Original subtitles

[THEME MUSIC]

Welcome to a special series of Missing Links,

where your questions get answered.

I'm your host, Tiffany Bush, and I'm also

the head of the Member Support Team here at Gaia.

And with me today is the star of the show, Gregg Braden.

We're here to answer your questions from the first season

of Missing Links.

Today, we'll look at climate change and our genetic code.

Welcome, Gregg.

Tiffany, thank you so much.

I've been waiting my whole life for this day.

Love it.

I'm so excited to be here.

And I'm really excited that our members have

felt moved to ask the questions based on what we've

shared in this first season.

The first season, I think, laid the foundation

for new information based on peer-reviewed science

that simply is not showing up in mainstream media.

So the fact they're asking the questions

tells me that what we shared was meaningful to them.

And I couldn't ask for any more.

I'm excited to be here today.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you so much for coming.

I love that you said not being shared in mainstream education.

One member of my team, Joe, actually

was like, this goes against everything I've learned,

on the very first episode.

So happy to be here.

Happy to hear your feedback and to share the questions

that we've gotten from the members.

Sure.

The first one will be from Brenda H.

She wants to know if you can address the climate

engineering.

What's happening there?

And is it a contributor to the acceleration

and extreme effects around the world?

Climate engineering, that term covers a lot of ground.

Often, when people ask about climate engineering,

that's code for chemtrails.

It's something that they talk about.

The fact is that we have been engineering

the climate for hundreds of years in the ways

that we knew how at the time.

I remember when I was a kid back in 1950s and '60s,

something called cloud seeding was happening in the Midwest,

I was born and raised in northern Missouri,

to create rain in times of drought,

where the planes would spray some kind of an iodine pellets,

or sometimes dry ice.

Sometimes, they even used propane.

In the upper atmosphere, there's something

there for the humidity to form a nucleus around

so that the cloud droplets can fall.

So the idea itself, and it also falls

under the category of geoengineering,

are we geoengineering our planet?

So all of these come together.

I'm just going to lay them out right

now so we can tie into them.

The question, are we doing it?

Absolutely.

Have we been doing it?

Yes we have, for quite a while.

However, when I get these questions,

my sense is that they're more about the controversy

of chemtrails.

Are they happening, who's doing it, what does it mean?

I'm a scientist, I'm a degreed geologist,

and I follow the scientific journals and the investigations

that are done by degreed scientists who are

asking these very questions.

And what I've come to understand,

in many cases very different from what we'll

see on that YouTube video or some of the e-mails

that are floating around, climate change is a fact.

As a geologist, I can tell you that.

It is not happening for the reasons that

were being given publicly, and we talked

about this in Missing Links.

There are some schools of thought

that are now suggesting that we can somehow change the climate

change, reverse the climate change, through geoengineering.

Through spraying particulates in the upper atmosphere.

And there is evidence to support that.

The experiments have been done.

This has actually been done in the past, where aerosols,

is what they're called, in the high elevations

or high altitudes, aluminum products.

Sometimes there are some other chemical products,

but primarily aluminum.

The idea is to reflect as much sunlight as possible

back away from the Earth.

Has that been done experimentally?

The evidence suggests that it has.

When we look up into the sky from our front yard

every morning and we see a white streak across our front yard,

does that mean that we're in the middle of the chemtrail?

Absolutely not.

There are a number of conditions where

conventional aircraft, commercial aircraft,

different meteorological conditions, they will

leave those trails.

And those trails will linger.

But we're being told that they don't, but they will linger

and they will spread.

We've got evidence from this early in the 20th century,

before any of this was even happening.

Certain meteorologic conditions, when

the humidity is a certain kind of humidity

and the planes are flying at a certain altitude,

they're using certain kinds of fuels.

There are a lot of variables.

So what I would like to say to our viewers is every vapor

trail that you see in the sky, I don't see any evidence

to suggest that that is a chemtrail that is poisoning us.

Have we done this in the past?

As I mentioned, we have.

And this comes up in some of the other parts of Missing Links.

As a scientist, I've been involved

in the industry, various industries, the earth sciences

industry, the defense industry during the Cold War years,

where amazing technologies are developed.

And there's a question, Tiffany, that always comes up.

And that's it's a tough question that scientists

grapple with all the time.

And the question is simply this.

Because we can do something, does that mean that we should?

Yeah.

Because we can genetically modify an embryo before

it's born to make it perfect, does that mean that we should?

Because we can manipulate time and space,

does that mean we should?

Because we can geoengineer our planet,

does that mean that we should?

And there are two schools of thought with regard

to the answers.

I've been with scientists that say to me, Gregg,

because we can, that gives us the right to do it.

If we were never meant to do this,

we never would have learned how.

That's one school of thought.

Another school of thought says that while we

have the knowledge to unlock the keys to creation and life

in the universe, it's up to us, we

have to find our own moral compass.

Where do we draw the line, and how do we apply

what we now know to be true?

And this is why I think this is a really important question.

Because I think everyone knows our world is changing.

We are at what I call the sweet spot right now,

where we have the technology to do whatever we want.

And now, we must bring the wisdom

that we have created among ourselves.

Who are we, what is the value of life, what

is the value of human life?

How much do we cherish the life on the planet?

Where do we draw the line between what we manipulate what

we don't?

We're at that point right now where we must determine that.

Because the technology is pushing us to be used.

So there are proposals, very real proposals,

from scientific agencies that say

we now have the ability to geoengineer this planet,

to cool off the planet.

And I'd like to talk at some point about why

I think it would be a mistake to do that,

and that may be another question you're going

to ask about climate change.

Because the climate change is going

to cool the planet for us, and I'll say that now.

So to wrap up, and I know this is

a long answer to a short question,

but we're tying some concepts together here.

There has been some regulation regarding the geoengineering.

And while pilot programs have happened,

I don't see it happening on a large scale right now,

me personally.

Thank you.

So I think you might have touched on this a little bit,

this question from Maureen.

She wants to know what is the best

way to enlighten the "people in power" about global warming

as a naturally-occurring event.

But it sounds like if we just keep

having these conversations, how do we get them, too?

The question, how do we enlighten people?

My experience is it's impossible to enlighten someone that

doesn't want to be enlightened.

True

So what we're talking about is scientific fact.

Peer-reviewed science, I'm going to make a quick distinction

here.

There's a big distinction between a scientist writing

his opinion on a piece of paper and posting it on the Internet,

and the scientist creating a paper circulating

among university and peers, looking

for places where the theory doesn't hold up,

and then publishing that.

And what I'm sharing here as a scientist,

I'm a degreed geologist, I'm sharing this

from a perspective of a peer-reviewed science,

there are many people that simply

don't want to be enlightened.

Those that want to know already know.

This is no secret.

The things that we've shared are no secret.

They're in the peer-reviewed science.

They're not in the popular media, however.

And this is what I was saying earlier.

There's a story, there's a scientific story about us,

who we are in our relationship to the earth,

and there's a battle right now.

A struggle that is going on to preserve

a story that's now obsolete.

So the first season of Missing Links,

and again, this isn't about making anything right or wrong,

or good or bad.

My sole purpose in sharing this is what I just mentioned.

We are at this precious moment in the history of our planet

when the choices that we make now, because of the technology

we've developed, we have the ability

to forever change the balance of energy and life and climate

forever.

We can do that.

So we must make choices.

What do we value, where do we put our priorities?

And make those choices now.

And that's the purpose, that's the reason, that we

created this Missing Links.

To share the new discoveries that

are circulating in these very technical journals

among small groups of people.

But the average person watching CNN or BBC World,

they're not going to see these things.

But it based on peer-reviewed science.

So the people in power, many of them,

there are many agendas that help people to move into power.

And I'm not saying the right, wrong, good, or bad.

And I'm not trying to make anyone right, wrong, good,

or bad.

My question is this.

How can we become resilient to a time of extremes

when our planet is changing, unless we

are honest with ourselves about that change?

Honest, truthful, and factual.

And so that's all I'm inviting people to do

is, let's embrace the deepest truths of our existence.

What Mother Earth is showing us through her records,

the science, and let's apply this

in a healthy way in our lives.

I like that.

I like what you said about making choices,

and that leads us into Justin B's question.

He says, "If climate change is a natural occurrence,

does our human footprint on this planet still have an effect?"

Maybe you can talk about some of the choices we can make.

Yeah, climate change.

It's a huge topic, and we could do this whole program

on climate change.

We devoted, I believe, one episode, and probably

a little bit of another episode of Missing Links.

We could have done the whole series on climate change.

So let me just encapsulate quickly.

As a geologist and earth scientist,

what the data strongly suggests and what

many scientists are embracing is that climate change is a fact.

I think we all know that.

It is being driven by Earth's location in space,

Earth's locations to the sun.

Three parameters, the tilt, the angle, and the wobble.

The precession of the equinoxes, what's

called the orbit of the Earth around the Sun,

sometimes it's further, sometimes it's closer.

And it's the tilt angle and the obliquity

is what we're talking about.

Scientists know this.

This isn't a secret.

If we were not on this planet, Earth

would still be going through climate change.

But here's the key.

If you look at the records of the past,

and I prefer Mother Earth's own records from the ice cores,

rather than the interpretation from a corporation

or from a scientist who's beholden to someone who

is funding their research, what Mother Earth's records show

us is that we are, in fact, undergoing climate change.

And the climate has warmed briefly.

And not that much, compared to other times in the past.

It's about a third as warm now is

what it was during a time called the medieval warming period,

around 800, right around in that period of time.

But what's important is, after the warming happens,

the warming is intense, it's brief.

And it's what comes next that can be the problem.

And that is the cooling.

There's an abrupt cooling that always comes afterwards

So, Tiffany, here's where it gets really interesting.

What the Earth's climate records show is the carbon dioxide

levels, when they increase, that's

when the cooling happens.

The higher the CO2 levels, the cooler the temperatures get.

Not the warming that we see right now.

So Earth has had cooling cycles in the past

based on the CO2 that was available from natural sources.

We have now kicked more carbon dioxide

into the atmosphere of our planet in the last century

than we've ever had in the past.

If the little bit of CO2 from the past

caused the cooling that we're seeing in the ice cores

from Antarctica, that we showed in Missing Links,

there's a lot of CO2 that we now have.

What does that mean?

And the implications are that the cooling, I'm

not saying an ice age, but we may see a little bit more

cooling that we have, which is only a problem

if we're not prepared for it.

So if we can be honest with ourselves

and embrace what these changes really mean,

I think they're not a problem at all.

Because we are simply going through a cycle.

But the thinking in the past has always

been that climate is static.

And when something begins to change,

we either think something's wrong,

or we work to try to force the climate back

to where it used to be.

This ties into the previous question.

This is why from my opinion, my personal opinion,

is that it's a mistake to try to geoengineer

to put that stuff in the atmosphere

and make the earth cooler.

Because Earth, Mother Nature, Mother Earth

is working on her rhythm in a cycle that's

more than 20 years or 30 years.

And the intricacies, the interrelated nature

of these parameters, we're just beginning to understand.

So to try to change them before we fully

understand them, in my opinion, is irresponsible.

So are they happening?

Yes, and this is where I think we are in this right now.

Does that make sense if I say it that way?

Did I cover all--

Yes, absolutely.

I was wondering, when you said that we

do have the means to change the climate back to how it was when

you said "initially," I was wondering

if that was beneficial or not.

And I'm glad you answered that.

Yeah, I don't think so.

And what's interesting is, when you look at the years records,

the climate change that we're undergoing now

is so minuscule compared to what it's been in the past.

Are we warming?

Yeah.

We're not nearly as warm as we've been in the past.

And the warming that we've seen, even--

scientists, they tend to look at things in a shorter scale.

We're comparing temperatures today

to where they were 20, 25, 30 years ago.

Mother Nature doesn't work on those scales.

She's working on centuries and millennia.

So if you look at a snapshot, you say, my God.

Something's wrong.

When you look at the big picture and you gain that perspective,

you say, my God.

We're right in the rhythm with where we've been in the past.

I'll put it this way.

If we were not having some warming now,

I would be concerned.

Because I would say what's different now

from when we reached this point in the past?

Why isn't Earth?

These are cycles within cycles, 100,000-year cycles,

41,000-year cycles, 25,000-, 5,000-year cycles.

So if we have done nothing, I think

we would see the reversal of this climate change.

I got to be really clear on this.

We definitely need to go green.

We definitely need to stop burning fossil fuels.

We have the technology to give us the ability to-- we've

had that technology for 60 years to stop burning fossil fuels.

We need to stop kicking these pollutants into the air.

Norwegian scientists have taken this a step further,

and we're all looking at climate change.

And what they're telling us, they've got a beautiful pie

chart, is there are eight fundamental parameters that

must be in place to preserve what

is called the safe zone for life to inhabit planet Earth.

Climate change is only one of those eight parameters.

And each parameter, we get to see how far we have,

or if we have, come to the boundary,

if we have crossed the boundary.

Climate change, we're just really close to the boundary.

It's as bad as people are making it sound.

Other parameters, we are over 2/3.

We've crossed that boundary and we keep going.

One of those is the acidification of the oceans,

making the oceans acid.

One of those is the loss of biodiversity.

We're losing species on this planet

faster than we've ever seen.

We've been through five mass extinctions in the past.

Biologists are telling us right now

we are in the midst of the sixth mass extinction.

And the question is, will humans be a part of that?

I am an optimist.

I think we're going to learn about this delicate, precious

balance, and learn to cherish and preserve what we have.

But, Tiffany, this is the way we seem to learn as humans.

By experiencing what we don't want first,

and then saying we don't want it,

rather than saying this is the way we choose to live

and putting everything in place to move that way.

Does that make sense?

It does.

It's a really interesting way to learn.

So we have now learned that we do love and cherish our planet.

And it's like a ship on the ocean making a turn

to go back to port.

They don't turn on a dime.

Make a long, slow turn, we need to turn

this ship a little faster.

Because we are destroying those other eight parameters so very

quickly.

And I talk about this in the book Resilience from the Heart,

we talk about this.

The book Deep Truth, I talk about this as well.

Because climate change is important,

and it is one of other factors.

Let's talk a little bit more about the cooling effects

on the Earth.

Nadine wants to know is global warming

and cooling followed by a mass extinction?

Like is it always followed by--

A good question.

Not necessarily.

It doesn't have to.

And this is why we share this information.

By being honest, truthful, and factual,

it takes a lot of the fear out of what's happening.

Mother Earth and Nature are based in cycles,

in rhythms, as our bodies and our lives are.

Science is only 300 years old, and has

been reluctant to embrace those rhythms

and cycles in the modern world, the way many of our ancestors

and the indigenous traditions have.

We're going through a cycle, a natural rhythm,

a natural cycle.

We've been through a warming.

What the evidence suggests is the Earth

has not warmed significantly for at least the last decade,

possibly longer.

Probably moving into a cooling cycle.

A lot of that is based on the action from the Sun.

As the Sun becomes quiet, as the magnetic storms on the Sun

begin to dissipate, which is what has happened,

Earth typically becomes cooler during that time.

Not an ice age, but cooler.

And this is important, because even a little cooling

in the climate globally changes the weather locally.

Changes when it rains, when the seasons come,

when the monsoons come.

That changes when we grow our food, where we grow our food,

how we grow our food.

And that changes how people work and live together.

So the influence is huge.

It's only a problem if we're not prepared for it.

And we're not prepared only if we're not honest with ourselves

about what's happening.

Truthful, honest, factual interpretation

of what the Earth's history is showing us, I think,

is the key to us navigating through this pivotal moment

in climate change.

Interesting.

Let's shift gears a little bit and talk about-- you

mentioned the Sun.

I want to talk about the Earth and its effects on our DNA.

So Nicole wants to know, do you think

our DNA is changing, and/or the "junk DNA" that you mentioned,

is it being activated right now during this time of extra light

and energy reaching our planet today?

Sure.

That's a good question.

I'm going to approach this from a little bit

different perspective.

And it's actually not shifting gears that much,

because we're part of the natural system that we're

talking about.

So we're still talking about Earth and cycles.

There's a new science that's evolved within the last 15

years or so.

It's called epigenetics.

Epigenetics is the science that says

to us that our genetic makeup is not a fixed code.

We come into this world as babies with enough of our code

enabled to get us started in life in a healthy way.

What changes the code, this is important,

is our perceptions of our environment.

Or there could be physical things in the environment.

Chemicals, high tension power lines, things

like that, we all know those have an effect.

But the biggest effect is our perception of our world.

So when people ask me, is the Sun changing our DNA,

it's not that the light of the sun

is going to kick on some DNA if we go to the beach.

But as we just mentioned in the previous question,

our relationship to the Sun, the magnetic fields

of the Sun the ebb and flow, the magnetic fields of the Earth

ebb and flow in response to that.

And here's where it gets really interesting,

Tiffany, is that we are magnetic fields as well.

Our hearts are based in magnetic fields.

We are polar beings.

We have a north and a south pole in our bodies.

The science, so this isn't speculation,

it's not New Age wishful thinking, this is science,

is now showing us that humans are less aggressive and more

willing to cooperate with the magnetic fields of the earth

are stronger.

So what that says, or conversely,

more aggressive, less willing to cooperate,

when war and social hardship happens is when

the magnetic fields are weaker.

So now what we're saying to answer this question,

it's not the light of the Sun directly changing the DNA.

The magnetic fields of the Sun go through cycles,

influencing magnetic fields of the Earth, the human heart,

the human psyche.

As we perceive those changes, we become less aggressive

or more aggressive.

And our feelings are the epigenetic factors

that change our own DNA.

So are we changing our DNA?

We can do it all the time.

And there's a multipart question.

What's called been called junk DNA,

we now know Mother Nature didn't give us any junk.

Not in the cells.

It's not junk DNA.

It simply is DNA whose function has only recently

been recognized.

What we used to call the junk DNA is giving instructions

to the other DNA in terms of the functions

they perform in our bodies.

We need that DNA.

Scientists, for years, when they pull the DNA of the cell,

they've been throwing this stuff out.

Oh, we don't need this.

They're just after what was in the nucleus.

But there are other forms of DNA in the cell.

It's not junk.

It's sending instructions to our cell body.

So what we can say is that, as the Sun goes

through these rhythms that are triggering climate change,

it is also triggering, can trigger, genetic changes

in our body.

But the key is, it's how we perceive,

how we perceive the changes.

Or whether we feel that we are less aggressive or more

aggressive.

And I'm emphasizing this because it goes to the point

that we are empowered through our perceptions

to literally change our biology, to change

our physical being to adapt to the world as it changes.

We're not victims stuck, fixed, and at the mercy

of an environment changing around us.

We have the ability to change and adapt

so that we can thrive, not just survive,

but thrive in that environment.

It's a long answer to a short question

That is.

And it goes into Sarah's question, too.

She says, "How can we best prepare

for any spontaneous genetic changes caused by solar flare?"

I would love to address that spot.

Yeah, there's a lot of information on the Internet

going around about a big solar flare that's going to affect

the Earth in a lot of different ways.

Is it possible?

It is possible.

Anything is possible.

Have we had them in the past?

Yes, we have.

The 1850s was the last huge solar flare.

We didn't have the technology then that we have.

We didn't have cell phone towers and power grids the way

we have now.

What we did have, it destroyed.

The telegraph lines that were there acted as little antenna.

When that solar flare happened, it burned everything out.

So can it happen?

Yes.

Is there evidence that we are in for one now?

Personally, I know of no scientific evidence

that suggests that.

Now, I don't know that it can even be predicted.

And especially now, because the Sun has become so very quiet

and is influencing the planet the way

it is in terms of climate, the cooling

suggests that if we're going to have a flare,

it's not going to be any anytime soon.

So that was one part of the question.

Then there was another part.

She just wanted to know how we can best prepare for it.

The best way, and I've talked about this in Missing Links

toward the end of the program, new discoveries made

in the early 1990s now tell us that our heart and our brain,

two separate organs, are connected through a neural

network that allows those two organs to as is one potent

mechanism.

When we harmonize the heart and the brain,

we allow ourselves to harmonize with our natural environment.

And it all comes down to vibration.

Every moment of every day, there's

a conversation between our heart and our brain.

That conversation can be measured

as an electrical signal.

It's a very low signal.

And when it's optimized, it's 0.1 hertz.

It's a tenth of a hertz.

Can't even hear that.

This is the frequency that whales

communicate with in the ocean.

It's the frequency that military submarines use.

That's why it's a problem for the whales.

When we can feel the feelings and adjust our breathing

in a way that allows a 0.1 hertz signal between the heart

and the brain, we are harmonizing our body

with our natural environment.

And rather than something that we do every once in a while,

it's a way of being.

And our ancestors knew this.

They said this is a way of living,

rather than an activity that we do.

So for me personally, I don't have a meditation

per se that I do every day.

Life is the meditation and a mindfulness of other people,

my environment.

That is part of my practice.

And when I need to harmonize my heart and my brain,

I do exactly what I shared in Missing Links.

It's a breath, and an emotion, a feeling-based process

that optimizes that signal between the heart

and the brain.

So to answer the question, I think

this is the best thing we can do.

Because not only is it good for us.

It's good for us and our relationship to the environment

Thank you.

That's definitely a call to meditate.

Does that make sense?

It does.

To meditate, to show up and just be

aware of how we walk and move in the environment,

and with each other.

Can I say something else about that?

Yes

I spent a lot of time with indigenous people in different

cultures.

Monks, nuns, abbots in Tibet, Bolivia, Peru.

Indigenous peoples in kivas and in prayer.

As different as they are from one another,

one of the common threads is that all of them,

in their own way, have a way to harmonize

the heart and the brain.

So they learned this a long time ago.

And I think rather than thinking of it as something

we do on occasion to help us at a certain time,

in health or immune system or something

like that, if we can develop a practice where this becomes

a way of being, where we're in that state more often than not.

And I think it's our natural state of being.

I think it's natural for us to be in the states

when our intuition is tuned to its highest degree, when

we learn the best, super learning happens.

When we have direct access to our subconscious, when

our immune system at its strongest.

Rather than being an extraordinary way of living,

I think it's an ordinary way of living that we're only

now beginning to understand.

Thank you.

I wonder if we can take the time for one more

question from Naomi Simmons.

She says, you mentioned the code in our DNA

where you found a message from our creator.

Have you also looked into DNA of other species

and found this code?

Good question.

Is this message from beings from our planet that may have

dabbled with DNA here?

So I asked the same question that Naomi has just asked.

And so the bottom line is this.

The code that I found, it took me 20 years

to find that code in the DNA of humans.

It is in all carbon-based DNA.

That means that code is fundamental in every form

of life that we know today that is based in carbon.

So from a blade of grass to a hamster to a goldfish, to a dog

to a cat to an ape, when we interact

with life in another world, if their DNA is carbon-based,

it will have the same message.

How did that message get there?

That's a topic for another conversation

that I would love to share with you.

Thank you so much, Gregg.

Thank you, Tiffany.

I've enjoyed it tremendously today.

Thank you so much.

That's all we have for today.

I'm your host, Tiffany.

In the next episode, we'll answer

your insightful questions on heart-brain connection.

[THEME MUSIC]