S2E38: From Skeptic to Advocate: Becca Cramer Returns | Talk Tracks

Summary

The Telepathy Tapes – Talk Tracks

S2E38: From Skeptic to Advocate: Becca Cramer Returns

Release date: July 15, 2026
Hosts: Kai Dickens (A/B)
Guest: Becca Cramer (D), former nuclear engineer, writer, and advocate

---

Episode Overview

This episode explores the transformative journey of Becca Cramer, a former nuclear engineer and self-declared skeptic, who becomes an advocate for the validity of non-speaking autistic individuals' communication—particularly through spelling and its possible connection to telepathy. The conversation stretches across scientific skepticism, ableism, the failures and biases in research, and the implications of accepting “impossible” phenomena. The episode is rich in personal story, scientific critique, and calls to action for changing our approach and understanding of non-speaker communication.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Becca's Personal Journey: From Rational Skeptic to Advocate

• Background:

  • Becca details her trajectory from a scientific and religious upbringing into atheism, prompted partly by leaving the Mormon church and a period of chronic pain that reopened her curiosity about spirituality (02:09–04:16).
  • Quote:

    "I went from Mormon to seeker to atheist... I was in that headspace when I found the Telepathy Tapes." (02:09, D)

• Initial Skepticism:

  • Introduced to telepathy in the context of non-speaking autism through the podcast, Becca intended to debunk these claims but found herself unable to do so (01:34–01:53).
  • Quote:

    "I started researching it, tried to debunk it and couldn't." (01:50, D)

  • Her scientific mindset demanded evidence, grounding much of the conversation that followed.

---

The Relationship Between Spelling & Telepathy

• Defining the Connection:

  • Key message: While telepathy may explain some phenomena observed in non-speaker communication, it is crucial not to conflate spelling and telepathy; independence of communication validity is paramount (06:20–09:09).
  • Quote:

    "I think it's prudent to separate them... You don't have to say, yes, telepathy is happening in order for the communication to be valid." (06:20–08:44, D)

• Influence vs. Control:

  • Both hosts agree on the possibility of influence (cognitive, emotional, or telepathic), but reject that it invalidates all communication or implies total control by a partner (09:45–11:14).

---

The Science and Controversy of Non-Speaker Spelling

• Clever Hans Effect & Critiques of Spelling:

  • Explains the classic ‘Clever Hans’ case and psychological phenomena (idiomotor effect) often used to dismiss non-speaker communication (11:56–14:07).
  • Critique: The analogy breaks down with typing or spelling, especially given the speed and independence many non-speakers demonstrate.

• Ableism and the Validity of Support:

  • The episode critiques ableist assumptions that interpret any partner involvement as invalidating; compares communication supports to reading glasses and stresses that neurotypical standards cannot be the only benchmarks for competence (29:13–32:05).
  • Quote:

    "To say that communication needs to be 100% independent is ableist... It'd be like not letting someone have an interpreter." (31:13, D)

• Behaviorism vs. Internal Experience:

  • The tradition of diagnosing and evaluating people with autism through observable behaviors is contrasted with growing evidence and advocacy that focus on internal experience, motor control issues, and sensory challenges (10:28–11:40, D; 53:01–54:06, D).

• Failures of Early Research & Message Passing Tests:

  • Often-cited studies dismissing spelling were scientifically narrow and did not account for the stress or nuanced needs of the participants, nor for possible non-materialist explanations such as telepathy (19:13–26:37).
  • Quote:

    "This is very niche science. So I just think that's important for listeners to know... This was fairly simple, and it's remarkable how few people really control it." (21:29, D)

---

Evidence for Authorship and Thinking Beyond Materialism

• Eye Tracking and New Research:

  • Reference to recent studies (notably Vikram Jaswal’s work) using eye tracking to show that non-speakers look at a letter before they select it, undercutting cueing theory and supporting independent agency (32:05–35:08, D).
  • Quote:

    "...the non speaker’s eyes go to the letter before they select it. So it makes cueing theory even that much harder..." (32:16, D)

• The Limits of Current Science and Siloed Disciplines:

  • Becca highlights the need to move research from speech-language pathologist silos into neuroscience and psychology to ensure validity and appropriate methodologies (32:16–35:08, D).

---

Real-World Observations: Families, CRPs, and Outcomes

• Everyday Evidence Against Cueing:

  • Countless lived experiences among families and communication regulation partners (CRPs) provide practical evidence that non-speakers produce independent thought, sometimes against the desires or knowledge of their parents (38:23–40:53).
  • Memorable moment:

    "We were having a really fun night... I asked Houston something and he was like, it's time to go to bed. And I knew Katie did not wanna go to bed." (38:51, D)

• Telepathy as a Real Phenomenon:

  • Kai recounts anecdotes of non-speakers knowing thoughts or information only held in another person’s mind—sometimes relaying the “banana” trick when partners try to avoid telepathic influence (29:13–31:13, B).
  • Quote:

    “...watching a speller type… and all of a sudden they'll say, stop saying banana... they're talking to the partner...” (29:13, B)

• The Banality of 'Magic Show' Theories:

  • Skepticism about elaborate cueing 'shows' is countered by the real-life challenges and pressures facing families, and the severe physical challenges (like apraxia) non-speakers cope with (48:41–50:25, B).
  • Quote:

    “If you can't control your body in every realm of your life, can you sit down and do a 30 minute magic show? I mean, it's so... bananas... that, to me, is a bigger leap than telepathy.” (48:41–50:25, B)

---

The Ethical and Social Imperative

• Urgency for Science, Medicine, and Policy Shift:

  • Becca calls for a research, therapeutic, and insurance landscape that acknowledges the reality and potential of assisted communication by non-speakers (54:06–57:52).
  • Improved outcomes—not just communication, but health, independence, and happiness—are possible if agency is returned and access is granted.

• Accepted Supports in Other Domains:

  • Drawing parallels to accepted supports for reading or physical mobility, Becca and Kai frame CRP’s involvement as a justifiable, non-intrusive aid (31:43, B).

---

Spiritual Revelations, Openmindedness, and Future Hope

• Spiritual and Epistemological Implications:

  • The influx of reports from non-speakers describing telepathy, communication with other realms, and spiritual experiences calls into question fundamental assumptions about consciousness (57:52–58:47).
  • Quote:

    “…we're getting differing views on things as big as God and the nature of heaven, and non speakers are saying different things ... it gives hope, it's love, it's connection, it's beauty. It adds sparkle to life...” (58:47, D)

• A Call for More Researchers and Advocates:

  • Becca concludes with an appeal to scientists and others interested in consciousness to engage with non-speaker communication as both a scientific frontier and an urgent human rights issue (60:39–61:24).
  • Quote:

    “...it's like a call for scientists, for researchers. Anyone who's interested in the science of consciousness, this space, they can apply that to actually helping people right now.” (60:39, D)

---

Noteworthy Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On being fooled:

  "I felt like I had been fooled and I felt like people I loved were being controlled by malicious people rather than a higher power... I will not be fooled again, you know, is the feeling." (03:11, D)

• On the absurdity of cueing theories:

  "If you can't control your body in every realm of your life, can you sit down and do a 30 minute magic show?... That to me is a bigger leap than telepathy." (48:41–50:25, B)

• On ableism and communication supports:

  "To say that communication needs to be 100% independent is ableist... It'd be like not letting someone have an interpreter. It's support, but their words are still their own." (31:13, D)

• On advocacy and calls to action:

  “...this massive population of people... need our help... I hope we see more and more people really putting in their efforts to help non speakers because the way it is right now is not okay.” (60:39–61:24, D)

• On spiritual meaning:

  "For me, it gives its hope. It's love, it's connection, it's beauty. It adds sparkle to life, you know?... it makes life sparkle." (58:47, D)

---

Important Segments & Timestamps

• [01:34] Becca’s backstory – skepticism and scientific background
• [03:11] Leaving Mormonism and shifting views on belief
• [06:20] Distinguishing between spelling and telepathy
• [11:56] The Clever Hans argument and its application
• [19:19] Explaining why old research "saw" telepathy but made a materialist leap
• [29:13] Telepathy anecdotes in everyday practice
• [31:13] Ableism in communication research
• [32:16] Eye-tracking research supporting independent authorship
• [40:53] The practical impossibility of cueing and the need for outcomes research
• [54:06] The future: changes in research, insurance, and medical policy
• [58:47] Spiritual revelations among non-speakers
• [60:39] Final call for action and advocacy

---

Takeaways

This episode provides a comprehensive look at the intersections between science, skepticism, and belief in the arena of non-speaking autism and telepathy. It critiques outdated, ableist frameworks while offering hopeful perspectives born of new research and lived experience. Listeners are left with a sense of both urgency and possibility—a reminder that paradigm shifts in science often begin with challenging what everyone insists cannot be true.

---

For further exploration and bonus content (including telepathy tests and more), listeners are encouraged to visit thetelepathytapes.com and join the Backstage Pass community.

Transcript

[A]

Hi, everyone, I'm Kai Dickens and welcome to the Talk Tracks, brought to you weekly by TTT Media. In this series, we explore the threads that weave together our understanding of reality,

[B]

science, spirituality, consciousness, and even unexplained phenomena.

[A]

Because every era has ideas once dismissed as impossible until someone was willing to investigate them seriously.

[B]

And on this show, we do just that.

[C]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash? Progressive makes it easy to see if you could save when you bundle your home and auto policies. Try [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states.

[B]

If you want to see our incredible guests in person, we have a video

[A]

version of this episode on the Telepathy Tapes YouTube page.

[B]

Today we're with Becca Kramer, an unbelievable person who is a former nuclear engineer. And when she first heard the telepathy

[A]

tapes, she did what few people do,

[B]

which is go back and look at all the initial research around spelling, telepathy, non speaking, autism, and ended up on the other side a very different person and now an activist. So I am thrilled to have you here, Becca.

[D]

So good to be here.

[B]

You've had such a journey and some people remember that you were in our talk tracks last year about your journey and spelling. But for those who didn't hear that Talk Tracks episode, could you just give us your version of your backstory, how you end up on this couch?

[D]

Yes, absolutely. I listened to the telepathy tapes. Loved it. I'm writing a book about, honestly, it's about spirituality and pain and science. And I thought, okay, this telepathy is incredible. Gotta include this. Then I started researching it, tried to debunk it and couldn't.

[B]

So you were a scientist, you were a nuclear engineer. So maybe talk about your background, your view, like your, your. Your mindset. Like, are you pretty rational? Do you like to have a lot of evidence, you know, talk about just you and, and your career path and how that's influenced how you see the world?

[D]

So I am nuclear engineer by training, worked in the nuclear industry for over seven years, worked in healthcare after that. I grew up Mormon and went from Mormon to seeker to atheist. Then I had a bunch of health issues and chronic pain, which sort of gently nudged me back into seeking mode and that I was in that headspace when I found the telepathy tapes.

[B]

And just to ask you about that, because I have some friends who are ex Mormon and how, like, what happened to your thoughts around belief and Believing when you left the Mormon Church, like what lead? Cause it's hard. I mean, I think the Mormon community can be wonderfully grounding for a lot of people. Cause there's such a sense of community and love and looking out for each other and I know it can be extremely hard to leave. So are you able to talk about what made you leave and what happened in your mind and heart in that process?

[D]

Yeah, absolutely. And I. Much of my family is still Mormon and very close to a lot of them. And like you said, it can be very grounding for some people. And I've just gotten to this very full time flexible view of belief. But for a long time I was very staunchly against it. I felt against religion, organized religion. I felt it was very divisive. I felt like I had been fooled and I felt like people I loved were being controlled by malicious people rather than a higher power. And I've learned more since and my views continue to change. But yeah, it was like, I will not be fooled again, you know, is the feeling. And I've met a lot of people like that, like I was. So I considered myself an atheist for a long time and most of the people in my life are still atheists. So it's getting into this space while, you know, keeping my feet on the ground.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

And continuing to love the people I love on both sides has been really interesting and I love it. But it is hard because spirituality is such a personal question. It's such a personal thing, but I think it's been harmful. How much we've put it into the closet and how little we let ourselves talk about it because it's such an essential part of being human, I think. And I don't think you have to have God necessarily to be spiritual. No.

[B]

Yeah, yeah. And I think that was beautiful because I wanted to really understand what happened to you around belief. Because I think one thing I've learned in this journey with the telepathy tapes is most of us don't want to be fooled in either direction. You know, I think the majority of people don't want to be just spoon fed something and told this is real. Believe it or be told, nothing's real. You can't believe anything. And you're silly, you're uneducated. I think the truth for most of us is somewhere between. And I was so grateful that, you know, here's a stranger. But it's kind of what I went through because I remember when I first started hearing, oh well, spelling can't be real and this and This I went through my own, like cognitive dissidents for about eight months, going through all the paperwork, all the research, trying to figure out and then trying to stack it up with what I've seen of non speakers saying stuff their parents didn't know, typing about things in a cadence that their parents do not have. And it was like, what? And then the telepathy, to your point, spending so many time with families who were like, they knew when I was feeling sad and would start crying, they knew where things were hidden. I would think about where the Christmas presents were and they'd go get it. Like all sorts of stuff where I'm like, I can't add this up. So I think to even, like, further the conversation, there's two different things going on that the non speaking community is up against. One is their communication being valid. Right? That spelling is an affirmed communication and these individuals are authoring their own thoughts, not being joysticked by some parent or whatever it is that you know, or being cute or being prompted. And then there's a second element which is telepathy. And I guess to start, do telepathy and spelling go hand in hand or are they different things that can exist separately?

[D]

I think it's prudent to separate them. So I was arguing the other day on the phone, we were having a lively professional discussion with one of the leading researchers that's anti spelling. And we're talking and the conversation basically gets down to, you know, thinking they're being cued. And I'm arguing that they're not being cued. To be cued in that way, that's impossible. And it gets down to, I think telepathy is more likely than this cueing theory that's been established. But then in that moment I have this light bulb of, oh my gosh, it doesn't matter. You don't have to say, yes, telepathy is happening in order for the communication to be valid. And so what's happening is we're arguing about, is it telepathy, is it cueing? But what really matters and what's really going to move the needle for non speakers is are their words valid? And what I'm shocked to find is speech and language pathologist Asha. They believe that every word spelled by a non speaker is influenced, that it's controlled. Still, they can see all these very independent typers and when I say very independent, yeah, they still have a partner in the room. They're not even being touched. But because there's this potential for influence and they've just grabbed onto this one test that, you know, they have to do a message passing test. It's not appropriate science. But at the same, we're not even asking the right researchers. So we all want to be evidence based. That's important. Evidence based is good. What we know is that influence is possible between a speller and their partner. We don't know how that influence is happening. There's very convincing information that it's probably telepathy. But to stay scientific, we can say that is an unknown, that the influence is just a black box, an unknown. And we can do science like that you identify your unknowns and you move forward. So we say influence is possible,

[B]

we

[D]

can look into that further. But then spelling, saying that it's valid, saying that it's beneficial, saying that they are choosing to spell those words that can all be separated from telepathy. And it needs to be because I think we don't want to link it too strongly to telepathy because that's going to be really hard to study. And evidence based is critical.

[B]

I think that's true, that they can be very separate. I know a few non speakers who say telepathy is not a part of anything I've ever understood to be true. And then other non speakers who are like, yes, this is absolutely part. And I can hear voices all the time. But that doesn't mean that what someone is thinking, you're always going to spell. And that's why it's such an important thing to call this out. Because when I've talked to CRPs, they say if I can empty my mind completely and not be thinking any thoughts, it's essential to then have their true thoughts and feelings coming out. I mean, have you heard that at all?

[D]

Yes, I've definitely heard that. That it, that it helps to consider your internal experience when you're being the partner so that you're not influencing them. And you could say, okay, influencing them by cueing. Influencing them by telepathy. Either one. We can all agree influence is possible. But where it becomes madness and unacceptable is to make this giant leap. It's a massive assumption that turns into a huge human rights issue saying that every single thing they spell is influenced. Yeah. And like, you know, whenever you talk to anyone, you're gonna be influenced by who you're speaking to.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

And the science even behind this, it gets fascinating because the science of autism really supports what the non speakers are saying. We know it's a neurodevelopmental. It is not a behavioral problem. It's neurodevelopmental we diagnose it based on behavior because that's just the nature of the dsm. That's how we work in the world. But we're evolving and we're learning. Oh, it's the internal experience. It's the nervous system. That's where the autism truly lies. So when we're only diagnosing based on behavior, one, we're missing a lot of neurodivergent people by doing that. And I think we're missing what really matters.

[B]

Yeah. When you say dsm, what does that mean?

[D]

The Diagnostic Statistical Manual for like. It's what psychologists and psychiatrists use for diagnosing mental disorders. And neurodevelopmental disorders are also in there, like adhd, intellectual disability, and autism. We know they're neurodevelopmental. They're in the DSM for diagnostic reasons. And it can be severe or it can be not as severe. And it just. There's a spectrum.

[B]

So, you know, I'd love for you to kind of go through some of the common arguments that have been leveled against spellers or typers and why those arguments might not hold water. And I think starting with, what was that horse's name?

[A]

Clever Hans.

[B]

And maybe explain who Clever Hans was, what the argument was, and how that wouldn't translate to a letter board, from my understanding, because you'd have to cue every single letter, which would take a long time. So maybe. Could you talk about that?

[D]

Yes. So Clever Hans, it's like 1907, there's a horse that the owner is convinced that the horse is intelligent because you can ask the horse any question and the horse will stomp. It's a. However many times to get you to the right answer. You could ask true, false. You could ask how old someone is? A lot of different questions. What they found is, you know, even scientists came into this study, this horse, they couldn't figure it out, but then they did some studies where they blindfolded the horse, and the horse couldn't get the answers right when it was blindfolded. So they realized somehow the horse is going off of a visual cue to know when to stop tapping its hoof.

[B]

So, like, I did a Clever Hans Deep Dive 2, and it sounds like, let's say your child was 14. And you said to Clever Hans, okay, how old is my kid? And then it would start the hoof going. And when you got to 14, people would usually lean in and clap or smile really big, and then the horse would stop. Right. So the horse would pick up on a Subtle cue and know when to stop.

[D]

Exactly.

[B]

Okay.

[D]

Yes.

[B]

Okay, so now fast forward. How did that get tangled in with spelling?

[D]

So it's idiomotor effect is this. We make subtle movements subconsciously, and we all do this. And that is how mentalists work. They learn how to read people's subconscious cues very subtly, and they can pick up a lot of different information that way. So because the partners with the non speakers, they are not trying to fool anyone. They are not trying to do anything. They believe in the words that the non speaker is saying. So to explain that, they would say, well, then the partner must be doing something subconsciously. Something the partner's doing subconsciously is controlling the non speaker. It's controlling the letters. The non speaker is selecting which pause there.

[B]

Because what's so weirdly offensive about that? It's rooted in this idea that these people cannot be competent, that non speakers aren't competent because they're looking at behavior. Right? They're seeing someone who you ask them a question, they walk away, or you tell them to sit down and they might stand up, which is a function of apraxia. Your body's not able to do what you want it to do. But just because you're not speaking or not able to control your body doesn't mean you're not smart. But the idea that in order to spell something, you have to be cued or joysticked by like a human body is deeply problematic for me. Because it sounds like it's rooted in this idea that these individuals are not in there.

[D]

Exactly. And I. I was, when I was trying to understand, like, how can we think this? That's where I uncovered what I think is the link between telepathy and spelling.

[A]

Something about summer always makes you want

[B]

to be out and about doing things

[A]

all day long, whether it's long morning hikes or doing a beach day or just going on a fun road trip with my family. And every year when summer hits, I realize I want clothes that can actually keep up with all of that. But buying a whole new summer wardrobe can get really expensive fast. So I did some research, and I ended up joining Fabletics as a vip. It honestly has completely changed how I shop. When you sign up as a new VIP, you get 70 to 80% off

[B]

of everything, which is absolutely bananas.

[A]

It made it so easy to grab multiple matching sets, shorts, tanks, swimwear, and loungewear for the summer.

[D]

We.

[A]

Without overthinking the price, I've basically been living it in the Fabletics tank tops all summer. The quality honestly surprised me. They feel exactly like the premium activewear from higher end brands. Super soft and breathable but without the ridiculous price tag. Plus I can keep the same set. Plus I can keep the same set on to run errands, pop into the office afterward and still feel totally put together. So shop [e-mail] tapes to get 70 to 80% off everything when you sign up as a new VIP, take a quick style quiz and be sure to select tapes when prompted to unlock this offer. This is a limited time offer, so don't wait. Again, that's phabletics.com tapes for 70 to 80% off of everything as a new VIP. You guys know how much I value my wind down time. My absolute favorite thing to do at the end of a long day is to curl up on the couch, put on a podcast or pull out a good book and just totally check out. But I honestly didn't realize what I was missing until I got my Lola blanket. Once you feel it, you are officially ruined for all other blankets. And it's completely true. The blankets are crafted with this luxury

[B]

ultra soft faux fur which is so

[A]

comfy it just completely wraps you in the best way possible and feels like a warm hug. Lola is an amazing gift to give as well. It's personal, it's beautiful, and it's something that will be used every single day day. And also for anyone with pets. They will try to steal this. They absolutely will. But Lola now makes a full pet collection. They use the exact same crazy soft material for their orthopedic pet beds. So your dog or cat gets to be just as spoiled as you are and you actually get to keep your blanket to yourself. Lola has over 20,000 five star reviews and there's a reason it's called the world's number one blanket. This thing is just next level. And for a limited time, Our listeners get 40% off select Lola blanket products with code tapes at checkout. Just head to lolablankets.com and use code tapes to get 40% off your order. After you purchase, they'll ask where you heard about them. Please support our show and let them know we sent you Wrap yourself in Luxury with Lola blankets. You've heard us talk about one skin before and whether you try every new skincare product on the market or stick to the basics, at some point most of us realize our skin just isn't keeping up the way it used to. And that's what Oneskin has really changed for me. It actually works differently than anything else I've tried. Did you know that up to 80% of visible skin aging starts with sun exposure. And that's exactly where one Skin's limited edition summer bundles have you covered. They pair their OS1 peptide skincare with SPF to help reverse the visible effects of UV aging while protecting you from new damage. Lately I've been using the OS1 face alongside the OS1 Shield SPF. Most sunscreens break me out or make me look pasty, but this goes on completely sheer. Also, over the last couple of months, the redness and sunspots I usually get during summer are actually fading. I really love how it's helping my skin. Born from over a decade of longevity research, One Skin is helping you unlock your healthiest skin now. And as you age, for a limited time, try OneSkin with 15% off using code tapes at OneSkin Co tapes. That's 15% off OneSkin Co with code tapes. After you purchase, they'll ask where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them we sent you.

[B]

Okay, so you're looking at some of these tests that people point to as, you know, debunking spelling.

[A]

And what do you see?

[D]

They were seeing telepathy and needed an explanation. And so instead of believing the words the non speakers were spelling, we create this materialist explanation for how they can be spelling what their partner knows. So we create this explanation and then it just grows and grows and grows from there. And it, I mean, it put the science of autism back so far. But now we've got psychologists and we've got motor planning scientists looking into autism as well and finding that what the non speakers have been saying is true from a experiential perspective. We do know that they have motor difficulties and motor differences, sensory motor differences. We know there's apraxia, like speech is a fine motor. We know that loops are very common, that they'll get in this. There's a mind body disconnect. We can see that in, you know, level one, two, and three.

[B]

So and by level one, two and three, for people new to this, those are levels of autism based on quote, unquote severity.

[D]

Yeah, Yep, exactly.

[B]

Level three would be non speakers.

[D]

Yeah, exactly. So it's. What's fascinating is the things they were saying in the 80s with facilitated communication still ring true now. Which makes it unbelievably heartbreaking that they had access to communication. We shut it down because it didn't hold up to materialist tests. And now how do we come back from that? How do we make up for that? How do we, I mean, it's a lot of. A lot of people.

[B]

So bring people back there. So in the. Just when did facilitated communication start? What did that look like versus now? What was problematic and like, when did things start to unravel? And how do we still feel the repercussions of that today, 40, almost 50 years later?

[D]

Yeah, so facilitated communication started in the 80s, like in Australia, and they brought it over to the United States, and everyone was really excited about it, educators. And it was adopted very quickly, and people were communicating. So they thought for the first time, for the first time, you have this massive population of people that are now gaining voices. And not only that, their outcomes are improving. You know, it isn't just that they're gaining voices. It's that they're seeing results. They're seeing improvements in behavior. Things you can measure. But, you know, relationships seem to be forming in ways that they hadn't before. But then they do these tests, message passing tests, which were just one. The message passing test was just invented by a speech and language pathologist. It's not like this wasn't some fine science like vaccines or medicine or, you know, things that have a lot of specialists involved. This was. This is very niche science. So I just think that's important for listeners to know, like questioning. This is. It's manageable. There are many other forms of science that I wouldn't even go near because it's just too complicated. This was fairly simple, and it's remarkable how few people really control it. And so he makes this test, the message passing test, where the non speaker and the partner are asked different questions. And so they don't know what the other was asked. They're asked different questions. Let's make it really simple. The non speaker is shown a picture of a cup. The partner is shown a picture of a dog. The non speaker, when asked, what picture did you see? The non speaker spells dog. And so how could the non speaker do that? How could they know? The partner must be in control somehow. And no matter how far away they were sitting, no matter what the context, it was just always, if they failed, they're being cued. And because they failed consistently, because the way the tests were set up, it was stressful. It wasn't taking into account a lot of the things that we've learned from non speakers, they would fail. And it was just assumed that every word from that point on is controlled.

[B]

What do you think was happening? I mean, so I guess skeptics of spelling would say, okay, they were being somehow cued, or someone was moving the Board or something like that. What's the alternative to what was happening in those tests?

[D]

I like, I think it was telepathy. Yeah. Like I honestly, I wouldn't have even made that jump until I saw the footage. You know, it's a young girl and she's pointing to letters. And I just had to put myself in that position of like trying to work with someone holding a board and in any way trying to get them to put their finger on the right letter. That would what? Like that just seemed so hard and almost impossible. But I also get that, yeah, telepathy, many people think is impossible. But since my mind had opened the potential of telepathy just enough, you go, oh my gosh, what if that's how they're doing that?

[B]

Yeah. And I love, because that's where I ended up looking back at some of that research too was like, if you watch how quickly some of these individuals are spelling and the fact that if it was idiomotor, you'd have to cue every single word. So you'd have to float over A and get a Q. You'd have to float over B and get a Q. You'd have to float over C and get a Q. And I've, you've seen spellers at this point, I'm sure they spell so fast they're not waiting for Q. Sometimes the word is out before you know, no one even knows what's happening. Right. It's just so, so fast. Especially if you're typing like the spellers that we feature aren't being touched. Sometimes they're typing into an iPad on their own. You know, the parent isn't even holding the board or the device. Right. So it's like what is happening if they're saying what's in the parent's mind or what the parent saw. And if it's not cueing, it's telepathy. But to your point, in the 90s I think that would have sounded bananas. I mean it sounds bananas to people even now. So if you want to isolate telepathy, then they just do. Everything gets thrown out the window, right? Because it's like none of this can be possible. Okay, so as far as the people doing those message passing tests, so they weren't scientists with like IRB approval, which is like approval from big universities. This were these like peer reviewed gigantic tests that were put out in journals and studied or was it just like, tell me how what you think regarding how like these early 90s message passing tests became the baseline for dismissing communication for an entire Group of people.

[D]

Yeah, I think at first they weren't irb, but then they were. And I think once you get the failed message passing test, that's where the error happens. Once you are sure that they're communicating, the partner's sure that they're communicating, they do a test, you're not even touching them and yet they spell what's in your mind. Once everyone became aware that that's a possibility, I think that really solidified the message passing test, that it's we know influence is possible in very surprising ways. So we have to get a message passing test. And so this is what my big aha moment recently has been. Even if everyone kind of comes around to the telepathy piece, we have the other hurdle of presuming competence. And if people come around to well, they can potentially read minds, it still begs the question of well, are their thoughts their own, Are their words their own? And that's where the research going on right now that isn't getting included by ASHA scientists because it's being done by psychologists showing, you know, the eye tracking studies and really focusing on proving authorship rather than obsessing about this potential for influence. It's, we can move on from there. From a spelling science perspective, we know they can be influenced instead of staying in this how, why, which we may never know, especially if it's telepathy, we may never know how do we just ensure that their words are their own? And I've thought about this looking at how hard it is to spell, how much effort and if you're the parent of a neurodivergent person, you know how hard it can be to get them to do anything that they don't want to do. So I think it's not a wild assumption to say that they are spelling what they want to spell. And that's just the most humane to me obvious explanation is they're spelling what they want to spell. It might be something, a thought you're having, but they want to be spelling it if they're doing that.

[B]

Yeah. And what's interesting too, and this was the big aha moment for me was and why it felt important to talk about the telepathy piece is because I've met so many parents and CRPs now who will say, or communication regulation partners who will say, when I'm spelling with this person, I will completely empty my mind. I have no thoughts of my own. And if that becomes hard, I'll sing a song over and over in my head or I'll say the word orange or Banana something over and over and over again. And what's really funny is like I've been in a situation before watching a speller type something, some beautiful message, and all of a sudden they'll say, stop saying banana. And I'm thinking, what is happening? But they're talking to the partner, you know, or like, just clear your head instead of saying banana. Just really funny things that are like, that's actually really annoying to me right now. Like, can you just clear it so I can spell, you know, and not say banana over and over? So I think, you know, there's those moments that are really quite humorous but also telling. And I just want to add this thought too, you know, which it took me a long time to really understand this ableism, right? That like we. What does that even mean? But I think for some people just to think about it is that we have a box of what feels comfortable for us to validate something, right? Like, oh, just do it this way. And if you can't do it that way, it's like, oh, they can't do it. But that's pretty ableist because you're coming at it from a point of view where you're used to a neurotypical body responding to your thoughts, responding to the directions firing from your brain saying to do something xyz. Or even if you have a difficult time around controlling your body and need someone there to regulate. And non speakers will often say, if there's someone calming present helping me, reminding me to put my feet flat on the ground or my back up straight, it helps me to communicate, to function. And so to say your words only count if a person isn't in the room. Helping you with that. Again, we're coming from an ableist point of view. Our point of view, what works for our bodies, not working for theirs. And I think that is the big shift.

[D]

Exactly. That it's to view support as control. To say that communication needs to be 100% independent is ableist. And so it's not flinging insults. It's. That's what we mean when we say this is ableist. It'd be like not letting someone have an interpreter. It's support, but their words are still their own. Right?

[B]

Right. Or one example I've used before is like if someone needs to read a book but needs reading glasses, if you take away the reading glasses, it's a support. You're not saying the reading glasses are why you're reading. I mean, it's a support. And I think if you think about a communication Regulation partner in that similar way. It's just a support.

[D]

Absolutely.

[B]

Can you talk about any of the research you see happening right now in terms of mind exploration, proving authorship? You mentioned eye tracking studies. What are those? What have they discovered from eye tracking studies?

[D]

Yes. So Vikram Jaswal out of University of Virginia said lab and they do great work and the one study, it's eye tracking study where they're measuring the eye movements and they can show that the non speaker's eyes go to the letter before they select it. So it makes cueing theory even that much harder because then it puts it in the realm of like Morse code or something. So you know, there's these eye tracking studies, they just came out with a commentary in Autism Research Journal which is owning this potential for influence. Obviously not talking about telepathy, but just we know that they can be influenced. We know all these message passing tests have failed but wow, what a leap to go from influence to shut it down. And obviously they're much more eloquent and scientific in their explanation for why we need to revisit the science of assisted typing. They call it assisted typing, but I think that's good for all the parents, people out there that are curious. If you're not down with the telepathy piece, that's fine. This is not dangerous and it isn't going against science. It's just there are different silos in science and we have a perfect storm of this has been in the wrong silo for, for way too long. And then getting it out of the speech language pathology silo, it needs to be in physiology and neuroscience and psychology, like moving it over there. And there's great work going on. More researchers are needed though and we need much more people in this space. And I also want us to be ready for there will always be the potential for saying, well maybe they were influenced. Like, okay, so because we have so much research showing that influence is possible, how do we get past this potential for influence? And you go, you verify if anything is said of consequence, we validate it with an independent spelling partner. Done. And that's like this whole fear around not letting them spell, not letting them spell because abuse allegations are inevitable and that is damaging and very hard to deal with. But we can deal with it. But it really is going to be changing the science of autism. This is a big shift to say, oh my gosh, non speakers are much, much more aware, present, capable than we previously understood.

[A]

Lately I haven't really been drinking and I've been looking for other ways to

[B]

unwind at the end of the day,

[A]

something that still feels relaxing and fun

[B]

but doesn't leave me feeling off the next morning.

[A]

And that's what I love about Batch. They're micro mints and they're incredible because they're so easy. They're tiny, they fit in a purse or a jacket, a carry on, wherever, and you can choose your experience based on how many mints you take. So it doesn't have to be this extreme thing. It's just a simple, gentle way to take the edge off. And because they dissolve in your mouth, they tend to kick in faster than a gummy, usually around 15 to 30 minutes faster. And what I appreciate is it's not just a trendy wellness brand. It was founded by chemical engineers who actually understand what they're formulating and they're fully transparent about every ingredient. I also love their nighttime CBD gummies for those evenings when my brain is still running through emails, ideas to do

[B]

lists and all the things and I

[A]

just want to ease into rest without

[B]

feeling foggy or icky the next morning. And here's the good news.

[A]

Right now batch is offering 30% off site wide. And yes, that applies to subscriptions too, so you can lock in that discount for your monthly supply. Go to hellobatch.com tapes and use code tapes at checkout. Summer always makes me rethink what I'm reaching for because I want lighter fabrics, pieces that feel good the second you put them on and things that can go from work to dinner without feeling overdone. That's why I love Quince. They focus on high quality essentials like breathable linen, soft organic cotton, washable silk and beautiful jewelry without the luxury markup. It's that rare balance where everything feels elevated but it's still easy and affordable. Their 100% European linen pants, dresses and tops are the pieces you reach for all summer. They're lightweight, effortless to style and start at just $32. I recently bought the Flowknit Breeze short sleeve Polo and it's perfect for going

[B]

to work or going out on a

[A]

boat or to a concert in the and the big thing for me is that Quince works directly with ethical factories and cuts out the middle knit so you're paying for quality, not brand markup. I personally love their 100% European linen long sleeve shirt because in California you go from super hot to super cold and it's perfect for layering and easy

[B]

to throw in a bag.

[A]

I also love their 100% European linen high waisted shorts. They look so good and classic. If you're going to the pool or to the beach or just to a summer barbecue, make your summer wardrobe feel easier, go to quince.com tapes for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too. That's Q U-I-N-C-E.com tapes for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com tapes.

[D]

And the science is already supporting that. Like science coming out from neuroscientists. They're doing research on motor and sensory motor. It's all jiving with what we're finding with spelling, that we need to coach their motor. And then they gain access to much more language when their nervous systems are

[B]

calm and those motor pathways are formed.

[D]

Yeah, they can get the motor pathway formed. And I mean, this is just the beginning, I think, for the science of autism, especially, like, really understanding how we can support all levels.

[B]

I know you've now met some spellers and their families and CRPs. Have you had conversations? Because, again, it's something I see often where a speller will be spelling something the parent doesn't want to do, doesn't agree with, has no knowledge about, is frustrated because they will speak in long sentences when they want a quick answer. Have you seen any of that? Because that to me fits into a column of just common sense. If you're cueing something, you would want it your way all the time.

[D]

Yep. We were having a really fun night with Katie and Libby. It was after filming, I think, a little while back.

[B]

Katie, who we mentioned before, is Houston's

[A]

mom and Libby is John Paul's mother. And they were all Featured in Season

[B]

1 of the Telepathy tapes and the upcoming film.

[D]

Yeah. And Houston was there and I asked Houston something and he was like, it's time to go to bed. And I knew Katie did not wanna go to bed. So just like, little things like that. And I've heard plenty of stories, definitely where it's surprising. And I've asked multiple parents, because if you're in the camp of, like, I can accept the telepathy piece. It does beg the question, okay, if we're open to telepathy, how do you know everything they say isn't just, you know, what you want to hear? How do you know it's really coming from them? And there's just so many examples. Like when I've asked parents that, you know, they say they're learning their child's or adult's personality, they're learning likes and dislikes. And, you know, I want to go to the beach, and they'll go to the beach and they'll love it. And I mean, there's just so many solutions. And that's why I've said it'd be really great to track the outcomes, the mental health improvements, the relationship improvements. How do we show the benefits of them getting voices on top of just getting a voice? But I don't know. I like to think of what's the most valuable way we can research this. But it truly is right now we say inconclusive, and we have to let spelling across the board happen because we know how to mitigate the dangers. And it sure looks like we've been wrong. So how do you right that wrong as quickly as possible?

[B]

Do you think those who are so locked into wanting to disenfranchise and dismiss spelling as fake, you know, a lot of people at ASHA or there are like a lot of really intense lobbyists and people who are making sure spelling stays in the fringes. Do you think there's any amount of

[A]

research that would change their stance?

[B]

Or do you think there could be an emotional desire not to because it would show how wrong they've been? And being wrong about who won the super bowl or something two years ago is one thing. Being wrong about denying people education, life, relationships, friendships, autonomy, where they eat, where they go, what they do is massive. It is a crime I can't even fathom. And if I helped bolster that narrative, I personally would be very scared of being called out wrong. But who knows? What do you think about that? Do you think they want to accept a change or is there too much at risk?

[D]

I completely agree. It's so massive and it's been going on for so long. And through the research I've done, I can see people that deeply care for non speakers that it isn't coming from a place of negative. It really is coming from a place of believing they're protecting them, which is the. It's almost like the worst type of trying to help. It's like when I was trying to help by digging into the science of telepathy. And I think it helped, but then I had this moment of like, oh my gosh, did I make something worse? Did I actually hurt them? So that's the same. You know, a lot of these researchers are just trying to help in the best way they know how. But I think studying it, validating it, it's gonna be difficult. And because we know influence is possible for whatever reason, how do we incorporate that into the Science, I love, I

[B]

love what you brought up around trying. And maybe there's research going on around this. If there is, let me know. But trying to study the mental health and almost like behavioral outcomes in a family when someone starts spelling. Because what I've witnessed many times now is truly someone being able to say what they want for dinner or what they can't eat. Like, I remember hearing about a young speller who was just like, I actually cannot eat eggs. They make me feel so bad. And she was having all sorts of stomach issues and all sorts of stuff. And then like, they stopped eggs and their morning got way better, you know, or, you know, like you said, like, there's a non speaker I know who can surf. And that would have never crossed their parents mind. But when he started smelling, he said, I want to go to the ocean and I want to learn to surf. Well, that sounded bananas from someone with apraxia who cannot control their body and

[A]

he can do it.

[B]

And so I think those are the things where it's like, then as a family member or a parent, you're like, oh, we had this. And people have heard me share this story. When we were filming Nina, who's in our film, and she was really dysregulated, having a really hard time with our film team was there. And I thought, we can't film today. She's screaming and upset. And it was, you know, just out of respect for the family. And she took the. We were all about to go, and we're outside, and she spelled on her letterboard, no, bring me to the forest. And it was like, okay. And it's like we had to, you know, change everything, go to the forest. And the family was all ready for everything at home that day. You know, it was going to be like, you know, it was a shoot. It was a kind of a major thing. We were all there. So we all go to the forest. And she becomes so calm and relaxed and was just like, this is my happy place.

[A]

I'll tell you why.

[B]

I can jive with plants in this beautiful way and understand them. And this is grounding. And well, that was her talking. So I think that to look at those outcomes, right, of when non speakers have autonomy and agency over the decisions around their life, does it benefit the family? Does it benefit that individual? Does it benefit the greater society? And I feel like that research is going to be the stuff that moves the needle.

[D]

Absolutely.

[B]

And do you think those at Asha and again, those people who are fairly against spelling, thinking that they're protecting non speakers do you think they'd be open to research like that?

[D]

I don't know. I wonder if they would put it in the, the same vein as like acupuncture or certain forms of therapy. Like if they'll say yeah, it works, but they're not really communicating. I wonder if they would still hold to this. You know, their influence is possible. Therefore it's all influence that, that I think will be the hardest one to

[B]

shake because this is such fragile, divisive, fiery territory. Nothing in this world is easy around the spelling, the non spelling, the, you know, apraxia, the divisiveness. Even just within the autism community. I mean it's like so much. But from my point of view, the telepathy piece is essential because if people can understand it, that it's happening, and I deeply at this point now believe it is, then you can actually start to have a real conversation around spelling and understand there might not be cueing happening. It's telepathy. And how do you clear your mind or clear your thoughts so that authorship can really

[A]

prevail?

[B]

To me it's like a very simple thing. But until telepathy is accepted, the conversation will still go in loops like it has for 30, 40 years. We don't know how they're saying what they're looking at someone in another room, they looked at a cup and in this room they're smelling about a cup. Like, how can that happen? I mean there have been message passing

[A]

tests in other rooms

[B]

and it's like, how can someone be cueing someone from another room is telepathy right? I mean it's like that is the only logical leap. What is the other leap? I don't even know what the leap is.

[D]

Like even the Akil and his mom, that video, they go, well, you know, she's making sounds, any kind of perceptible sound, anything. But it's because I think that we really hold strong to materialism. And I think a lot of people are scared to be the fool and to, yeah, to not know. And I even think something really damaging. Oz Perlman saw the telepathy tapes and came out and said, oh yeah, they're, I know what they're doing there. And you know, assumed that, you know, the partner and they could be communicating. Like, you know, when you have a two man act for mentalism, you could in theory fool people. And it's like there's no one trying to fool anyone. No one thinks that's what's happening. And so it's like, and I've seen Researchers even point to mentalism. Journalists, serious journalists are like quoting mentalists about how mentalists can figure out how that's not telepathy. They're doing this and it's like, you guys don't know what you're talking about. It's physiological. This isn't a show. This isn't. No one's taking their kid around the country trying to get money. Like, I've heard people discount speller's words because they wrote a book and they, oh, they're just trying to make money to write a book. It's like, of course they're writing a book. This is incredible what's happening to people. And just because someone earns a living off of their experience is not a reasonable way to discount their experience.

[B]

It's interesting because I've often thought that as well. It's like the majority of, I would say all of the parents who have come forth, maybe there's like a few outliers that I haven't met. But like, of all the parents and teachers I know, they are legitimately all saying the same thing. I can't hide something. The non speaker will break into my computer with password. They'll know things that are private. They'll start responding to a text message that someone else just got. All sorts of things that they were like, we can't explain this. We are looking for answers. Can someone please help? The only thing that makes sense is telepathy. And then they ask the child and the child will say something that no one wants to hear. Yes, I can read your mind. I don't want my kids reading my mind. If I was a teacher, I certainly don't want my students reading my mind. So you think there's okay now hundreds of cases of parents and teachers saying this? Are they all in cahoots and all planning magic shows on the side? I mean, and what's so interesting is if you understand apraxia, I've never been around a non speaker who can get up when you say get up or sit down when you say sit down. There's no way with apraxia you can be like, we are going to control your body. If you can't control your body in every realm of your life, can you sit down and do a 30 minute magic show? I mean, it's so, to me, it's so disassociated from reality and such a bananas leap that to me is a bigger leap than telepathy. To be like, suddenly apraxia can melt away and this parent who's looking for answers who is so busy and raising other kids maybe and has another job and exhausted because they're up all night. They're taking care of often a Grown up for 24, 7. You know they're gonna plan a magic show. Like it's so ridiculous to me.

[D]

That is precisely, precisely what they try to explain away. When non speakers get very proficient at spelling and there's footage of them typing spelling words and they're so fast too, so fast. And the explanation is that, oh well, they just had them at home and trained them how to do that. And then when they get in camera then they do it. Or because of the apraxia, because it's this messy process, because support is required. All of that is used against them. All of that is used to say oh, see there? Oh, they moved there. That was controlled. Oh, that was controlled. That's I think the most important point of this whole thing. They are not being controlled. They have apraxia. It is very hard to control them. Like you said, they can't get their bodies to do all, all kinds of stuff. And that's supported by neuroscientists, that's supported by psychologists. So speech and language pathologists can judge the behavior, which is what they do. They're judging the behavior and like they know how to get up because he just went up and got a snack and now he won't get up. He's choosing not to get up. Now I can get on a soapbox. I think that's the biggest misunderstanding with neurodivergence in general is neurotypical people will observe a neurodivergent person's behavior and assume it's what they want to be doing. That's the number one disconnect is with neurodivergence you lack the ability to do what you want to be doing. And so when science assumes all behaviors based on what you want, you wouldn't be doing that if you didn't want to. You wouldn't be doom scrolling if you didn't want to. There is this paralysis that can happen in neurodivergent people. And then just imagine that times 10 where you just have. It's so hard to control your motor. And I think that's what non speakers are dealing with. And the science is coming around, but not fast enough. And so that's what's like spell, go spell. We can do it safely. And so I am pro science. I'm so pro science. Spelling is scientific. It is based in science, it's just based in psychology, physiology. It's based in different sciences. Not behaviorist science, Right?

[B]

Exactly. Yeah. And this has been in the behaviorist camp for a long time. And for audience members who are like, what are they talking about? Behaviorism is when you look at someone's behavior and judge their intellect. Right. I mean, is that a quick and easy way to define it?

[D]

Yeah, just we psychologists, we want to. Science needs to be objective. We can objectively measure behavior. And so that's just how it's evolved. So if you look at the way we diagnose mental disorders, you have a list of behaviors. So like depression, it's not clinical depression until it's really affecting your behavior and then it becomes clinical. But neurodivergence is different because it's an internal experience. And what if you're really good at. They'll call it masking. What if you're really good at hiding your internal experience, Showing the right behaviors, but inside it's so pained and it's not okay. And so that's where things are evolving.

[B]

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So if you look to the future, what do you think is happening? I mean, now there's a landscape where at least telepathy is entering the conversation. There's more research being done. There's more funding going into this. I think there's more families starting to get on letterboards. Like we're hearing about new families all time, you know, trying and more people wanting to get be trained as a CRP or communication regulation partner for again, audience members who might be new. Those are the people who will sit with a non speaker who has apraxia and coach their motor. Right. Okay, put your back up straight.

[D]

Okay.

[A]

Look ahead of you.

[B]

Okay. It looks like you're lost. We're putting the board right back down in front of you. They're not saying type these words. They're helping their body be in the best place to perform. The same way. If my son is doing a free throw, I say, okay, use one hand and look at the hoop. And don't, you know, it's like coaching motor. Getting people set up to win is something we all do right in life. So with all of this happening, where do you think this is going to be in five or 10 years? I know that no one can tell the future, but you have a science mind. You've been in the science landscape. Is anything different now? Do you think change could possibly be in the air for typers and spellers?

[D]

Definitely. I think it's getting to the point where it's undeniable. And also now that we're seeing more researchers in other silos, psychologists and people focusing on motor and sensory, motor. Those are the type of researchers we need looking at this. Because the more serious researchers we get to say they're in there. This is happening. This critical piece. We've missed this. We need to make this right. So I think the truth will always rise to the top. I think it's going to move slower than we want. It needs to be covered by insurance, which always takes a long time. So really the way the medical industry works is you've got some things that work, some things that are just placebo that are on the edge and eventually the research catches up and says, oh wow, this is really beneficial. Insurance will cover it. I think that's what's going to happen with spelling is we're going to start seeing, really trying to measure the benefits, measure the outcomes, measure the, you know, less crises. I mean, there's so many health benefits that once we can show that, then insurance should start covering it.

[A]

Right.

[B]

I know it is follow the money because once you realize there's going to be less medical interventions, you can curb maybe an allergy or problematic thing that's that a non speaker can spell and communicate with. I need this for regulation. I want this to eat. This actually makes my tummy hurt or whatever. Stomach. Sorry. I'm like such a mom. It makes my stomach hurt. You're gonna have less trips to the ER or the doctor or you know, nutritionist. That's hopeful, right?

[D]

Yeah. And then once, once medical gets behind it, then it'll be a wonderful tool for AIDS and paras to learn how to use it. Cause it'll be so regulating. So it'll be interesting to see how it evolves.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

And when we spend a lot of money on autism care right now, I have several friends who their kid. I mean, it is expensive. We are spending a lot of money right now. We could shift how we're spending that money, probably spend less money and get way better outcomes. If we start approaching this in the right way as a mind, body disconnect, apraxia, coaching, motor. I mean, the, the benefits, it's going to be remarkable. I think so.

[B]

And then I guess to kind of bring this full circle. You know, one of the things that was shocking to me is when I started meeting more spellers and their parents were stunned and often in denial about some of the things their children were spelling or students were spelling. Often it was about telepathy, but also sometimes things that were like totally beyond the pale, you know, communicating with the other side or seeing things their parents couldn't see and seeing auras, just things like that that were like, what? And again, these are parents often who were atheists, agnostic, didn't have a spiritual life of their own. This was never something that they would like, choose to spell if they were forcing the language. Right. How do you interpret all of that stuff coming from someone who went from a Mormon to leaving your faith, to becoming an atheist, to now seeking again? Where do you land on all of those spiritual revelations that are coming from the non speaking community?

[D]

Yeah, that was a really tricky piece for me because we're getting differing views on things as big as God and the nature of heaven, and non speakers are saying different things. And I think if you're just skeptic, not curious, you're gonna say it's all baloney. You just next stay in the real world. I'm gonna ignore that, but I think it's opening up our ideas of what another realm could be. What is true for one person may not be true for another. And is there a way we can think of that space? If telepathy is occurring, it could be like an information field. What does that mean? And then for me, I'm a very practical person and it's like, how do I bring that into my life now? What does that mean for my day to day with chronic pain? Or how do we. Why do we care? Why is it even worth looking at? And for me, it gives its hope. It's love, it's connection, it's beauty. It adds sparkle to life, you know? Yeah, be safe. But still, it makes life sparkle. It's been really lovely to learn, kind of get a spiritual education. I thought that was a part of my life that was just done.

[B]

So. Yeah, I feel the same though. I mean, you can't be too far in either extreme. I think to understand the world, you have to find a way to analytically experience or be curious about both.

[D]

Yeah. All right.

[B]

Any closing thoughts? Any final things you want to say? I didn't ask you about.

[D]

It's been just a joy. I love working with non speakers and I think it's hard, but it's an exciting time. Not just the paradigm shift, but really, wow, we're going through a paradigm shift and on top of that, we have this massive population of people that need our help. So to me, it's like a call for scientists, for researchers. Anyone who's interested in the consciousness science, the science of consciousness, this space, they can apply that to actually helping people right now. And I hope we see more and more people really putting in their efforts to help non speakers because it's the way it is right now is not okay.

[B]

Yeah. Well, thank you.

[D]

Yes. Thank you for coming.

[B]

Yeah. That was wonderful.

[D]

It's great.

[A]

That's it for this episode of the Talk Tracks, but new episodes will be released every Wednesday, so stay tuned as we work to unravel all the threads, even the veiled ones that knit together our reality. And please remember to stay kind, stay curious, and that being a true skeptic requires an open mind to dive in deeper. Subscribe to our Backstage Pass by visiting our website. With it, you'll unlock access to bonus

[B]

content like Telepathy tests, Ask Me Anything,

[A]

interviews with myself and guests. You'll be able to enjoy the podcast ad free, connect with other members on our Telepathy Tribe Discord and hear and see exclusive content from the Telepathy Tapes Vault. Visit our [e-mail] for more info on how to subscribe to our Backstage Pass. Thank you to my amazing collaborators, producers Kathryn Ellis and Selina Kennedy. Technical Directing, Audio mix and finishing by Jeremy Cole Opening and closing music by Elizabeth PW and original logo and cover

[B]

art by Ben Condora.

[A]

Design I'm Kai Dickens, your executive producer, writer and host.

[C]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash? Progressive makes it easy to see if you could save when you bundle your home and auto policies. Try [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states. Ever wonder who's out there making the world go round? It's truckers. Who unites baristas with coffee beans. Truckers. Who unites dogs with their favorite chew toy? Truckers. That's why Progressive offers truckers even more protection with cargo plus coverage to keep truckers moving right along. Quote Truck insurance today in as little as 8 [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Coverage subject to policy terms, limits and conditions not yet available in California, New York and Virginia.