“I do believe in a God-force. I think I come at that from a cosmological prospect as well as a belief in that the cumulation of all these other things suggest that to me very, very, very strongly. And I do think there is a survival of consciousness because there are just far too many fields that tell us, consciousness can operate independent of time. It can operate independent of location.
“And so, eventually you come to these topics and you find out, oh my gosh, consciousness behaves independent of any of the explanations of normal science and physics and independent of your container, in a sense, that…in several different ways, it exhibits independence of the container that is spawning consciousness.”
Comments and transcription by Joe Murgia – @ufojoe11 on Twitter.
Recently, researcher Keith Basterfield created and posted a transcript (which included his commentary) of George Knapp’s interview on Coast to Coast AM with Robert Bigelow from September 28th, 2008. Bigelow discussed the formation of BAASS with his new partner/sponsor in an attempt to glean technology from the study of UFO and paranormal cases. That partner turned out to be the DIA and it was the beginning of AAWSAP.
There’s not a lot of long-form interviews available where Bigelow discusses UFOs and/or paranormal subjects so I decided to transcribe this one from Bigelow’s appearance with Art Bell on the March 17th, 2007 edition of Coast to Coast AM. As expected, Bigelow is well read/informed on the evidence related to consciousness and it was fun to transcribe this one since I’m familiar with a lot of the work of the researchers he referenced. I think this interview offers great insight into how Bigelow thinks about these subjects. Hope you enjoy it.
I only transcribed the segments that dealt with UFOs or the paranormal.
Art Bell (AB): Well all right. Back again with Bob Bigelow. Bob, welcome back.
Bob Bigelow (BB): Well, thank you.
AB: Actually, all of this aerospace business is new. Prior to aerospace, you were into all kinds of paranormal subjects. Very deeply into paranormal. And I know you financed many, many scientists that I’ve interviewed on the air, over the years. And I guess, in some ways, one sort of lead into the other? And in fact, kind of meshes or may mesh with the other. Is that so?
BB: Uhhh…Well yeah, I think that’s kind of fair to say. I think so.
AB: A lot of my listeners, they follow UFOlogy very closely, Bob. And obviously, here you are, a private citizen with a spacecraft in orbit. Another one about to be. More on the way. You’re gonna have a lot of cameras in space. You’re gonna have a lot of ability to look around, as it were, and view unfiltered, untampered…you’re gonna have a lot of footage, Bob, that didn’t go through anybodies’ filter. Are you going to be looking?
BB: Well, you know…one of the things that characterizes the UFO enigma and that fabulously, interesting topic, is that it is in command of its behavior. And it really is selective as to when it wants to expose or where, to whom and the timing.
BB: And it is always a challenge to try to ever get a replication of an exposure and have a second performance. Those kinds of things are relatively unique. And so, it’s a catch can, catch it catch can, kind of thing. And obviously, our cameras are looking back at the Earth as we show those scenes on our website. We also have a lot of cameras, however, that are looking back on the spacecraft itself to monitor the behavior of the spacecraft, what is going on. And, of course, a lot of those cameras are interior as well. The majority, though, I think are probably exterior located. But if you were to say, look, would you promise us that if you capture something looking in the face of one of those lenses that you’ll identify it as such? You’re damn right we will. Absolutely.
AB: In addition to that, aside from a possible little gray face or something like that…the STS cameras have, on occasion, caught things that are very, very curious. I mean things that just almost can’t be. They’ve caught objects, apparently shooting at other objects.
(Audio in French but it’s easy to see what they’re talking about. ~Joe)
AB: They’ve caught all kinds of things, Bob.
AB: And you’re gonna have cameras focused in the same area. So, if you catch something like that, you’ll make that available, won’t you?
BB: Absolutely. Absolutely. If we see something crossing in a certain direction and it makes a right angle turn, that is anomalous.
AB: It sure is. I’m sure that you’ve seen some of the STS footage of things just like that haven’t you?
BB: Yes. Yes. Yeah. And they explained it away as ice crystals that were blown off prop systems on board. (laughs).
AB: Yes, I know. I know. From the tone of your voice, I take it you didn’t fully buy that yourself?
BB: No, not based on a couple of those that I’ve seen. I think that’s something else.
AB: Okay. Is it reasonable, Bob, in your mind, that if there was another intelligence out there – since we set off the first, above ground test – that they would have been watching us? That they would be monitoring us and therefore, something in low-Earth orbit or any kind of orbit, might well get a look at something?
BB: Uhh, yeah. I think, uhh, you know, you’re…you have kind of two thoughts that you’ve just expressed at the same time. And one suggests that the awareness of this phenomenon occurred at the time that we first started detonating nuclear devices.
AB: Yes, Sir.
BB: And I could argue that maybe it has been around much longer than that. But then…yeah, I think, you know, you have a number of astronauts that have come back and reported things that they have seen both terrestrially, incidentally, as well as airborne.
AB: Oh, that’s absolutely true, of course, And it’s kind of underreported. But yes, many astronauts have…quite a few astronauts have seen something. Something! So it’s entirely possible that in this venture…I mean, it is after all, going where very few people – you just documented it yourself – have gone. And so, I don’t know…I’ve always had this theory that maybe, since the beginning of man, they’ve been watching us or keeping tabs on us. But certainly, when we entered the Element 92 (Uranium ~Joe) age, we would have really captured their more intent observation of us, I would think.
BB: I think it would be interesting to be an objective observer of the human species and ponder the progress of the technological achievements at the same time that you’re hoping that, gee, the spiritual maturity is keeping pace. And what happens when it never does? And, you know, I always wonder, are we the Klingons?
AB: Oh yes (laughs)! Yeah, are we the Klingons.
Ralph in Cerittos, California, asks, “Has the U.S. government, at any point, ever asked you to censor any possible footage that you might get in space?”
BB: No. Not yet…as of this time.
AB: (laughs) How would you react to such a request?
BB: Well it would have to be an awfully good reason. I mean, you know, we are Americans and we feel as patriotic as the next guy. But we would have to really be convinced that such a demand…it would have to get into the context of not just probably a request but an actual demand. We have already experienced something in a different kind of way. In a different context.
AB: Oh? Can you talk about it?
BB: Well, only in a circumspect kind of way. And that was that we were…the result of exposing something would have violated a promise and agreement that we had with some other folks and we refused to do that. It wasn’t something that, in our judgment, was warranted. It was something that violated our ethics, it violated our principles of contracts and it violated our keeping our word. And it wasn’t in a the context in which it was…we were given as, in of terms of a request. It wasn’t a demand, it was in a request and we turned the request down.
AB: Hmmm. All right, well obviously you can’t talk any more about that so I won’t push any further.
AB: I wonder if you can give us any late, updates on The Skinwalker Ranch? We’ve been kind of going through a UFO flap over the last months, since the O’Hare Airport incident.
AB: And it’s been pretty wild, Bob. Do you have any comments on that and any update on the ranch?
BB: Oh, well…you know, I still am involved in investigations, not of the intensity of what I was in the nineteen nineties and the late eighties and prior to when I just had to jump in on the space subject. But well..okay, going to the ranch. We had a period of time when there was a lull in that ranch in activity. And that lasted for, oh gosh, perhaps a year and a half or two years. I don’t recall exactly how long it was but there was a time there when it, where…and you know..in this subject, it kind of ebb and flows, as you know. And, so lately, in the last couple of years, we’ve had a lot…we’ve had a reemergence of activity and it’s, it’s…it’s umm, and again, it doesn’t repeat itself. The characteristics are that they’re very unsuspecting as to…you do not suspect the time or the kind of performance or the timing of the perfoemance, number one. Things do not repeat themselves, either, in the same way, number two. And number three, there does not appear to be a hostile intent. It’s not a performance that is…appears to deliberately or, you know, cause harm.
AB: More like poltergeist activity.
BB: Yeah, there is a sense of game with it. There is a strong sense and I’m not sure, you know…I won’t go down the relationship…characterizing it as relationships or anything of that sort. But there is, I’m sure you know there’s, you know, this is a topic that seems to lend itself to conscious behavior or consciousness connections. I’ll put it that way.
AB: That’s right.
BB: And so you can get the feeling that there is an awareness that we can’t account for. There is an awareness that is not something in which you have control over. So therefore, you know, these performances are at the behest of the performer. We are an observer and a bystander and a participant, willing or unwilling, you know, in this. And were are getting an education (laughs), you know, all of this kind of stuff produces information. Just like the little spacecraft that we’re flying, in an attempt to do something grand some day, it’s all very informational.
You know, in the cattle mutilation area, for example, gosh, we’ve researched all these different subjects from crop circles to cattle mutilations and abductees and propulsion systems and shapes of craft and all kinds of other consciousness-connected kind of things. And, you know…you just…well I don’t know where you want me to go in this. But I think that the…in the cattle mutilation area, as an example. If you wanna say, well what can you make use of? Let’s say this. Let’s supposed you were to ask the question: Well, is there anything about this that might relate beneficially to an application that you can do in some time soon? Well I would say, in the cattle mutilation area for example…gosh, there are some very interesting exhibitions of relatively non-invasive surgery that have removed a great deal of tissue from an animal. And you don’t know under what circumstance that animal was anesthetized or was it already dead or what. But the less invasive you can make your surgery, the faster your recovery, right?
AB: Of course.
BB: So in a space-based application, that’s very important. You don’t want a lot of loose liquid flying around and so you wanna do things to heal a patient that are the least invasive that you can do.
AB: (laughing as he speaks) I never thought about that. There might be an application there. I never thought about that. All right, Bob. I’ve got a whopper of a question when I get back. I know you funded scientists. You’ve looked into consciousness. You’ve looked into survival of what are, I guess our soul after physical death. And so when we get back, I wanna ask you if you’ve come to any conclusions, with everything you’ve funded, about life after death. Bob Bigelow. Back in a moment.
For years and years, behind the scenes…most of it, frankly, behind the scenes, Bob Bigelow has funded scientists who are looking into areas that we talk about all the time on Coast To Coast AM. Areas like survival of consciousness beyond bodily death, as an example. He’s done work and has funded people that ahh, you just, you wouldn’t believe. There’s been a very great deal of it behind the scenes that’s gone on. So in a moment, we’ll ask Bob what he thinks about that. Stay right there.
Bob, I probably only know about a small portion of the funding that you’ve done of various scientists into this area. But I wonder if you’ve come to any personal conclusions over the years about survival of consciousness? An increasingly important question for you and it. Beyond it. Do you believe that it does survive?
BB: Well you sure kicked this conversation up a couple of notches didn’t you? As (inaudible) said.
AB: Well, I did (laughs).
BB: (laughing) Bam! You just knocked it up! Yeah, this is the holy grail, isn’t it?
BB. Of topics. This really is. And I am a person that has difficulty accepting things on faith alone. This is the way I am. And so, I’m one that needs quite a few rocks on the pile for convincing. And I’m also, I need more than just one pile of rocks. I have to have different ways that I come about validating a hypothesis or some notion or some piece of information that I get. And so I always come at it multiple different ways, different directions. So, for me, on this particular topic, which is so profound, so huge and has so much diverse meaning behind it, I came at it [from] multiple directions.
Now, in this area, let’s talk about consciousness for a minute because we’re talking about, does consciousness survive bodily death. And as we have to say, exactly…what do we know about consciousness? What is it that we think we really know? And, of course, none of our science, our traditional science can, whether it’s quantum mechanics or not, can begin to handle the subject of consciousness. In this whole theater, there are many, many different compartments to this area. For example, we can talk about consciousness as it affects things in micro/macro PK, or psychometry, mental telepathy, remote viewing, the power of prayer,. You know, we have all kinds of famous authors that have written about apparitions and poltergeists. And so we have even the remote viewing that was famously engaged by the CIA for twenty years and friends of ours who ran those programs for SRI. We have Bob Jahn and Brenda Dunne of PEAR on random/remote generators.
AB: You bet.
BB: And so we understand all that and we know those people. And so, we know that if we look at any one of these kinds of areas and say…is there any substance to any of this stuff? I mean, can we find one white crow? If you find one, lousy white crow here, you got a problem from normal science context. In that context, you have a problem. And so, what I did, was I tried to find as many…first, one white crow and was there a second one or a third? And did I really know it was a white crow? And so you’d go down that road until finally, you say, yeah, there’s legitimacy here because there’s too many validations of this.
So then you get into, oh gosh, other subjects like past lives that Brian Weiss engages in and that opens up all kinds of…because then you find out that guys like Harold Sherman wrote about this a long time ago. And then you find out that, people like Williams James wrote about it even way before that. And William James was no slouch. He was a world class scientist and researcher in his time. And James Pike. So you had these kinds of folks. And so for me, I went back, like I did in the UFO topic. In fact, our science advisory board – you may not know this – when we initially formed NIDS, it had two pillars of interest: UFOs and consciousness. And we had a population of members on that board that fit in both camps. And so we were blessed to have…Ian Stevenson and Melvin Morse. Emily Cook, who was also an associate of Ian Stevenson. And other people…very high caliber work. World class researchers.
And we talked with people like Larry Dossey, familiar with and all of his work and the power of prayer. And how do you validate that? Do you have double blind studies where you have a placebo situation and they’re able to validate that the control group is severely in place? And yet, you’re having this effect. And is there a difference between whether the patient is assisted by the physician? Or is there a factor of how many people are praying? Does that make a difference? Or the conviction of the people that are praying, including the physician? Is there a component here that’s connected to the belief? How strong is the belief in facilitating this?
And then you get into the apparitional side of it. And poltergeist activity. And so, I think, long story, short, I do believe in a God-force. I think I come at that from a cosmological prospect as well as a belief in that the cumulation of all these other things suggest that to me very, very, very strongly. And I do think there is a survival of consciousness because there are just far too many fields that tell us, consciousness can operate independent of time. It can operate independent of location. I mean, look at Edgar Cayce. I mean, you don’t have to, you know, a person doesn’t have to take any one of these things and say, well…gee, I don’t really kinda believe all that really happened. That Edgar Cayce could do those things and so forth. Well, then move into one of the other topics and research the hell out of that. And see if you go from topic to topic to topic until you come up with a white crow. And now, you’ve got a problem. If you’re a skeptic, you have a problem here. And it’s now trying to explain that. And so, eventually you come to these topics and you find out, oh my gosh, consciousness behaves independent of any of the explanations of normal science and physics and independent of your container, in a sense, that…in several different ways, it exhibits independence of the container that is spawning consciousness.
AB: Here here. Did you find or do you believe there to be any connection, Robert, between consciousness and the appearance of UFOs?
BB: Oh gosh yes. Oh yes. Oh gosh yes.
AB: (laughing) I thought you might say that.
(Joe’s Comment: I REALLY wish Bell had following up on that answer by BB.)
Question from a caller: Did not God, as a creation and to himself, give man the power to create. And God being able to create reality in which we now live, do we not, perhaps, have the power to create as a collective consciousness or perhaps even individually, our own realities?
BB: Well, yeah. Actually, there are some physicists and scientists that have kind of come to the conclusion that there is a God-force that has a conscious aspect to it. And in fact, there’s a new book out by Bernie Haisch, who is a zero-point expert as is Hal Puthoff. And in his new book, it’s something like The God Theory, and he espouses the notion that a lot of us have, that if there is a universal God-force that was prior to the Big Bang existing and caused that information to take place, that probably it permeates every single organic and non-organic substance in the entire Universe.. That all of it, every single thing in the entire Universe, is part of that God-force. And that way, that God-force in theory, has [been] able to express itself by being part of every living and non-living thing.
AB: I wonder if there’s any limit to the creation that we’re going to be allowed to do?
BB: Well, I would guess there would be (both laugh). Yeah!
AB: Yeah, in other words, when we get to creating life ourself, we may not be that far from it.