Disclosure: Advanced Technology Training Part 1

Disclosure: Advanced Technology Training Part 1

Disclosure with David Wilcock

Season 4, Episode 1
September 24, 2018
Broadcast on GAIA

David Wilcock: I’m here with Pete Peterson, and we are exploring some of the early influences that led to him being able to have such an incredible scientific knowledge.

Every subject that Pete seems to talk about, he has amazingly technical details that go far beyond what most people would ever do.

So Pete, welcome back to the show.

Pete Peterson: Thank you much.

David: We’ve been talking in the past about your work with what appears to have been some highly classified, compartmentalized program, which may have been run by the government, that you were calling White Star Ranch.

And you also said that they were only kind of directing you, loosely, through a very advanced and very prolonged study program.

Pete: That’s correct.

David: You’ve also mentioned – and this is some of the stuff that we’ve talked about off camera – that you worked with some really intense luminaries in the course of these, shall we say, “facilitated” study programs that you were brought into?

Pete: Absolutely.

David: So could you start with some of the names that were earlier along of people who you worked with that we might be able to look up or corroborate some of the details that you’re sharing with us?

Pete: Well, some of them were highly well known in the esoteric science field, or mathematics, or other things.

Some of them were known in the business field, but differently than they . . . Definitely, they were different than they were known about the public. And I’ll cover those differences and things like that as we go along.

David: Okay.

Pete: Some of them are luminaries today in their fields, and they were beginners in those days. And there are some of them I co-studied with that were co-studiers within this overall program.

And the White Star Ranch thing was kind of a coordinating thing, and it was all very highly . . . like, you never knew who you were really . . . who was directing it. You never knew who was doing it. It wasn’t White Star Ranch.

All White Star Ranch was there for was to take care of the paperwork, and the books, and the bookings, and the transportation.

And then I got my directions as to where you’d be studying next, or who you’d be studying with next from there, but it was like they were just passing envelopes along.

So they weren’t really . . . This was a very top secret program, and they were really compartmentalized.

David: Were you aware that it was top secret from the beginning when you first started?

Pete: I was . . . My original briefing was one that made me shiver for a couple years.

David: Really? What about the briefing made you shiver so much?

Pete: Well, the fact that if I opened my mouth or said anything, I would be summarily dismissed – permanently! And that was made very clear.

And every once in a while, somebody boo booed in the program that you might have known was in the program, and they were no longer in the program or any other program.

David: Mm.

Pete: And so it . . . You know, it’s like during the Gulf War One, the F-117 was introduced to the public – the stealth fighter.

And everybody went, “Oh, my God!” They never realized we had anything this advanced.

“What a wonderful craft. It’s just amazing, and etc., etc., etc.”

Most of them had been in mothballs for 20 years.

David: Right.

Pete: Ha, ha, ha. I mean, that was . . . That was an old thing, and yet nobody had ever heard about it.

David: Well, one of the . . . Pete, one of the ones I’ve used, just for people who don’t think that the government ever keeps a secret, would be the Manhattan Project.

Pete: Oh, absolutely.

David: It’s documented that there was 130,000 people working on it for many years. Many of them – most of them – didn’t even know what they were working on until the bomb actually went off – in some cases, not even until after the bomb went off.

Pete: Right.

David: So this is something that was reinforced with threats. You were fearing for your life if you were to ever talk to anyone about what was going on.

Pete: Oh, I couldn’t talk to my sister I was very close to and my parents.

David: But yet some of the names that you’re going to be sharing with us were essentially celebrities, or at least . . .

Pete: Times have changed. Many of them have passed away.

Some of their . . . Very few of their exploits are really known, yet they were quite well known.

David: Well, I’m also saying, though, it must have been difficult for you at the time to know that you were working with these big luminaries who were publicly known, but you couldn’t say a word about ever talking to them at all, right?

Pete: Well, maybe that’s why I was selected. I didn’t ever have a problem with that. I had . . . had had a problem learning about it.

And, of course, I had friends that were . . . I admittedly was the geek of the time. A “geek”, you know? A total geek.

David: Right.

Pete: And had no idea that women had any other role than cooking, and that kind of thing.

I was interested in science, and I loved spending my time in science, and I was put into contact with brilliant scientists.

I was put into laboratories with brilliant scientists, and I learned things that I never would . . . not even today, a lot of the things I’d have a chance to learn anywhere else.

David: Well, let’s get started. Could you tell us one of the earlier names that we might be able to look up – like somebody you studied with?

Pete: Well, I’ll start with the earliest name. The first contact I had with one of my mentors was Edwin Land, who was the head of Polaroid Corporation.

David: Hm.

Pete: And I remember when I went out there . . . I was 13 years old and went out there on a DC6 airplane. That gives you an idea how long ago it was.

David: Ha, ha. Yeah.

Pete: That was the most modern thing we had for hauling people.

And I got off the plane, and he said, “If you think we’re going to talk about the GD [God-damn] Polaroid camera, get back on the plane and go home.”

David: Ha, ha, ha.

Pete: He was embarrassed by it, because that wasn’t his real field. And it’s something that he did in order to make something very new happen, which was the Polaroid camera.

Now his expertise was in the field of human sight, and how we actually see.

And I remember the first comment, he said, “Now, the first lesson is: you don’t see with your eyes.”

And I’m trying to think, “Well, yeah, I have heard there are other organs that have light sensitivity, but I don’t see why we talk about the eyes so much.”

Well, it turns out that we do see with out eyes, but only very primarily, and then the brain converts those signals over to what we “see”.

For example, 8′ away from a wall . . . About the most sensitive, or the smallest device we have in our system to see is the end of a rod. The rod cells and cone cells in the eye, and the end of the rod . . .

David: In the retina, yeah.

Pete: . . . is just the tip of a pin. And he said, “Now, if you take the diameter of that and multiply the diameter backwards through the magnification of the lens of an eye, at 8′ [243.8 cm] the smallest thing you can see on the wall over there is not a cockroach. It’s like a 1/4” diameter [6.35mm]. . . It’s like a ladybug, or about a 1/4” diameter-type thing.

David: Hm.

Pete: And I’m looking at the wall, and I saw an ant crawling. So how am I seeing the ant crawl up the wall?

He says, “That’s exactly what we’re here to talk about.”

He says, “You don’t see the ant crawling up the wall. What you see is: it’s a number of sightings of this ant, and then you put that together with the ants you’ve seen when you’re close up to the wall, and the mind is not only looking at the ant and seeing how fast does this thing go, how does it . . . how does it, you know, how does it crawl?

And all of that goes together, and then that comes back and says, “Oh, I remember this thing you saw when we were right up looking at the wall. That’s an ant.”

David: Hm.

Pete: And then from then on, that little ant up in your brain is what you see. And then it warps itself according to the movement that it sees on this thing and makes an ant out of it.

David: Do you think that this may be part of why there’s that legend of the Mayans not being able to see the ships of the conquistadors as they were sailing in?

Pete: It’s learned. All vision is learned.

You go into a new field. You go into a new field and you see things. A, you see things differently. B, you see other things.

It’s like . . . I taught a lot of classes when I was in the Marine Corps in survival. And I taught a lot of classes in combat survival, which is very different.

And when people went in . . . We had a huge . . . We had a canyon, and we had bleachers on one side, and on the other side, at Camp Pendleton in California, is jungle – or apparent jungle.

And so you’re looking out down through this canyon and up the other side.

And then they said, “Now, look to see if you can see people behind trees, in trees, behind bushes, on the ground.”

Well, you’re in combat. You want to know if there’s an enemy out there.

David: Right. Well, you’re trying to see little traces of them. Yeah.

Pete: Well, now you’re trying to see THEM. You want to know: there’s a sniper there. There is a mortar outfit here. And you’re out looking for very specific things.

This is your first day on this training ground.

You look out there, and you see nothing. And then a sergeant major or a gunny walks out and says, “Attention!”

And the whole damn field and the whole other side of the thing and all the trees – everything – just come alive.

David: Ha, ha, ha.

Pete: And you realize everybody was there, but you didn’t see a thing.

By the time you’re done with those classes, you walk out there and you can say, “There’s a sniper. There’s a guy with a gun. There’s a guy with hand grenades. There’s a guy . . .” And you can see ’em all . . .

David: Hm.

Pete: . . . because what’s happened is you’ve now made recordings in your mind of what these things are, and you’ll have one . . . each person get up individually and make movements.

David: I think you’ve mentioned to me before something called a ghillie suit. Is that one of the things that was being used?

Pete: One of the things that we studied there was the ghillie suit. It’s a Scottish thing, coming from way back when.

And it’s taking a little bit of fishnet – that’s what they did – and draping it over your clothing, pinning it on, say, with safety pins, or whatever they had in those days – buttons, probably, . . .

David: Okay.

Pete: . . . or toggles – and pinning it on, and having different colors of threads, yarns and threads, hanging down, and different pieces of foliage and leaves sewn on.

David: Right.

Pete: And, you know, you can look like a tree and part of a tree trunk. You know, things that in real life out there are vertical, you have vertical on your suit. Things that are horizontal, you have horizontal on the suit.

And then you’ll have some tree branches stuck on there, and so forth, and all of a sudden, when the mind sees you, the mind sees everything else around, because it’s all the same shape and size and orientation.

David: Well, so you mentioned Ed Land is saying that the eyes aren’t really seeing, and that there’s some sort of associative memory that has tracking of what you already noticed before.

Pete: You see through the filters that are in your brain.

David: Okay.

Pete: Your eye is a sensor, and it picks up . . . it picks up certain portions, certain colors.

Part of your eye picks up color. Part of it picks up black and white. Part of it increases more and more as the sun goes down, or when the sun comes up – it deadens and it goes down.

David: Well, you know something you remind me of? It’s really funny.

There’s this video on the Internet, and before you watch the video, they tell you: “Watch the basketball and see how many people . . . how many times the basketball bounces from one person to another.”

And you watch this basketball going around. I did it myself, and I never saw that there is this person who walks through in a jet black gorilla suit – very slowly, [he] kind of walks through the scene. And you never see the gorilla.

But then when you go back, you’re like, “Oh my God! There was a gorilla there!”

Pete: This is the . . . a good part of the study of ninja – martial art, ninja art.

Fore example, if you don’t ever look at people in a scene, the people in the scenes never see you. Many people, they never see . . . That’s why you bump into people in the street, and it’s such a surprise when you bump into someone.

It’s because they weren’t looking at you.

David: Hm.

Pete: Or it’s because they had the right color . . . a different color pattern on.

David: Well, let’s also talk . . . I’m sure a lot of people are thinking about this: when you are “hypothetically” taking psychedelic drugs – not that any of us have ever done that, but theoretically I’ve heard that people take psychedelic drugs, and that your peripheral vision: it doesn’t work the same way anymore.

You start seeing things that aren’t really there. You have these bizarre experiences.

Pete: Well, on the other hand, you may see things that are there that you haven’t seen before, too.

David: Right. So is this part of the . . . Are hallucinations and those . . . You don’t have to be tripping.

Pete: Hallucinations are part of our life.

David: Hm.

Pete: And we can develop these skills just like you develop the skill to see someone in very good camouflage.

Good camouflage only lasts in the military for four to five years. Like four to five years ago, we didn’t have a camouflage called “MultiCam”.

Now, we’ve gone almost all the way through the Multi-Cam thing. I’m back to the thing that I think olive drab is probably the best thing because then the mind can make up whatever it wants to.

Instead of going down into a narrow band of things that we want to train the eye to see, or not to see, you have a very broadband, which the eye can decide what it is.

But you make it such that it will decide that it is something that it isn’t.

David: Well, since we’re focusing on names in this episode, let’s talk a little bit more specifically about Ed Land, and . . . What was the exact nature of this training?

He’s starting to tell you that the mind is seeing . . .

Pete: The idea was to train me. The end idea of my training, my particular training within this group, was to be able to bring me any . . . any type of problem and have me come up with a solution.

David: Hm.

Pete: So I was trained in electronics and optics and linguistics and mechanics and physics, and, you know, etc., etc., etc. – overall, a jack-of-all-trades, master of maybe a couple.

David: Hm.

Pete: And it was very handy because there’s so much out there that we haven’t studied.

For example, James Clerk Maxwell, father of electromagnetic theory.

In studying electromagnetics, I realized that Maxwell, without the use of all the modern equipment we have – laboratory equipment – he came up with electromagnetic theory, which is the basis for all of electronic sight, television, etc., etc. – all the basis for all of radio, all electromagnetic communications, etc.

I was in England and went to where . . . his laboratory there. And they have everything that he ever wrote – all the notes, all the . . . – in those days, you know, we didn’t have electronic communication – and all the notes and letters and everything.

They had gone around the world and gathered up all this stuff.

I got realizing that of what he came up with that was earth-shaking, only about 10% of it had ever been published.

David: Yeah, I – years ago, years ago – studied Oliver Heaviside taking all of these different mathematical expressions that Maxwell had come up with called “quaternions”, and then boiling all of it down to just four of them, and finding that most of the stuff that we needed to do, electromagnetics that we were doing, could be done just on these four, so why do you want to mess with all this other stuff?

Pete: Exactly. And a lot of the stuff was not done. Each one of these things was an invention as important to humanity as electromagnetics and electromagnetic radiation. And yet nothing had ever been done with it at all.

Well, he was only capable of so much, and it was so exciting in those days they left off with it.

“Oh, here, we can communicate over a distance. Here we can . . . “ And so there was a lot of stuff there.

So I bought a brand new Xerox machine and wore it out. And I have books and books and books somewhere, if they haven’t been molded away in storage, but of different things that I wanted to get back to, but I’ve had such a busy life, I’ve never done it.

David: So this multi-disciplinary education you were given, as you just said, had as its goal making you the ultimate go-to-guy for fixing any type of weird problem that they might have been facing.

Pete: Well, one of them, because there were a number of us that were made this way. Some you probably know about was . . . Patrick Flanagan was in that same training group. And . . .

David: He’s the guy who wrote the pyramid power book that was so famous in the 1970s.

Pete: Right.

David: Yeah.

Pete: I remember one time I had dinner with him when he was visiting in Salt Lake.

I asked him about something that he was doing, and he says, “People don’t want the truth. They want BS that sounds exciting or familiar.”

So I in my lab, he did it in his lab, he did brilliant, brilliant, brilliant work, but you rarely saw that come out in public because the people weren’t sophisticated enough to know how good it was. And it completely overruled the science of the day.

David: So it sounds like this was a very unusual education that you were being given.

Pete: Well, I would . . . I would work with the teacher for a period of time – six months, usually, or somewhere in that area. Then I would work within that field for a period of time, where actual work was going on.

David: Okay.

Pete: And they’d move me around. If there were three things going on, I’d move here and then move here and then move here, so I would get an upgraded experience, plus I’d get hands on . . . hands on knowledge.

And I would devise experiments later on as I got smarter.

David: Can you give us another example of somebody that we might be able to look up that you studied with?

Pete: There was a gentleman that was exceedingly famous, but unfortunately his timing was off. We called him Ed, but Ewart Baldwin.

And he’s the gentleman that built the first transistor. And then his teachers at the time – Bardeen, Brattain, and . . . I used to know the other one – took the credit for it.

He formed the first semiconductor company, which I think was . . .

David: Off camera you had said National Semiconductor.

Pete: National Semiconductor. And then he built . . . And I don’t know exactly which order, but he built Hughes Semiconductor, Rheem Semiconductor, R-H-E-E-M.

David: Okay.

Pete: Several others. And he had two right-hand scientists that worked with him through all of this.

As he got older, they broke off and formed a company that you’ll know that got very famous by developing . . . They’d been developing a device to make what’s called a “dumb terminal”.

In the early days of computers, you had key switches. You’d put 11001011, enter, and you’d do that for quite a while.

And then you’d get the computer to realize it was a computer, and it would come up with a basic operating system.

And then you could program it with a dumb terminal and control it with a dumb terminal phone.

If you push an “a”, the terminal shows an “a” on the screen. If you push a “b”, it shows a “b” on the screen.

If you push “Return”, it sends the “a” and the “b” to the computer, and they disappear from the screen. And then it’ll send you something back.

And up until the mid-’80s, that’s how all – we call them IBM personal computers – would work.

You had a dumb terminal, and then you had a computer that would take that, so you programmed in a language called DOS, which was Disk Operating System. And it would take the data, put it into a disk, bring it off a disk, process it.

David: Yeah, I had some corporate jobs in the early ’90s where you had to use these LAN terminals, . . .

Pete: Right.

David: . . . and the LAN was “local access network”. It was all central computer brain, and your dumb terminal didn’t have any computer in it.

Pete: Right.

David: And they were horribly slow.

Pete: And they were horribly large.

David: Yeah.

Pete: And . . . So there was this company that was formed called Intel by Ed Baldwin’s two right-hand people. and they were to make a chip that would replace a lot of the individual components.

You looked in that dumb terminal: there were 10 times more chips in there than there are on a typical desktop computer today.

And all they were doing was just arranging what you were putting in, and what was coming out in a logical sequence so you could read it.

David: So what did Ed Baldwin actually teach you when you started to study with him?

Pete: Well, again, he was like Land, who said, “Let’s not talk about the camera. Let’s talk about sight.”

Ed Baldwin said, “Let’s talk about quantum physics.”

David: Really?

Pete: And his thing was quantum physics. And he had made a lot of changes in it and hadn’t told anybody. And he told me, and he made it right and made it very appealing, very . . .

David: Why wouldn’t he want to tell anybody?

Pete: Well, for the same reason you don’t want to tell people things today. As soon as you say something, somebody else out there is either brighter than you are, or they’ve got more money involved with them than you have, and they will take your idea, and they will patent it before you can even think about it.

David: Hm.

Pete: And/or the government will . . . The government reviews every patent application and gets first pick.

And they’ve been, as best I can tell, very fair with things in that they will come back and make a bargain with you and turn it back to you when it’s no longer something secret, and a number of things. But you’ll be paid for your work, and an appropriate amount of money.

David: I want to know what Ed Baldwin discovered about quantum mechanics that’s not conventional. What did he see that was so unique?

Pete: Well, he saw a little different way of structuring it, which expanded its capabilities dramatically.

Anything you learn about is learned about in some area that you know something about and you’ve noticed an anomaly. And he decided: what’s that anomaly?

Well, there might have been 500 anomalies in quantum physics, and so a few things that . . . He was also very good in semiconductor theory, and so he looked at it as a semiconductor theorist as well as from a quantum physics-type of person.

So he could say, “Well, this over here . . . “ He’d say, “This I’d really like to look at because I know it will allow us to do things with energy. We can increase heat or decrease heat, so we can cool things.”

Always in science you’re trying to heat or cool something. Like in an automobile, you have radiators and radiating structures – a certain amount of oil capacity to cool the engine by airflow past the oil waves, and such.

And so he’d discovered some things about semiconductors that were very strange, like, for example, hole theory, which is used there, making a hole in the normal atomic matrices and the molecular matrices, and moving holes instead of electrons or protons.

Later on, I came to realize that electrons and protons were very good theoretical things that allowed you to do a lot of . . . a lot of good work, but they had very little to do with reality.

David: Well, let me just add this in, because I know you and I have talked about this before, I’ve studied this whole area a lot myself, and I know that most of what people take for granted as being what’s going on at the quantum level is based on things like: certain elements give off a particular color spectrum, and then they make assumptions based on these particular lines of color, or the so-called “black body radiation” that it gives off.

Or they will shoot a subatomic particle, if you want to call it that, into a chamber of very highly compressed gas or liquid, and it will squiggle a certain way in the chamber, and then they make all these very, very elaborate equations based off of the spiral calculations of these paths.

And yet nobody’s ever really seen anything down there. Nobody ever actually knows what’s down there.

Would you agree?

Pete: Exactly.

David: Okay.

Pete: You know, you have things that: you do this, and you’ll get this result. You have things you do, a different thing, and you’ll get a different result.

You have things: you do this, and you get a same result.

And you combine all those together and you make up a supposition. And then you test the supposition, and it turns out to work pretty well.

David: What are some of the cool things that his new interpretation of quantum mechanics would allow you to do?

Pete: Well, one of the things was: we took an old Xerox machine . . . this was in later life when I came back and we became partners on a couple things, you know, 30, 40 years later.

David: Okay.

Pete: He was nearing the end of his lifespan, but he had some very good ideas.

We took a Xerox machine, and we made a thing we could slit mylar sheets in it and print photo cells at about 25¢ [US$0.25] a watt.

David: Hm!

Pete: We made some special batteries, or electronic storage devices. Well, I’ll call them batteries. They were something different, but we’ll call them batteries, but they stored electricity.

Some of them were very, very good as solar cells.

And then we learned how to make better and better and better solar cells, so now there are cells that are lithium ion phosphate cells that are as efficient at converting solar energy into electric energy – some of them up 25%, 26% efficient.

In production, there’s always a 10, or 6 or 7-year break between, you know, a physical thing that you can show as a reality, and something that you can use at home with.

David: So there were practical applications, obviously.

Pete: Very practical applications. He passed away about three or four years ago.

David: It’s really good to get this down, and we’ve got a lot more coming. So thank you, Pete, for being here. And I want to thank you for watching.