Disclosure: Spoon Bending and Psychic Abilities Disclosure with David Wilcock and Guest Pete Peterson

 Disclosure: Spoon Bending and Psychic Abilities

 Disclosure with David Wilcock and Guest Pete Peterson

 Season 4, Episode 3

October 7, 2018

Broadcast on GAIA

 David Wilcock: All right. Welcome back to our show. I’m your host, David Wilcock, and I’m here with Pete Peterson, who has done a truly incredible amount of things in classified programs.

And in this episode, we are going to get into some of the unusual laws of physics that are laws – and they do work – that allow for some truly extraordinary human functions to be made possible.

And specifically, we’re going to be talking about telekinesis, the ability to move objects with the mind. It’s a very exciting subject.

And some of the things that Pete has told me about this are unlike anything I’ve ever heard before. They’re truly incredible.

So, Pete, welcome back to the show.

Pete Peterson: Thank you.

 

David: So I remember, Pete, reading some books years ago about a man called Daniel Dunglas Home, and it was spelled H-O-M-E, his name. And he lived near the Great Lakes in New York state.

 

And they had – this is in the 1800s . . . They had had European dignitaries coming over, seeing this guy.

 

He’s able to put his hands into flames, and he didn’t burn. He was able to levitate.

 

He could levitate out one window and fly into another. He could levitate an accordion inside a cage and play it.

 

And all this stuff was very heavily eyewitnessed at the time.

 

So we’ve heard all stories like this. Of course, there are stories of Jesus and what he could do. There are stories of Indian yogis, Tibetan yogis, that can do really amazing things.

 

So I’m wondering what your personal experience has been with telekinesis, and if there’s ever been a scientific study of it that was done.

Pete: That all sounds very, very exciting. I have not heard of any of that, and that’s amazing because I tried for a long time to study everything in that area. I hadn’t heard of this fellow.

 

I heard a lot about Anton Mesmer and mesmerizing, but it had nothing to do with hypnosis. Because Mesmer would hypnotize them at a distance, not eyeball to eyeball.

David: Hm.

Pete: He’d be in a building six blocks down the street and hypnotize someone and get them to do all different kinds of things.

David: He didn’t need to be there to get somebody in trance?

Pete: No, he was not there at all. You read about it, and it was like a hypnotism show, except the fact that he was six or 10 or 12 or 20 blocks away.

 

David: What was he doing?

Pete: He would take basic control of their conscious mind, if you would, and then have them do things, or he would tell them to do things.

 

And they could do things that they couldn’t do when they were in their normal state of mental being.

David: Give me an example.

Pete: Well, he could have them rest their heels on a . . . They’d take a pair of chairs and put them 5′ or 6′ apart and have them put their heels on one chair and their head on one chair and lay just as stiff as an iron rod.

David: Wow!

Pete: He could get them to levitate a little bit. He could get them to levitate things a little bit.

David: Really?

Pete: He could get them to act out various things, such as act out as if you’re a . . . If it’s a woman, act like a man. If it’s a man, act like a woman.

 

And he would have them do things like drink a cup of tea. Well, women have a way that they drink tea, and men have a different way that they drink tea.

 

And so they would take on these other things, probably something they had never practiced.

David: I’m still kind of having trouble understanding how Mesmer could make somebody do this stuff if he’s six blocks away. What was the technique that he was using?

Pete: Well, we call it, nowadays, things like “remote influencing”.

David: Okay.

Pete: So it was very, very different. It wasn’t what we read about.

 

When you dig into the things that were read about him there locally, it was a whole different story because the people that would come from New York to write up about it, or from the United States . . . and there was a lot of interest from Japan at the time because of the ninja influence there, and the things that they’d seen ninjas do.

 

There was a lot of interest in that area, and they had a lot of reporters from Tokyo that would come and write about it, but then we couldn’t read Japanese, and they would get the result of that.

 

I’ve gone back and looked at some of the transliterations and translations of Japanese and find that a lot more took place than I ever read about in the English literature.

David: Wow!

Pete: And then I spent some time teaching my form of acupuncture and oriental medicine in Paris at various places. So I had access to a lot more data from there.

 

And one of them was a group called SMB. And they were a biotherapy group that studied the seemingly psychic aspects of oriental medicine.

David: Well, just to get back to the question for a second, could you explain to me what at least one of the techniques was that he was using to actually get people to do things six blocks away?

 

I’m still having a hard time understanding that.

Pete: Well, when you get into what’s called psychotronics, which is indeed a science, you find out that in the realm that that exists, there is no such thing as distance.

David: Okay.

Pete: Things happen everywhere and everywhen.

David: But how do you get it to work across that distance? If there is no distance, what’s the technique?

Pete: You don’t get it to work. There is no technique. It does work across that distance.

David: What was he actually doing?

Pete: So you just practice the technique the way it’s done, and the distance thing takes care of itself.

David: What’s the technique?

Pete: It’s not a physical technique. It’s a mental technique. And you allow yourself to be connected.

 

And you’re connected throughout the whole universe as best I can tell.

David: So there’s a telepathic component to this?

Pete: We could call it a telepathic component to it.

David: Okay. So this would not be something anybody could do. There has to be a projection of the force of the will of the individual, I would assume.

Pete: Well, it’s a science.

David: Okay.

Pete: It is a science, so you can train to do it. You learn how to hold your mind.

 

I mean, you go in and watch any craftsman. Watch a jeweler. I mean, a manufacturing jeweler – someone who repairs expensive watches.

 

And you watch them . . . [Pete illustrates by sticking out the tip of his tongue as he’s moving his fingers.]

David: The tongue.

Pete: And you watch their tongue. They have to hold their tongue in a certain place to get it to work.

David: Well, aren’t there certain Indian mudras – ways you hold your hands . . .

Pete: Mudras and Indian things. Absolutely.

David: So you’re saying this is related to the flow of prana or chi, somehow?

Pete: I don’t know that at all. I just know that there is an information flow. You hook into that informational field, and you can cause things to happen that you can’t cause another way.

David: So are you saying that in some of these Japanese records that you saw that people were able to levitate or levitate other objects as a result . . .?

Pete: There were Japanese, especially . . . This was trained at certain secret schools, if you would.

David: Hm.

Pete: So everybody’s heard about Shoalin and the Shaolin Temple . . .

David: Yeah.

Pete: . . . and things like that. There are things that you do repeatedly, and your thoughts of the world are very different because you get to see the world differently. Then you get to operate in the world differently.

 

And then you get to . . . Once you do that, your belief system . . . These are all based on belief.

 

There’s a whole physical set of things that go on in the world. There’s also a whole set of belief things that go on, and it’s part of your universe.

 

Very few people use those things.

 

And probably one of the better examples is someone playing tennis, someone playing ping-pong, someone playing basketball.

 

You see them do something extraordinary, and you say, how in the world did you do that? And the rest of the game, they’re completely off because they sit there thinking, “How DID I do that?”

David: Ha, ha.

Pete: “And I want to do that again.” And it doesn’t work that way. It works from a whole different standpoint.

 

So you can throw it off just by being called on it.

David: Do you remember any specific examples that jumped out at you from these Mesmer records of something extraordinary?

 

Like is there a specific case of somebody levitating an object or something like that?

Pete: Well, there are people that levitate or levitate or are levitated.

David: But what are we seeing? How much do they levitate?

Pete: Well, like the person with their heels and the back of their head. You know, you can’t lift yourself straight there because there’s too much leverage the other direction, just from a physical standpoint. You’ll bend in the middle.

 

Yet, they will lay down and do that, and you can sit on them. You can put two, three people sitting on them.

 

There’s nobody in the world that’s that strong.

David: Right.

Pete: Then you can get up, and then the person can raise up three feet in the air and still be laying there, straight as can be.

David: Wow!

Pete: So it’s not the chair that they’re lying on.

David: Do you think the popularity of this being done in public demonstrations is part of what led stage magicians to do these levitation tricks with the hoop, and there’s like a hidden thing in the back that’s lifting somebody off the ground?

 

Do you think they were copying that?

Pete: In some, there’s a hidden thing, and in some there isn’t.

David: Oh!

Pete: There’s some that actually either discover it . . . Most of them, I think, discover it on their own.

 

And they look at it. They see it happen, and they can’t think of how it’s done, so they try something else, and it works.

David: Hm.

Pete: And it’s their manufacturing that particular type of universe for their own use that makes it happen.

 

And when there are not 10,000 people that believe it can’t happen, and there are people there that think that it could happen, then it happens.

 

And it’s a consensus. It’s a part of the reality that we live in.

David: Why would anyone in the government think that this was other than nonsense?

Pete: I don’t know why they would. Most of them think it’s nonsense.

 

I mean, we could be light years beyond where we are today if it weren’t for that.

David: But it would appear that, at some point, based on some of the things we’re going to get into, that there WAS some research done into this stuff.

Pete: There was a lot of research done.

David: What was the idea behind that research? What were they hoping to get from it?

Pete: Well, they were hoping to get what they saw they could get if they did quote, unquote, “something”.

 

And so they tried a number of different things, and what they didn’t understand was what was needed to set it up so that it could happen: the mindset that they needed.

 

There was a lot of remote viewing [that] went on.

 

There was a device that was built called a “brain trainer” that allowed you to . . . They took people that had these abilities and recorded their brainwaves.

 

Then they played those brainwaves back in such a manner that the person could listen, could hear the brainwave. So they could hear their brainwaves now, and they listened and tried to make their brainwave replicate the brainwave of the person that could do it.

 

And so we taught people to generate certain brainwaves.

 

Like, I can go in and do a brainwave lab and put a brainwave recorder on and startle the hell out of them by playing “Yankee Doodle”.

 

And then I’ll play it in a round, where you play “Yankee Doodle”, then you start again with the other side of your brain.

David: So are you saying that you could use a sort of biofeedback to generate these musical sounds?

Pete: Use biofeedback, right, to generate the musical sounds. You could learn to play “Yankee Doodle”, and then you can learn to do it with one side; then you can learn to do it with the other side.

 

Then you can learn real well to do it with one side. And then you can learn to play it in what we call in a round and do it on the other side but one phrase back from the other or ahead of the other.

David: And this is not a technology that somebody could just order online today? It’s still classified?

Pete: Ah, I don’t know that it’s classified. I don’t think it’s classified anymore, but I don’t know anywhere you could order it.

David: Right.

Pete: I thought I’d put it on the market just for the heck of it. But I think . . .

David: Oh, we’ve talked about that. Yeah.

Pete: I’d probably have my finger spanked if I did . . .

David: Ha, ha, ha.

Pete: . . . or more.

David: So let’s talk about spoon-bending parties, because this is a clear example of something you’ve told me about before in which you were directly involved in psychokinesis research.

 

So could you kind of start that discussion for us, open up who was responsible for putting you into these spoon-bending parties and why? And what did you do?

Pete: Well, that’s probably something I can’t say.

David: Okay.

Pete: But there was a gentleman by the name of Jack Houck, who was an engineer for several rumored . . . rumored that he was an engineer for several companies, one of them being Lockheed.

David: Okay.

Pete: And Lockheed was known for its prowess in machining scandium aluminum or a lot of alloy parts that were very, very, very lightweight.

 

And the metals involved didn’t allow themselves to really . . . the typical warm-forming thing, like injection molding and the high temperature thing or molding them as a molten metal.

 

They’d heat them up, and then they’d stamp them. They’d stamp them into various positions rather than have to be machined.

 

They’d cast an ingot, nearly what they needed, and then they’d have to machine it into the shape they wanted.

 

And then later, they found out how to just manufacture it by a normal process, and you could hammer it and press it and mold it into a shape that you wanted.

 

And it cut off a lot of money, a lot of time, a lot of effort, and they found out that it worked real well.

David: So you mentioned Jack Houck. And I remember seeing him online – H-O-U-C-K is the last name – as a guy who did spoon-bending parties.

 

And I specifically remember: I was a guest on Laura Lee Radio. Lauralee.com was the website way back in the day – late ’90s. It was the first radio show I ever did.

 

And I was totally amazed when she described . . . She’d had Jack Houck on as a radio guest, and she described being at a spoon-bending party that Jack Houck, who you just mentioned, had led in which a person, she said, was holding a fork.

 

And she watched the tines of the fork, one by one, just melt down without him ever . . . The person never touched the fork at all. They’re just looking at it, and the tines just melted like they were in heat.

Pete: Right.

David: So this is . . .

Pete: You could take a spoon or a knife and roll it up like a tape measure.

David: So how did this get started? Who was doing it first?

Pete: Jack got involved with a group of people. Some of them I knew.

David: Okay.

Pete: And we all had our ideas of how it was happening, and what was going on.

David: You had people that could do it, and you were able to observe this?

Pete: Oh, yeah. I mean thousands of people, not just a few.

David: Okay.

Pete: Lockheed made a lot of money for making things out of titanium, because they could do it really, really good at a very, very low price because they could just have five or six people get around this plate of titanium or titanium alloy.

 

They’d get around the plate, and they could make that titanium alloy immediately, without getting very hot, go exactly like bread dough or pizza dough.

 

And then a big stamp press could come down and mold it into a part.

 

And then they could release it and let it be that way. And it’d cool off just a little bit. And they had a molded magnesium part.

David: Or titanium or . . .

Pete: Titanium.

David: . . . whatever the alloy was.

Pete: Yeah, whatever.

David: So are you saying that people using telekinesis, similar to spoon bending, could actually make that titanium or magnesium alloy . . .

Pete: Absolutely. We did spoon-bending parties all over the world.

David: “We” meaning you were involved in this?

Pete: I was involved in it at times. There was a group of us that did these things.

David: But there’s a big difference between what you just described and spoon bending.

Pete: No difference at all between that and spoon bending. It’s the same thing as spoons.

David: Size is a big difference.

Pete: Size is a little difference, a little tiny difference.

David: Okay.

Pete: When you can do it to that, you can do it to a chunk the size of this table.

 

David: All right. Well, let’s break this down, because this is a really, really important thing that you did.

 

Take us through a spoon-bending party. Like, just walk us through what happens. Because, again, Laura Lee witnessed one of Jack Houck’s parties, saw this person melting down the tines of a fork.

Pete: Okay.

David: Walk us through what happens.

Pete: We developed the technology very much over a period of maybe 15 years.

David: Okay.

Pete: So in the beginning, it was very crude. Later on, it’s very sophisticated. But there are things that we learned.

David: You said you developed a technology. What was the technology?

Pete: No, I didn’t develop a technology. Everybody . . .

David: You said, “We developed a technology.”

Pete: Everybody developed it. Everybody threw in what . . . They said, “”Oh, well, I tried a couple parties, and we did this, and this happened.”

David: Okay, but wait. So, when you say “technology”, you’re not talking about a machine. You’re talking about, maybe, a technique . . .

Pete: A technique.

David: . . . of how these spoon-bending parties could do that.

Pete: Because there’s no machine required.

David: Okay.

Pete: It’s all done in the mind.

David: Okay. I just wanted to clarify that.

Pete: Yeah. And so now when we do a spoon-bending party, the first . . . we found out that a lot of people weren’t getting spoon bending done that could have gotten spoon bending done.

 

And we started out with silverware for two reasons. One of the big reasons was because we said, “Hey, how would you like to learn how to bend a spoon with your mind?”

 

Now, this person would come, and they’d do it or they wouldn’t do it, but they wouldn’t know why they were doing it. They just thought, “Here’s a fun little party thing we’re doing.”

 

111And we always made it a fun little party thing.

David: Hm. I will say I remember reading about Jack Houck’s spoon-bending parties, and that one of the defining characteristics of all of them is that it’s a very uplifting, positive, party environment – not anything spooky or mystical, but this big celebration, lots of energy.

Pete: No, nothing at all. And we make no pre-promises. They don’t know what they’re going to get into.

David: Hm.

Pete: So we make no pre-promises.

 

So they . . . Personally, . . . For example, people like Art Bell, who people know, he was just completely spooked by it because he was very Catholic in nature. And he had no way of thinking about it from his Catholic mind.

 

So he didn’t know if it was spooky or good or bad or going to put a curse on him or whatever. So he never really got involved in it.

David: Hm.

Pete: But he had people that got involved in it, and that scared him even more because they all did it. He didn’t know if he was participating in something evil or not.

 

That’s my take on it.

David: So what were some of the techniques that you guys would use to create this positive environment? How did it get going?

Pete: First off, we’d start, and we’d make it just a fun thing to do – no big deal.

David: Right.

Pete: And let’s just see if we can do it. A lot of people have; some people haven’t. Let’s see what we can do.

 

Then we’d go through what was going to happen, and what the history was.

 

Then we’d show people silverware and things that had done that. If I’d know we were going to do this, I’d have brought a big box full of silverware.

 

And you dump it out on the table, and it’s in positions and shapes that are absolutely unreal that people did just by holding it like a spoon or a fork or a knife up like this, . . . [Pete motions like he is holding a piece of silverware at one end by his fingers, and it is pointed upward.] . . . just holding it there and then causing it to do all kinds of things.

 

And when it was done, it looked like a piece of overcooked spaghetti that had dried.

David: And you’re saying they never touched it in some of those cases?

Pete: Well, they’d hold onto it so it doesn’t fall on the ground.

David: Right, but I mean, they’re not manipulating it with their hand.

Pete: Oh, no, they’re not manipulating it with their hand.

 

And you can do it where you manipulate it. It depends on what you’re thinking.

 

If you think it needs to be pushed, then push the damn thing.

David: Right.

Pete: And that’s why the best people doing it were old grannies and little kids because none of them knew any different.

 

And that’s exactly why it happened for them. They said, “Well, you can bend it with your mind as easy as you can do it with your hands, so why use your other hand? Put it in your pocket.

David: So if you have, let’s say, a knife or a spoon in somebody’s hand, what is some of the most outrageous stuff that you personally saw happen at these parties?

Pete: Well, okay.  Imagine a spoon there.

David: Okay.

Pete: And then imagine the bowl of the spoon starts rotating like a light on a police car, and it just screws up.

David: Wow!

Pete: Now, you’ve got a handle that’s made out of metal, and it’s in the form of a screw. And it’s shorter. And the spoon is facing . . . started facing toward you, and, now, it’s facing away from you.

David: Wow!

Pete: Sometimes it gets slightly warmer. That’s why it’s called “warm-forming.”

David: Okay.

Pete: Sometimes the people have to stroke the spoon and tell it what to do. Sometimes some people can just hold it.

 

And the ones that have to tell it what to do, after a while, can get where they don’t have to tell it what to do because they realize that that’s inconsequential.

David: Hm.

Pete: And so is it a different way of doing it? Is it a different thought process?

 

All that’s now been studied. So you can teach people to do these things pretty easily.

David: So could you give me an example of one of the things that you would tell people? What are some of the actual instructions that you would tell people that would get them to do be able to do this?

Pete: Before we’d give them any instructions, we run them through these little pre-tested things, which is a way of giving them instructions not to the thinking part of the mind.

 

You don’t want to do the thinking part of the mind because they’re very dead set on: “I can’t do this.” “It’s sinful.” “I’ll go to hell if I do it.”

David: Which is like conditioning.

Pete: Yeah. And so instead of saying, “No, you won’t do this.” They’re not going to believe. If they didn’t believe you, it wasn’t going to happen in the first place. It won’t in the second place.

 

So you just go through it. “Okay, here’s what we do.”

 

First thing we do is we get them familiar with it. We show them some things that have been done. We throw some tableware out.

 

Then we tell them that we found that a lot more people could do it when they understood the background of the knives, forks and spoons that we started with.

 

We said that people . . . “Oh, well, that’s like one of my grandmother’s. And that was her favorite thing, and I don’t want to bend one of those up because maybe it’s somebody’s grandmother’s thing.”

 

And they’re all trying to look for a way out because they think it might be evil.

 

So we go through, “How we’ve chosen the silverware is . . .”, and we do this. I mean, we actually do it. We’re not telling them stories.

 

We go to a swap meet [an informal gathering in an open usually outdoor space where anyone can rent space to display personal items they are willing to sell to people browsing through the items], and we find that people that don’t sell their old crappy silverware just leave it there.

 

So we say, “This stuff wasn’t thought enough about to even be taken home. They’d abandoned it because they didn’t sell it at the swap meet.”

David: Ha, ha, ha.

Pete: And then, we try to pick stuff that looks like it might be grandma’s favorite teaspoon and stuff. We throw it out. We don’t take that, because somebody else may think the same thing.

 

And so this is just junk knives, forks and spoons.

David: So I think I get what you’re saying, but I want to specify this. Are you saying that if people feel that a spoon was treasured, such as grandma’s favorite, that they don’t want to disturb it, and therefore, it won’t bend, even if they normally could bend a spoon?

Pete: Right.

David: Okay. So they need . . .

Pete: It’s not that it won’t bend, because I can pick them up and do them anyway, but it’s that THEY think there may be some emotional attachment somewhere.

 

Some of them have had . . . And you ask them. I mean, it’s like this was a research project. You ask them, “Well, why don’t you want to bend this one?”

 

“Well, I think of this favorite pickle spoon or pickle knife that my grandmother had. And it looked very much like it, and I thought, ‘Well, maybe there’s somebody out there that really would treasure this,’” and etc., etc., etc.

 

So we don’t do those things. We just make them generic.

 

We try to get silverware that’s stamped “stainless steel” or just stamped “tableware”, . . .

David: Right.

Pete: . . . non-generic, nothing exciting about it.

David: So it doesn’t need to have any special metal. It doesn’t need silver, for example.

Pete: Right. Right. And it can be any kind of metal. It CAN be [silver], but it doesn’t have to be.

 

It’s not something that somebody’s heirloom, somebody’s favorite grandmother’s butter knife, or whatever. We try to make it non-genetic.

David: Okay.

Pete: That increased our hits tremendously and is something we learned slowly. I mean, we didn’t think that.

David: Once you’ve established that part of the protocol, and somebody has a spoon that they’re comfortable with . . .

Pete: Well, no, we have a way of selecting spoons that they’re comfortable with. We teach them a little bit about dowsing.

David: Oh, really? Okay.

Pete: Then we’d give them a big nut or a bolt off of something on an end of a fish line. And we’d say, “Okay, now, take this knife and swing . . . and ask it . . .”

 

We have a big pile we dump out on the floor of generic tableware.

David: Okay.

Pete: We say, “Pick four or five that look like good candidates to you.”

 

And they’re, “Well, that’s too much like grandmother’s,” whatever, so they don’t pick that one. So they pick some non-generic things.

 

“Okay, set those over here. Pick one. Ask this fork if it will bend for you, and here’s how you do it.”

 

“Put the nut and bolt as a plumb bob, or as a pendulum, over the fork or spoon, and then see . . .”

 

Oh, the first half, we start off and say, “Okay, indicate what’s good. How will you indicate to me what is good and okay?”

 

“And you just hold it there, and pretty soon, it will start going left. It’ll go clockwise, counterclockwise, back and forth, right and left. That’s good.”

 

“Okay, now, break that train of thought. Now, show us what’s bad.”

 

Oh, bad will go back and forth. Good goes this way [up and down].

 

Bad goes this way [counterclockwise]; good goes this way [clockwise].

“You’ll find two things that happen, one for bad, one for good. Okay, remember those.”

“Now, take this fork and say, ‘Will you bend for me tonight? Will you warm-form or bend for me?’”

And all of a sudden, wham. They’re not moving their hand, but the thing is swinging around on a big loop . . .

David: Right.

Pete: . . . pulling their hand. “Okay, that’s a good one.”

 

“Okay, let’s see you take the next one.” It’s a fork out of the same bunch or whatever. You do it, and it goes back and forth, back and forth, slowly.

 

“So ask it, ‘Is there a good reason you won’t bend?’”

 

And we get “Yes” and “No.” “Which is ‘yes’? Which is ‘no’?”

 

“Oh, no. That’s got a bad one.”

 

And so they’ll pick out five good ones.

 

We have them put all the rest back in the pile. Somebody may pick one of the others. Who knows why, but we know that these [pieces of silverware] have said, “I will do it.”

 

So now we have that little pile.

 

I say, “Okay, take one of them. Hold it like this.” {Pete shows he’s holding a utensil by the tip so it’s standing straight up.]

 

Usually it’s a fork, because that starts off and . . . it’s just an easy one to do.

 

You say, “Okay, what I’d like you to do is: I would like you to bend for me. I’m going to consciously require and ask that you bend in some unique way.” Because we don’t limit them into how it could do it. And we get every kind of combination the thing could bend.

 

Some of them . . . [pointing to the tip of a fork] this tine will bend backwards. This tine will bend forward. This tine will bend to the right or the left, or two will bend one way and two the other way – just however it happens.

David: Sometimes without people touching them, you’re saying?

Pete: You can do it with your hand over the top. You can push on them a little bit.

 

In the beginning, sometimes they need a little push. Like, I’ve seen many people sit there and sit there. And they’re trying to do it. “No, it won’t bend. It won’t bend.”

 

I said, “Give it a little push.”

 

And they give it a little push, and it will “flop”, . . .

David: Wow!

Pete: . . . like it was an overcooked noodle, and it flops clear down the back of their hand and makes wrinkles on their knuckles . . .

David: Wow!

Pete: . . . wrinkles for their knuckles.

 

“Oh, that worked!”

 

And then that happens, and then they’re a little bit scared. And then it’s a hard time to do it another time.

 

And sometimes they’ll do three or four and then they’ll say, “Look over here! Look what happened to me.”

 

And one will be this way [motioning forward], one will be this way [motioning backward], one will be this way [motioning sideways].

 

And we found these typical reactions that we get – the reactions coming from the fork. It’s being made by the person.

David: Are there any people who just are not properly made to be able to do this at all?

Pete: About 15%.

David: They can’t ever do it?

Pete: I’ve never seen them do it.

David: Only 15%?

Pete: Yep, but they . . .

David: And the other 85% can?

Pete: Then you ask them why. On average, over 30 years of doing this, about 15%. And you ask them why.

 

We’re always discovering new things that help out. So you’ll get parties today that go as little as 10% can’t do it and as much as 50% can’t do it.

 

You get a couple of, for example, Jehovah’s Witnesses. I’ve never seen a Jehovah’s Witness ever do it.

David: Ha, ha. That makes sense.

 

Are you saying that the 15% average that you noticed who couldn’t do it have some very strong blockage in their mind or their belief system that would stop them?

Pete: Well, we’ve tried to come up with that. There’s always some little thing that we discover, usually – usually.

 

And there’s some that we don’t discover anything, but they just can’t do it.

 

There’s a lot of people that think it’s against their religion.

David: Hm.

Pete: That’s the main thing. When you have someone that will tell you why they feel they can’t do it, it’s because they’re not sure if it’s religiously correct.

David: So Pete, if somebody could push a fork over, and it just flops like a wet noodle, that would imply that, eventually, some of these people might be able to do something more than just spoons, forks and knives.

Pete: Well, this is why we went around and did this.

 

We identified people who were warm-formers. And then, those who were identified were, after a certain period of time – three or four months, we’d call up and said, “Hey, we’re going to have another party and learn how to do larger things like axle shafts and railroad spikes, and things like that.

 

So then we’d find out that those people pretty much – about the same percentage that could do the initial – could do the secondary.

 

They’d take a Volkswagen torsion bar and make a little pair of them that had a half loop in them and make one of those puzzle games where you can put them together.

David: Really?

Pete: And you go to Volkswagen in Wolfsburg, and you’ll find two Volkswagen torsion bars linked together like that loop puzzle that you can buy in the puzzle stores.

David: Wolfsburg, Germany, you’re saying?

Pete: Yeah.

David: Okay. Wow!

Pete: And you can find that they can link them together, and there’s a couple hanging on the wall.

 

The reason is that engineers know you can’t bend that material. It’s a special tempered material. If you bend it past a certain point, it just goes “bam!” and explodes into little shrapnel.

 

But these things are obviously bent right around.

 

“Oh, well, you didn’t temper it.” No, it was tempered.

David: So when people start to be able to do the larger things, what do you ask them, or what do you do with them next?

Pete: Then we teach them more. That’s a person we can teach . . . actually, because their will allows them to do it.

David: Okay.

Pete: It’s a matter of testing them to see if they’ll be useful.

 

Now, you get a bunch of people, and they work for a company that does a lot of testing of titanium or other such things.

David: Okay.

Pete: They don’t form easily. You have to cast them and then carve the part you want out of the metal.

 

And so those people get five or six of them around a big chunk of metal. And the metal is in a big punch press or some type of press.

 

And you say, “Okay”. And we go through the same exact thing: “This thing is okay to work with. It’s okay within the universe. It’s okay within people’s minds. Yeah, they want it to happen, and the metal doesn’t mind.”

 

And we go through a whole bunch of classifying technology. And then, all of a sudden, they say, “Okay, everybody hold and let it process.”

 

And a punch press will come down, and it’ll punch press just like it was pizza dough.

David: What’s the . . .

Pete: Now they’ve got a manufactured metal part. They don’t have to cast it and then machine it into a part.

David: What’s the experience of the punch press coming down? Does it make noise?

Pete: Well, no more noise or no less noise than the punch press would make. There’s no extra noise. There’s no different noise.

David: Does it startle everybody when it comes down?

Pete: Well, the first few times, and then after that, it becomes routine.

 

Then they’re good at it for about four years, and then they can’t do it anymore.

David: Really? Did you ever figure out why that was?

Pete: Yeah, it’s because now they’re back thinking about it.

David: Huh.

Pete: When they’re not thinking about it, it’s easy to do.

David: Well, I remember seeing the ’80s television show, “That’s Incredible”, in which they were describing mothers whose child is trapped under a Volkswagen Beetle, let’s say.

 

And she lifts up the whole Volkswagen Beetle.

Pete: Right.

David: Is it the same type of principle involved?

Pete: Different principle entirely.

David: Different principle?

Pete: Yes.

David: So what’s going on there when people can lift up a car?

Pete: They want to do something for their mother, father, child, neighbor, somebody else. They want to do something altruistic. And they’ve heard about it.

 

All those people have heard about it happening. So in their mind, it can be done if circumstances are right.

 

So they ask God for help – many of them, a lot of them. They call on some other thing that forms their mind, like religion or reading texts about things that say it’s happened, and so it can be done. It’s okay.

 

You need to have permission to do it, anyway.

David: Right.

Pete: And so you ask for those things, and then they just do it.

 

And to them, lifting a car is like lifting a marshmallow.

David: Hm.

Pete: You just reach down, take it and pick it up. And they know at some point, it’s going to come down, so they don’t mind how long they have to hold it. They’ll hold it for a couple hours at times, . . .

David: Hm.

Pete: . . . wait till somebody gets there and helps them.

 

Or they’ll think, “Oh, I can’t do . . .” They start thinking . . .

 

Instead of thinking ABOUT it, they start thinking about other things. “Oh, I know I couldn’t hold this for an hour.”

David: Hm.

Pete: And so eventually, they let it down. But it’s open. It’s available to you.

 

And when you practice enough and understand it, it’s nothing. It’s easy to do.

David: Another insider, who I call Jacob, and I was sitting there with you guys, and we were all talking, and I hear this “tink”.

 

And I’m like, “Did you hear that?”

 

You didn’t hear it, and Jacob didn’t hear it. And the woman that was hosting us didn’t hear it. And you all kept on talking.

 

And then the next thing I know, I take my fork, and I push on my plate, and the plate just falls into two pieces.

Pete: I remember that well.

David: Now, in a case like this, it would appear that . . . I mean, I guess I’m just going to ask you directly.

 

I don’t think that I did that as a telekinesis thing. It seems like that might have been some sort of a directed energy weapon that was intended to threaten us because of what we were talking about.

 

I’m just curious as to what you think that might have been.

Pete: I don’t think that’s the case. I think it’s very typical of many phenomena.

David: Oh really?

Pete: I think it just happened naturally.

 

What happened was . . . And, I mean, when you look at the sequence of it and things that I’ve seen and experimented on, it just seems to me to be a natural thing.

 

What happened was that there was a little psychic glitch, or flip, and I think the plate cracked at that time.

David: Ah.

Pete: And then, when you put your fork down on it, what happened was it parted it the rest of the way. And it was kind of a response based on what was happening there.

 

And then, as you know, that person was a unique person.

David: Oh, yes.

Pete: He was going against what you would think the universe would like, and he was not telling the total truth, and he was a con artist, and on and on and on.

 

And what happened was that the universe went against him.

David: Hm.

Pete: And that’s my take on it.

David: Okay.

Pete: I could be wrong.

David: Sure.

Pete: I’ve seen it a lot, and that’s my take on it.

David: One of the things that I remember reading about – I believe it was in a Charles Berlitz book, but I’m not entirely sure because it was a long time ago, and I’ve read hundreds and hundreds of books . . .

Pete: Well, Charles Berlitz was a very special person when it comes to psychic investigation.

David: Oh, really?

Pete: Oh, he was a well-known psychic investigator from forever.

David: Yeah, sure. I remember reading about Uri Geller doing spoon bending on the radio. And it wasn’t even a television show. It was just people hearing the excitement of people as spoons and things were bending, and that all these kids around the country were able to get watches that had stopped to start running again.

 

And I remember even hearing about all these little kids could start doing it.

 

And in one case, I remember hearing about an entire drawer of silverware where every spoon and knife  and fork in the entire drawer just bent all at once.

Pete: This is a problem that we had with Jack Houck, who ran a lot of the Lockheed spoon-bending parties.

 

We’d do it in neighborhoods, and the neighbors’ forks and spoons the next day would all be rolled up and curled up.

David: Really?

Pete: Yeah, that happened very often.

David: Wow!

Pete: And so we had to learn to be specific. “These forks” and “these spoons” and not the neighbors’.

David: No kidding?

Pete: And then we’d straighten them out, and the neighbors would have some that for some reason had been bent.

 

They’d come over, “All my spoons and forks that were bent are all straight now!”

David: Oh, wow!

Pete: And we had a lot of that kind of incidents, I mean, a percentage.

 

You wouldn’t expect to have that happen to start with. And then all of a sudden, you have 10% of the neighbors’ forks are all straight.

David: Wow!

Pete: So then we were very interested in investigating: “Well, what’s the distance effect here?”

 

Well, then, when we looked at the distance effect, we found out that they happened all over the country.

 

There were a lot more happening than we thought of, that there was no distance effect. It was not here and now but where and when.

 

And so we found out that a lot of the communication . . . We did a lot of things toward communication.

 

One of the big things in the day was to try to find out: how do you tell a submerged submarine to launch its cruise missiles?

David: Hm.

Pete: So there was a lot of interest taken in that.

 

And so it turns out that the best way to communicate that way was with some plant life that would react to human control.

David: Right.

Pete: And so you’d find a plant that would clone – some worked and some didn’t. But some were evidently put here for that, they were so good.

 

So you’d take the plants, and you’d breed one off of another. And all the plants that are sensitive to that tend to breed from . . .

 

Like there’s a plant called the paulownia that grows in China. And they made it a chop your hands off kind of thing if you try to take some paulownia seed out.

 

Well, you don’t need paulownia seed, just a couple cells, and they’ll reproduce.

 

And then you can take one of those and reproduce cells from it.

 

You can stimulate this end, and no matter where the other end is – clear across the universe, the next star down the road, or the next planet down the road – and you can do something here, and the other end will react.

David: Yeah, I mean, that sounds a lot like the Dr. Cleve Backster research.

Pete: Exactly. Cleve is a brilliant, brilliant guy.

David: So there is a . . . You’re saying that the same type of communication could be used to actually communicate to submarines.

Pete: That’s how it’s done.

David: And that, somehow, when people are doing this telekinesis, the spoon-bending stuff, that there is some sort of non-local spoon-bending signal that they generate.

Pete: Well, it’s . . . The best we can tell, it’s non-local.

David: Right.

Pete: I like . . . For some reason, I still think, not in my experiments, but it just . . . You know, it seems to me that it would work good clear all the way out to Pluto, but after that, it might not work so well.

 

Well, that isn’t the case. It works everywhere.

David: We also mentioned Dr. Rupert Sheldrake. And one of the things I asked him about in my interview with him was research into certain crystals, where they have a very hard time crystallizing.

 

But then, all of a sudden, something changes in the universe, and then they all can crystallize. No matter where they are in the world, they all crystallize right away.

 

There’s like some change in the basic physics of how those crystals, those chemicals, combine.

Pete: Yeah, they are there to obey you.

David: And that’s one of the big secrets.

Pete: So we make it so that, “Oh, if they do that, it’s sinful; you’re going to go to hell,” on and on and on.

 

And so then they don’t do it because we don’t wish it, or we don’t allow it.

 

But you can learn to allow it, and it works just fine, thank you.

David: Well, this is awesome. We’re overdue in terms of time for this episode, but fascinating stuff. So thank you very much, Pete.

 

I’m your host, David Wilcock, and I thank you for watching.