Chapter 2

First section is about “a remarkable female healer known as Pachita–born Barbara Guerrero–born in Mexico. Carla Rueckart describes the psychic healing treatment in The Law of One, Book I:

In late 1977 and early 1978 we accompanied Dr. Andrija Puharich and his research associates to Mexico City to investigate a Mexican psychic surgeon, a seventy-eight-year-old woman called Pachita, who had been practicing for a great many years. . . . Pachita used a very dull knife with a five-inch blade. She passed it around amongst the entire research group watching to see our reactions, especially mine, since I was the guinea pig. Since her “operations” took place with me lying on my stomach I cannot give a firsthand account of what occurred, but Don informs me t hat the knife seemed to disappear four inches into my back and was then moved rapidly across the spine. This was repeated several times. Pachita was, she said, working on my kidneys. Again we made no attempt to conserve “evidence” as we knew t hat it would come to nothing. Many have attempted to research psychic surgery by analysis of its products, and have found either inconclusive results or null results, indicting that psychic surgery is a fraud. (4)

[ . . . Skipping a couple of pages . . . ]

Said the book’s author, “Andrija was convinced that Pachita’s ‘instant surgery’ was completely genuine, and that no fraud of any kind was possible under his and his colleagues’ scientific observation and documentation.” (5)

Mexican Neuroscientist Enters the Twilight Zone

Whether or not these were actual surgical procedures, Pachita’s work also had a huge impact on Dr. Jacobo Grinberg-Zylberbaum–arguably Mexico’s most controversial neuroscientist. In 1977, Grinberg took a teaching job at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) in Mexico City–and produced a wealth of hard scientific data on the physiology of learning and memory, visual perception and physiological psychology. That same year, Grinberg met Pachita–who completely transformed everything he thought he knew about biology, psychology and medicine. Sam Quinones described the effect Pachita had on Grinberg in a 1997 article:

“According to Grinberg, [Pachita] performed successful surgery without anesthesia, using a mountain knife. She replaced diseased organs with others that appeared out of thin air. . . . Grinberg spent several months watching Pachita’s operations and talking and traveling with her. He admitted that his description of her operations sounded like ravings, but he insisted he’d seen them.” (6)

According to the same article, Grinberg ultimately wrote seven volumes on the shamans of Mexico, and had gone deeply into this type of research by the mid-1980s. Puzzled by the feats he believed he had observed Pachita performing, he theorized that there must be a “neuronal field,” as he called it, created within the brain, which in turn interacts with what he called the “pre-space structure”–a field that all space, time, matter, energy, biological life and consciousness emanates from–i.e., the Source Field. Here is how Grinberg explained it in his own words–which are admittedly technical.

“The pre-space structure is a holographic, non-local lattice that has . . . the attribute of consciousness. The neuronal field [created by the brain] distorts this lattice, and activates a partial interpretation of it that is perceived as an image. Only when the brain-mind system is free from interpretations, do the neuronal field and the pre-space structure become identical. In this situation, the perception of reality is unitary, without ego and with a lack of any duality. In this situation, pure consciousness and a feeling of an all-embracing unity and luminosity is [sic] perceived. All the systems that spiritual leaders have developed . . . have had the goal of arriving at this direct perception of the pure pre-space structure. . . . The science of consciousness that I would like to develop is a science that will try to understand, study and research the above-mentioned ideas.” (7)

Obviously, if such feats as Pachita’s are even possible, very few people possess such abilities. In order to awaken the world to what our true potential might be, Grinberg knew he would need to start with something very simple and repeatable. His earliest experiments in the category began in 1987. Two people, usually a male-female couple, would sit and meditate together for twenty minutes–to form a close bond with each other. They were then separated into two different rooms, each of which was shielded from any and all electromagnetic fields. Both participants’ brainwaves would begin to noticeably synchronize, even while they were apart–and Grinberg could measure it on their EEG readouts. He also found that both hemispheres within each person’s brain would show the same patterns–which normally only happens in deep meditation. Furthermore, the person who had the most coherent, well-organized brain waves seemed to always “win”–exerting greater influence upon the other. (8)

In 1994, Grinberg came up with an even more compelling way to demonstrate this effect. Most of the experiment was the same–two people meditated together for twenty minutes and then went into separate, shielded rooms. Now, however, he flashed bright lights in one participant’s eyes–causing them to expeience sudden shocks. Each time he ran the experiment, one hundred different flashes of light were given at random. Twenty-five percent of the time when he flashed the light in one person’s eyes, the other person had a very similar brainwave “shock”–at the exact same time. Grinberg’s control subjects did not show any such connections. This was a stunning discovery–and the results were published in the prestigious, peer-reviewed journal Physics Essays. (9)

This is when disaster struck. Shortly after the publication of his paper in 1994, Grinberg disappeared. He still has never been found–and there is even a Facebook page dedicated to tracking him down after all these years. (10)

Rigorous Laboratory Proof of Consciousness Transfer

Thankfully, other scientists have performed similar experiments, further validating Backster’s initial results. Dr. Charles Tart, from Berkeley, set up a bizarre experiment where he gave himself painful electrical shocks, automatically–and then attempted to “send” his pain to another person who was the “receiver.” This person was wired up to measure heart rate, blood volume and ot her physiological signals. Tart found that the receiver’s body did indeed respond to the shocks–through things such as an increase in heart rate and a decrease in blood volume–but the receiver had no conscious knowledge of when Dr. Tart was sending them. (12)

Probably the greatest modern pioneer in these sorts of experiments is Dr. William Braud. According to Lynne McTaggart in The Field, Dr. Braud began by performing an experiment in the late 1960s in which he attempted to transmit his thoughts to one of his students–while the student was under hypnosis. When Dr. Braud picked his  hand, the student felt pain. When he put his hand over a candle flame, the student felt heat. When he stared at a picture of a boat, the student made comments about a boat. When Braud stepped into the sun, the student mentioned sunlight. Distance did not seem to matter; even when Braud was many miles away, it worked just as well. (13) This certainly suggests that the Backster Effect is just the beginning–we share so much more information with one another than just the shocks from our nervous system. As the years went by, Dr. Braud sought ways to study this effect under controlled laboratory conditions–and he has now published more than 250 articles in professional psychology journals, and written numerous book chapters. (14) (15)

Braud’s first rigorous laboratory experiment involved knife fish, which emit electrical signals that change whenever they move from one position to another. These electrical signals can be used to precisely determine the fish’s position, and can be picked up by electrodes attached to the side of the tank. Braud’s participants were consistently able to change the position of the fish by their conscious intent alone. Similarly, Braud found that participants could increase the speed that Mongolian gerbils ran on their activity wheel,s with all other factors being ruled out. Braud also designed an experiment in which he put human red blood cells in a test tube–along with a saline solution that had enough salt in it to kill the cells. His participants were able to focus their minds and protect these cells from bursting open. This was easily verified by measuring how much light could pass through the solution. The more the cells broke down, the more transparent the solution became–so less light was a sign of healthier cells. (16)

From there, Braud moved on to human beings. Have you ever felt someone staring at you, only to turn around and fin out you were right? Braud wanted to see if he could study this effect in the lab, and confirm that it really works. He put one person in a private room with a small video camera, wired him up to the polygraph and told him to relax. In a neighboring room, he could see the participant’s face on his television monitor. A second participant was then told to stare intently at this person on the monitor and try to get his attention–but only when a computerized random-number generator told them to. Sure enough, when the first person was being stared at, his skin revealed significant electrical spikes. This occurred an average of 59 percent of the time he was being stared at. (17) This might not sound like much, but a 9-percent increase above chance is considered highly substantial.

Dr. Braud then changed the experiment. He had his participants meet each other first–and stare intently into each other’s eyes while they talked. He encouraged them to get comfortable with each other. Now, when the person was stared at by his friend, he noticeably relaxed–on a measurable electrical level. (18) This is solid proof that people can be staring at us, sending us their pai, transmitting thoughts–and even though our bodies may react to these signals on a physical level, we usually don’t have any conscious awareness of what’s going on. The same thing might be happening when the phone rings and we think we know who it is–only to find out we were right. When the caller visualizes our face, we feel something–and if our mind is quiet enough, we might get a mental image of who it is. Rupert Sheldrake, one of the most renowned Source Field investigators in modern times, also has proven “the sense of being stared at” is indeed genuine–in multiple, published experiments. (19)

The Outer Limits of Shared Consciousness

Minor anxiety disorders, like nervousness and the inability to concentrate, also were measurably improved in Dr. Braud’s studies. In an experiment from 1983, Dr. Braud and an anthropologist named Marilyn Schlitz studied a group of highly nervous people along with a group of calmer people. The nervousness of each group, in this case, could be directly measured by the amount of electrical activity on their skin. In some cases, the groups were given common relaxation techniques and instructed to calm themselves down. In other cases, Braud and Schlitz tried to calm them down by simply concentrating on them from another room. The originally calm group showed very little change by practicing the exercises or being “remote influenced,” but the nervous group became much calmer–in both cases. Surprisingly, Braud and Schlitz’s remote influencing effects upon the nervous group worked almost as well as any relaxation exercises they did for themselves. (20) Similarly, when Braud and Schlitz remotely concentrated on someone in an attempt to help him focus his attention, the subject had an immediate improvement. The people whose minds were the most apt to wander gained the strongest benefits from this process. (21)

Thankfully, Braud also found out that we are not helpless against these remote influences–we can shield the ones we don’t want. (22) If you visualize a protective shield, a safe, a barrier or a screen–whatever you feel comfortable with–you can indeed stop these influences from affecting you. (23) The remote influencers did not know which participants were trying to block their thoughts, but the peopple who did try to shield themselves were successful. (24) Other evidence suggests a positive attitude in life is your best protection, as we will see–the highest “coherence” wins.

Sperry Andrews put together a proposal for a series of ninety-second television spots that would demonstrate these “collective consciousness” experiments to the world–for an initial investment of $711,000 dollars.

In this proposal, Andrews mentions some startling facts. More than five hundred different scientific studies have proven that human consciousness can affect biological as well as electronic systems (26)–and we will learn more about the electronic experiments later on. Schlitz and Honorton explored thirty-nine different studies during which people successfully shared thoughts and experiences–while they were physically separated from one another. The overall probability that these effects were caused by chance alone was less than one part in a trillion. (27) In some studies, ordinary people detected events that had not even happened yet in linear time. (28) (29) In an extremely comprehensive paper on the Source Field from 2004, Robert Kenny revealed that the Institute of HeartMath developed Grinberg’s original discoveries about brain-to-brain entrainment much further:

“Even when participants were in separate rooms, their heart and brain waves became synchronized or entrained, when they had close living or working relationships, or when they felt appreciation, care, empathy, or love toward each other. . . . When people were able to internally entrain their own personal heart and brain waves [through meditation and other related techniques], they caused the heart and brain waves of other individuals to entrain with theirs. Entrainment appears to increase attention, to produce feelings of calm and deep connection, and to facilitate tele-prehension of each other’s sensations, emotions, images, thoughts and intuitions.” (30)

Great controversy again rose because The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, a highly respected science journal, decided to publish the research of Dr. Daryl J. Bem–an emeritus professor at Cornell University.

In one case, Dr. Bem wanted to see if people would “remember” words that they didn’t actually study until after they had already been tested on those words. This experiment began with the participants being given a test in which they had to memorize certain vocabulary words. After they took the test, Dr. Bem randomly chose some of the specified vocabulary words and had the participants study them closely: learn their definitions, practice with them and become comfortable with them. The words they studied in the future (after the test) became the words they memorized most easily in the past (during the test).” (32)

Works Cited

4 Rueckert, Carla; Elkins, Don and McCarty, Jim. The Law Of One, Book I: The Ra Material. Atglen, Pennsylvania: Whitford Press, 1984.

5 Ibid

6 Quinones, Sam. “Looking for Doctor Grinberg.” New Age Journal. July/August 1997. http://www.sustainedaction.org/Explorations/professor_jacobo_grinberg.htm (accessed December 2010)

7 Grinberg-Zylberbaum, Jacobo. (1994) “Brain t Brain Interactions and the Interpretation of Reality.” Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico and Instituto Nacional Para el Estudio de la Conciencia, Project: D6APA UNAM IN 500693 and IN 503693. http://www.start.gr/user/symposia/zylber4.htm (accessed December 2010)

8 Grinberg-Zylberbaum, Jacobo, and Ramos, J. “Patterns of interhemisphere correlations during human communication.” International Journal of Neuroscience, 1987; 36: 41-53; Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J. et. al., “Human Communication and the electrophysiological activity of the brain.” Subtle Energies, 1992; 3(3): 25-43.

9 Grinberg-Zylberbaum, Jacobo. “The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox in the Brain; The Transferred Potential.” Physics Essays 7,(4), 1994

10 Jacobo Grinberg-Zylbrbaum Facebook page. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=25113472687 (accessed December 2010)

12 Tart, Chares. “Physiological Correlates of Psi Cognition.” International Journal of Parapsychology, 1963: 5; 375-86.

13 McTaggart, Lynne. The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe. New York: HarperCollins, 2002; pp. 126-127

14 Institute of Transpersonal Psychology. William Braud’s Faculty Profile. http://www.itp.edu/academics/faculty/braud.php (accessed December 2010)

15 Institute of Transpersonal Psychology. William Braud: Publications. http://www.itp.edu/academics/faculty/braud/publications.php (accessed December 2010)

16 Braud, W. and Schlitz, M. J. “Consciousness interactions with remote biological systems: anomalous intentionality effects.” Subtle Energies, 1991; 2(1): 1-46

17 Schlitz, M. and LaBerge, S. “Autonomic detection of remote observation: two conceptual replications.” In Bierman (ed), Proceedings of Presented Papers: 465-78.

18 Braud, W., et al: “Further Studies of autonomic detection of remote observation: two conceptual replications.” In Bierman (ed), Proceedings of Presented Papers: 465-78.

19 Sheldrake, Rupert. Papers on the Sense of Being Stared At. Sheldrake.org. http://www.sheldrake.org/Aricles&Papers/papers/staring/index.html (accessed December 2010).

20 Braud, W. and Schlitz, M. Psychokinetic influence on electrodermal activity. Journal of Parapsychology, 1983; 47(2): 95-119.

21 Braud, W., et al.: “Attention focusing facilitated through remote mental interaction.” Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 1995; 89(2): 103-15.

22 Braud, W. G. “Blocking/shielding psychic functioning through psychological and psychic techniques: a report of three preliminary studies.” In White, R. and Solfvin, I. (eds), Research in Parapsychology, 1984 Metuchen, NJ: Scarecroww Press, 1985, pp. 42-44

23 Braud, W.G. “Implications and applications of laboratory psi findings.” European Journal of Parapsychology, 1990-91; 8: 57-65.

24 Braud, W., et al. “Further studies of the bio-PK effect: feedback, blocking, generality/specificity.” In White, R. and Solfvin, I. (eds), Research in Parapsychogy: 45-48.

26 Andrews, Sperry. Educating for Peace through Planetary Consciousness: The Human Connection Project. Human Connection Institute. http://www.connectioninstitute.org/PDF/HCP_Fund_Proposal.pdf (accessed December 2010).

27 Schlitz, M.J., Honorton, C. “ESP and creativity in an exceptional population.” Proceedings of Presented Papers: 33rd Annual Parapsychology Association Convention; Washington, D.C.: 1990. In Andrews, Sperry (ed). Educating for Peace Through Planetary Consciousness: The Human Connection Project. Human Connection Institute. http://www.connectioninstitute.org/PDF/HCP_Fund_Proposal.pdf (accessed December 2010).

28 Jahn, R.G., Dunne, B. J. Margins of Reality: The Role of Consciousness in the Physical World. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1987.

29 Bisaha, J.J., Dunne, B. J. “Multiple subject and long-distance precognitive remote viewing of geographical locations.” In: Tart, C., Puthoff, H. E., Targ, R., eds. Mind at Large. New York: Praeger, 1979: 107-124.

30 Kenny, Robert. (2004) What Can Science Tell Us About Collective COnsciousness? Collective Wisdom Initiative. http://www.collectivewisdominitiative.org/papers/kenny_science.htm (accessed December 2010).

32 Carey, Benedict. “Journal’s Papers on ESP Expected to Prompt Outrage.” The New York Times, January 5, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/science/06esp.html?_r=2&hp (accessed January 2011).

Advertisements