Reverse Speech

Mark Twain said, "The truth is the most valuable thing we have." Ironically, it is Twain to whom a few have referred as the archetypal "Gonzo Journalist"; his "reportage" was often a skillful blend of truth, embellishment, and outright fabrication. Indeed, the above quote is only partial. Twain actually said, "The truth is the most valuable thing we have. Let us economize it."

Twain was of course joking, but like all "Twainisms," the observation was intended to cast a light of humor on the darkest aspects of the human condition. Twain was a skilled fabricator because he understood -- and perhaps empathized with -- the enormous portion of Homo sapiens for whom truth is an aversion. Publicly, everyone claims to be a proponent of truth, and almost no one thinks of himself as a liar. But as history demonstrates, a vast majority of humankind lives in active denial of and resistance to truth.

Most people would rather opine a lie and "fit in" than profess the truth and be excluded. Just as the majority would rather be lied TO and made comfortable than be told the truth and made uncomfortable. Liars have held humanity in the throes of illusion for countless centuries. Governmental, religious, and academic officialdom can and do transform basically decent human beings into unconscious automatons bereft of free will. They do this successfully because a majority of humans are terrified to assume personal responsibility. To accept and speak the truth unconditionally is to make oneself the master of his own destiny, and this is a burden few people are willing to carry. It is always easier to allow oneself to be manipulated like a marionette on a string.

The mass of humanity has always lacked the insight, discernment, and internal gumption to tell truth from untruth. If this weren't so, liars could find no profession other than used car salesmen; instead they are running the world, heading corporations, educating our children, controlling the government, leading nations into war and bringing our species to the brink of annihilation. Little or no awareness of this exists in the common man, who actually takes COMFORT in the belief that the world's elite know better than him.

The forecast is abysmal for any species that prefers lies to truth. Without truth there is no meaning, and without meaning life is a pathetic, joyless facsimile of its great potential. Intelligent beings cannot live peacefully or sustain life without meaning. The only possible road to redemption for humanity is the unconditional acceptance of truth.

Ask yourself, how might humanity react if someone were to demonstrate a reliable means to distinguish truth from untruth (or more specifically, true statements from untrue statements)? Not just a sophisticated lie detector, an actual KEY that could unlock the door to the infinite treasure trove of human consciousness and tell us what a person is really THINKING. Imagine the ramifications for civilization: politicians would have no choice but to tell the truth or be driven out of office; the justice system could convict or acquit the accused with little or no doubt of the person's guilt or innocence; consumers could make more informed decisions by exposing the deceptions of big corporations; world religious leaders and cultists that have corrupted the great spiritual teachings might be exposed as the worst kinds of hucksters. Ultimately, the integrity of EVERYONE, both public figures and private citizens, could be put to the acid test, thereby forcing human beings to make a choice either to speak the truth, or be exposed as liars. Would human beings accept this key and bravely push through the door into the light of truth? Or would they retreat like frightened animals back into the darkness from whence they came?

The year was 1996. I was a 21 year-old living life with few meaningful responsibilities, and as is often the case with people in a state of drift, my obligation-free routine led to an abnormal sleep pattern. I began staying up into the wee hours of the morning listening to late-night talk radio -- and yes, the show I generally listened to was Art Bell's Coast to Coast AM. One evening, Art interviewed a man named David John Oates, an Australian researcher who claimed that when human speech is played backwards, intelligent messages are sometimes heard that reveal what the speaker is actually thinking. Oates had been developing the theory since 1983, accumulating thousands of audio examples on celebrities, politicians, religious figures, and private citizens, including newborn children. Like many others, my knee jerk reaction to Oates' claim was not just skepticism, but outright denial -- how could anything so transparently silly possibly be real! Yet there I sat by my radio, listening hour after hour, totally enthralled despite my best "judgment." I was able to decipher most of the reversed statements easily, and something about their ethereal, "ghost-like" quality struck a nerve at my core. Ten years later, my memory of that first interview remains remarkably clear.

Oates immediately became a fixture on radio shows around the U.S. Interest in his work crossed-over into semi-mainstream media, and he was featured on such TV shows as Extra and Geraldo. I followed the progress of R.S. with an odd blend of dubiousness and fascination until a personal "paradigm shift" around 1998. It wasn't any one revelation but a combination of factors that began to persuade me R.S. was probably valid. For one thing, R.S. seemed to have uncanny "predictive" powers, or rather the ability to glean secret information that would later prove accurate.

In 1998, David found a reversal on President Clinton that stated, "Had sex with an Oregon madam." Several months after David presented the reversal publicly, Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky (who had attended college in OREGON) was exposed. Other Clinton reversals included "She's a fun girl to kiss" and "You trash, make her swallow" -- interesting considering Clinton and Lewinsky's contention that their relations were limited to oral sex.

Also in 1998, Oates presented a reversal on former U.N. inspector Scott Ritter that seemed to reveal highly sensitive info. Ritter stated in his forward speech that the U.N inspection of Iraqi "weapons sites" was a "pre-ordained" setup intended to justify U.S. military action. In reverse, Ritter said, "Our wrath won't shake the fox." Weeks later, the U.S announced its bombing campaign in Iraq under the code name Operation Desert Fox. Reversals on Clinton seemed to support Ritter's assertions, including: "Our pile of sh*t / Helps us. He helps little fox"; "Afraid to damn the fox"; 'Hell with the Earth, seek desert answers"; and most chillingly, "I am a snake oil terrorist."

In the late 90s, Oates' presentation of R.S. began to enter increasingly dangerous territory. His reversals on the F.B.I's investigation into the doomed TWA Flight 800 ("We flogged the wing"; "We assassined it"; "We don't serve the law"; and "We'll beat the crime.") aroused a generally horrified public reaction. (Reversals can be heard here: www.reversespeech.com/twa800.htm)

As bizarre and disturbing as those reversals might seem, they were downright tame compared to the ones Oates presented on NASA scientists Don Savage and Ray Vellard. When speaking on the topic of the so-called Martian Face, Savage and Vellard stretched credulity with such reversals as: "We're involved with Cydonia"; "Mars set the ray gun"; "These ships are on it, but nobody's getting answered; and "What's locked up with their starship, this needs to be know." (Reversals can be heard here: www.reversespeech.com/nasa.htm)

In 1999, interesting scientific support for R.S. seemed to come (indirectly) from a study at the California Institute of Technology, which showed that the brain can "decode" backwards speech. An Associated Press report on the study reads: "The ability to understand speech is so deeply ingrained that people can decipher recorded sentences that have been chopped into brief segments and played backwards...Digitally recorded sentences were sliced into very short segments in the study, then reversed. The distorted speech was played to seven test subjects. The participants had no problem understanding the sentences. Their brains were apparently able to perceive the syllables as sounding nearly the same whether heard backwards or forwards." (Of course, this argues against the a priori assumption of "skeptics" that R.S. is mechanically impossible for the brain.)

I noted all of these developments as part of a growing anecdotal body of evidence arguing in favor of R.S.' validity. By 1999, I'd decided that R.S. was not only real, but might have the power to transform the course of human history. The potential applications seemed limitless. In addition to its obvious capacity as a "lie detector", Oates had been using R.S. in a private therapy practice for years. R.S.' ability to tap the subconscious mind not only revealed the truth of what a person was thinking, but seemed to offer a gateway into the very soul.

And alas, the very thing that made R.S so beautiful may have been the source of its (temporary) derailment. Around 1998, Oates' world began to burn, sometimes LITERALLY. He suffered an arson house fire and numerous death threats not long after presenting his reversals on Flight 800. He had a famous (and still mysterious) "falling out" with the aforementioned Art Bell that led to a prolonged personal and legal battle. By the end of 1999, David had decided that he could no longer safely continue his research in America, and decided to return to his homeland of Australia.

I was disillusioned and angered by the devastation that befell David and the science he had developed, and wanted to help in any way I could. Through a series of odd serendipities, I was able to meet David in Portland, OR, prior to his departure from the U.S. I connected with him both personally and intellectually, and the two of us began a correspondence and friendship that lasted into the new millennium. I became intensely involved in reverse speech, accumulating many hundreds of reversals of my own, and as is so often the case, I found that one cannot know the truth about something without investigating it first hand.

The most common "skeptical" argument against R.S. is that listeners cannot hear reversals without being prompted beforehand. My experience is that this is NOT correct; on frequent radio interviews, I played my examples for the hosts with no pre-suggestion, and roughly 90% of the time we agreed on the reversals' exact wording. And in fact, for the last year that I was doing R.S., I would not document a reversal without independent and unprompted agreement from another listener.

But here is perhaps the most compelling fact about R.S.: it is actually quite easy to predict what TYPE of speech will produce reversals of the greatest number and clarity. In my years of investigation, I rarely found reversals on individuals reading directly from scripts, and when I did, they were of an inferior quality. This was not for a lack of trying; I spent many hours "reversing" newscasters reading directly from teleprompters, and I never found anything much better than "gibberish". On the other hand, when people speak extemporaneously and with great emotion, reversals occur anywhere from a hundred to a thousand times more frequently, and are of a much higher clarity. This was NOT something I had anticipated, and in fact, I had hoped for the exact opposite, particularly since the speech of most public figures tends to be stilted and rehearsed. So the question is, if R.S. is nothing but "coincidental sounds," why do these sounds occur PRIMARILY in emotional speech?

On many instances, I asked David if he could explain what went so terribly wrong during his time in the U.S. Not surprisingly, David expressed the belief that elements of government may have taken action to suppress R.S., but he felt that a more fundamental cause was behind some individuals' violent reaction against his research. It wasn't enough for some people to DISAGREE with David; more than a few actively sought to destroy him. David always began his explanation of this with the same two words:

Imagine a gorgeous young woman who has spent most of her life gazing into a mirror admiring her own beauty. The impeccable picture reflected back provides her entire sense of self, but this is fine, as she is quite beautiful. Then one day, a bearer of truth walks into her room and says, "Um, I'm sorry to have to tell you this, miss, but that mirror is broken. This is what you really look like." And before her eyes the truth-bearer holds a mirror reflecting her true image: the visage is unspeakably grotesque -- her angelic countenance made of supple skin, luminous eyes and golden locks has been replaced by the mask of a hag -- toothless, wart-riddled, misshapen and scabrous. Of course she goes completely mad, but she retains enough presence of mind to shatter the mirror and slit the truth-bearer's throat with the broken shards.

The above analogy may accurately describe the condition that David has defined as "reversal reaction" -- a reportedly common response by traumatized, dysfunctional, or highly egotistical personalities upon hearing themselves "reversed". According to David (and many others who have used R.S. in private counseling sessions), R.S. provides a direct gateway to the subconscious mind, allowing an unfiltered examination of one's own dysfunction at its TAPROOT. This provides a metaphorical mirror for self-inquiry, and oftentimes, the image reflected back is anything but flattering.

The ego-dominated mind lives in denial of the true essence of self, which is spirit. R.S. is the voice of self that speaks without the influence of ego or intellect. With brutal and unrelenting honesty, the true self "comments" on the best and worst aspects of one's own personality. To hear oneself indicted by the voice of one's own consciousness is a trauma that few individuals are prepared to absorb. Oates has described people who have descended into intensified dysfunction after exposure to reverse speech, sometimes lasting for years. (This is why David has always insisted that R.S. specialists require years of training before they can responsibly use the technology to counsel others.)

And just as the individual ego can be shattered by the uncompromising honesty of R.S., so too can the collective ego. The information that Oates injected into the public consciousness -- shockingly scandalous speech reversals on the world's most powerful figures, including the highest ranked officials in the U.S. Government -- could not have been a source of comfort, pride, or uplift for anyone. In retrospect, how could things have turned out DIFFERENTLY for Oates in the U.S? Denial amongst our citizenry runs deep; despite embarrassingly overt demonstrations of high-level criminality in the Bush administration, outrage is barely a rumor. The unflinching courage required to stare the truth in the face is tragically lacking in the vast majority of the American public.

One of the great sayings of Alcoholics Anonymous is, "I am only as sick as my secrets," and the same can be said of any society. As many have already observed, our country is becoming increasingly analogous to a prison...but it is dishonest and self-defeating to pretend that this prison is inescapable. A way out is RIGHT THERE in front of you, a door leading from the drab and gray confines of your cell and into the radiant sunlight of the REAL WORLD. But before you can open this door, you must be willing to look in the mirror -- and no, you're not allowed to blink.

David John Oates Founder and Developer of Reverse Speech Technologies PO Box 678, Noarlunga Centre, SA 5168. Australia phone: 08 83824372 - international: 61 8 83824372

David John Oates
Founder and Developer of Reverse Speech Technologies
PO Box 678, Noarlunga Centre, SA 5168. Australia
phone: 08 83824372 - international: 61 8 83824372