Steve

When you mentioned that some of these areas that we would call primitive, but they're living more in touch with nature, have this innate ability, it hearkens back to the aboriginals in Australia that had what was called dream time. And they would literally have lucid dreams at night, communicate with each other and have meetups with no telephones or smoke signals or anything.

When you mentioned that some of these areas that we would call primitive, but they're living more in touch with nature, have this innate ability, it hearkens back to the aboriginals in Australia that had what was called dream time. And they would literally have lucid dreams at night, communicate with each other and have meetups with no telephones or smoke signals or anything.

And so in many civilizations that we would dismiss as primitive, That was just part of the natural order. Western civilization coming into science and through the scientific revolution and also rejecting the superstitions and excesses of the Middle Ages and whatnot. Sort of threw the baby out with the bathwater.

And so in many civilizations that we would dismiss as primitive, That was just part of the natural order. Western civilization coming into science and through the scientific revolution and also rejecting the superstitions and excesses of the Middle Ages and whatnot. Sort of threw the baby out with the bathwater.

And so in many civilizations that we would dismiss as primitive, That was just part of the natural order. Western civilization coming into science and through the scientific revolution and also rejecting the superstitions and excesses of the Middle Ages and whatnot. Sort of threw the baby out with the bathwater.

So I see a time where we'll go forward as a high-tech civilization, but at the same time an increasingly conscious and enlightened civilization, both. And I think that's the sort of balance where you become a very advanced civilization because primacy is with your conscious evolution. You know, the world is as you are, as it says in the Vedas.

So I see a time where we'll go forward as a high-tech civilization, but at the same time an increasingly conscious and enlightened civilization, both. And I think that's the sort of balance where you become a very advanced civilization because primacy is with your conscious evolution. You know, the world is as you are, as it says in the Vedas.

So I see a time where we'll go forward as a high-tech civilization, but at the same time an increasingly conscious and enlightened civilization, both. And I think that's the sort of balance where you become a very advanced civilization because primacy is with your conscious evolution. You know, the world is as you are, as it says in the Vedas.

The world we see as a reflection of what our level of consciousness and thoughts are. And so I think that can evolve. There's no reason why we have to be stuck in the current state of things. Now, change is difficult. Most people don't like change or adventures. I love adventures and change.

The world we see as a reflection of what our level of consciousness and thoughts are. And so I think that can evolve. There's no reason why we have to be stuck in the current state of things. Now, change is difficult. Most people don't like change or adventures. I love adventures and change.

The world we see as a reflection of what our level of consciousness and thoughts are. And so I think that can evolve. There's no reason why we have to be stuck in the current state of things. Now, change is difficult. Most people don't like change or adventures. I love adventures and change.

But it's something that if we stay, you know, there's like the old Chinese saying, unless we change directions, we're likely to end up where we're going. And I say, look, where are we going? We're going to hell in a handbasket right now. Not just geopolitically, but in terms of tensions and wars, but also with the earth and the environment and poverty.

But it's something that if we stay, you know, there's like the old Chinese saying, unless we change directions, we're likely to end up where we're going. And I say, look, where are we going? We're going to hell in a handbasket right now. Not just geopolitically, but in terms of tensions and wars, but also with the earth and the environment and poverty.

But it's something that if we stay, you know, there's like the old Chinese saying, unless we change directions, we're likely to end up where we're going. And I say, look, where are we going? We're going to hell in a handbasket right now. Not just geopolitically, but in terms of tensions and wars, but also with the earth and the environment and poverty.

You know, The Economist last couple of years ago had an article, 3 billion people on earth don't even have energy to cook their food. So they're cutting out the brush and making deserts appear and cutting down the rainforest. 3 billion of the 8 billion. So there's no way to have a peaceful world or a just world with the zero-sum game of the current energy system. This becomes very clear.

You know, The Economist last couple of years ago had an article, 3 billion people on earth don't even have energy to cook their food. So they're cutting out the brush and making deserts appear and cutting down the rainforest. 3 billion of the 8 billion. So there's no way to have a peaceful world or a just world with the zero-sum game of the current energy system. This becomes very clear.

You know, The Economist last couple of years ago had an article, 3 billion people on earth don't even have energy to cook their food. So they're cutting out the brush and making deserts appear and cutting down the rainforest. 3 billion of the 8 billion. So there's no way to have a peaceful world or a just world with the zero-sum game of the current energy system. This becomes very clear.

But as Patrick David told me the other day, if you bring these out, there are so many powerful interests. You're talking about hundreds of trillions of dollars in aggregate impact. And that was the mistake of 100 years ago.

But as Patrick David told me the other day, if you bring these out, there are so many powerful interests. You're talking about hundreds of trillions of dollars in aggregate impact. And that was the mistake of 100 years ago.

But as Patrick David told me the other day, if you bring these out, there are so many powerful interests. You're talking about hundreds of trillions of dollars in aggregate impact. And that was the mistake of 100 years ago.