?

A: Let’s imagine that someone else you know does have neurosis or is very naïve on a specific issue. Afterall just like you might seek attention through an issue… so might others. This poisons the issue. To ensure that you are not poisoned you simply need to… Free the issue of any neurotic psychology (inside you) that you have associated with it.  (e.g., using an issue for attention is neurotic). Identity issues are great examples of this (maybe the best examples). All that matters is overcoming suffering. Attachments prevent you from overcoming a branch of suffering. Deliberately dissociate identity attachments. All you need in common with others is the goal of overcoming suffering. So I am not interested in the political party, the political leader, the urban or rural demographic, or the class of the person etc etc. The health of the human being is all that matters. All else is a neurosis. Overcoming suffering is the be-all-and-end-all.

Q: Any final thoughts?

A) Identity is neurotic. Just focus on overcoming human suffering.

May 24th 2019

Most people think in time & place specific cultural ways (as opposed to thinking universally) thus they use the word ‘impossible’ within that very limiting & biased context. Therefore the capabilities we see in the UFO are impossible to us… but so too were planes in the 1890s.

May 14th 2019

The Universalist worldview is far superior to the time/place specific cultural perspective

Paul Budding


There are concepts (ideas) that we possess that did not even exist in any shape or form in the Victorian mind. i.e., concepts that hadn’t even been imagined as fictional/mythological entertainment… in books.  Here are 3 examples of concepts (ideas) that simply did not exist in Victorian times:

  • The Simulated Universe (or less radically, Virtual Reality tech).
  • The Interdimensional Universe.
  • The Internet.

Straight away this should tell you something. It should tell you that a time/place specific cultural perspective is extremely flawed. The way to take-up a universalist worldview is to reject the word ‘Impossible’. Also reject negative associations to the word ‘Paranormal’. Because we are paranormal from the past’s perspective (e.g., we are paranormal from the Victorians perspective). The ‘paranormal’ is simply the ‘normal’ not yet discovered. The ‘Impossible’ merely means impossible at our specific time/in our specific place. And sometimes we even see revealing patterns that falsify the impossible in the here-and-now. UFO and NDE Witness and Experiencer patterns in the data falsify the view that there is nothing to see here other than the mundane. However, they do not provide definite interpretations. For example, the UFO pattern in the data is about a pattern in the data about capability. Zig Zag movements, hovering, separating and reuniting with other UFO’s, blinking in-and-out of existence. None of that tells us what the UFO is. And to interpret patterns often risks precisely the cultural interpretations that we are trying to get beyond. For example some people interpret NDEs as part of the Simulation. Remember that the Simulated Universe wasn’t even a concept in the Victorian era. Now Simulated Universe risks becoming the default position for everything. Of course, we will create a Simulated Universe anyway. So what was once not even a concept, will eventually become reality in a practical (not just a theoretical) sense. Meanwhile with UFO’s, I could imagine time travel theory becoming dominant. Again, that would no doubt end up as a new cultural bias. And I will not promote cultural interpretations. But one day we will time travel. So ‘Universalist’ perspectives nukes the impossible. Indeed, it replaces the word ‘impossible’ with the word ‘inevitable’. We will inevitably live in a Simulated Universe. We will inevitably time travel. We will inevitably live forever. Indeed, we are starting to understand how it will be that we will live forever. Eternal life will largely be thanks to nanotech in the bloodstream. Nanotech is an extremely serious science and extremely complex science (to 99.9999% of us). Yet as recently as the 1980s it was impossible and it was science fiction. The Impossible fictional nanotech is now not only inevitable… it is present day serious science.

The Universalist perspective nukes insane cultural bullshit and replaces it with sane reality.

May 14th 2019

Psychological change (in the individual) is ego level stuff (but still very important at this level)


The ability to change at will is crucial for ego-level mental health. People who say that people cannot change have presumably never matured… or if they have matured have forgotten that they themselves have changed a lot. Maybe they can no longer change and are therefore projecting their ego-conditioned hypnosis onto all other people. If they are neurotic (or if they ever experience neurosis) then (if they went from healthy to neurotic) that would be change. Yet if they maintained their view that people cannot change that would certainly make their prognosis very poor due to the principle of self-fulfilling prophecy.

So to repeat, the ability to change at will is crucial for ego-level mental health. The better able to do so the healthier in relative terms. The less able to do so the more neurotic in relative terms. When it comes to psychological health the ability to ‘change’ is impossible to underestimate. Afterall the inability to change at all smacks of autism.

But there is another level (i.e., ‘the’ real level) of psychological being that is relevant to mental health. This level that does not render ego level mental health irrelevant ~ but is very important due to it equating to the ‘True Self’. It is also the universal archetypal level.

May 7th 2019:

Psychology: Participation Mystique and Empathy 

(Note: Participation Mystique is also known by many psychoanalysts as ‘Projective Identification).

Participation Mystique = choosing an object and then sucking up to the person with the object… and this is not real (even if some of the choice of object is genuine)… but not real/not authentic because you suck up to some extent for the sake of sucking up to the individual and getting them to (in some way) respond to you in the way that you set out hoping they will respond to you. In that sense its manipulation.

Meanwhile empathy is genuine relating with no agenda.

Q) Is Participation Mystique neurotic?

A) Yes. It involves anxiety. There’s a rather psychologically desperate characteristic to it. And its manipulative. There’s an agenda.

Q) Is empathy a cure for participation mystique?

A) Empathy doesn’t seek anxious power and control. The Empath is as interested in the Other as much as (s)he is interested in him or herself. In that sense the Empath is more at ease relative to the person with a mindstate characterized by Participation Mystique. The empath is deploying no deceit/no agenda.

Q) Does this connect to the things you were saying in your May 4th Paper below (The Mind: The Mythological and the Real)?

A) Yes. Participation Mystique has fake aspects to it. It is partly a mythological mindstate in that its inauthentic.

Q) Say more about neurosis/mental health in relation to this.

A) Living a life of participation mystique conditions anxiety and maintains your weakness. It means you need to compensate with power and control. It is neurotic.

Your ‘truth’ is what will make you strong and free.

May 2nd 2019

Thought about Thought


I reflected on my response before to Ingrid Honkala concerning thought about things needing to be healthy. But I think in order to maximize psychological health, thought must be about thought itself. I think as an NDEr she is likely to agree. The thought must also be unifying. (non-conflict thought). Thus it must not be thought about competing ideas (ouch! Which means I have to change as I do think about such things). Separation is unhealthy/creates conflict. Thought about [non-conflict] thought itself = inner psychologically unifying. Then it requires communication with others… discussed within the context of unifying thought about thought ~ so that its outer world psychosocially unifying.

May 1st 2019



Paul Budding


“Time Travel is real”. That is definitely my most revolutionary view. However, I think its self-evident for the following reason…

… Time-Travel is theoretically possible. It is merely an engineering problem (Hawking). Therefore the engineering problem (at some point in time) will have been overcome. Hence, time travel is happening now. Its meaningless to say that its happening in the future but not happening now. Because if its happening in the future then those time-travellers will appear in all times and in all places. Indeed, they’ll be popping up in ancient Egypt and ancient Greece, etc etc.

I do not just say that time travel will occur because the engineering problem will be overcome. True, the desire and temptation to test time travel would be immense in itself. But its far from a case of being… we will merely time travel because we can. There’s the historical accuracy reason for doing so (time travelling Archeologists). But the biggest (most important) reason for time travelling is to save humanity from death. Life and Death are the key words here. Time travellers seed the past with technology. Now lets imagine a sceptic hearing that. (S)he might respond by asking “Why seed the past with tech”? The answer is because I would do so and I do not claim to be more moral than others. The ethical and moral case for doing this cannot be over-stated. Every human being that has ever died could be saved. There was a 19 year old girl from Marske who got killed crossing a road in Redcar a few years ago. (that’s a local news story that comes to my mind). Then think of your own priorities on this issue. (e.g., a close relative who has died). Think of the innocent Paris population gunned down by ISIS terrorists. Think of the kids and adults blown to bits (murdered) by the Manchester bomb at the Ariane Grande concert. Think of the Jews gassed to death during World War 2. Think of individuals involved in horrific accidents who suffered PTSD and then later went on to die from their injuries. You might argue back, well maybe they still exist due to the afterlife. Well we can ensure that they do exist beyond all doubt. That is the point.

Let’s say the sceptic said that what is done is done. If you change the past you change the future. My response is… I doubt it very much. Because on your timeline what is done is done. But I think that when you change the past you create a new branch. So imagine a tree with branches. You do not change a timeline branch. You create a new timeline branch. Hence in some ways the past is only relatively true. And ‘relatively’ here means only true to one branch of the tree. And the tree is probably seemingly infinite. So the past is largely myth. But it is oh so real to those who have lived it.

The sceptic is now turning curious and asks… if your timeline is fixed then what does that mean for free will? I think that’s a fair question. I think that precognitive dreams seem to imply a predetermined future. My answer to the free will or no free will question is… I don’t know.

The curious questioner moves on to the issue of UFO’s and asks… “are they the time-travellers”? My answer is… time travel as theoretically possible and thus merely an engineering problem means that it is happening irrespective of whether contemporary UFO’s have anything to do with it or not. I have no idea what UFO’s are. I only say that the one’s that mess with the U.S. military, airforce and Navy are intelligently controlled. I do not imply anything when I say that. I have no idea what the answer is concerning the intelligence behind UFO’s. Clearly the answer is a secret.

The questioner moves on to a new question, asking when will we experience open communication with time-travellers from other times? The answer is… when we reach the point whereby we are time-travelling ourselves. At that point in time, if we were still experiencing death, we would demand technology from the future that eradicates death. This is an additional reason why the future has to cure death. It will be demanded from the past.

May 1st 2019

Avoidance Neurosis


Avoidance is carried out by those with attachments and corresponding inner oppositional complexes/outer prejudices.



I no longer have these attachments so I do not possess the inner complexes/outer prejudices. Moreover, I won’t succumb to habitual reactions. Reason = I will remind myself they are merely habitual and that the original illness has been cured.

Personal issues can be left as private. So lets just imagine that ‘football’ was one of my personal issues. (as stand-in for whatever was an issue).

Example) Football (Anger)


Football = attachment.

Change at will (I eradicated football attachment = Football related anger is now impossible).



The ability to change at will is essential for mental health.



What you give power to has power over you. If you give power to ‘X’ its opposite ‘Y’ also has power over you. Y = inner Complex. Inner Complexes are seen in outer prejudices.

May 1st 2019

Inner complexes are seen in outer psychological prejudices

Ability to CHANGE at will is very important. The ability to change means that you can overcome neurotic conditioning attachments. Inability to do so means you cannot heal yourself.

It is common for people to be selectively empathic. But selective empathy results in inner complexes and psychological prejudices concerning any perceived opposition to the selective empathy.

Internalized complexes (and their accompanying outer prejudices) need overcoming through ability to change at will.

The method required to overcome the inner complex and outer prejudice is to eradicate the thing you are empathic with. i.e., you become ‘indifferent’ to the thing you were previously empathic with. In becoming ‘indifferent’ to the thing you were previously empathic with, you automatically eradicate the oppositional complex.

Ultimately I want myself and everyone else to be healthy. If that’s empathy then so be it. But you cannot get there with inner complexes/outer prejudices.

May 1st 2019 (originally written 29 April 2019)

Eradicating Inner Conflict


Paul Budding


When thinking about psychological health/ill health I say “Inner complexes are seen in outer psychological prejudices”. Note the inextricable link to ‘conflict’ in that inner/outer neurosis.

Q) How do you eradicate your own inner/outer conflicts?

A) Eradicate any interest that is at all characterized by ‘conflict’. For example I eradicated football in my mind.

Q) What about politics?

A) I have eradicated it in my mind. Just like with football, its now an indifference. Its not a prejudice. If it were a prejudice then both football and politics would still be inner complexes/outer prejudices and I would be in conflict with them. So, to be clear, my mind is indifferent towards them.

Q) You are a Brit so… What about Brexit/Remain which seems to be quite an obsessive issue in the UK?

A) Brexit and Remain are the UK’s classic conflict and it attracts drama queens like a moth to light. I have thought about the cultural significance of this issue a lot. But I have now eradicated the issue from my mind. My mind is indifferent on this issue.

Q) If conflict issues (especially identity issues) are so psychologically poisonous, then what issues are ok for psychological health?

A) Yes, conflict is neurotic. So the answer is to focus on universal answers. For me this means technology eradicating physical, psychological and income problems for all. E.g., eradicating depression with realistic (yet highly safe) simulations such as sledging through a snowy forest. Tech eradicating physical illness thanks to nanotech in the bloodstream. VR creating familiar and unfamiliar worlds that you can live in for no cost.

Q) Sum up the main point in one or two sentences.

A) Eradication of interest in anything in my mind that is characterized partly or fully by ‘conflict’. Support for ‘Universal Tech’.

May 1st 2019

The U.S. Navy and UFO’s: Late last month the U.S. Navy spokesman, Joseph Gradisher, said that “the Navy is updating and formalizing the process by which reports of any such suspected [UFO] incursions can be made to the cognizant authorities. A new message to the fleet that will detail the steps for reporting is in draft”. Gradisher is not saying that biological ET’s are responsible. This is more in-line with my view that the UFO Phenomenon is real. There’s a pattern to it. Its intelligent. We don’t know what it is. Indeed, Gradisher says “We want to get to the bottom of this. We need to determine who’s doing it, where its coming from and what their intent is. We need to try to find ways to prevent it from happening again”. I have no idea how the Navy can work all of that out. I bet against them succeeding.

I remember a few years ago Richard Dolan comparing the Washington Post and BBC… he was making the point that the latter is as bad as the former in its attitude to UFO’s. Well, I think the BBC still merits that criticism because I have never heard a statement from the BBC like this one from a Washington Post reporter: “The Navy has enough credible evidence – including eye witness accounts and corroborating radar information – to know these vehicles fly over the country several times per month, defying laws of physics”. – Deanna Paul, The Washington Post, 25 April 2019.

UFO’s: Capabilities and Origins: If UFO’s are man-made it does not make them less extraordinary. It is their capabilities, not their origins that make them extraordinary. This is especially true if they are man-made due to the fact that the phenomenon is 72 years old… or thousands of years old if you believe Jacques Vallee. (See for example Vallee/Aubeck’s ‘Wonders in the Sky’ book. https://www.amazon.com/Wonders-Sky-Unexplained-Objects-Antiquity/dp/1585428205/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_1?keywords=vallee+wonders+in+the+sky&qid=1556713927&s=books&sr=1-1-fkmrnull

Some of the capabilities: Popping in-and-out of existence. Seemingly teleporting. Zig-Zag movements. Silence. Hovering. Separating from other UFO’s and then re-uniting (i.e., that last one well-and-truly seems to me to be for purposes of proving intelligence).

May 1st 2019 (originally written 25 April 2019) 

The Bias to the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) is also the Pop Culture (mythological) side of the UFO Phenomenon

Paul Budding

The bias to the ETH is explained as follows…

… Lets contrast the ETH with Human Time Travel Theory (and to a lesser extent with other theories which I will touch on in brackets). Take the Victorian author H.G. Wells as a starting point. He wrote about ET’s in his fictional classic The War of the Worlds. True he wrote a classic Time Travel book as well called The Time Machine. However, the Time Machine was not a UFO. It was not something seen in the skies. This ‘linking or not linking’ point is the key to what I am saying in this paper. (There was no Victorian era interdimensional fiction, simulator fiction, Strong AI fiction that was linked to UFOs. The concepts did not exist). Forward to the 20th century and early TV. There were popular black and white movies about ETs linked to UFOs. In the 1970s, the Stephen Spielberg movie Close Encounters of the Third Kind pushed the ETH, further connecting UFOs and ETs into public consciousness. Jacques Vallee, who was involved with the movie, advised Spielberg against promoting the ETH, as Vallee takes the view that we do not know what the intelligence behind the UFO is. But Spielberg said that the ETH is what the viewers want so that is what he will give them.

Further on in the early 1980s there was even a classic movie titled ‘ET’, again linked to UFOs. Then into the 1990s there was a regular famous show, ‘The X-Files’, that linked ET’s to UFOs. Again, in the 1980s there was the ‘Back to the Future’ movies but none of the Back to the Future movies were linked to UFO’s or things seen in the skies. Indeed, I cannot think of any time-travel movie linked to UFO’s. This again biases the ETH as the cultural mythological projection onto UFO’s because all ET related movies that I can think of ‘are’ linked to UFOs. (Meanwhile, even as the concepts of interdimensional universe, digital simulations, and Strong AI have come into existence there is still no fiction that I can think of that links any of them to UFO’s).

My view is… if, within popular culture the UFO’s had been linked to ‘Time Travel’ from the time of H.G. Wells to the present day, then that would be the dominant theory in peoples minds concerning what these UFO’s are. It would not make the theory of time travel any more (or any less) true. But the linking would become internalized in many peoples minds. (I am tempted to say if UFO’s had been linked to Simulators, or Interdimensionals, or Strong AI from Wells time to the 21st century then that theory would have become the favoured theory of the masses. However, people had no concept for such things until recently, hence why I primarily demonstrated my point using time travel theory as people did possess the concept of time-travel in their minds as far back as the 1800s… so it is a fair comparison to the ETH).

In conclusion I regard the ETH as a mythological projection (a positive prejudice) onto the UFO field, thus infecting it with an unwarranted cultural time/place specific bias… the same as any other epoch’s cultural biases onto the unknown. It is therefore unscientific. This does not mean that the intelligence behind the UFO is not extraterrestrial. But it has no more likelihood than the other potential theories (human/human time-traveler/interdimensional/simulator/strong AI from other planets or dimensions). Indeed, maybe we do not possess a concept concerning what the true interpretation is. After-all as I have said in this paper, the Victorians did not possess concepts for most of the possible theories.     

The Witness accounts demonstrate a pattern of extraordinary maneuvers by UFOs, of blinking in and out of existence and of displaying intelligence by, for example, separating and reuniting. At other times they display intelligence by toying with planes. There are other patterns too. For example, burning vegetation, and burning people who get to close to the UFO, giving them nausea symptoms and even temporary blindness. These intelligent UFOs are frequently tracked by radar. It is the pattern in the data that gives the UFO Phenomenon credibility. It means that it is a real phenomenon with intelligence controlling the UFO. It is to be distinguished sharply from the pop culture mythological side of the phenomenon, as it is that side of the Ufology that made the field ripe for ridicule. The UFO Phenomenon is real, intelligent, there is a pattern to it… but we do not know what the intelligence is. That is what the ‘U’ is for… the ‘U’ stands for ‘Unidentified’.

MAY 1st 2019:

I am still interested in NDE Simulations. However, I am changing this site to a more general blog covering other interests of mine.

Inline imageInline image

A science fiction novel set in the year 2020, the Simulation Station follows a university student – Patrick Clifford- along his life journey. The story involves recent developments in science and the way these might evolve in the near future. Pat goes through a series of unexpected events along the way as he builds a team and starts a very important quantum software project which could change the course of history.

Purchase Philipe’s book here: https://amzn.to/2BoEw9N


Image result for near death experience

Philipe Dorion’s Project Script © for a Simulated Immersive Near Death Virtual Reality Experience: CLICK HERE to read it: https://www.flipsnack.com/page-flip-software/share/fujav0qej/

Inline image

April 2019

Virtual Reality will contribute to curing depression: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-6949673/Virtual-reality-cure-depression.html

March 2019


The above video expresses how I have been thinking about VR for years. Its what I am meaning when I refer to “full immersion virtual reality incorporating all 5 senses” … and I sometimes add… “connected to the internet for communications and google earthed”. Of course, it is not physically healthy to live like that right now. But once we are kept healthy from within (nanotech) then it will be physically healthy to live in VR. I would add a couple of more developments that need to (and will) occur. (1) The headset will be miniaturized and (2) smell, taste and physical touch will be added to the already outstanding visual and auditory senses.

March 2019

Virtual reality adds to tourism through touch, smell and real people’s experiences


March 2019

Spiritual VR Experience: https://www.oculus.com/experiences/rift/998016373574782

February 2019

Look at how realistic the Home looks on the Oculus VR Video. https://www.oculus.com/experiences/rift/1432150526836829/ You need to forward it to 50 seconds into the video before you start to see the home. Of course full immersion VR will add all the other senses… not just vision. Hence also smell, taste, hearing, touch.

January 2019

10 years ago I discovered a way to contact Ray Kurzweil. (email messaging). Note he no longer uses the email account that I am referring to.

The question I put to Ray was … “I can’t resist asking…What percentage of people alive today (with say a margin of error of 10%) do you think will still be alive in 200 years?” The answer was “Order of magnitude: 50%.” No photo description available.

Image result for ray kurzweil

And here’s some extracts (concerning full immersion virtual reality) taken from Ray Kurzweil’s book, The Singularity is Near.

Page 29) “As virtual reality from within the nervous system becomes competitive with real reality in terms of resolution and believability, our experiences will increasingly take place in virtual environments”.

Page 313 – 316) “The 2030 Scenario. Nanobot technology will provide fully immersive, totally convincing virtual reality. Nanobots will take up positions in close physical proximity to every interneuronal connection coming from our senses. […] If we want to experience real reality, the nanobots just stay in position (in the capillaries) and do nothing. If we want to enter virtual reality, they suppress all of the inputs coming from our actual senses and replace them with the signals that would be appropriate for the virtual environment. Your brain experiences these signals as if they came from your physical body. After all, the brain does not experience the body directly. […] your brain will experience the synthetic signals just as it would real ones. You could decide to cause your muscles and limbs to move as you normally would, but the nanobots would intercept those interneuronal signals, suppress your real limbs from moving, and instead cause your virtual limbs to move, appropriately adjusting your vestibular system and providing the appropriate movement and reorientation in the virtual environment.

The web will provide a panoply of virtual environments to explore. Some will be re-creations of real places; others will be fanciful environments that have no counterpart in the physical world. Some, indeed, would be impossible, perhaps because they violate the laws of physics. We will be able to visit these virtual places and have any kind of interaction with other real, as well as simulated, people (of course, ultimately there won’t be a clear distinction between the two), ranging from business negotiations to sensual encounters. “Virtual-reality environment designer” will be a new job description and a new art form.

Become Someone Else. In virtual reality we won’t be restricted to a single personality, since we will be able to change our appearance and effectively become other people. Without altering our physical body (in real reality) we will be able to readily transform our projected body in these three-dimensional virtual environments. We can select different bodies at the same time for different people. So your parents may see you as one person, while your girlfriend will experience you as another. However, the other person may choose to over-ride your selections, preferring to see you differently than the body you have chosen for yourself. You could pick different body projections for different people: Ben Franklin for a wise uncle, a clown for an annoying coworker. Romantic couples can choose who they wish to be, even to become each other. These are all easily changeable decisions.

I had the opportunity to experience what it is like to project myself as another persona in a virtual-reality demonstration at the 2001 TED (technology, entertainment, design) conference in Monterey. By means of magnetic sensors in my clothing a computer was able to track all of my movements. With ultrahigh-speed animation the computer created a life-size, near photorealistic image of a young woman – Ramona – who followed my movements in real time. Using signal-processing technology, my voice was transformed into a woman’s voice and also controlled the movements of Ramona’s lips. So it appeared to the TED audience as if Ramona herself were giving the presentation.

To make the concept understandable, the audience could see me and see Ramona at the same time, both moving simultaneously in exactly the same way. A band came onstage, and I – Ramon – performed Jefferson Airplane’s “White Rabbit,” as well as an original song. My daughter, then fourteen, also transformed into those of a male backup dancer – who happened to be a virtual Richard Saul Wurman, the impressario of the TED conference. The hit of the presentation was seeing Wurman – not known for his hip-hop moves – convincingly doing my daughters dance steps. Present in the audience was the creative leadership of Warner Bros; who then went off and created the movie Simone, in which the character played by Al Pacino transforms himself into Simone in essentially the same way.

The experience was a profound and moving one for me. When I looked in the “cybermirror” (a display showing me what the audience was seeing), I saw myself as Ramona rather than the person I usually see in the mirror. I experienced the emotional force – and not just the intellectual idea – of transforming myself into someone else.

People’s identities are frequently closely tied to their bodies (“I’m a person with a big nose”, “I’m skinny,” “I’m a big guy,” and so on). I found the opportunity to become a different person liberating. All of us have a variety of personalities that we are capable of conveying but generally suppress them since we have no readily available means of expressing them. Today we have very limited technologies available – such as fashion, makeup, and hairstyle – to change who we are for different relationships and occasions, but out palette of personalities will greatly expand in future full-immersion virtual reality environments.

In addition to encompassing all of the senses, these shared environments can include emotional overlays. Nanobots will be capable of generating the neurological correlates of emotions, sexual pleasure, and other derivatives of our sensory experience and mental reactions. Experiments during open brain surgery have demonstrated that stimulating certain specific parts in the brain can trigger emotional experiences (for example, the girl who found everything funny when stimulated in a particular spot of her brain, as I reported in The Age of Spiritual Machines). Some emotions and secondary reactions involve a pattern of activity in the brain rather than the stimulation of a specific neuron, but with the massively distributed nanobots, stimulating these patterns will also be feasible.

Page 317) Nanobots will be introduced without surgery, through the bloodstream, and if necessary can all be directed to leave, so the process is easily reversible. They are programmable, in that they can provide virtual reality one minute and a variety of brain extensions the next. […] Perhaps most important, they are massively distributed and therefore can take up billions of positions throughout the brain, whereas a surgically introduced neural implant can be placed only in one or at most a few locations”.

Page 341 – 342) “By the late 2020s, [full immersion virtual reality] will be indistinguishable from real reality and will involve all of the senses, as well as neurological correlations of our emotions. As we enter the 2030s there won’t be clear distinctions between human and machine, between real and virtual reality, or between work and play”.

Page 397) “We will spend increasing portions of our time in virtual environments and will be able to have any type of desired experience with anyone, real or simulated, in virtual reality”.

Reference) Kurzweil, R, 2005, The Singularity is Near: When Humans transcend Biology (Penguin Books).

Full Immersion VR: The visual side of VR is already very impressive. Hearing is improving. The tactile sense (touch) is progressing each year. The potential for such a technology is limitless. One of my contacts on Twitter is Gemma Evans (who until recently was the host of Sky News Swipe technology programme). In 2017 I suggested a VR question that she should discuss on one of the programmes and she did precisely that. This is our twitter exchange that led to the question being asked: https://twitter.com/GemmaEvans/status/828633300658954240

A truly unique and expressive work that will challenge any ideas you ever had about grief, loss, mental illness and everything you thought you knew about society. Whether you subscribe to the numerous and, at times, complex theories explored here or not, you cannot help but question your own perceptions of reality. Beautifully written and with a carefully judged balance of humour and pathos, this is a book that can confuse, repel, delight and inspire – all with a glorious Pink Floyd vibe pulsating through at all times.’ – Lucy Brazier

Book Review Page: https://thesimulatedneardeathexperienceproject.com/2019/01/01/book-reviews/

Purchase Neil’s Book here: https://amzn.to/2s7KK8U


Pause on 10 seconds… this is just a random VR twitter post I clicked on… not some amazing breakthrough post. Yet I observe the visual brilliance in terms of the reflection and shadow that is clear in the visual characteristic of this Virtual Reality kitchen. Imagine being able to touch that kitchen sink tap. We are getting closer and closer to the Matrix.

What does it mean to say that technology will become Ubiquitous?

Paul Budding


It means technology will be everywhere. It isn’t everywhere at the moment. Most people seem to think in terms of Artificial Intelligence. (AI). They are right to do so. But they would be equally right to think in terms of Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR). It is well documented that in the outer world AI’s will be doing everything humans do. They will possess human level intelligence. Indeed, they will have higher than human level intelligence. Once they have reached the ability to communicate as effectively as biological humans then we are at the stage of not knowing that we are talking to an AI when booking an appointment or making a reservation on the phone. At present we have Weak AI. Weak AI does this-or-that specific task. But when it’s human level intelligence its strong AI. Strong AI possesses General Level Intelligence. Just like a biological human it is not restricted to a specific task. But as said, technology will be ubiquitous. Hence it goes beyond just the outside world. The doctor will be within you. i.e., nanobots in the bloodstream. This is getting seriously ubiquitous as you can now start to understand what is meant by ubiquitous technology. It’s outside you and its inside you. And as great as it is that nanobots will keep you healthy from within, they are also going to be connecting you to the immersive VR world. (Full immersion virtual reality incorporating all 5 senses). This will inevitably be nicknamed the ‘Matrix’. For many years I have put a big fat question mark over whether or not people will still be interested in the outer world? I will leave that question unanswered. But there will be an inbetween. The inbetween is augmented reality whereby you can see digital products, e.g., in your front-room. And like a light switch you can switch them on and off. Hey, clutter be-gone! Tidying up has never been so easy! Interestingly getting into the fully immersive VR world (the Matrix) will be as simple as A-B-C. I am not sure how it will be done yet but think about it… the VR is within you hence you don’t as much as swallow a pill. (you will have already done something like that!). I am guessing that it will be something closer to keying in a pin number (yes I am borrowing from cash machine logic here). I am not saying that is what it will be keying in a number… but the reason why I say it will be something like that is because it will have to be something that is more than just blinking your eyes… otherwise we would be accidentally going into the VR world while busy crossing a busy road or walking with hot drinks in your hands etc.

I think I have made my point. Technology will be ubiquitous. It will be inside of you, outside of you, and in the form of Augmented Reality in will even be inbetween the digital and physical worlds. Everywhere.