Chuck Shute Podcast

Jay Dyer (conspiracy theorist, author, TV host)

July 13, 2022 Jay Dyer Season 4 Episode 261
Chuck Shute Podcast
Jay Dyer (conspiracy theorist, author, TV host)
Show Notes Transcript

Jay Dyer is an author, comedian and TV presenter known for his deep analysis of Hollywood, geopolitics, and culture.  He frequently guest hosts the Alex Jones Show on Infowars.  He has a new book out titled "Meta-Narratives: Essays on Philosophy and Symbolism."  We discuss a lot of great stuff in this episode including Ghislaine Maxwell, The Great Reset, the Montauk Project, MK Ultra, Alien Psy-Ops, Universal Basic Income, why Bill Gates is buying up farmland, D.U.M.B.s and more! Listen now before this episode is removed! 

0:00:00 - Intro
0:00:54 - New Book 
0:01:32 - Metaphysics 
0:05:36 - Ultimate Reality Vs. Materialism 
0:09:25 - Art Made By Screwed Up People 
0:11:15 - Problems with Science 
0:18:42 - Karl Popper's "Open Societies" 
0:21:05 - Controlling Natural Resources & Transhumanism 
0:24:47 - C.E.R.N. & God Particles 
0:27:08 - Darwinism & Evolutionary Theory  
0:31:05 - Number Theory & Symbolism 
0:35:55 - Alex Jones 
0:38:55 - Ghislaine Maxwell & Pedophile Ring 
0:43:57 - Pickton Pig Farm 
0:45:45 - The Great Reset & Zero Population Growth 
0:52:30 - Media Narratives & Propoganda 
0:54:35 - Mass Murderers & Serial Killers 
0:59:15 - Montauk Project & Experiments on Children 
1:00:30 - Operation High Jump, Mind Control & MK Ultra 
1:03:26 - Universal Basic Income & Population Reduction 
1:04:17 - UFOs, Alien Psy-Op & Area 51
1:07:10 - Denver Airport & D.U.M.B.s 
1:09:55 - Outro 

Jay Dyer website:
https://jaysanalysis.com

Chuck Shute website:
https://chuckshute.com

Support the show

Thanks for Listening & Shute for the Moon!

Chuck Shute:

All right, well, I hope you're ready to have your mind blown. We have author podcaster, conspiracy theorist Jay Dyer on the show, and we're going to do a lot of deep dives. In this episode. He has a new book out right now we're going to talk about that. Plus what's going on with Epstein and Maxwell, the great reset, why Bill Gates is buying up a bunch of farmland, AI and transhumanism media manipulation, MK Ultra serial killers, deep underground military bases, and so much more. So before we get to it, if you could real quick, please subscribe to my show and hit the bell on YouTube so you won't miss any notifications when I post new videos. Thank you so much. Now enjoy my interview with Jay Dyer. Welcome to the show, I just read your latest book. It's it's a little above my head. I'll be honest, it's your you go into some deep stuff here. And I love it. I feel like I need to reread it like maybe two or three times to really understand it.

Jay Dyer:

Well, thank you. Yeah, I wasn't sure if it would translate to, you know, kind of audience new to philosophy or not. So maybe on one level, it'll it'll pique people's interest. So want to want to dig deeper. But yeah, I mean, I'm happy to try to explain anything I can. I've actually, I've actually been rereading it because some of these essays I wrote, you know, back in my 20s. So I was a little fuzzy on some of it, but I think I remember most of it.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, so Well, let's talk about like metaphysics, you said, that's the reality itself, the study of the totality of what is like, don't explain that to me. So basically, in

Jay Dyer:

the history of philosophy, you had, you have three branches. And so it's broken down, typically into three branches. The first is, the easiest one, to get a hold of, which is just ethics ethics is just what's right and wrong. What motivates, you know, our decisions to choose this over that what makes something good or bad? And then the next domain as usually, it's usually divided into epistemology, which is the branch of knowledge or knowing. So how do we know what we know? What does it mean to have knowledge as opposed to opinion? What constitute what constitutes knowledge, strictly speaking, as opposed to just a belief? can we justify our beliefs give a good reason for them? In other words, it's one thing to say, well, you know, I believe that it'll rain tomorrow, I believe that you know, the sky is blue, so forth, and so on. But let's say that I said, I believe it's going to rain tomorrow, because I rolled the dice, and I got a five. And when I roll the dice and get a five, that means it's going to rain tomorrow, well, that's not a good reason to believe that it's going to rain tomorrow. So even if it did rain tomorrow, and I was right, I didn't have a good reason to believe that it would rain tomorrow. So we want to have not just reasons for our beliefs, but good reasons for our beliefs. And usually, those are the kinds of questions that are being asked on the domain of epistemology. The third domain is connected to the first two, but it's a little more abstract, a little more difficult for a lot of people think to grasp, and that's called metaphysics. So it's meta physics, meaning beyond or above the physical. So what is it that exists? What are the types of things that exist? Is everything just matter? Is everything just energy in motion or something like that? Those are metaphysical questions. And so while further physics might be concerned with the scientific discipline of matter in motion, and what constitutes physical objects, and you know, how do they change position and whatnot, metaphysics is more of a ancient and medieval idea of dealing with what are the different types of things that exist beyond just the physical realm? What are what are numbers? What are thoughts? Do they have any kind of existence? Are they all fake? Are they all real? Maybe some philosophers have said maybe fundamental reality is itself thought. And so this would be for philosophers like Plato. Right? So those are the kinds of questions that metaphysics is asking, likewise, the first domain that I mentioned ethics, let's say we think, for example, that giving to the poor is good. So if I donate money to the poor, that I think that's a good thing. Well, that can immediately relate to metaphysics, because the next kind of higher level question we could ask is, okay, but what is the good, right? If you say the giving to charity is good. I can just raise that question up the ante and say, Okay, well, you tell me what good is. And those are the questions of metaphysics good. Even the beautiful in the history of philosophy. So art and aesthetics oftentimes falls under metaphysics, because if we say that, let's say a piece of art or a musical composition is really good or beautiful. As opposed to something that's crappy, and it displays no talent, well, what is it that makes that one good, aesthetically pleasing, as opposed to the you know, the one that's bad? And so we're asking questions like, well, then what is the beautiful? And those are questions that, you know, Plato brings up in the Phaedo. And some of his other dialogues were, those kinds of metaphysical questions are asked. So that's what I would say metaphysics is,

Chuck Shute:

okay, yeah, so some of that stuff's obviously subjective. But one of the things you get into a little bit too is the materialism versus the ultimate reality. And I'm on my kind of marks learning more about this my my dad, he actually wrote a book called Ultimate Reality and I had on Are you familiar with Dr. Hoffman's work at all?

Jay Dyer:

There's a lot of Dr. Hoffman doctorate one doctor,

Chuck Shute:

Dr. Donald Hoffman. He's a. So he's like a cognitive psychologist, and like, and you talk about the quantum physics, because I think the thing was, the scientific world was always saying, you know, it was more materialistic view. And now the science is showing that there may be some other reality and kind of diagnosing it. And Hoffman's stuff is all about kind of like, basically, he describes it as not this not that we're actually living in the matrix. But that's kind of a good analogy for for a description of the world that we see is not the real world. It's kind of like you're wearing a virtual headset.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, those would be parallel to Plato. So Plato had a lot of similarities to modern simulation theory, or matrix theory, or these these kinds of views. I think there's some insights in that, but I'm not a full on Platanus through like a full on, you know, matrix kind of guy, those would be more akin to, like, Gnosticism. So the Gnostic worldview would be, again, very close to those ideas. And the idea there is, like you said, you know, reality can't just be purely physical hard matter. It's got to be more than that. And so some of the essays that I put in there, were trying to demonstrate that you can actually show this to be the case with things like numbers, or higher dimensions, as you mentioned. And so I think that, yes, it's kind of the pendulum kind of swings in history like it. So for a long time, in the ancient medieval world, you had a pendulum that swung towards the transcendent towards Plato's ideas and these kinds of things. And then, after Aristotle, after the enlightenment, the pendulum swung over towards what you're calling, you know, materialism and modern scientism. And so it's kind of a radical extreme. And then now, it's, like you said, the pendulum is swinging back the other way with things like simulation theory and higher dimensions. And a lot of the mathematicians like Max Tegmark and others who are looking at reality and saying, hey, it's actually seems like math is the fundamental, you know, programming language of reality. And so that's going to swing back in the other direction. And in my view, that reality is something in the middle where we have a mix of both the physical material world and other dimensions. And so it's a both and in my view, and the one thing I would say not to be contentious, but you're right, that in one domain of the domain of aesthetics, there is an element of the subjective. So we do have a, an area where certain musical styles or artistic styles will appeal to one person and not to another. But I actually think you can make a good case to that. There's also some objectivity in the arts as well. And that's what allows us to avoid what sometimes it's called romanticism or existentialism and the arts, the idea that it's all purely emotive like it's the art is the artwork is good only because of how it makes me feel. There might again, be that subjective element, but you can also make a good argument that No, actually, as a lot of medieval art theorists argued, you actually need some objective components like beauty, symmetry, harmony, patterns, or organization for the artwork to count even as artwork. So I think there's a case to be made for that. And even some modern atheistic philosophers like Anne Rand, she wrote a pretty good book on arts and art theory where she even argued that we have to have some kind of objective standards in the arts, to even have the art. So just being a little more nuanced that I agree with you there is a subjective component, but there's also an objective reality to these things, too.

Chuck Shute:

So why do you think I mean, because I feel like most of the best art is made by people who are fucked up. Like, I think one of my favorite artists is Salvador Dali, and that guy seemed like he was a little nutty. And then what Van Gogh cut his ear off. I mean, a lot of this arts that artistic stuff is, is made by people who are messed up, but you're saying that it's like,

Jay Dyer:

Well, again, I mean, I guess that kind of depends on the period where we pick I mean, you could pick a lot of ancient, you know, sculptures you could pick a lot of Renaissance are that. I mean, I don't know the lives of everybody and you know, like Bernini, are all of the all of the Renaissance sculptors whether they were you know, screwed up, I guess they could have been there is Perhaps to you know, people who have I think all people to a degree are screwed up. So I don't know that that's true. Yeah, I don't know that there's something particularly about the arts per se that I think that's again, a kind of a romanticist era notion that to be an artist requires that you'd be effed up and, you know, have problems or whatever. But there could be something to that. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I'm not trying to deny the role of emotions in the arts, certainly, they play a heavy role. But I mean, it's also kind of vague in terms of how narrow we it's unclear in terms of how narrow we want to specify the arts, for example. I mean, you could argue Plato's dialogues are a form of art, but the odd there's an oddity to it, where he felt like the art should be heavily regulated. So you know, here's somebody who doesn't want, like, he has a whole dialogue called ion where he's arguing that you can't let the artists run the society, because they're driven by their passions, and the society will collapse, because they're not governed by reason. So, you know, it's that's a difficult question to ask. I mean, it's a good question. I'm glad you asked it. But but that's a difficult one.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah. Well, so then you move on to, we talked about scientism, and you bring up some interesting points about the problems with science. And I feel like that's something that's interesting to talk about today. Because I think a lot of people just kind of accept, oh, this is science, we should all just accept it. But isn't that like, kind of back in the day that they everyone accepted that the Earth was flat? And so everyone just accepted that? And if you thought the world was round, you were nuts. And you bring up some interesting things that I had to Google this because I was like, Wait, is this this is really you say, carbon dating? There's issues with this, and I Googled it. And you're right, there's a lot of issues. If it's more than they said, 40,000 years old, it's very hard, because the amount of carbon left is very miniscule.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, those kinds of measurements are based on certain presuppositions baked into the worldview, or the paradigm of most of the people who do the measurements. So you know, it's going to tell us what we assume from the outset. In other words, and a lot of science works this way, where they assume things that are in the domain of philosophy that most scientists just don't question or that they're not familiar with. Because when you go to Edge, when you go to higher education, it's very compartmentalized. So people who study physics or study geology, they, you know, they don't do anything in philosophy, typically. I mean, every now and then you'll have a professor like a, there's a guy, I really like Dr. David Bradshaw. He has a degree in ancient philosophy and in physics, so he's a unique case. But like, that's point oh, 1%. Like hardly anybody has two PhDs in seemingly disparate fields. And so on the one hand, there's there's the element of compartmentalization, where a lot of academics don't even know what basic logical fallacies are these kinds of things. So they don't really know that when they're doing what they think is pure, quote, hard science. They're really in the domains of metaphysics, they're in the domains of philosophy, which they think isn't really necessary. A lot of pop science, especially, you know, Neil deGrasse. Tyson face famously said a few years ago, that philosophy is pretty much worthless, it's not needed anymore. And I think that that's because the he knows that he can't really answer the kinds of questions that philosophy is, is posing, and he doesn't realize that there's no such thing as, quote, pure science, there's no such thing as a neutral presupposition unless paradigm by which to interpret the world we all come to the world to interpreting the world with our own presuppositions, assumptions, that kind of baked in paradigm by which we read the world. I don't think that's a problem. I think we're just, you know, humans are just constituted that way such that they read the world in that way. And so that was those that again, the questions of philosophy and science assumes that it's neutral and assumes that it doesn't have these kinds of presuppositions, and again, doesn't realize that it's that it's making these kinds of judgments. So for example, science, I believe it's a tool it's a tool for mastering and understanding the natural world. But it can't tell you values it doesn't it can't give you value judgments. Famous enlightenment atheists, David Hume even said, being more consistent than most of his skeptical scientism buddies that you can't get an OT from an is in other words, describing the features of the way things are, which is a metaphysical domain, by the way, doesn't tell you whether that's good or bad, whether it ought to be that way or ought not to be that way. Right? So one of the one of the easy ways to see the flaws of modern scientism is that scientism can't tell you good or bad, it can't tell you what are called value judgments because that's the domain of ethics and metaphysics. And so just reading or interpreting the data doesn't tell you whether that's the data you ought to have or ought not to have. But most people who have the scientism worldview or presuppositions like they tend to think that They're on a moral high horse, they have a moral high ground, they're prepared to tell, you know, all of the superstitious religious people or whatever, who don't agree with them how they should or should not live, what does and doesn't exist and so forth, which again, the limitations of the scientific method can't even do that. So that's kind of what I've tried to point out.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, no, it's just the biases, like you say, much of the scientific literature may be untrue. And you say about because half of the studies that are done are sponsored by industries. So they're going to sponsor a study that's going to favor whatever it is their product that they're pushing, and even, I mean, this was fascinating, the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine for two decades. I think it was a was it a she or he, I think it was a she said she doesn't trust all the research that's published. And that's the New England Journal of Medicine. I mean, that's a pretty telling statement.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, I just had the great opportunity to be on a podcast yesterday with James Lindsay. And I didn't recognize right away, we had to do a little bit of the podcast before I realized, Oh, he's that guy. But he's the guy who Joe Rogan had on a couple years ago who with his his buddy, they had published a whole bunch of like fake peer review studies as a test to see if you could get fake review studies published. And I think they got. Yeah, so I was on that podcast with that guy. And we were talking, I was like, Oh, you're that dude. I was like, Man, that's awesome that you did that. I said, You're a hero of mine for doing that. Because I, if I recall, I think he's the guy that got that goofy joke study published about how dog parks were racist, because they didn't have like gay dog sections. Yeah. So that's another example of that. There's a great website too, that would that would track peer review fraud, I can't remember if it still exists, but you can look it up. There's like a website that just tracks you know, science fraud publications. And so the other reason I kind of knew about this was not because my mom was dealing with science fraud, but my not my mom was an editor for many years for the biggest science journal publisher, Harcourt Brace. And she did that for about 15 years. And what I got from her doing that was that there's a clear, little known relationship between billion dollar mega corporations, publishing corporations and peer reviewed science. And most people don't even know that. But I mean, yeah. I mean, do we honestly think that billion dollar mega corporations tied into you know, all the other mega corporations, Big Pharma, that they don't have an influence in the science that's published? I mean, has not the last couple of years shown that I think to people who have an open mind,

Chuck Shute:

all right, because where's the money from the that are the donations for these universities? Who's donating money?

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, one thing I learned too, when I was at university was that there's an intimate relationship to between the university system and the textbooks. And not just the the University Board to decide what textbooks and whatnot but the big corporations have a say in what the university textbooks say. So again, there's this incestuous relationship between what's supposed to be a public institution of the university, and the private corporate interests that print the textbooks and the boards who decide what textbooks will be used. And so yeah, you better believe that. They have a say so and you know, what college students learn in terms of their biology texts, their nutrition texts, which are going to be influenced by big pharma as well. So yeah, it's it's a giant, giant scam. And my view,

Chuck Shute:

yeah, well, this book, you mentioned this book, in chapter seven, Karl Popper's the Open Society and its enemies. And it's something about how fighting against an ideology of philosophy that has a common goal value or meaning. And you said that George Soros, which I have a book on him, and I had not read it yet, but he regards this book, The Open Society, one as his personal Bible. So what does that mean? Exactly? So we should not because it seems like there's also this thing about the World Government and everything, everything should be the same, but then we should also not have a common goal.

Jay Dyer:

Well, the common goal is to let the elites decide what the common goal is, and you just do what they tell you to and so popper is part of the what's called the Vienna circle. And they were the logical positivists of the 20th century. So the radical empiricist. People like Bertrand Russell was involved in these groups. And you know, they had a very, fairly open idea that they wanted to promote world government. Some of these philosophers were tied into Quigley's book, Anglo American establishment and the Royal Society elites. So there was a close connection to the Royal Society in the Vienna circle. empiricist slash positivist and popper is one of those key figures who really promotes this idea of open liberal quote unquote democracy, which is really just open free markets. That that's why I Soros is a big fan of that, right? Because he likes to sort of manipulate markets in these different countries that, for example, he recently was talking about the former Soviet bloc, Soros was instrumental in being allied with the CIA back in the 80s and 90s, under Reagan to open up those Soviet Bloc countries to free market capitalism, not because of any sincere interests to free these people up but it was a scam to once the Soviet economy had collapsed, they would come in and buy all this stuff up. Then they opened it up to so called Western liberalism, and color revolutions. And so that's what we've been seeing for the last several decades. Definitely. Engel has a great book on the color revolutions and how all that works called Full Spectrum dominance. And he covers Karl Popper and poppers philosophy of open society. And then you know, how that relates to Soros as a being kind of ally with the CIA for for these cold war operations, which open it up to economic liberalism.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, so you said angle elites want to control? This is weird. They want to control the natural resources for immortality? How can you be immortality by controlling the resources?

Jay Dyer:

On don't remember that exact law. I'm not saying that it's wrong. But if I recall, I was implying that the goal of the Anglo American establishment would be to eventually obtain immortality through technology. So in order to corner the markets in the domain of natural resources, natural resources, which are necessary to not just control the world, but there's an end goal is not just control, it's actually also the idea that technology can eventually produce, you know, a means of immortality. And so that's that's the whole transhumanist movement, but transhumanism requires, you know, the big tech elite, for example. Bill Joy, the Sun Microsystems guy, he wrote a famous essay in Wired magazine called why the future doesn't need us. I had I did a whole episode of Alex's show the other day, or actually a few weeks ago, on that essay, and I recommend reading that essay. It's not that long. But you'll notice if you rebuild Joyce, Si, who's the guy that created Sun Microsystems, a big good early tech billionaire guy, and he was talking about the meetings in Silicon Valley that he had with people like Ray Kurzweil, the famous so transhumanists and how they were discussing immortality and he in that essay talks about how it would be the 20th century's attempt to control the natural resources is ultimately for the purpose of transhumanism. So that's that's the essay I would say to read if you want the the lowdown on on why that is the case.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, me because they're already working at the neuro link stuff. And I had a guy on the show Dr. Morin surf and he's, he's talking about how you're going to put this chip in the in your brain and it's going to, it's going to give you more power to like manipulate the stock markets and things like that. And he said, it's kind of he compared it to like breast implants. He's like, Oh, well, people are going to see that other people have this upgrade, and then you're going to want it to.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, but I don't know. The odd part about that is that if you look at Ray Kurtzweil, 's book singularity, he has a chapter where he talks about VR, virtual reality and what would later be called Metaverse, because I think he wrote that book in 2005, or six, but he talks about this too, that eventually won't need to be a chip implanted, it'll be what he what he says is an advanced form of now tech, which would just be in your body. And he says it can come between you and your perception of the external world. And he says that it will not only be a thing where you link in and experience cool things, but he says that a centralized authority could also control you. So it's a two way thing here, right? It's like the Palantir stone in Lord of the Rings, right where Pippin looks into it and sees saw rhombus or Sauron can also see back at him and so it's a two way thing that Kurtzweil talks about and and even admits that. Yeah, you might be able to have certain advantages if this if the technology works. But there's it's a two way thing. It's a backdoor where they can also put things into your head.

Chuck Shute:

Do you think it's going to be a voluntary thing that people are going to want to sign up for this? Or do you think some people will be skeptical?

Jay Dyer:

I think eventually they'll promote it as something hip trendy, involuntary, and then see how that goes. And then eventually and gradually try to make it eventually mandatory. In fact, one of the one of the white papers that I covered this year was the UK Ministry of Defence white paper on transhumanism and brain jumps. And that's what they say. They say, eventually, they'll just alter through social engineering people's attitudes towards these things to make it a government mandate.

Chuck Shute:

scary shit. Well, so what you mentioned in chapter 10 quantum mechanics and you mentioned CERN, you don't go into it a lot, but explain what are your thoughts on that what that is? I don't really know a lot about it. I just heard about it about a month ago because I think they just recently turned it back on. It's this big machine that you Trying to find the God particle. I don't even know if I understand Do you understand that stuff?

Jay Dyer:

You know, I don't have a hard opinion on CERN. I know like what the public, what they say about what it is publicly that it's, you know, this thing that is just studying, you know, miniscule level physics. And I just kind of per purpose some of the physicists who got into philosophy like Wolfgang Pauli, Verner, Heisenberg and people. So they're speculative physicists who, you know, were involved in, I don't know, they're involved directly in CERN, but their research is the kind of stuff that CERN does, where they're looking at, you know, tiny, tiny particles to see what's down there, in those lower dimensions. And, you know, the, the, what I found most relevant was that they talk about it, like, it's structured that it has patterns and forms. And that would speak to the kind of world that Plato talked about in the Timaeus. And some of his other dialogues, which is where we have this idea of the platonic solids that fundamental reality is geometrically structured. And to me that suggests design and you know, a lot of pre, you know, people prior to the 20th century, couldn't see reality at that level. So they wouldn't have had an insight into reality being highly structured. And so that shows that it's not just pure chaos, there's a fundamental design there to reality. So that's the reason that I was including that there's a lot of speculations as to what certain really does anything from trying to open up portals dimensions, I mean, it could be any of those things. I've sometimes I speculate that these kinds of things might also be for other reasons, like security surveillance purposes, it could be something like that, and the particle physics is a cover for it. But yeah, could be any of those things. So I just kind of looked at it from the vantage point of what they claim about miniscule particles, you know, being structured.

Chuck Shute:

It is fascinating, I hope something happens, something comes out of that. You mentioned to Darwin theory at links, explain this the link with Freemasons?

Jay Dyer:

How did that go. So Darwin's going from either dad or granddad or the Collins brothers have a really good book where they go into a lot of depth with this. In fact, their new book is called invoking the beyond. They're buddies of mine. And they wrote a really long book on not just the history of Darwin, but its relationship to the British Empire social engineering. And it was either Darwin's dad or granddad was a really prominent Freemason, and he wrote these poems about Hindu philosophy and Hindu thought, which appear to have influenced Darwin himself in terms of formulating his view, which, again, is not really a scientific view, because it goes far beyond the limitations of what the scientific method can actually prove or show. So it's packed with all these metaphysical assumptions about what occurred millions of years ago about the transmutation of species. And the irony is that Darwin's view is not new. It wasn't even novel. In his day, people before him had posited this kind of view. Even ancient Greek philosophers had a version of evolutionary theory. And even prior to them ancient Hindu thought, is really the source of Darwinian evolutionary theory.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, he even says there's some of the problems with his theory, one of them which been we've been, we've never been able to recreate that in a lab setting because they say like, this, bolt of lightning struck the, I just love this term primordial goo, that's created the amoebas, and the fish and then everything, but we've never been able to recreate that. So

Jay Dyer:

yeah, and it's built on a whole bunch of other assumptions to that, for example, you know, one species, or one type of creature can start to print the unique code of some other creatures. So that's what's required for it to be the case to have the transmutation of species. And, you know, DNA says that that's not possible, you'll never have a bear printing whale code or a whale printing frog code, they always are going to print the same code that exists, even the mutations are only the mutations that would be possible in a minor variation within that species, right? So you might get a frog with, you know, 10 fingers or something that's a mutation, but that's, that's never going to get you to another species. And that's why they always just say, Oh, well, but if there were zillions of years it would happen. But again, that's never empirically observed. This is an impure, this is supposed to be an empirical obser observed science. And not only can the principles of, you know, transmutation species and whatnot, not be empirically observed. Most of these people are empiricists in terms of their philosophy. And you can't even prove empiricism because how can you prove through empirical sense data that all knowledge comes through empirical sense data, you can't have an impossible proposition to proof.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah. And another example, you given your book that was really interesting about when you talk about like the Grand Canyon how people assume that it took millions of years. But then you get these examples of things that was in the Bighorn Mountains, like gas or something you're in Wyoming took.

Jay Dyer:

I mean, it's not as big as the Grand Canyon, but there was one that opened up within a day. Yeah, that's pretty sizable. Exactly.

Chuck Shute:

And fly ranch geyser in Nevada. It's sprung up over a few decades from from people humans drilling, we cause that.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, so so people go out and party at this area, there's a giant geyser there that the drilling, as you said, cause and I think it was in about 40 years, I had a giant calcite deposit. And that, you know, the typical narrative explanation for those kinds of things. So that takes, you know, 11 million years for that to form or whatever, which is just not true. I mean, people, there's houses from the 1800s that have in their basements, you know, stalactites and stalagmites that have formed, you know, within 100 years, that, again, are supposed to take millions of years.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah. And then you have a chapter about numbers. This is always interesting to me, because, you know, these seven is associated with perfect 666. The devil like, why, why is that? Exactly? I mean, you kind of explain it, but I'm still confused.

Jay Dyer:

Well, so that there's two different things here is one is number theory, which is the metaphysical question of what are numbers? And then there's a separate question of number symbolism or numerology. And so the reason for example seven is relevant is that the world seems to be structured on a seven day week. And the best explanation that I have for that is that the Bible explains that in the book of Genesis, we have God creating the world and the seventh day being the Sabbath. And so there's a fundamental seven day structure to the week, which is just primordial, it goes back to the ancient world. And so that's probably the origin of seven being significant, marking the days off in that way. And the origin of ancient calendars, which I don't actually think anybody really knows the total, you know, the further we go back in history, you know, 6000 years or whatever, 5000 years, the further we go back, the the more speculation is involved on ancient cultures and how they did what they did. So there's a lot, there's far more that we don't know than what we do know. So I was mainly just pulling from biblical symbology in terms of the Old Testament and how the six what the significance of seven is the significance of a triplicity of sixes, you know, a 666 would be kind of an inverted version of the trinity of a via a triad that's not perfect, it's imperfect. And so it'd be lacking that the the perfection of the number seven at the completion of a weak, it's also in Scripture, the number of a man or humanity. And so, you know, there's multiple reasons why six would be referred to man, of course, 666 is the number of talents of gold that Solomon would bring in as a salt as Solomon sort of, in his later years apostatize as from God, and becomes this sort of type or Antichrist type of figure. And that's why I think, in the Apocalypse, John uses 666, which is also coded terminology for Nero, in my view. So I think John was talking about Nero, the the Emperor at that time and how he, as a persecutor of early Christianity was seen as this Antichrist figure. So those are some of the reasons why seven and six and 6x six are seen that way in Scripture. Yeah. And then number theory is a different thing, though. We're, we're talking about like in that early, like we were talking about at the beginning with metaphysics like, well, you know, we all know what the number 234 what those are, but what is a number? Where is a number? What kind of existence do numbers have? Are they just in our heads? Do they exist in some realm? Are they just words we make up? Are they social constructs? Right? Those are the kinds of questions that metaphysics asks about numbers and number theory.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, that's it's hard to come up with an answer for that. It's weird to computer programs are just a series of numbers of zeros and ones.

Jay Dyer:

Right. And there's a chapter on that as well, because I mean, I'm just trying to use computers as an analogy for how we look at computers, and we see them as machines that are clearly designed and structured. And so by the same logic, we should look at the world as designed and structured. I mean, again, I don't believe in simulation theory. But one thing that the simulation theory people have correct is that they see that analogy that I'm making, they see that point that well, hey, wait a minute, reality is highly structured, kind of like computer programs for playing a video game or structure. And so basically, this is just the return of the notion of Tilos or design, right? Something that enlightenment atheists throw away, they say, oh, there's no design, look at the mutations in the world. There's no design, but now we can see even you know, fundamental, fundamentally smaller levels of React. Melody, such that they are designed, which brings the notion of T closer design back into the world.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, fascinating stuff. Like I said, I need to read it again. Because it's like so deep but yeah, it makes you think to it. You gotta you gotta take it slow. I think I read it a little too fast. But so a lot of good stuff in there. And yeah, no, it's great. Hopefully people got any degree, I think I've read your first book and this one that you have you have another Hollywood esoteric. The second one. I haven't read that one yet, either. So

Jay Dyer:

yeah. That one I think was better written the sequel. I mean, you know, the first one is just kind of my freshman book outing. And then I think the part two was a better writer by the time that I wrote a lot of those. So it's, it didn't sell as many copies as the first one. But it's actually a better written book. But

Chuck Shute:

okay, yeah, I have to check that out. You have so many conspiracy theory, we got to talk about that. I think last time you were on, we didn't talk about even ask you about Alex Jones. Because you guessed for him on on his show on Infowars. Have you seen his latest video? Or? He's like the thing about threatening to cut his finger off? And have you seen that one?

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, I thought that was that was really funny.

Chuck Shute:

He said, I'll cut my penis off.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, I think he knows how to do these really sensational, you know, sort of satire pieces. And he knows the media will pick it up as if he was being serious.

Chuck Shute:

Is that not

Jay Dyer:

really gonna cut his finger off? Right, right? No, but they picked it up. So yeah, they were like, he's insane. He's gonna cut his finger off.

Chuck Shute:

How did you get hooked up? Did he like seek you out? Or do you actually like, sit and hang out with him sometimes? Or is it just the thing where like, the producer picked you out and you fill in for him when he's not there?

Jay Dyer:

Well, Alex had been aware of my stuff for a long time, because I had called into Alex, back in 2006, five or six. And he liked what I was talking about, because I'd read a bunch of global elite stuff even back then. And so he was like a call back, go back Monday, I want to have you back. And so I called back Monday. And then and I was many guests, I guess you could say for about 30 or 45 minutes. And then I wrote back then probably five or six articles for Infowars, back in the day to those five or six. And then nothing much ever came of that I did some satire videos and impressions that they put up back in the day. And then just I guess there's the channel grew. And his producer is a big fan of the stuff that I do a lot of people that that are at his operation, like my material. And so I had actually missed the email, she sent me an email and I went into my spam box. And she was like, Hey, do you want to, you know, come on the show and be a guest. That was two years ago. And so I dug that email magically out of that, and none of this would have ever happened if I hadn't checked the spam box. But so I was like, Yeah, sure. I'd love to come on. And, you know, he was impressed with the interview that we did. And so that led to sort of hosting about once a week, the fourth hour, and then yeah, what so I've been in studio, we've been hung out in some of the protests and whatnot a couple times. So yeah, I've spent a few days with Alex, which he's, he's just the same person as he is on air. So he's always just super energized. And, you know, raring to go. But yeah, so that, that that opened a lot of doors to so I'm very thankful for that. But yeah, I really enjoy hosting because it kind of gives me the ability to speak to, you know, a really big audience. Yeah, I, I usually take the, the lecture series material for the global elite books, which now I think we've done about 50 or 60, top writings of the elite. I usually just take one of those and put that into that fourth hour.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, no, that's great stuff. Why if I would be remiss if I didn't ask you about the biggest thing right now, I mean, I think is the just Layne Maxwell and Epstein Island. I heard you talk a little bit about this. I didn't know because I'm watching the show about Maxwell on HBO or whatever. But I don't know if I knew that. You said her dad was connected to the KGB and was a Cold War spy. Or tell me more about

Jay Dyer:

laser Masters by Robert Maxwell was the Epstein of the 60s, the 50s and 60s, the Cold War and he was a British media Baron. And I actually just finished a book on that because I didn't know a whole lot about the whole background of I did an interview with a good buddy of mine who's a Russia analyst Mark hacker. And he translated a essay that a KGB Colonel wrote back in the Cold War about Maxwell and that's her dad so that that's how she learned the art of all of this blackmail and sexual entrapment stuff was from him and he was doing all the same operations back in the I guess, the 60s and 70s. But yeah, he ended up having a sort of mysterious death where he you know, started going he He started going against some of his masters and that a lot of people think that ended up with him meeting his death on a boat and in the ocean somewhere.

Chuck Shute:

Israeli intelligence. Yeah. Okay,

Jay Dyer:

well, that's might have also been who got rid of him? Because he kind of tried to turn on them. So,

Chuck Shute:

yeah. So I mean, I don't understand how this list, everyone's talking about the list that Maxwell should have. I feel like more than one person would know who was at these parties and things. Why is that not being? How is that? I mean, that's, I don't even think that's a conspiracy theory. It's just how is this not this list not being published? It's very bizarre.

Jay Dyer:

Well, probably, you know, people are afraid of publishing it. Because, you know, there could be serious consequences for that. So, you know, I don't know what's on the list. I don't know any more than anybody else. But I did. I did read it. I know more about her dad and his history than, than her or speculations about her and that operation, but I think we can clearly see that these kinds of operations are pretty standard. I mean, I'm not trying to be downplay it, because it's pretty crazy stuff. But like her dad was doing the same stuff in the Cold War period. The Franklin scandal covers a similar type of operation in the 80s. There's, you know, Savile LM house in the UK, which has been the exact same stuff, blackmailing people of high profile politicians in the UK. Lm guesthouses called so you know, this, this is a more prevalent thing than we than we previously knew about. But of course, all the conspiracy theorists knew about it and talked about it. And if you remember, the DC madam Deborah Jean Palfrey, she was supposedly suicided she was talking about the same kinds of operations. My publisher has a book, what is that guy's name? There's a guy that published a book. In fact, it may be called Confessions of a DC man, I'm getting maybe getting mixed up with the other one, but it's the same thing but with gay stuff. So there's another guy Henry Vincent, I think is his name. Okay. He's like WGN policy, but it was just like, entrapping gay politicians and people. Okay, so ran that kind of operation in DC. So in other words, this is a this goes on. And this is this is a big part of how this system works. And how help how we have so many corrupt politicians, because a large portion of them are sexually blackmailed. And people in Hollywood too, right?

Chuck Shute:

Right. So this is not this is just one pedophile party or whatever, whatever you want to call it. Operation? Yeah, one operation because I had a sex trafficking expert. She's not a conspiracy theorist, but she works with sexually trafficked girls. And she said, I asked her, you know, is there going to be another Jeffrey Epstein? And she said, Oh, absolutely. So do you think there is

Jay Dyer:

operations right now running the same stuff in other parts of the world? I mean, for example, Eastern Europe, Romania. I just read a big long report about this the other day, that's like a huge hub for this stuff. So yeah, it goes Oh, no.

Chuck Shute:

Do you know any names or any ones in the US that are that are currently happening that have just not been exposed yet?

Jay Dyer:

No, I don't. I mean, I don't know any of that.

Chuck Shute:

Like, I mean, any sort of hints of things of people that might be involved, or,

Jay Dyer:

I mean, again, nobody who knows those kinds of things is going to just say people's names. I mean, all I know, is what's in the public domain in terms of books that have been published on that material. And then there's a guy who wrote an essay about Eastern European gangs and human trafficking. So you can look up something like look up Eastern European, Eastern Europe, comma human trafficking, and you'll get articles on the public like law enforcement articles.

Chuck Shute:

Okay, because there was another example that I heard you talking about that I had to I had to Google this I'd never heard about, I feel like this should have been a big story. The Picton pig farm. explain that one to my audience. That is that was a crazy thing that I heard you talk about.

Jay Dyer:

Right? So there's a guy who puts up serial killer stuff, of archive footage of interviews with them. And the theory there is that a lot of the serial killers may be connected to organized crime. They may be in fact contract killers or hitman. And some of those instances may be connected to you know, human trafficking as well because as part of Oregon organized crime so there was some people who had done some podcast theorizing that I don't remember this person's name, but they theorized that the Picton pig farm could have been one of those kinds of operations because it had it's a famous serial killer incident and a sort of burn the lower level guy, but the rest of the people involved in this big compound, like Hells Angels and others that this sort of went up to high level people in the Canadian government. So the theory is that it might have been some kind of entrapment operation or asin UFO film operation or something like that, because of the high level people who didn't get in trouble, but they just burn this kind of scrubby, skanky, low level dude that was running it on the ground.

Chuck Shute:

So yeah, cuz these the people and the people that go to these parties and such. So maybe like even Epstein was was more just like a pawn.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, I think he was the, you know, point man to run that operation. And he seemed to have had connects to, you know, various intelligence agencies to, you know, have the blackmail data, basically. I mean, that's, I don't think he was like some super high level person, huh, that's interesting. He was put there to run the operation. So the people management kind of person.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, you talk about a lot of this the great reset. Let's talk about that, then. So the, you know, the global government, the global economy, all this stuff. So it because this one was confusing, why are all these rich people putting money into leftist organizations? Explain that to my audience?

Jay Dyer:

Well, I think that they've always seen liberalism as a tool for social change. It's a really powerful and effective tool for that. And so one thing that especially socialism and Marxists movements do is that they level the existing order, and they consolidate wealth, because Marx always said, you know, one of the first things you have to do is create a centralized Federal Reserve type of bank. And that allows all the money to be, you know, printed by this central entity. But of course, the real owners of the central banks are not the public, but they're private. So it's a private Federal Reserve based system, which is what we have, we've had it since 1913, in the US, and you know, it is one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. So, although I don't think the global conspiracy is a, quote, Marxist conspiracy, Marxism had a very important role to play in bringing about the world that we are going into, and it was always aided and funded by very wealthy individuals. This is Professor Anthony Sutton has a series of books on how elite wealthy individuals funded, Hitler funded the Bolshevik revolutions and socialism. So look at Wall Street in the Bolshevik Revolution, or Wall Street to Hitler by Sutton, and you'll get the same information that we find in Dr. Carroll Quigley strategy and hope, where he also says that the most wealthy people in the US funded the liberal socialist causes for social engineering, because they have an agenda and ideology, which they want to bring about. And so liberalism is just a means for that, really.

Chuck Shute:

So the divisiveness that's on purpose, though, right? That's the way to kind of destroy, what did you say something about, like, we're going to destroy ourselves with all this stuff?

Jay Dyer:

I'm not, I'm not sure. Which is specific what you're talking about where I said, we destroy ourselves. But what do you mean? Like what? Well, yeah, I mean, they certainly zero population

Chuck Shute:

growth. So like, so like, first, we said, you know, there's a push for gay marriage and such like that, then it was transgender. You said, Beastie reality is that going to be the next rights thing that

Jay Dyer:

nothing, all of those are going to be pushed, because they're useful, again, for this goal of creating GPG as your population growth, zero carbon output, as they're calling it, that's the goal of all the carbon stuff, is to basically just ensure that there's no more humans, because they are committed to post humanism. And post humanism is a transhumanist worldview. So you can see this, for example, in the radical today is radicals are groups like extinction, rebellion, right? The radical eco people, you know, there's prominent people who think that there should be no humans. And they, they tend to believe that we can be, you know, downloaded into computers. So even though they don't believe that there is consciousness, they claim that they're going to download their consciousness into computer. So it's not a consistent view. But it's a it's kind of a crazed sort of cults type of view, really. But they really do believe that and so all of these events that are occurring in terms of the great reset, it's really to get to that end goal. And that Klauss book actually says that, like the first two thirds of the book is about why we need, you know, this global, great reset in the last third of the book, Fourth Industrial Revolution by Klaus says that while we need to remake and re retool the entire biosphere to make it synthetic, because it's broken. And the way to fix it is to alter human DNA to change everything in society to radically reduce the population 90 to 95%. I mean, this is what they believe.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, so what is the thing with your favorite as you call him, Gil Bates, the CEO of Microsoft, so he's buying like all this farmland, and they keep pushing this like fake meat shit, and they're going to try to make people eat bugs I think is the next thing. It's going to be crickets or something. They're going to cricket proteins. Is that going to be or what is the eating bugs because the soy the fake meat, it's already out.

Jay Dyer:

You Yeah, this is an old technique of oligarchs to control population by controlling their diet. I mean, this is just a really simple form of warfare basically. And so if you think about in terms of siege, Siege is a form of warfare where, you know, people are locked up in their, their readout or they're, they're, you know Helm's Deep or whatever. And so siege involves all the different techniques that you would do to break their defenses and to destroy them in their in their castle. And so one of those would be, for example, controlling the food supply. So if I can control what food comes into the society or how they eat or what they eat, it's a tremendous form of warfare. Again, this is very well known, it's ancient warfare, it comes up in even some of the global elite writings, Bertrand Russell, Charles Dalton, Darwin, I mean, in their books, they have sections on in order to depopulate we're gonna have to take control the food supply. So I think that's 1% where it is. Yeah. And

Chuck Shute:

then also education. I mean, you talked about the neural link and all that stuff. You're saying that, that or I don't know if it was your Alex Jones that had said, I heard with the education thing with the neural link, you're not going to have access to a lot of the the history and the past education, you're only going to have access to the things that's like the North Korea kind of stuff.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, this is what Jacques actually says in his book, Brief History of the Future. He's one of the globalist he's a he's the Kissinger of France, basically. And he says that, by 20, I think it's 2040. Every house will have its own sort of AI version of Alexa. Right? So you'll have a personal house assistant, that doesn't just, quote, assist you around the house. It will also be where you get education from. So you won't go to school or anything like that. You'll have a you know, this bot that that educates you. And he says that you it's not like you're going to have some free internet where you look at whatever you want, it'll be a one way thing where it teaches you and tells you what you need to know. So it's just straight up dystopia, right? Like all the scientific science fiction dystopia is wrapped into one. And I mean, that's what he says. He even says that the hive mind that everybody will be LinkedIn to because a Gollum.

Chuck Shute:

Wow. So it's all about control controlling the population. So we're we're basically they want us to be slaves is what the goal could be.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, I mean, these people are psychopathic control freaks. Absolutely. 100%.

Chuck Shute:

So what and with the media what's going on? Because the media seems so we're just in my lifetime, I've seen a drastic change from just regular used to be just reporting the news. Now we have this, like, what my friend calls fad politics, like, you know, it's just like, there's always some sort of cause, like for a while, it was the Ukraine thing, which, again, I'm not necessarily siding with Russia, but it seemed like it was like a real big push to like, why was there such a big push for the Ukraine thing? Because there's tons of wars in the Middle East and Africa that nobody's talking about those. Nobody's cared about those. But all of a sudden, something about Ukraine was this big deal, and everyone had to change their Facebook profile pictures, and what is there a conspiracy behind that?

Jay Dyer:

Could you ask, I'm sorry, somebody, my important person was was calling me I'm trying to turn off the phone. So I repeat that question.

Chuck Shute:

No, just just just for the fad politics, it seems like there's always this push for some sort of cause it changes. So but like for a while there, it was Ukraine, and I just, I just I was suspicious. I didn't pick aside I didn't do a lot of research as to the conflict. I mean, I knew some of the basic things. But it just seemed odd that there was such a push to pray for Ukraine and all this stuff. It just seems strange. To me, it seemed. I don't know if there was a nefarious motive or not. Maybe I'm just being paranoid. But it just seemed odd that with all these other wars going on in the world, and a lot of genocide in Africa and the Middle East and terrible things, people being bombed. That's that's not a big thing. But for some reason, why was Ukraine the big one?

Jay Dyer:

Well, because the media is controlled, and it puts out what they want people to be concerned about, or to have a pseudo activism about. So yeah, activism is a complete scam. It's complete joke. I mean, there's there's plenty of people who are sincere about their activism. Any anything the system is telling you to be involved in activism about is just a joke. And it's really just propaganda. That's all it is.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, well, then. So like, Ukraine would be big for a while, and then it was like there'd be a shooting. And then that's the big thing. So let's talk I had I found an expert on here about mass shooters and such. What is it? I can't remember we talked about this last time or not, but I curious to get your thoughts on some of the mass shooters and I mean, I think that you you say that a lot of them have ties to CIA or the government. A lot of them have ties to Colt A Coulter. satanic things.

Jay Dyer:

Well, no serial killers, serial killers, necessarily mass shooters.

Chuck Shute:

Some of the manifestos they always find these manifestos of the mass shooters and a lot of them are very similar. And

Jay Dyer:

sometimes they're copy and paste. So like the copy and paste brave ik Anders Breivik, His was an odd sort of copy and paste thing. You know, this goes back to the Unabomber with the the manifesto goes back to him. He, he, you know, was openly involved in in culture. He was part of the culture experiments. It's in his obituary that he was involved in in kilter experiments. So it's very odd that he then becomes this, you know, so called terrorists figure after MK Ultra experimentation. And then the odd part is that the main locus of his message revolves around transhumanism and the AI grid that they're bringing in. So he was warning people about technocracy and what do you know, he's this quote, terrorist. Right. So the very thing that that was being planned for a long time, technocracy, right, you need the people who warned about it to be seen as these radical you know, terror figures, and that's exactly the same, seemingly the the function that he served. Likewise, you know, they sort of mind controlled, staged, created, maniac killer people, whether serial killers, or mass shooters are a kind of a serial killer. So I understand the overlap there. But I think some of these mass shooter types are just sort of drugged out there. A lot of them are on SSRI types of drugs, a lot of them have, you know, handlers and people who work for intelligence agencies sort of provoking them, riling them up, that's a pattern that comes out all the time. Especially the Islamic T R. R. O R networks. That's especially an infiltrated and controlled type of thing. And the same with right wing militias. And these people too. They're all sort of handled in this way. And so there's no definitive, you can't definitively prove that all of them are, you know, caused by intelligence agents, but the patterns and the handlers seem to consistently be there, which is again, you know, legitimate question. But in this in regard to the serial killers, what's a more interesting connection is that a lot of them were part of the military. And so it's odd that so many serial killers had military service and seem to have been stationed and suspicious areas seem to have been part of LSD research. For example, we know that Berkowitz went into the middle of military and took LSD. We know that Gary Hyde Nick was involved in MK Ultra. He's one of the most famous serial killers as well, during his Vietnam service. He was involved in MK Ultra. We know that the Phoenix program, according to Douglas Valentine included training individuals that they profiled to be psychopathic, to engage in cannibalism and human mutilation and sacrifice that was part of the vehicle. That was a part of the warfare against the Vietcong. And so a lot of these serial killers had Vietnam service. And so the theory is that they could have been involved in the Phoenix program. And this is why we have this outbreak of serial killers in the 70s and 80s. Because the guys coming back from Vietnam who had basically gone nuts,

Chuck Shute:

yeah, I think you said I never heard this before. Jeffrey Dahmer was investigated for murders in Germany while he was stationed there, because he was in the military.

Jay Dyer:

He was stationed 20 minutes from where hideaway was station to, I think, I don't think they were there at the same time because they were hiding something was a little older. But it's odd that you have two of the most prominent serial killers station in German millet, US German bases within a few minutes from each other. And they both come back to America to be the craziest serial killers in American history. That's really suspicious in my book. So my my, the theory is that they could have been involved in some form of mind control projects as well. And I can't I can't authenticated, but there's a cable that surfaced that shows that prominent general squashed the German government investigating Dahmer for those murders in Germany.

Chuck Shute:

Wow, crazy. What about Do you know anything about the Montauk Project? I just I learned about this after I had you on the first time. And this thing just really fascinated me. It seems like there's not a lot of information on it, that I can. I've just seen a

Jay Dyer:

few like, I've just seen a few passing references and videos and maybe a chapter here and they're in a book, but because I've tried to read most of the source material that's out there, and I'm kilter. So you'll see it in passing. But it seems to have been this sort of project of taking kids and putting them into these sort of programs, which is what Stranger Things the TV show is playing on there. They're sort of playing on the Montauk Project. I have no doubt that it was real. But we just we just don't know much about it. But there's other programs that we do know about that are very similar to that where they would experiment on kids Dr. John See Lily, the famous psychonaut weirdo who had a fetish for dolphins. He talks about mind controlling kids in his books. Dr. Kinsey mean he molested kids for science. And everybody knows about that. So it shouldn't seem far fetched that they would, you know, kidnap kids or use orphans or whatever for these projects, either.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah. What about do you know about this one? This is another one. I just recently found out about Operation Highjump and Richard D. Bird and the stuff that's gone in Antarctica, what's going on there? So there's some sort of government base there are.

Jay Dyer:

I have heard of HighJump. I don't know much about it. I did a video just speculating about Antarctica. I know it's a you know, it's obviously an important geostrategic region in terms of geopolitics. But I have no idea what I mean. I have no idea what what the deal with Antarctica is. There is an odd situation with Bundy who has a lot of connections to prominent and intelligence connected people. So Ted Bundy was a roommate for a year or two with a CIA Department of Defense cover individual who was involved, I think, in high jump.

Chuck Shute:

Do you think the likes of Bundy and Dahmer and these guys are? are being mind controlled? Do they know they're being mind controlled? Or is it totally out of their realm? Like they think they don't know how this happened?

Jay Dyer:

Well, there's different types of mind control, there's different possibilities. Only a small percentage of the public can be hypnotized or is possibly a dissociative, it can go into dissociative states. So it's hard to know or hard to say because again, it's speculation. We do have Dr. Esther books writing a famous essay that is still sourced in the DSM, which says that he could create hypnotic careers where information would be stored in one of the altars. Now, is it possible that he was just making that up? It is possible, but it's also possible that he really could do that. And so you know, he was writing that at the time of the 50s. And this kind of stuff would inspire things like mentoring candidate, and mood, you know, movies like this, which have this theme. And then of course, now, you know, since the 50s, Hollywood has had dozens and dozens of movies with the idea of mind controlled assassins and mind controlled couriers and all this kind of stuff. So you know, it's in the literature, but as to how advanced or how far they can go with it is, who knows?

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, well, because like the MK Ultra, I mean, that that came out that the Unabomber was involved in that like that was public information. Right. MK Ultra is not going on right now. But you think it's got to be there's got to be something that evolved into something else. So there's a different project for that,

Jay Dyer:

right. So even back in the 70s, one of the first books on it was like 1970, a book by John Marx called the search of the Manchurian Candidate. And the last chapter in John Marx's book is about how MK Ultra evolved into MK surge and MK delta, which means that it went under bio warfare and human genetics. So all of DARPA's stuff to do with microchips that's, that comes out of MK Ultra. Crick, as they were doing. They were testing electrodes in the in the brain, and that turned into microchips in the brain. Jhansi, Lilly was a pioneer of that.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, what else is going to be coming? Like, what other predictions Do you have? Or things that people don't know about? That they should know about? With the great reset or any of this stuff?

Jay Dyer:

Um, yeah, I don't know about predictions. I mean, they, you know, they definitely say that they, I think that what they seem to want to do is to blow up the existing system and economy to say, haha, look, it doesn't work. So here's our solution. Here's our Universal Basic, Basic Income. Here's our, you know, fed coin crypto that you all need to be on. I think that they'll probably try to go with something like that. And, you know, they have goals of population reduction by 2040 and 2050. So, you know, how they would go about that? I don't know. I'm gonna try them. I trying to do a giant war might be a bio event. I mean, who knows? Yeah, well,

Chuck Shute:

in the last time I had you on here you we talked about aliens. You don't believe in aliens? You told me to watch this movie Mirage man, which I did. It was really fascinating. But now that this video comes out, that the Navy puts out of a UFO, and they say we don't know what this is. I mean, but I don't know if I trust the government. But then so if it's not your if it's not aliens, if it's or if it's what is it? I mean, is it this is some sort of manipulation technique that the government is using to control us?

Jay Dyer:

Well, I mean, I don't know who knows what those blurry old camera footage of that can be anything. I mean, that could be completely made up. I mean, certainly there are on unidentified flying objects, but it's a leap to say to go from that. To extra biological entities, so I just don't I think that there's plenty of evidence that the alien mythology is a psyop itself. And again, the best book for that is invoking the beyond by the Collins brothers, they spend about 300 pages in their book, going through the CIA documents about creating majestic 12. And that being a psyop, and sort of promoting this idea of Space Brothers and all that there's a lot of usages for the space, brother mythology and the alien mythology of panspermia and so forth. So, yeah, I think that anytime you see naval intelligence, or quote, the Navy coming out telling you about aliens and UFOs, you can bet that that's 100% of style.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, well, I mean, they don't say I mean, because yeah, it's just a UFO. We don't know what it is. It is fascinating to me, because they say that it couldn't be a technology that they're familiar with. So I mean, it's possible that it's something from China. Yeah.

Jay Dyer:

But I mean, the government lies. I mean, yeah, could be something from a foreign government. But I mean, there's just, there's, to me, it's nothing. I mean, they come out with these all the time. I mean, they've been saying that there's flying saucers for, you know, 50 years, 60 years. And I mean, all, it just, it just doesn't add up to me. But what does make sense is that it would be a very useful tool for social engineering. Yeah, well,

Chuck Shute:

that's, that's because that's what they were in that Mirage men movie, that's what they did is they made the guy think that that he was that there was aliens, and they made him think he was crazy. And they, they drew him to the ER, they forced him to the hospital, because they really did make him crazy. Just so that they could hide what they were doing, which is like, and we still don't know, what were they doing over there? There's still a lot of mysteries with area 51.

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, but I mean, even sort of mainline books have pointed out that the alien smokescreen as a cover for either black operations, you know, drug running could be any of those things, that that's probably what it really is at those bases.

Chuck Shute:

Okay. Last thing that I got that I got to ask you about another thing about this conspiracy theory, the Denver Airport, what the hell's going on with that? Are you familiar with this?

Jay Dyer:

Yeah, this is, you know, I mean, it's kind of one of the classic internet conspiracy theories has been around for a long time. And there really is an underground base underneath the Denver Airport was pretty well known, it's pretty easy to verify that I think there's, you know, the government has many underground bases all over the United States. So that's not a conspiracy theory. That's it's a real thing. And usually, it's explained as continuity of government. So in other words, if there's an attack, or if the government and the US went down, or something like that, there would be facilities for the preservation or the continuity of order in the United States, you know, in the case of some big event. So that's the public reasons for those things. I mean, you can find all kinds of public news articles and documentaries on the underground basis. So the Denver Airport is one of those, but I think the reason that people pick that one is that the Denver Airport was designed with a lot of really bizarre dark artwork. Yeah, seems to this seems to suggest the sort of apocalyptic themes and depopulation. So I think that's that's why people find that one particularly fascinating.

Chuck Shute:

Yeah, that is that's so that's called the I think they call them the dumbs right. Deep underground military bases.

Jay Dyer:

That's a real I mean, this is even been been in mainline literature for a long time. James Bamford who wrote the first book on the NSA, famously back in the early 80s. You know, he talks about underground cities and underground bases in the first few chapters. And that's, that's a famous, I think, a Pulitzer winning book from the from the 80s. So you know, the it's, it's a real thing. What all those bases and underground cities and underground facilities are up to is anybody's guess I don't have any knowledge of that.

Chuck Shute:

scary shit. Well, this is on, you'll have to come back again, if we if we still have a civilization, or maybe we'll be in the same Gulag or something. Who knows? Yeah, as my friends are, like, real, they're real, like doomsday. preppers. You know, they think they're the worst. So who knows? But I mean, it's, it's interesting to think about it, but I try not to get too wrapped up. And I think last time, the advice that you gave gave me and my viewers was just to try to stay off the internet too much and try to be more self sufficient. I think that's good advice. Regarding I agree with

Jay Dyer:

that. The more off the grid you can be the better I don't think you have to be totally, yeah. permit, you know, to run to the but

Chuck Shute:

yeah, yeah. All right. Well, thanks so much, Jay. Everyone should get the book. It's called a meta narratives here his essays on philosophy and symbolism. Good stuff. Exactly. Yeah, I need to read appreciate it. I got a lot more work to do, because you've mentioned a lot of things that I want to do a deep dive on. So I'd love to have you back.

Jay Dyer:

Well, thanks, Chuck. Appreciate it. Good. All right. See you

Chuck Shute:

later. J Have a good day. Bye. Thanks again to Jay Dyer. He doesn't do charity. So if you're a regular listener to the show, you can support any of the other ones that I've promoted. Or if you want to support Jay, make sure to buy one of his books or pay for his content and Redfin, he was demonetized from YouTube, which is really stupid in my opinion. But you can find more links to his content on his website, which is in the shownotes. My website is in there as well. Check out my other interview with Jay or some of the other episodes I've done. The playlists should come up on YouTube that has all the authors and things and make sure to subscribe again and hit that bell so that you get the notifications whenever I post something. Thanks for watching. Have a great day and shoot for the moon.