[Note: This is part 2 of an interview Paola Harris did with Courtney Brown on 17 April, 2000. It was previously published on her Italian web site].
Harris: I know what you're telling me, but it's just unbelievable.
Brown: What happened was when we put up the scans of the sessions, you then compare the sessions with the transcripts. And then people would say, "Oh lord, my gosh. This is the exact thing I downloaded two weeks ago."
Harris: That's incredible. Okay there's two people, you were one and somebody else was the other?
Brown: Joey Jerome, and later Matthew Pfeiffer. For the first ten experiments it was myself and Joey Jerome. After a while, he got a little tired and then Mathew Pfeiffer was the second viewer. And then we all got a little bit exhausted after six months. We had to do some other research. We were all doing some other stuff that we had to get back to, and so we stopped the demonstration.
Harris: Okay, before we go on to something else, because there's so much here.... Give a statement you want to give about time. Can you give me a statement about time that I can quote? Tell me about time.
Brown: What we know for sure is that time does not exist. And I do not mean this as new age metaphor.
Harris: I understand.
Brown: Time is nothing more than a limitation of perception.
Harris: You call it a "limitation of perception."
Brown: Perception - that's all it is. It has nothing to do with the way we live in our physical bodies. Somehow in regards to this three dimensional plus one (time) universe, time anywhere outside of this three dimensional plus one (time) universe just simply doesn't exist. That means that when we remote view something in the past or the future as we did with the thirteen successfully completed experiments in the public demonstration, the future already existed. The past also still exists. Meaning, we were remote viewing a target that was already determined: it was already there. It hadn't yet been chosen for two weeks but this didn't matter. It was still there. We just couldn't see it yet with our physical eyes. We had to wait in our bus ride through the street of time. We had to wait till we got there when our physical perception could actually see the actual target that we remote viewed correctly two weeks or more prior.
Harris: But the obvious question I'm going to ask you is then is it all fixed? Is it all fixed or are there places where we can change the future by jumping in?
Brown: I've had extensive discussions with physicists on this. The remote viewing results clearly show that there is a definite future for any particular time line going out, but if you remote view it, the future, and receive some information and thus change your current behavior, then you can veer off into another future. And no one really knows what to call that, a time dimension, another dimension, another time stream. Even the physicists are arguing what word used for it. But there is only one sequence of events that brings us to our current time stream. You would be talking right now and only one sequence of events have brought us here. However, that doesn't mean there aren't many other possible other histories, but there's only one sequence of events that brought our current perspective to this point in time, this moment where we're having this conversation. We just don't perceive, we don't remember anything that happened in alternative past times. In the future, it's a little bit more variable.
Harris: Okay, now you just used the words, "alternative past time streams" - but these "past time streams" exist? Right? Because these streams all go at the same time. You can jump from one to another. For instance, can I use an example just so I know what's going on.
If the predicted future is that we have a nuclear war but if we can change a behavior then that could be an alternative time stream. Otherwise, we would have no hope right? Is that possible?
Brown: I can use an example. There was a time, and here I'll mention one thing that we did in the past ... we don't do this anymore at the Institute. I just thought that I'd tell you. But we had some inkling of information that suggested that there might be something that could be happening, some terrorist event that could occur. Some people had some sort of vague vision, and we just decided to explore this as a target. The secret is we sent all of our viewers out to look at it. And they all came back with the same thing. This happened several years ago, right after the Soviet Union broke up, and so many of the viewers came back with some terrorist type of personality shooting a tactical nuclear weapon from some location near New York City, a suitcase-size type tactical weapon, with some type of portable vehicle to transport it to the United Nations. Most viewers were coming back with this person being a Russian or a Slavic person. We got all this information at the Institute. Now we don't have any project like this any longer on the web site. We did this in the old days of the Institute. And this is one case where we sort of said "Oh my goodness, what are we going to do with this information?"
Harris: What year is the old days? Sorry I want to know when this was?
Brown: Approximately 1997. And so we asked, "What are we supposed to do with this? Are we just supposed to file it away? Nobody's talking to us." The Intelligence people weren't talking to us. We decided to just let "them" file this. So we took a risk and just put it up on our web site. When we got this information, you know, we knew we were going to be laughed at. I knew we were going to be mocked. And I knew that people would think we were nuts. But what are were we supposed to do with this? If we got laughed at, what's the cost? The cost was only to ourselves. So, we just put it up any way, the whole analyses, the whole stuff. Well, we found out later, a couple months later, a general of the former Soviet Union in Russia (General Lebed), announced formally that there were approximately 128 small tactical weapons missing from the (former) Soviet arsenal, and that they might potentially be in the hands of some groups that are hostile to the United Nations. And then about a month after that, U.S. Security Forces arrested two Lithuanians for trying to sell really small nuclear capable missiles in Miami, and they had been trying to sell them previously in the East Coast and had some problem. But the main idea was that (1) the General himself had admitted that weapons were missing and (2) that Slavaic types were actually caught a couple months later trying to sell nuke-capable small portable missiles because they couldn't use them for whatever they were originally trying to do. It was just reported this way, but it wasn't made into a big deal in the press. Yet it circumstantially supports the original remote viewing data.
But then we got a very strange communication after this from somebody in the intelligence community. He actually became interested to what we were doing. Indeed, he became very interested in what we were doing. They (the intelligence community) were monitoring us very closely and he sent us a communication that gave us a transcript of one of our important phone calls so that we would know for sure that he was from the intelligence community, because how else could he have a transcript of our phone calls? He gave us a transcript just to show us who he was, and then he basically indicated that he wanted us to know that while everybody out there was laughing at us, the government was taking what we were doing extremely seriously. Nothing's being missed, and then we got some information afterwards suggesting that something we did made a major difference. Then they would not tell us anything more. Now what were we supposed to do? So the point is, can remote viewing be used to determine future events? Well, we demonstrated for six months that it could be done.
In the old days we used to do more risky targets that were just fun. I mean in the old days, we used to think these things were fun. So we did that one, and it got us into a whole bunch of trouble, and to be quite honest, we probably won't ever again do these things. Now we just want to build up the Institute and focus on the scientific part.
Harris: The trouble is you got monitored right? That was the trouble?
Brown: The trouble is that the whole world laughed at us, and we want to be taken seriously. It is hard to do risky application targets and more sedate science experiments at the same time. The unfair public response to the risky application targets makes it difficult to have people seriously consider our other work.
Harris: Can you now address the ET question?
Brown: Cosmic Voyage and Cosmic Explorers ... those books address my own personal interest in ET material.
Harris: I was just reading this on your personal web site that you said there's a species that are antagonistic. Some say they may be working with the government. Are they?
Brown: That is my interpretation. There's nobody in the government who comes to talk to us about this. But the results of my sessions are very consistent, and there are so many sessions that I've lost count. Cosmic Explorers goes into this in great depth. Apparently, there is an actual conflict going on up there in the skies some place. The government is fully aware that there is a conflict, and that's one of the reasons they don't want any of the ET stuff to come out. It's bad enough that they'll say that there are ETs but, my gosh, they have ETs in a conflict! Which side are we supposed to align ourselves with? Then they are worried about stock market, society....
Harris: I know this, but aren't there a group of ETs working with the government? Are they good or bad?
Brown: Well there's more than one. They're both trying to influence the government. My research clearly suggests that the Greys are good. They're better than benign. They're very good.
Harris: They're very good?
Brown: Yeah. The best test to indicate what is good and what is bad is if you openly acknowledge that they are ETs, and then tell one of the groups to go away. Would they go away? The Greys would go away. But the other group, and I wish there was a better word for them, are reptilians.
Harris: Oh great.
Brown: They would not go away
Harris: They will not go away?
Brown: And they are directly tied in with the government in one way or another and the Greys are trying to influence them (the government) the other way. But the Greys have been very evolutionary about their activities. They're asking permission to do what they do all over the place. But the Reptilians have a very interesting approach. You see, the Reptilians are willing to give technology, and you know how materialistic humans are, especially over small bits of technology. Some will call that group the best friend they've ever had.
Harris: Because of the technology.
Brown: Because of the technology. The little trinkets that they throw.....
Harris: But these reptilians, Are they also shape shifters?
Brown: I have been told about such things, but I do not know.
Harris: Well have you've see a Reptilian, I mean something totally Reptilian?
Brown: Well that is always a question on my mind. We have remote viewed them. Under blind conditions we were told to remote target them, and every time we have a Reptilian target, we end up drawing these pictures of scaly types. Though they do look human, or at least humanoid. And the point is they're probably very beautiful. When I say scaly types, I'm not meaning ugly.
Harris: I understand.
Brown: But they just ... have this type of a skin that sort of seems like a reptilian animal. You know, who knows. The prophets were probably the very first remote viewers, and they even realized Reptilians have been around for a long time. Maybe that's the origin of the mythology of Satan and the snake. In the original Biblical text, the Serpent isn't a snake, a lowly type of creature, a simple reptile. Maybe that's the way it got translated. In the original text, the word they used for this Reptilian guy was a full blooded big humanoid type fellow. We only translated it into a snake. It's not a snake.
Harris: That's interesting.
Brown: The prophets were the ones who were seeing this at first and sort of tried to figure out how to describe it in their own primitive remote viewings, and people later tried to decode the word reptile and ended up calling the guy a snake. But in fact, there is a conflict going on between species on a heavenly level that definitely have different agendas. I actually followed out in an alternative timeline in the book Cosmic Explorers and explored the agenda for the Reptilians. In a future timeline, if we should side with the Reptilians, we end up in very dire circumstances. The Blacks in South Africa under Apartheid in the old days were better off than we will be if we align ourselves with the Reptilians.
But if we go the way of the Greys, or make an alliance with the Greys, things will be better. The remote-viewing evidence clearly suggests that the Greys will not solve any of our problems, meaning they allow us to evolve and make mistakes but...
Harris: We're better off.
Brown: We're better off. We're finding our own way, our own way in the universe.
Harris: But you didn't, but what about the third type which is the - Nordics?
Brown: I've never remote viewed them. They may exist, they may not. I do not know.
Harris: You've never viewed the Nordics?
Brown: You know, time is short, but maybe one day I will be able to get to it.
Harris: Okay. Can I tell you something on a personal level, you mentioned the interview I have on the web on Dr. Michael Wolf. When I went to do Wolf's story, and that's one of my biggest stories, I flew with my Italian co-writer, Adriano Forgione to Connecticut and we were with Wolf all day and then, we left, closed his door and walked to the elevator and we heard these chirping sounds all over the place and we couldn't see where they were coming from. We heard them in the elevator. We heard them downstairs when the elevator door opened. They only stopped when we reached the street. At night something very strange happened in the hotel room. The next morning when Wolf talked to us he said, "well, you didn't see my little Grey Friends. They walked out with you," he says, "they were trying to understand the human love and bonding and he said, "they walked right out the door with you." We only heard chirping - like Dolphin sounds. You mention this chirping connected with the Greys in your book and it struck me!
Brown: That's sort of like a sound that they make. And I have heard that there's sort of a spicy smell sometimes, but I've never smelled it.
Harris: No, there wasn't a smell. It sounded like birds then kind of like dolphins, like a dolphin-bird sound. And I, you know, when you talked about chirping, I guess chirping was the best way I could describe it. And your book, it just hit a note with me. I said, "Oh my God" you know, that's what - it really happened, I mean, Wolf. I had to believe him because that's what I heard. But is it possible I could hear and not see?
Brown: Oh yeah, definitely. They have a way of making it so you can't see them. You won't see them, you'll just see right through them.
Harris: You can see right through them? I heard them, I mean we couldn't get rid of the sounds. We thought it was the elevator, we opened the door, and then we walked out the front door and we didn't hear them anymore.
Brown: I don't have anyway to comment on what your experience was, I wasn't there. But I do know that the Greys have technology that allows them to be, well, invisible. You can see right through them. You know, that's not something that's really far off for us because in my remote viewing work I have been pushing the idea we are composite beings, that the soul really exists and the body is just a machine. And so obviously when we die, the body drops off, but we're still there. You can't see a "dead" person any longer, but we're still there. I guess you saw the ghost movie with Whoopie Goldberg? So it's sort of like that, and so apparently the ETs have the technology to mimic this. It's only a matter of time before we'll be able to get our own devices that do the same thing. Right now the only way- Well, right now we have only a very primitive ability to interact between the two dimensions that I call "subspace" and physical reality. But I hope that the physical side of things and the metaphysical side continues to be a focus of research so that it's only a matter of time before you get technology that will let us actually interact back and forth between the two dimensions more easily.
Harris: Well it's all exciting, what you're doing is extremely exciting. The reason I had to ask you that question though, Courtney is because, you know, I have so many interviews, I can't take everything as face value, unless because the Wolf experience was bizarre that I couldn't, that I didn't necessarily believe Dr. Wolf I mean...
Brown: I honestly don't know anything about him other than the fact that Richard Boylan talks a lot about him. I know a little about him from your interview, and I found out there that nobody's seen his credentials yet.
Harris: No, I've seen them, I've interviewed him. I've seen them, they're there. I have seen his credentials.
Brown: I'm not raising any doubt about that.
Harris: No, no. You see the problem what Wolf says that he's part of this acclimation program called the slow process release of information. He's being told what he can tell and it's all on a timed. It's a timed release that is partially approved by the government.
Brown: I read an interview where he mentioned something like that on there.
Harris: Yeah, I know. He started to tell me all this.
Brown: We have situations where we have remote viewed certain people and the remote-viewing evidence indicates that they were hybrids of some type and indeed we did find out medically afterwards that this may be true.
Harris: Is that in either one of your books?
Brown: No. I had to take that all that out for publishing reasons. I don't publish anything in my books that has any connection to an identifiable real live person. My publisher thinks it is too risky.
Harris: So you can't take the chance.
Brown: And they don't.
Harris: Listen, I have to wrap this up. I'm calling you from Rome so can you give me, for my article, a message or something you would want people to know, something that's very important that you would want the world to know and I'll promise I'll write it. What would you like people to know?
Brown: That the remote-viewing evidence is absolutely incontrovertible if you have an open enough mind to look at it. And that it would prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the human soul exists. It's more and more advanced than any other thing that you've ever seen. The only acceptable hypothesis from this is to accept that there is a non-physical component to all of us. We call it a "subspace mind." But the point is that we now have some scientific proof of this. Any reasonable person can see this. That means that we all are just souls, transforming through light years and transcended through time and space, and that we are virtually unbounded. It is our actual personal selves which is unbounded. Our bodies are nothing more that machines. You don't have to believe it, but we don't have to go to a church or a synagogue or a temple or a mosque to be told it, to hope for it, and to pray for it. Now we know through positive scientific reasons that it's proven that our bodies are nothing more that machines, and that our souls are real.
Harris: Is this also included in reincarnation?
Brown: That's a whole other story.
Harris: Well, you said "in between" lifetimes.
Brown: To my knowledge, there's no police force out there that says you can't be reincarnated into another life. So if we know that time doesn't exist, then this idea of reincarnation is actually not exactly correct because all these experiences are going on simultaneously. They're not happening sequentially.
Harris: I know, simultaneously.
Brown: On a level of reality, most importantly to all, is that the soul is truly there. The second most important thing to us is our understanding of time. It is an illusion, a perception, and that means two things; that means everything that was bad, that was ever done by anybody will never go away. That means the Holocaust is still going on right now. That means everything that we do to other people, if we hit our child in anger, minutes later, that means it doesn't ever go away. You can't try to wipe the pain away. The act is always there. If there's ever a molestation that occurs, and someone is actually guilty of that molestation, they can't remove the event in time to phase it out...it always exists.
Harris: It's always there.
Brown: So the most important thing with regard to time is that once people realize that, I really think that people will change for the better. There's a whole new horizon out there that. Nothing ever goes away.
Harris: Conversely any good you do, it's there forever.
Brown: The other side of it is that any good you do, it's there forever. It is so important that you brought up the good side. I was focusing more on the negative, hoping people who do bad won't do it anymore. But the good is always there as well. So those are the two morals of the story.
The bottom line, the most important thing is that we now know for certain that the soul exists.
Secondly, not quite as important, but the second most important thing is that time never fades away. Everything we've ever experienced in the past is still there. Go through the web site and see the scientific experiments and public demonstrations. Strong evidence exists.
Again, you can go to www.farsight.org, that's the non-profit Farsight Institute.
Harris: You know, I read the book and it struck me, and that's why I'm talking to you, because I'm putting together pieces of a puzzle. But I know quite a bit about the whole ET situation. I know quite a bit on the time situation but I'm putting together pieces of a puzzle. What I'm happy about what you're doing is that you're making it scientific because I'm fighting everybody here, saying that this kind of work is non-scientific. It is soft science. In other words, it's pure psychology. It's not, you know.
Brown: And one of the things you can put into this article is that these public demonstrations took place for six months and we're going to do it again, we're going to re-do it again sometime. It wasn't like we did it for one day, we did for six months. And the world is watching, and you can now look at the whole - and so that's what you can say. You can say that the data are scientific.
Harris: I want to thank you so much. It's been really, really interesting and I will get your second book.
Brown: God bless you .
Harris: Thank you very much. God bless you too.
Return to part 1: Paola Harris interviews Courtney Brown (part 1)