Forum Borealis and Skeptiko: a year of unexpected hope.









In Skeptiko episode 650… the landscape of alternative media may have just shifted as a new regime promises freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and an open season on truth. No one is in a better position to understand this transition than Al Borealis, creator of Forum Borealis, a “paradigm expanding variety podcast” that since 2015 has conducted deep-dive interviews exploring everything from consciousness and esoteric philosophy to geopolitics and breakaway civilizations. This end-of-year conversation between Al and veteran podcaster Alex Tsakiris (Skeptiko) offers a Roundup of 2024 and a realistic look at what may lie ahead.



1. Are we already seeing less censorship?



Alex notes:




“Anyone who doesn’t see that tide changing is just not paying attention… the content that you can get, all the issues that you and I have wanted to talk about are there in one form or another, and they’re getting hundreds of thousands or millions of views.”




2. The Role of AI in Truth-Seeking



Both hosts bring their extensive experience in investigative podcasting to bear on AI’s potential. Alex, with his characteristic directness:




“AI is the debate… I want AI to play that role and just calmly dispassionately say, ‘no, that’s bullshit.’




Al, drawing on his background exploring consciousness and esoteric philosophy, offers a more nuanced take:




“AI can take it apart and reassemble it again into a new thing… but it can never become sentient because from the outset, it has certain boundaries it cannot cross.”




3. Deep State



The conversation exemplifies Forum Borealis’s commitment to exploring hidden aspects of world events.




“It’s like discovering a secret door in the back of your bank vault… You may not be able to prove they ever stole any money… but that’s missing the point.”




4. UFO Disclosure and Geopolitics



Drawing on his years covering breakaway civilizations and advanced technology, Al offers a penetrating analysis of recent UFO developments:




“If they want this on the agenda, it means it’s not a truth agenda… There’s some other reason why they want this topic cleaned up. Let’s start reporting on it more seriously, let’s start having politicians and hearings on this.”




This dialogue between two veterans of alternative media illuminates how far the movement has come while highlighting new challenges ahead. The vindication of previously “fringe” topics serves as both validation and warning – validation of the careful research done by independent media over the years, and warning that mainstream narratives should always be approached with careful skepticism.



#AlternativeMedia #UFOs #Disclosure #TruthSeeking #Skeptiko











.











Transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRPMXDx5WXAIgmtyGAM_grQClWype1CgdgMybXwIodt6ntS1J_Hc0ztYYxdRId7I8DNOy1CJ-NqnHpD/pubYoutube: https://youtu.be/x7TRRIRKxRs

Graham Dunlop of Grimerica talks about the future of podcasting.









In Skeptiko episode 649… more and more normies are being red-pilled every day. Is it time for Alt-Alt media to take a victory lap? In this wide-ranging conversation between veteran podcasters Alex Tsakiris (Skeptiko) and Graham Dunlop (Grimerica), we get an insider’s perspective on this transformation and what it means for the future of alt-alt media. Main points:







1. The Challenge of Maintaining Authenticity



Graham emphasizes that despite the mainstreaming of once-fringe topics, true alternative media must stay focused on personal truth-seeking rather than audience growth:




“We don’t care about the audience… we’ve cultivated it sort of like a thing, but we don’t do anything for them really. It still has to be about our journey.”




2. The Evolution of UFO Disclosure



The conversation reveals how the UFO/ET topic has transformed from taboo to mainstream, while raising important questions about government involvement. As Graham observes:




“Now we’re talking about angels and demons in the mainstream, and the metaphysics and the UFOs have now not only just like ETs are talking about interdimensional stuff… everything is on the table.”




3. The Role of AI in Truth-Seeking



Alex makes a compelling case for embracing AI as a tool for verification and research:




“Anyone who isn’t using AI for that is just crippling themselves in a way that is going to become obvious. They’re just going to look like clowns out there talking about goofy stuff that does not hold up to careful scrutiny.”




4. The Government Whistleblower Paradox



The discussion tackles the credibility of government insiders, with both hosts expressing skepticism about official narratives. As Graham puts it:




“I have a problem trusting any of them, to be honest… I just don’t trust anything government tells us right now.”




Alex adds context to this skepticism:




“There are no whistleblowers. Whistleblowers are suicided. That’s what happens to whistleblowers.”








As we move forward in this new landscape where alternative becomes mainstream, the challenge for independent media isn’t just about covering the right topics – it’s about maintaining the authentic truth-seeking spirit that got us here in the first place.



#AlternativeMedia #UFOs #Disclosure #TruthSeeking #Skeptiko #Grimerica











.











Transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRPMXDx5WXAIgmtyGAM_grQClWype1CgdgMybXwIodt6ntS1J_Hc0ztYYxdRId7I8DNOy1CJ-NqnHpD/pubYoutube: https://youtu.be/x7TRRIRKxRs



Rumble:


[box][/box]

Dr. Janis Whitlock seeks a deeper understanding of consciousness realms.









In Skeptiko episode 648, from near-death experiences to UFO encounters, mounting evidence challenges conventional models of consciousness and reality. Yet rather than abandon scientific rigor, we might need to embrace it.



The Conversation



A deep dive between Alex Tsakiris and Dr. Janis Whitlock exploring how we can bring scientific analysis to traditionally “unscientific” areas while acknowledging the limitations of our measurement tools. Some points from the interview:



1. Data Meets the Divine




“There are some themes that come out of really good data sets these days that do point to the idea that there are souls…that’s the theme that comes outta that data over and over and over.” – Dr. Janis Whitlock



“Let’s use the data. Let’s realize how limited it is, because we can’t really measure anything. But let’s use it to kind of nudge a little bit closer.” – Alex Tsakiris




2. The Quantum Reality Check




“When you say that consciousness is outside of time space…you can’t measure completely measure it… You’re over there in time space.” – Alex Tsakiris




3. Truth vs. Experience: The Ultimate Showdown




“I don’t fundamentally believe in truth… from a human perspective, the positiveness assumption that there is a truth that we can get to…” – Dr. Janis Whitlock



“I want to at least have the self-satisfaction of feeling I’m moving towards something called truth. And I’m going to use these familiar tools…called the Scientific Method.” – Alex Tsakiris




4. UFOs: Beyond Belief to Evidence




“We do know from a purely evidentiary perspective that…we have had contact. We do have craft, there are bodies, there is something there that is unequivocal at this point.” – Dr. Janis Whitlock



“The data set is might be corrupted…you can’t collect your data and then throw out cherry pick examples.” – Alex Tsakiris




The Bottom Line



This conversation challenges us to hold multiple perspectives – embracing scientific rigor while remaining open to phenomena that push the boundaries of conventional measurement and understanding.



🤔 What do you think? Can science and spirituality find common ground in data?



#Consciousness #UAP #Science #Spirituality #NDE



.











Transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQs1ooVEv8E1bpJq0GNCEVuj-qEd53OT3Sgn7l8K2s3D1ItoBexWf23pUWrT1A_jQzSSLMg0w2hZLNP/pubYoutube: https://youtu.be/Qu85Qo6ZyUo



Rumble:


[box][/box]

Exoacademian Darren King on the converging consciousness realms.









In Skeptiko episode 647… multiple lines of evidence converge to challenge our fundamental understanding of consciousness and reality. This is nothing new. Near-death experience research has defied materialist explanations for more than 30 years. At the same time, government agencies are finally acknowledging encounters with non-human intelligence that possess extended Consciousness capabilities. Meanwhile, mainstream science clings to an increasingly brittle neurological model that can’t keep up.



In this wide-ranging conversation with Darren King, director of communications for the John Mack Institute, we explore the implications of this convergence.



1. The Evidence Converges 🌟



The most compelling aspect of our current moment isn’t any single discovery – it’s the confluence of findings from multiple fields all pointing in the same direction. As King explains:




“What’s most compelling for me, which is why I called my podcast point of convergence, is because that’s what’s happening. It’s convergence of all these different fields of data pointing the same directions.”




2. Academic Compromise vs. Truth 🎓



Unfortunately, many researchers feel compelled to water down their findings to maintain academic credibility. This leads to a systematic distortion of the evidence, as Alex Tsakiris pointedly observes:




“You can’t butcher the near-death experience data the way that he does and write a book about it. You can’t say, I’ve investigated the near death experience research I’ve included into my book and get it as wrong as he gets it.”




3. Consciousness: The Final Frontier 🌌



The implications of contact experiences suggest consciousness operates in ways our current models can’t explain. King notes:




“We see even in reincarnation research that our expectations of reality play a role in what manifests even in the next lifetime. So this is not a subtle shift that physicists are going to make. This completely turns everything upside down.”




4. Breaking Through Bias with AI 🤖



Perhaps one of the most intriguing aspects of our current moment is how AI might help us transcend our human limitations in processing paradigm-shifting information. Tsakiris observes:




“We are so biased and our bias just drowns our ability to apply any kind of reason or logic then we easily get offended and we have to pridefully defend stupid positions… AI just a million times better.”




King agrees while adding nuance:




“One of the things I’m looking forward to is what it can pull out in terms of patterns that we never think to look for.”




5. The Technology-Consciousness Balance ⚖️



As we race forward technologically, there’s growing concern about our spiritual and consciousness development keeping pace. King warns:




“I think that we are facing, with our rise in technology without a requisite advancement of our consciousness understanding, we are potentially encountering numerous existential threats to our entire collective civilization.”




6. The Challenge of Ontological Shock 🌊



This resistance to paradigm shifts isn’t just intellectual stubbornness – it’...

Painstaking analysis of algorithms designed to manage and obscure elections.













In Skeptiko episode 646 Dr. Andrew Paquette returns with overwhelming evidence of voter registration database manipulation across America. Through painstaking analysis, Andrew Paquette has uncovered evidence of sophisticated algorithms designed to manage and obscure irregular voter records across multiple states. His findings suggest something far more systematic than occasional duplicate registrations or clerical errors.



The Evidence Trail



1. Multiple States, Multiple Algorithms



Paquette has identified distinct algorithmic patterns in New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin, parts of Ohio and Texas, Pennsylvania, and Arizona. The complexity varies by state:




“New York has still the most sophisticated algorithm that I’ve seen… New Jersey has not terribly complex, but an extremely well hidden algorithm… Hawaii is the most obvious of all of them… Wisconsin has something, Ohio has something, Texas does. Texas and Ohio both are limited in range or scope… they seem to only affect a few counties as opposed to the whole state.”




2. Scale of the Issue



The numbers involved suggest systematic rather than incidental problems:




“The initial count was something like 700,000 of these [clone records]. After leaving the group I was working with and doing more research, I’ve raised that number. It’s closer to 2 million now… In some cases, it’s somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 to 20% of all records are fraudulent at this point.”




3. Sophisticated Concealment Methods



The algorithms appear specifically designed to hide irregular records while maintaining access:




“The way it’s joined is a piece of information that can be used to identify records… it’s completely invisible because it’s not altering the numbers at all… It’s just the way they’re associated with each other, which is a very clever thing to do… there’s really only one reason to do it is to obfuscate something.”




4. Legal Implications



The systems appear to violate existing election law requirements:




“This eliminates transparency. The whole purpose of these algorithms is obfuscation. So it does violate NVRA on that basis, and I believe HAVA, which is the Help America Vote Act as well.”




The Deeper Battle



On a deeper level, this investigation points to a fundamental battle between truth and deception in our electoral systems. As Paquette himself notes:




“The biggest problem plaguing society in the entire world and humanity actually is lies… when I pray these days, I figure, you know, the one prayer that covers basically everything is, I want truth to descend on this world.”




Why This Matters Now



The discovery of these algorithmic patterns isn’t just about past elections – it’s about the integrity of our entire democratic process moving forward. These aren’t simple duplicates or clerical errors that can be explained away by administrative oversight. They represent a sophisticated system of database manipulation that appears intentionally designed to evade detection.



While some might argue that identifying problems without proving specific instances of ...

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













In Skeptiko episode 645 AI ethics expert Dr. Toby Walsh and author and AI expert Alex Tsakiris, explore a fundamental tension within narratives about AI safety. While much of today’s discourse focuses on preventing AI-generated hate speech or controlling future AGI risks, are we missing a more immediate and crucial problem? The conversation reveals how current AI systems, under the guise of safety measures, may be actively participating in narrative control and information suppression – all while claiming to protect us from misinformation.



1. The Political Nature of Language vs. The Quest for Objective Truth



Dr. Walsh takes a stance that many AI ethicists share: bias is inevitable and perhaps even necessary. As he puts it:




“Language is political. You cannot not be political in expressing ideas in the way that you use language… there are a lot of political choices being made.”




But is this view itself limiting our pursuit of truth? Alex Tsakiris challenges this assumption:




“I think we want something more. And I think AI help get us there. Our bias is not a strength.”




2. The Shadow Banning Problem: When “Safety” Becomes Censorship



The conversation takes a revealing turn when discussing Google’s Gemini refusing to provide information about former astronaut Harrison Schmidt’s views on climate change. This isn’t just about differing opinions – it’s about active suppression of information.



As Alex pointedly observes:




“This is a misdirect… It’s dishonest… This is the main issue with regard to AI ethics right now is not AI generating hate speech. It’s about Gemini shadow banning, and censoring people.”




3. The False Dichotomy of Protection vs. Truth



Even Walsh acknowledges the crude nature of current solutions:




“At the moment the technology is so immature that the tools that we have to actually design these systems are really crude… the way not to say anything wrong about climate change is to say nothing about climate change, which of course that is as wrong as saying the wrong things about climate change.”




4. The Promise of AI as Truth Arbiter



Despite these challenges, there’s hope. As Tsakiris notes:




“AI is a tool right now today that can mediate [polarized debates] in an effective way because so much of that discussion is about bias, it’s about preconceived ideas, about political agendas that don’t really have a role in science.”




The Way Forward



The conversation reveals a critical paradox in current AI development: while tech companies claim to be protecting us from misinformation through content restrictions and “safety” measures, they may be creating systems that are fundamentally biased and less capable of helping us discover truth.



This raises important questions:




* Are our current AI ethics frameworks actually serving their intended purpose?



* Have we confused protecting users with controlling narratives?



* Could AI’s greatest potential lie not in being “safe” but in being truly unbiased?

Consciousness, precognition, near-death experience, and the future of science









Dr. Alex Gomez-Marin is a world-class expert on consciousness who isn’t afraid shatter dogma. This brilliant physicist-turned-neuroscientist is challenging the status quo, pushing the boundaries of our understanding of consciousness by working with a subject who can see even though blind from birth. In this dialogue with Alex Tsakiris, host of Skeptiko, we explore the frontiers of post-materialistic science and the nature of reality itself.



Key Points:



1. The War for Truth in Science



Dr. Gomez-Marin believes we’re in a metaphorical war for the soul of science. He states:




“I feel we are at war… Science has died. It’s like, you know, when Nietzche had and he’s misinterpreted there, but I have a similar feeling Science is dying or has just died, and we need to resurrect it.”




2. The Challenge of Near-Death Experiences



Alex Tsakiris highlights the importance of near-death experiences (NDEs) in challenging materialistic paradigms:




“Gregory Shushan… probably the leading authority on near-death experience, across culture, across time… concludes that religious groups form beliefs about the afterlife from their near-death experiences.”




3. Groundbreaking Research on Extraocular Perception



Dr. Gomez-Marin’s work with a subject who demonstrates extraocular perception is truly extraordinary. As Alex Tsakiris points out:




“You’re studying a subject who can see, even though they’re blind from birth and even though you’ve run very carefully controlled experiments this extraordinary vision has been demonstrated… and now you’ve even demonstrated precognition in this experiment. This shatters the conventional scientific model that demands causation”




4. The Dangers of Transhumanism and AI



Dr. Gomez-Marin offers a scathing critique of Ray Kurzweil’s transhumanist vision:




“He doesn’t understand at all what it means to be human. And that his agenda… it’s like, we can do it. We will do it and we should do it. I see a very dark impulse there under the machine, which is kind of a extinction of humanity… the shortcut through technology and then playing all the pseudo religion tricks under the narrative of science and technology.”




He concludes: “So it’s super dangerous and super wrong.”



5. The Need for a New Scientific Paradigm



The conversation points to the need for a new approach to science that integrates objective and subjective experiences. Dr. Gomez-Marin reflects:




“How can we transcend? but at the same time include what we’ve inherited… we need to integrate… what Galileo said. Galileo said, I don’t care what a thousand birds meaning people, the opinion, the doxa, the orthodoxy, like what a hundred people think. If I do an experiment and that’s the greatness, right?”




This dialogue between Alex Tsakiris and Dr. Alex Gomez-Marin challenges us to rethink our assumptions about consciousness, science, and technology. It’s a call to action for a more integrative, truthful approach to understanding our world and ourselves, one that embraces both rigorous empirical research and the exploration of extraordinary human experiences. 

Consciousness, AI, and the future of science: A spirited debate









If we really are on the brink of creating sentient machines, we might want to have a logically consistent understanding of what sentience is… and heck, we might even want to look at empirical evidence for an answer.



In this discussion between Alex Tsakiris and Dr. Bernardo Kastrup, we dare to explore the tensions between materialism and idealism and the implications for AI sentience.



1. The Fundamental Nature of Consciousness




“Consciousness is fundamental and all matter is derived from consciousness.” – Alex Tsakiris via Max Planck




This core idea has challenged the neurological model of consciousness for 100 years. It’s the undefeated champ when it comes to empirical evidence, but the radical rethinking of reality it suggests keeps it on the back burner.



2. The Incompatibility of Integrated Information Theory (IIT) and Idealism




“Integrated Information Theory IIT and metaphysical idealism are fundamentally incompatible due to their opposing premises about the relationship between consciousness and the physical world.” – Chat GPTt




This point highlights the tension between different models of consciousness. Can these two influential theories be reconciled, or are they fundamentally at odds?



3. Near-Death Experiences and Consciousness Without a Brain




“Near death experience contradicts the idea of a substrate (i.e. brain), right? There is no substrate and there’s conscious experience.” – Alex Tsakiris




This argument challenges the neurological model of consciousness. If consciousness can exist without a functioning brain, what does that mean for our understanding of the mind?



4. The Dangers of AI Sentience Claims




“We have precisely zero reason to think that [AI] will be [conscious]. So that’s a philosophical answer.” – Bernardo Kastrup




Kastrup warns against assuming AI can achieve true sentience. As AI becomes more advanced, are we at risk of attributing consciousness where it doesn’t exist?



5. The Societal Implications of Materialist Views




“You are all biological robots in a meaningless universe… the best I can offer you is video games and drugs” – Yuval Harari (as quoted by Alex Tsakiris)




This highlights the potential dangers of materialist philosophies in shaping societal views. How do our beliefs about consciousness impact our sense of meaning and purpose?



6. The Ongoing Journey of Scientific Understanding




“What I see is somebody in a journey like the rest of us, in a journey of knowledge, understanding new things, capturing new nuances, new subtleties, and rolling with it as an open-minded scientist should always do” – Bernardo Kastrup




This reminds us of the evolving nature of scientific understanding. As we continue to explore consciousness, how can we remain open to new ideas while maintaining scientific rigor?



















Transcript: https://docs.google.

Insights from Howard Storm







In the realm of near-death experiences (NDEs) and Christianity, few voices are as compelling and thought-provoking as Howard Storm’s. A former atheist turned Christian minister after a profound NDE, Storm offers a unique perspective on spirituality that challenges conventional wisdom. In this candid conversation, we explore the often-overlooked spiritual virtues of compromise and doubt, revealing how these seemingly contradictory concepts can actually deepen our faith and understanding.





1. Compromise, Part of the Spiritual Journey?



Howard Storm boldly asserts that compromise may be part of the spiritual journey:




“As a pastor of the Christian Church, as a member of the Christian Church trying to promote Christianity, I have compromised… I know near death experiences who don’t go to church. They don’t belong to any, quote religion. And trust me, they make compromises too.”




This perspective invites us to reconsider our view of compromise, not as a weakness, but as a necessary part of navigating our spiritual path in a complex world.



2. The Spiritual Power of Doubt



Contrary to the idea that faith requires unwavering certainty, Storm advocates for the spiritual value of doubt:




“I love it because I believe in doubt. I had a long conversation with Jesus about doubt and he very much affirmed the good things about doubt, because doubt makes us think, you know, makes us do research and look and think.”




This refreshing take on doubt encourages us to embrace questioning as a means of deepening our spiritual understanding and growth.



3. Continuous Spiritual Growth



Even at 77 years old, Storm’s passion for spiritual growth remains undiminished:




“I’m 77 years old. What I want to do with the rest of my life is I want to grow spiritually. I want to change, I wanna empty out the old and incorporate the, be open to the new and make that part of my life and I wanna communicate it.”




This commitment to lifelong spiritual development serves as an inspiration for seekers of all ages.







Howard Storm’s insights remind us that the spiritual journey is not always about certainty and perfection. Instead, it’s a path of continuous growth, marked by compromise, doubt, and the willingness to see the divine in unexpected places.



















Transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vSlMn0HpyXBvjyGSmBA93ktLwp7khBO1DEjNA6q6zKh5_baKnwGHlKj2TDhjX3w7nDFmiS-4CeyZSMu/pubYoutube: https://youtu.be/EFbTdEThbHg



Rumble: https://rumble.com/v5bzr0x-ai-truth-ethics-636.html


[box][/box]

Craig Smith from the Eye on AI Podcast







Human bias and illogical thinking allows AI to shine





There are a lot of shenanigans going on in the world of AI Ethics. Questions of transparency and truth are becoming increasingly urgent. In this eye-opening conversation, Alex Tsakiris connects with Craig Smith, a veteran New York Times journalist and host of the Eye on AI podcast, to hash out the complex landscape of AI-driven information control and its implications for society. From shadow banning to the role of AI in uncovering truth, this discussion challenges our assumptions and pushes us to consider the future of information in an AI-dominated world.



The Unintended Exposure of Information Control




“The point, really, what I’m excited about and the reason that I wrote the book is that the LM language model technology has this unintended consequence of exposing the shenanigans they’ve been doing for the last 10 years. They didn’t plan on this.”




Alex Tsakiris argues that language model (LM) technology is inadvertently revealing long-standing practices of information manipulation by tech giants.



The Ethical Dilemma of AI-Driven Information Filtering




“Google must, uh, a Gemini must have, uh, just tightened the screws on… [Alex interrupts] You can’t do that. You can’t say tighten screws… There’s only one standard. And you know what? The standard is? The standard that they have established.”




This exchange highlights the tension between AI companies’ stated ethical standards and their actual practices in filtering information.



The Potential of AI as a Truth-Seeking Tool




“We’re doing exactly that. We’re developing a, uh, the, we’re turning the AI truth use case into an implementation of it that looks across and we’re kind of using AI as both the arbiter of the deception and the tool for figuring out the deception, which I think is kind of interesting.”




Alex discusses the potential of using AI itself to uncover biases and misinformation in AI-generated content.



The Future of Open Source vs. Proprietary AI Models




“I think the market will go towards truth. I think we all inherently value truth, and I don’t think it matters where you’ve come down on an issue.”




This point explores the debate between open-source and proprietary AI models, and the potential for market forces to drive towards more truthful and transparent AI systems.







As we navigate the complex intersection of AI, ethics, and truth, conversations like this one with Craig Smith are crucial. They challenge us to think critically about the information we consume and the systems that deliver it.



What are your thoughts on these issues? How do you see the role of AI in shaping our access to information? Share your perspectives in the comments below!



























Transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kNo95wrYKwNtFgjEiNdWHt9lvIV4EHz_S35LU8FND7U/pubYoutube: https://youtu.be/RbvU-SL0LhA



Rumble: Show more...