123: Anders Bolling - Escaping Misery Bias: How This Journalist Found Truth Beyond Mainstream Media - The Quantum Biology Collective Podcast

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Meredith Oke (05:00):
Welcome to the QVC podcast. I am really looking
forward to this conversation.

Anders Bolling (05:07):
Thank you for having me. Me too. I'm also looking
forward to this conversation.

Yeah. So we had a delightful discussion when I
was on Mind the Shift recently, and I sent that
link out to my audience and they were all very
excited to find your show, the type of thing that
they all really appreciate. I wanted to dive into
your story because on this podcast we. We talk to

(05:35):
a lot of doctors and we, you know, health
professionals who have broken out of kind of the
mainstream, you know, infrastructure that they
came up in, whether it's. In whether it's
allopathic or even alternative. Right. There's
just so many new paradigms of health opening up
that we tend to talk to people who are more

(05:57):
breaking out of whatever it was that's no longer
serving them or answering their questions. And
you have done a similar. You've been on a similar
path, but in the area of journalism, which I
think is crucial because that is how we learn. We
get all of our information, most of us. So tell

(06:19):
me a little bit about what kind of journalism you
did when you were a, quote, unquote, regular
journalist and then we'll start sort of explore
where you are now.

Sure. Thank you. Yes. Well, I trained to become a
journalist when I was in my 20s and I really
looked forward to doing that. I had been looking
forward to becoming a journalist since I was, I
guess, 15 years old or something like that. When
I was a kid, I read these comic books with the

(06:50):
hero was called Tintin. I don't know if you have.
You do, I guess. It's a Belgian, serious. Anyway,
he was a journalist, but he was all. Always on
all these fantastic adventures all over the
world. So it looked really cool. And he never
wrote anything that I can remember, didn't write
any articles. So it seemed like a very

(07:10):
interesting life. And when I was like, you know,
seven or eight or nine or something, I wanted to
become a discoverer of the world. But then I
realized, oh, every landmass has already been
discovered. So I can't. I can't do this. I have
to do something else. Anyway, so that's the
background. And I wanted to become a journalist,
but I took a couple of, you know, gap years to

(07:33):
travel before I studied. And then I became a
journalist and I got this job at the biggest
newspaper in the biggest morning newspaper in
Sweden. I'm living in Stockholm, Sweden, Northern
Europe. After having had brief sojourns at other

(07:55):
outlets, I ended up Douglas New Hatter Daily News
biggest Newspaper. So I was there for 22 years
as. As full time with a full time job there. I
had been there a couple of times before, just
briefly, but then 22 years. Okay. From 1998.

So you were employed full time as a newspaper
journalist for over 20 years. Okay. @ a major.

I had.

Major Swedish publication.

Exactly. I had different kinds of jobs. I was a
reporter, I was an editor. I did different
things, but. But I was there for 22 years. Yes.

And so did you cover all kinds of different
things like politics, culture, all the things.

I was always. As we might come back to. I was
always interested in the deep questions in life,
you know, the big questions, where, who are we?
Where do we come from? And all that. And I had
spiritual streak, a spiritual orientation already
from childhood. But I kind of kept that under
wraps because I kind of sensed that that wasn't
really what you could talk about openly. But I

(09:02):
was all I was. I've always been interested also
in what's happening in society, foreign policy,
economics, science, all kinds of stuff. So I
wrote about all kinds of stuff. And when I was an
editor, I had edited. I. I was working with other
reporters, writing about these different kinds of
things, the environment. I also wrote some

(09:25):
columns, more personalized things where I shared
my look on things, my worldview. So that was kind
of nice. Then I had a blog for five years. I ran
a blog called the Progress Blog, which was aimed

(09:47):
to describe the world in brighter colors than we
normally do in news journalism, because it's. And
it was tied to a book that I wrote in 2008, and
it came out in 2009, and it was called the Cozy
Darkness of the Apocalypse. So that's where I
kind of my first, you know, kind of. What's the

(10:12):
word? When I dealt with. With news journalism,
and I had struggled with it within. And so I had
many things to say about it. And I was critical
to the. To the misery bias that is kind of in the
dramaturgy of news journalism. So I wrote a book

(10:33):
about that and where I also displayed so many
facts, waves and waves and waves of facts,
showing that the world is not as bad as we think
it is. And it was about the environment, about
violence and about poverty broadly. And then it
was kind of in detail as well. And I also

(10:54):
speculated what this misery bias is, what the
causes are behind this misery bias, and there are
all kinds of explanations for it. It's a human
trait, because I think we have in the lizard
brain this tendency or we're prone to search for

(11:16):
a scan for danger. And that was probably a useful
trait 10,000 years ago or 100,000 years ago when
our ancestors lived in caves and there were
different dangerous animals are around and
wildfires to keep track of and all kinds of
stuff. But it's not really useful in our day and

(11:38):
age in this society where, I mean day to day life
is hardly ever lethal. I mean, the dangers are
not lethal, but we still have this tendency.

But if you just read newspapers and that's it,
you stayed alone in a room, you never went out,
you only read newspapers, you would not know that
we are not, generally speaking, on a day to day
basis under threat. It would feel.

Exactly.

The newspapers make us feel that. Misery bias, I
love that term. That's absolutely what it is.

Yes. And I also think about the misery threshold.
The threshold over which we, I mean, where we put
the, where we start talking about misery and bad
things, it gets lower and lower all the time. If
you go back to 300 years, it was probably a much
higher threshold before people actually thought
that something was a big problem. Probably, you

(12:30):
know, it had to be large catastrophes, big worse
and stuff like that. We still have that, that's
for sure. But I mean, newspapers can make war
headlines out of things that are far, far less
dangerous today. So we lower the misery threshold.

It's interesting, I really noticed that living
overseas because I lived in places and a few
different times there were major, major events
happening that were in the area that I was living
in, that had headlines, global headlines. And I

(13:10):
would get messages from people like, I lived in
Paris when or near Paris during, when there was
that attack in the nightclub in the Bataclan.

2015, I think.

Yeah, it was 2015 because we just moved there.
And it was a terrible, terrible incident. It was
major terrorist incident. However, I had people
for days and days reaching out, are you okay? Are
you okay? And outside of the, the one block
radius where that terrible event occurred, I was

(13:46):
like, yes, I'm, I'm at, I'm in the grocery store,
I'm buying my groceries. And so, you know, life
was going on. But it was interesting to me
because the entire perception of all of, you
know, oh, you're in France, you must be living
through this terrorist event. And it was like.
Because that's what everyone's focus was on,

(14:09):
their attention was on and they connected those
two things. And I just thought, isn't this
interesting? Like, how often have I done that
where I've just painted an entire region based on
one incident that's getting my full attention and
the attention of the world.

Yeah, it's very healthy to be out abroad
sometimes and see it from that perspective and
also read foreign newspapers, what they write
about your own country. Because as you say, I
mean, when I was at this big newspaper in
Stockholm, we wrote stuff about, you know, what
was happening. There is a narrative. We don't
have to go into the politics of everything, but

(14:45):
there is a. There is a certain narrative that is
told that we are told in the Western world. And
there's a slightly different narrative about the
world told in Eastern Europe and in Russia and in
China and as we all know, so different
narratives. And I tend to think that there is
some truth to all of them, but they're not. None
of them is entirely the whole truth, so to speak.

(15:05):
So there was a lot of, you know, kind of self,
from our perspective, self evident things to say
about Hungary and Turkey and countries like that.
But then it's interesting to read or get to know
what they, the newspapers in those countries
write about Sweden and things that are happening

(15:26):
in this country. And it's kind of, you know,
people get. They feel attacked, you know, because
I mean, personally when they read these things.
But no, that's not me, that's not my country.
That's not what's happening. You don't know
what's happening here. It's nothing, nothing
dangerous. But. But they are focusing, of course,
on certain things that are happening in this

(15:48):
country and that are in some countries. That in
some countries get to be very big headlines. Like
we have this gang violence, you might call it
groups, gangs of youngsters, mainly young people
who have come from other countries, from
countries in the Middle east and Somalia and
stuff like, and places like that. And there's

(16:08):
some kind of a turf war around, you know, the
cocaine and the drugs trade. And for some reason
they've started using guns here. It's really
bizarre. And I'm not denying that this is a big
problem. It is a big problem, but it's not
affecting everybody here. I mean, if I didn't
read about it in newspapers, I wouldn't know it

(16:29):
was going on. I'm living in Stockholm. I know
there have been many shootings in this area in
the suburbs of Stockholm. I've never heard a shot
being fired once. So I mean, it's the same thing.
But then if you think about it, I mean, why
wouldn't these countries, the newspapers in those
countries write about Sweden in that way? It's

(16:50):
logical if we write, I mean, if we pick up some
problem that's happening there It's a bit. Both a
bit sad and a bit funny and a bit ridiculous that
we look upon each other in this way. How we
cannot see the whole story and the whole truth
and just try to be neutral about things. And
there's a lot we could say about, for instance,

(17:12):
what's happening in Ukraine and all that. I don't
think we should dive into that, but it's
fascinating. I try to stay. I try to stay as
neutral as possible in all these matters. I'm
still interested in the news. I try not to follow
the news as much because I kind of was marinated
in it for so many years. So, I mean, to stay

(17:33):
sane, I need to stay away from the news. I don't
listen to it 247 like I did, but I kind of check
the headlines and read a couple of articles every
day. So I know what's going on. The big, big
picture. And you can't miss the big things, of
course. But I try to stay neutral. And it's,
It's. It's incredible how people, you know, crawl

(17:56):
into their different boxes and. And just see the
world from one perspective. It's. It's so
polarized. I don't know. And that's something
that. I mean, my credo. Credo has been for many
years that the world is better than we think. But
this is actually something that's accentuated as
being accentuated lately, this polarization. I

(18:18):
wonder what it. Why, why that is. Because I would
say that these, These opinions, that some people
are shocked that they exist now, they have always
been there. That's. I would say that I think they
have always been there, but they haven't been
able. They haven't. People have always had
different views on things, but now they are so.

(18:39):
It's so easy, you know, to express them by way of
social media and all kinds of alternative media
and all that. So we can see it. We can see it
being said and being expressed. And I don't think
people should be so shocked about that because
we're different. We're 8 billion different angles

(19:02):
on reality and we should respect each other and
listen to each other. And we don't have to agree
with each other. Absolutely not. But we should
kind of be better at listening to each other and
trying to understand what the other person means
when he says or she says certain things. Because
it's sometimes like people are just shut down

(19:23):
when they hear that somebody is on a particular
political spectrum. They just shut down all, you
know, ability to.

I think we've been encoded in Some way to trigger
a shutdown. Upon hearing certain words, the names
of political parties, the names of certain
politicians. I tend to avoid saying them because
I. I want this podcast to, like, transcend
politics. Yeah, everyone has. Everyone's in the

(19:55):
quantum field, right? Everyone has mitochondria.
We all deserve to know. So. And I feel like as
soon as you say certain things, we've been
programmed, Right. You hear a certain word, a
certain name, or someone says that they're
affiliated with a certain party, and it's like,
boom, the mind closes and you feel almost

(20:16):
triggered, like, oh, like a betrayal. Like, here
I was listening to this. It just happened to me
yesterday. I was listening to this coach who I
really like. She's. You know, she was sharing all
this stuff, and then she said something about her
feelings on a political situation, and I just
felt myself go, and I felt betrayed because it
was different than mine. And I thought, oh, my

(20:37):
goodness. Oh, we have all these programmed.

Yeah, we're programmed. It's. It's sad, but it's.
It's also very interesting. But I think it has.
It's part of the. Sorry, part of the health. It's
part of our health, actually. I mean, your
podcast is all about health and quantum health,
which is wonderful. And I think what we're
discussing now is actually part of that, because

(21:03):
being healthy is also about being able to see the
whole world and also to be able to dare to
question things and speaking your own truth and
all those things without fear and not being so.

(21:26):
You know, we're so scared of being on the wrong
team or being on the wrong side or. It's not that
we're only humans and we're only people, and it
has to do with our health, because if we kind of
block ourselves from certain parts of this
reality, I think we end up blocking also energy,

(21:49):
energy lines, energy fields in our bodies. And I
think it's bad. I think we should be open.

Yes, no, I completely agree. And that's why I
wanted to talk to you, because we don't. I think
even the categorization of physical health and
mental health, I think those categories are
fading away. Just like politically, the left and
right is starting to be meaningless. You know,
like these. These compartments that we've been

(22:19):
trained to put everything in are no longer valid.
They're no longer useful. And so if health is
just health, spiritual, mental, emotional,
physical, psychological, then how we process
information, which is in large part through
media, whether legacy media, traditional media,
social media, we need to understand how to do

(22:44):
that without going crazy, without Getting
triggered and with a level, as we were talking
about before, with a level of discernment as we
were. So we're moving into this new media
landscape and you've been on the forefront of
that. You were traditional newspaper then you did
a blog, now you have your YouTube channel where

(23:08):
you get to cover whatever you want because it's
yours. But thousands and thousands of people are
doing that. So it's become a very busy media
landscape. We used to have four choices and now
we have 4 million choices. So talk to me about

(23:29):
that word discernment and how in this new
landscape where there are so many more choices,
there are so many people like yourself, right.
Who have been trained to deliver information and
are choosing to do it in a new way versus people
who just are like, I'm just going to turn on the

(23:50):
camera and start talking. I've never done this
before. That's all good too. It's all good. But
how do we make sure that we are. I know we can't
really make sure of anything, I guess, but how do
we practice discernment in this very crowded
media landscape? Would you say?

Very, very. Yeah, very good question. I'm not
sure I have a wise enough answer to that
question. But it is, as you say, I mean, the
landscape is so broad now and, but it's also,
it's like everything that happened, the big
changes that happened, they contain both
opportunities and threats. It's like the, the old

(24:28):
saying that the Chinese sign for crisis comprise
is comprised of the sign for or the character
for. What is it now? Threat and opportunity. I
think it's threat and opportunity. This is the
definition of a crisis. So there's always an
opportunity in this myriad that we see, myriad

(24:51):
new outlets that we see and can access. But I
think the Internet in general is such a big
opportunity. I tend to think of it as kind of the
approximation of the akashic Records, the 3D
version of the Akashic records. It's kind of a
nice try, but we're not really there. But I mean,

(25:15):
because for real, it is actually very, very easy
now for people. I mean, despite the attempts at
censoring people and stuff like that, it is very
easy to find very, very interesting information
about things that you will never actually learn
in the, the legacy media or very seldom, at least

(25:37):
you can, you can hear about them out about those
things in, in alternative media perhaps. But I
think it's actually, of course people say, I
don't have time to check everything up. I need
the media to tell me what's true and what's not
true. But I think that time is over. The time
when we could rely on authorities to tell us what

(26:00):
is true and not true. The time when we rely on
authorities to tell us what's happening and not
happening and what we should do and not do and
what we should vote for and not vote for. I mean,
if you go back 50, 60 years, people were. People
tend to romanticize that time and say, oh, it was
much more calm, the society was calm and
everybody agreed on everything. But I think

(26:22):
that's actually a false narrative. I think it was
more like people just assumed that authorities
were trustworthy, they were to be trusted,
because people didn't think for themselves as
much. It was more hierarchical in that sense. And
you went to a doctor and the doctor told you what
you were sick of and you just accepted that.

(26:43):
People don't do that anymore. They kind of want a
second opinion and they think for themselves and
they're skeptical. And that's a good thing. It
makes the world a messier place and a more
complex and confused place. But I think that's a
necessary process. And same with what you read in
the papers and here on the TV news or whatever.

(27:04):
Check it up for yourself if you can. If you have
the time, just go to the Internet and search. Try
to find the. The primary sources for everything,
if it's possible. Because it's oftentimes not as
simple as you were being presented it to be. When
it comes to science, for instance, or health or
the ua, the UFO phenomenon, which I've lately

(27:27):
been very interested in, or there are so many
things happening, so discernment, that's one
thing. I mean, that's the practical way of, of
looking into things for yourself. But also trust
your own judgment because we are all, if I am to
be a bit esoteric now, we are all aspects of

(27:50):
source, if you will, and we have much greater
capacity than we are led to believe. If we just
listen to our inner voices and our higher selves
and sit in stillness five or 10 minutes now and
then and just let things sink in and don't think

(28:12):
actively about them with your brain, but just let
them sink in. And then oftentimes when you come
out of that still little period, you have better
discernment actually just by doing that, just by
meditating a little bit or just by not doing
anything for five minutes, it helps. I think
that's a good practice. I try to meditate every

(28:33):
morning, or I do, but not every meditation
session is extremely deep. But most of the time
it's really, really good. It makes one start the
day on a much better and calmer note than if you
don't do it.

So, yeah, and I think that's really wise to
approach the media that way. And for myself, over
time, I can now it's super clear to me when the
headline has an agenda of some sort. And so then

(29:13):
it's like, okay, well, take that with a grain of
salt. Take that with a grain of salt. And then
you finally find someone who's covering it in a
somewhat neutral, or at least maybe with a
different agenda, so they're highlighting a
different aspect of it and really have to like,
put all these puzzle pieces together and see the

(29:33):
voices that come through who are most often
dedicated to really just wanting to know what's
happening and not to as driving a bias in some
sort of direction. And yeah, it's a journey.

It's a journey. It's also, we, you have to also
respect, I mean, everybody. We are all human.
We're all human. And I've been, As I said, 22
years at this big newspaper. And I can add, by
the way, that the blog that I had was actually
within that newspaper. So that was my thing that
I was able to have it on there. But so I know, I

(30:13):
know how, I know the drill, so to speak, and I
know how people tend to. And this is natural. It
happens in every workplace. There is a certain
amount of groupthink and it's, it's, it's, it's
not very good, but it's natural. I mean, it's
explicable, explainable. It's, it happens. So

(30:34):
it's not that. It's, if you, if you, if you find
certain media outlets being not trustworthy, not
reliable, especially not reliable, certain media
outlets, perhaps you have to respect that people
working there, or most of them are not, I mean,
they are convinced that they're doing a good

(30:56):
thing. And so it's, it's just, you know, hard to
just go against the stream sometimes. And. Well,
there are certain narratives and there is,
there's a lot of narratives. I mean, science, for
instance. I'm also now engaged in an organization

(31:16):
called the Frontier Journalists Network, which is
something that your listeners might be interested
in checking out, perhaps. And we are, it's a very
small organization still, but we want to convey
to journalists around the world the science, the
research that is happening at the interface of

(31:37):
the, the nexus, if you will, between science and
spirituality. And there is a lot of things
happening there, which is exciting, actually. Not
least the Research on consciousness and what
consciousness is. And it's getting closer and
closer and closer to, I mean the mainstream
science there, there neuroscientists are getting

(32:01):
closer and closer and closer to, to spiritual
traditions that have been there for thousands of
years. And it's really exciting. And this is
actually happening. It's not, I mean it's peer
reviewed papers, but this has not sunk into the
mainstream media yet. It will, it will. I've
written a couple of articles and I'm very

(32:22):
grateful that I've been able to publish one big
long read in a mainstream news magazine here in
Sweden about the latest findings in consciousness
research. And, but there is a going back to this
group think and, and the narratives that we're
being told for decades and decades. This is a

(32:43):
good example of that because journalists are,
they tend to, you know, stick to the, what is the
mainstream view in, in certain, all kinds of
areas. A few of them can sometimes take it, take
a detour and write a, you know, a column about
some new woo woo. But you know, news articles are

(33:07):
mainly following the mainstream path. But, but
that is actually moving now. It's a moving
target. But most journalists don't know that yet.
So it's, but I mean it's difficult to, it's, it's
not really fair to blame the journalists for not
being on the front, you know, the cutting edge of

(33:29):
this development here because they will
eventually. But there is an inertia.

Yeah. Well, it's interesting you say that because
I really think, you know, we get so mad at the
bureaucrats and the, the politicians and the
journalists. But I'm not sure, you know, I don't
think it's the people who are terrible. I think
it's the systems that are, have terrible

(33:55):
incentives. So you know, I, someone was saying
like, why are, who are all these incompetent
people? Like why can't they hire better people?
And I'm like, they're probably fine. They
probably have the potential to be highly
competent. But bureaucracy incentivizes
incompetence. Right. And politics incentivizes
corruption and the medical system incentivizes

(34:19):
treating symptoms with drugs.

Yeah.

And that's, and we just kind of lean into it. And
so what I hear saying for journalists it's like
you're incentivized to stay in the boat and not
rock it. And is the punishment for that losing
your job, losing your reputation? Right. Because
I know people who are like viscerally terrified

(34:43):
of touching a woo woo subject because they really
think it will destroy their credibility they want
to.

They don't want others to put the tinfoil hat on
their heads. Yeah, they're terrified of that. I
can understand that. But I'm out of that now. I
don't, I don't care anymore. I care a little bit,
but not too much because I haven't. I mean, I've
been a freelancer for five years now, and I've
been out there so much. And I know that I have. I
have a soul family all over the world.

Yeah.

That thinks and feels the same way that I do. So
I'm, I'm, I'm fine. But if I were still in that
situation, I would probably feel a bit scared
about that. Yeah. Because everybody wants to be
in the group, on the right side, on the, you
know, the sane side of things. And this is. The

(35:30):
UFO phenomenon is the same thing here, actually.
But what's, what's good about it is that, that
it's been discussed in Congress. I mean, these
are.

Let's unpack that one. What do you see happening
with that topic right now?

Well, people who have been working in, you know,
with. Both in the private sector and in the
public sector with security on a high level,
they've been working in the military. They are
trained officers who have worked for many years
in the military special operations, and have come

(36:10):
to work with these very secretive, These covert
operations that have to do with retrieving
unidentified anomalous phenomena, craft et craft
probably, and transporting them to certain
facilities where they have been. Certain special

(36:33):
people have tried to reverse engineer those
craft. And this has been going on for probably 70
to 80 years. And this is what you hear in
congressional hearings now. There have been,
there have been two of those, one in 20, 23 and
one last year with people who are.

You have members of Congress sit and listen to
the testimony of people participating in the
activities you just described.

Yes.

Okay. And so this is on the record.

This is on the record.

All right.

And it's been. And some of the mainstream papers,
they have written about these hearings, of
course. I mean, that otherwise would be really
strange. They have, but it's, it's like they kind
of. They don't really believe it anyway. It's
like it's too, it's too far out. So they had to,
you know, add some kind of. They have to
formulate it or word it in a way that it's a

(37:26):
little bit tongue in cheek sometimes, perhaps, or
always end the articles with a little bit of
skepticism. But it's coming out there more and
more, and I don't know about this latest
administration that is now in place in the United
States. It's very early to say what's going to
happen with many things around that. But anyway,

(37:48):
this is one of the things that they have said.
People in that administration have said that they
will disclose what has been going on in this
area. And so it's very, very interesting,
interesting times. And if you're really into the
woo woo stuff and listen to people who are
channeling and stuff like that, which I do
sometimes, I find it very fascinating. I can't

(38:08):
say that I am convinced that everything that is
actually an extraterrestrial entity that
communicates through a channel, but doesn't
really matter because what is being said is often
very wise and often very interesting. And some of
those people have been saying that this is the
time of disclosure and we are soon going to see
actual craft hovering above cities and people are

(38:31):
not going to be able to deny that they're
actually there. So we will see. We had these, you
know, so called the drone crisis in New Jersey
and some other places, mainly over New Jersey.
And they were. This is still a very, very
unsolved matter. It's been, you know, dismissed
by, by the authorities as. No, no, it's totally

(38:52):
fine. It's just drones. But there are a lot of,
there is a lot of video footage from not only
civilians but from mayors and from police
officers that show, you know, that this is not
just ordinary drones. Some are probably, some
are, but not all of them. There is something

(39:14):
strange going on there and I don't know, maybe,
maybe it's all man made. But then they have to
because these craft are moving in such strange
ways sometimes that they have to. In that case,
if FAA has, has, you know, authorized all these,
these operations, they have to explain what's
going on. Otherwise we don't. It is something

(39:38):
fishy going on. Maybe it's not ETs, but it's in.

This case it's something at the very least, it's
advanced technology that nobody has. And
knowledge exists, whether it was made on this
planet or somewhere else.

Yeah, maybe on this planet, but with technology
that we have retrieved from reverse engineered
from retrieved. Did you hear this? Or these
interviews and these episodes on News nations
with the journalist Ross Coltheart who
interviewed Jack Barber.

Yes, you did actually. It's funny. Bring it up. I
just listened to it two days ago.

Okay.

Because I heard someone on YouTube talk about it.

Yeah, it's fascinating.

It was. They did. I thought. I didn't really, I
hadn't. Wasn't familiar with News Nation as an
outlet. I thought they did a beautiful job
covering that story and respectfully and treating
all of their interview subjects respectfully, but
also not, you know, sensationalizing it and

(40:44):
jumping to conclusions, just staying with the
facts as they were being related and what they
could back up with video. And I thought they. I
thought they did a really nice job.

Yeah, me too.

Journalistically speaking.

I understand Ross Coulthard had, you know, vetted
this man, Jake Barber, and some other people that
were on his show as well for a couple of years.
So he really, really. Yeah, he really worked a
lot beforehand to make it possible because he. I

(41:18):
mean, he's a serious journalist. And this is a
good thing with journalism. It should be like
this.

I think that's what I was picking up on. Like
these. This just has a depth to it. These people,
these producers and these journalists have done
their homework. They really, really. It felt
connected to the material. They had researched
every piece of everything that they were
presenting to the audience. It was. And so now
you're telling me it was years of research.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Wow.

And Jake Barber has also requested to be
testifying before Congress as well. So he's
working on that. And he has this group of people
who. In an organization called Sky Watcher, I

(42:07):
think, or Sky Watchers.

Yeah.

And they are people like himself who have been
working in these covert operations concerning
these UAPs and the retrieval programs. And they
are. They say that they will try and they are
certain that they will succeed also to summon
these craft within that. Within that. Within the

(42:32):
confines of this organization, Sky Watcher, and
be able to retrieve them and to. Because that's
also. That's. You heard the interview. Part of
this actually has to do with consciousness. And
this is where. This is the part. As Ross Coltort
pointed out, this is probably the part that
people have the hardest time wrapping their heads

(42:54):
around because they're not used to talking about
consciousness, and especially not in combination
with practical things like technical things and
science and all that. But it all goes together.
Of course. Consciousness is part of it. And as
far as I understand, Jake Barber and his. These
teams that are working with these retrieval
programs, they have certain groups that are.

(43:19):
Psyops. No, not psyops. They're psionics. They
work with psionics. So it's.

Right.

Yeah. Parapsychologically, you know, they have
extra sensory.

They have like a team of psychics.

Like a team of psychics. Right. Yeah. Thank you.
I was trying to find the right words there.

No, but that's not what they call them. You're
right. They call them psionics. They had a
special military word. So that doesn't sound like
team of psychics, except that's what it is. Okay.

But they actually contracted these crafts by way
of consciousness in some way. So they, they,
that's why. Because you can, you can maybe think
that, well, if they're so advanced and they come
here from another star system and why would they,
I mean, why would they do something as stupid as,
you know, crash their. Why would they craft crash

(44:08):
on Earth Sounds really, you know, not very
advanced. But maybe that's not what's happening.
It's more like they are being summoned. So
anyway, if this group, Skywatcher or organization
or whatever it's called, I think it's a company
really, but it doesn't matter if they're able to
do that and then to present these parts of craft

(44:31):
or whatever they get hold of, that would be
really, really interesting. Pretty difficult for,
I guess, journalists to just dismiss. So we'll
see. I think this year is going to be
interesting. More things are going to be
revealed, I think in that, in that area.

Yeah, I think so too. I get my information from a
similar way you just described a little bit of
this, a little bit of that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay. What are the. And that seems to be a common
thread is that these next couple of years are
just. There are going to be so many shifts in how
we see things. It's just going to be impossible
to maintain the status quo. And I feel, and I'm

(45:24):
curious what your experience has been. I feel
that a lot of us have been called to step into
these alternative spaces and start laying the
foundation so that when these shifts do happen,
there's some projects, some place to go for the

(45:46):
people. Yeah. Something in place for people for
all of us to grab onto. Like, do you feel that
sense or what's your experience been like.

Yeah, I feel the same way. May sound a bit
pretentious, but it's not. I don't think it's
that. It's just because in many ways it would
have been easier to just stay in the mainstream
and do what everybody else does. But I never
really felt at ease or I didn't feel comfortable
and I didn't understand what it was because I had

(46:16):
this fantastic job at this fantastic workplace,
this big newspaper. But something told me that
I'm not sure I'm supposed to be here. And then I.
It's a personal thing also because me and my ex
wife who's now still my best friend. We meet all

(46:38):
the time and we discuss these kinds of things
also a lot. So it was a very beautiful, loving
divorce that we decided to have there five years
ago. And so all this happened at once. We
separated and I quit my job. My father died and I

(47:02):
started this podcast. And so it all happened at
once. So there were a lot of things happening. So
there was some kind of a. Maybe it was a Saturn
return in my life, if you know about that, every
29 years. So I was 58 then. Was I 57 or
something? I don't know, something like that. 56
maybe. But somewhere around there, there was

(47:24):
something telling me that if I don't do this now,
then when. Because I got an inheritance. And a
little bit like that, when we sold our house, we
made some money on that. So I had some. Some
extra money and I thought, so if I'm going to
quit, I better do it now because this is the best
time. So I did it.

It's like, there's no more real world reasons.
It's like, oh, I need the paycheck, I need to pay
my mortgage. It's like, okay, Exactly.

And then, yes, during that period, I was very
grateful that there were people like yourself and
others on YouTube and on Alternative platforms
that could talk about deep stuff that I was
pondering at the time, that I didn't find anybody
talking about that on Swedish national radio or

(48:12):
in the newspaper. So I already. Back then, I
mean, it's not very long ago, but it's growing
even more so. I think you're right to your point
there, that people like you and me, I think we
have a role to play there. When it's going to
become even more confused and chaotic out there,

(48:36):
which I think it will in many ways. I don't think
we're going to have violent, more violence and
stuff like that. People are scared of that. I
don't know. Of course, I know as little as
anybody. But my sense is that it's going to be
kind of messy but not really dangerous, if you
see what I mean. So people are gonna perceive

(48:58):
things as dangerous, but they're not really. It's
just that things are handled in a different way
than they used to be handled. And old paradigms
are shattered and old ways of organizing science,
nations, economies, politics are changing and

(49:22):
people always get scared when this happens. I
just think it's from the place where I am now. I
just think it's very, very interesting, actually.
It's not going to be easy, but it's Going to be
very interesting.

I think it's true. We. What's that? I think it's
also a Chinese proverb, may you be born in
interesting times. But it's kind of. We're in it
because. Yeah, I think messy is a good word.
That's the sense I'm getting. And that's what
I'm. I'm starting to see. Like a maelstrom. Like,
there's just. It's. It's like the Zone is being

(49:59):
flooded with messages and information and this is
happening. No, that's happening. No, that's
wrong. No, this. Wrong. And it's becoming. Yeah,
it's. It's not clear. And that part of us that
wants. That wants it to be clear was this. Is
this disinformation or not? It's like, what. But
what you always say is, there's a golden thread

(50:21):
of truth in everything. It's like. Well, it's
kind of. Kind of misinformation, but there's
something true about it. Right? It's like.

Exactly.

That seems to be what we're coming up against
over and over. And navigating through that, for
those of us, like, oriented towards truth, is.
Yeah, it's. It's. It's exciting.

It's exciting. Yeah, it's exciting. And golden
thread of truth is. Is a very good thing here to
think about, because when you see that, if you
can. If you can see all. All the pieces of
information that you glean with a neutral, with
neutralize, you. You. You will discern, you will
be able to discern that there is, as I say, a

(51:03):
golden thread of truth in everything, even the
things that the mainstream might call
disinformation. But then you also realize that
what you have thought for 30 years was the
absolute truth was not either. Not the absolute
truth, but it had a golden truth, a golden,
golden thread of truth in it. But it wasn't the

(51:25):
whole truth. I mean, take history, for instance.
It's kind of obvious these days that, I mean,
more and more things are coming up about what's
happened in history and we haven't been told
everything. Of course, it's not strange, of
course. I mean, if you take wars, for instance,
that have been fought over the course of history,

(51:45):
the winner writes the history. So there's another
side to it, always and has always been. So it's
not. It's not. There's nothing strange in it.
Some people might get nervous and feel uneasy
when they realize that there is no such thing as

(52:05):
one absolute truth, because there isn't. But to
Me, it makes life much more interesting and much
larger. And it also has to do, of course, it ties
in with what kind of worldview or life view you
have. Because if you're a materialist and you

(52:26):
believe that we are only biological robots with
no purpose, we just have to do the best we can of
this physical life and then we die and it's all
black and there is nothing more, then you might
get nervous about it. But if you have a different
view and you realize that the essence of us, the
core, can't die, it never dies. It's, I mean,

(52:49):
consciousness is eternal. We're just part of,
we're all together, we're all part of the same
all encompassing consciousness. Then it's, it's
just, I mean, this may sound almost preposterous
to some people, but it's, it's all good. When you
see it that way, it actually is all good. I mean,

(53:13):
in essence then you can, of course, on the
surface, when you day to day life and decisions
that are being made and events, you can, of
course you can have opinions about them. That was
bad. That was good. That was bad. That was good.
That's how we operate, that's how we are human.
But I mean in general, the big scheme of things,
it's all good. That's the big secret of the

(53:36):
universe, is that everything's going to be fine.

Yes, yes. And we, and we get to participate, we
get to contribute to the type of consciousness
that we're living in, the type of reality that
we're living in. So your decision to leave
mainstream media and start your own is

(54:02):
contributing to a timeline where that, that
exists. And then everyone who chooses, whether
you do it in a public facing way or you just
choose to put your energy on different types of
things. Like we're building, we're building the
reality that we are then going to be experiencing.

Yeah.

Or are experiencing.

Yes, yes, I agree. I wonder what people,
colleagues, old colleagues of mine from the
newspaper are thinking about what I'm doing. Or
maybe they're not thinking about it at all. Maybe
I'm just, they have just forgot about me. That's,
that's fine. But because I think I still, I think

(54:50):
I'm a person who's pretty difficult to pinpoint
for, for people because I'm still writing, you
know, pieces that are kind of, you know, normal
about science and about the environment. And I
get the thumbs up for that from the old guard.

Oh, thank God he did something that we can talk
about.

All of a sudden I write an article about the UFOs
phenomenon or about consciousness. And then I can
imagine that some people go, whoa, he seems to
have lost it. What's happened?

He's gone off the deep end again. Yeah, it's so
interesting to me because. And I noticed this,
doing research on all of these different
scientists and physicists over the last few
years. Psychologists. And so many of them were
considered brilliant and they won all the prizes

(55:43):
and they were like, all the medals and they were
the towering figure in their field. And then so
many times in the bio I would read, it would be
like. And then in the last like 10, 15 years of
their life, they went on like, they got all weird
and they went down this weird woo woo track.
Nobody, they must have just got old and crazy.

(56:05):
And it's like bio after bio after bio has some
version of that. And I'm like, at what point do
we say maybe all of these towering figures of
intellect saw something once they, you know,
accrued all of their achievements and no longer,
you know, saw the end of their life coming and
were ready to accept a larger truth. But every

(56:27):
time, nope, they just went, they just got old and
crazy and they write off the bigger esoteric,
more difficult to explain conclusions.

Yeah, yeah, I know. I've also seen what you're
describing, especially on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is
terrible when it comes to describing the
scientists that are interested in esoteric
matters. It's the worst. You know that there is a
group called the guerrilla skeptics on Wikipedia,

(56:59):
gsow I think it's abbreviated and they are.
There's a guy in California, journalist I know a
little bit, Craig Wyler, he has taken it upon
himself to kind of expose this group because it's
an active group and you can look it up on, also

(57:20):
on Wikipedia actually, because they're proud of
what they're. And they are, you know, materialist
skeptics who are really, you know, in this
physicalist box. And they have, I think they're,
they actually, actually believe that they are
doing a very, very good thing for humanity. And
so they, they go into all these articles about

(57:41):
people like Rupert Sheldrake and Dean Radin and
Pim Van Lommel and they just change things
because they don't want, they want to depict
their research as pseudoscience. That's their
task. So it's terrible. It should be exposed.

So Wikipedia is intentionally framing any of
these more esoteric thinkers?

Yeah, well, yeah, right, but Wikipedia is not
this group. But the thing with Wikipedia is that
it's kind of user operated. So I mean they are
Kind of. They have become admins of it. And you
can become that. You can. You can apply for that
and. But I think the founder, Jimmy Wales, is

(58:32):
himself a materialist. I don't think he has
openly said that. I support this group and I like
what they're doing, but I think he silently
approves of what they're doing. That's. That's my
guess.

No, I think so, based on my experience with
Wikipedia and hearing stories of how political it
is to even be able to edit on there. I mean, I
know. I know people. There's a journalist called
Alex Berenson. He. He does a lot of. He covered a
lot during COVID and on the vaccines and
everything. And I saw him, he wrote one time,

(59:08):
he's like, I just gave up. My Wikipedia bio is
garbage, and there's nothing I can do about it. I
can't get in there. I can't change it, I can't
fix it. It's filled with lies. And so I guess
that goes back to what we were talking about
earlier, cultivating discernment, and especially
when there's these intentional forces muddying

(59:29):
the waters. Because what you were saying and what
your work covers is that there is a lot of quote
unquote hard science behind so many fascinating
things, you know, quantum biology, consciousness,
and all of it. But then there are forces that are

(59:50):
intentionally making it seem unfounded.

Yeah, yeah. It's, it's, it's. It makes you, of
course, then become suspicious towards other
topics as well, if you know that they're
manipulating or doctoring information when it
comes to science and spirituality stuff. Maybe
they have other groups doing the same thing on
other topics. Probably. Probably.

Meredith Oke (01:00:15):
Right. Probably. And then this comes back to
something else I wanted to ask you more about,
because what happens then, and I see this very
often in the health sort of ecosystem. People
become kind of bitter. They feel that they're
being lied to. They feel that they're being

(01:00:36):
betrayed, and they are. And it's just sort of,
you know, forget everything sucks. Everyone's
terrible. These people are terrible. And it can
create a. Yeah. Like a bitter, unhappy kind of
way of life. And so I'm curious. Your book was

(01:00:59):
the.

Anders Bolling (01:01:00):
The Cozy, Cozy Darkness of the Apocalypse.

The Cozy Darkness of the Apocalypse. Right.
Which. The point of that being that sometimes we,
like, we. We feel more comfortable saying, like,
oh, everything's terrible.

Yeah.

Is that.

Yeah.

What is. What was your premise there?

Kind of the background to the title there.

Okay.

Trying to describe how we kind of. What's the
word? Wallow in the Misery in a way because I
mean we can all relate to. And it's probably ages
old. You can, you can imagine people sitting
around a bonfire outside of the cave 20,000 years

(01:01:43):
ago and there's some person in the, in the, in
the group there telling horror stories about
saber toothed tigers that he met on his, you
know, hunts and things like that. And everybody
was, oh, tell me more, tell me more. So we love
that. And people love also thriller movies and

(01:02:05):
horror stories in novels and it's, it's very,
very difficult to write. I've heard of Swedish,
Swedish author talked about this once and said
that it's so sad that it's extremely difficult to
write a truly happy story because nobody really
wants it or nobody really is really interested in

(01:02:26):
it, which is, I don't know, there's something
about the human condition. But then people have
often also had these visions. They've talked
about the global village. And I remember when I
grew up, quite a few people who were kind of
visualizing a world in peace and a world where we

(01:02:49):
didn't have any borders. And I mean that's still
possible. We're not dead yet, we're here. So why
can't people have these visions? I don't really
understand that. It's strange to me. It's like I
can sometimes kind of wake up in my waking state
and be surprised that firstly I'm still here.

(01:03:12):
I've been here always. Because I mean that's this
sense that you have when you, when you're in this
life and you. I think it's kind of a, kind of an
evidence or indication that you are eternal.
Because there's this sense that I've always been
around, of course, anyway, that's one thing. And
the other thing is I kind of wake up and look

(01:03:35):
around and think what are we still doing this? We
have nations, we have even, we even have wars, we
have money, we have what's. What is this? I mean,
I've been having this, you know, since I was a
kid and back in the 70s idea that oh, it's soon
going to change dramatically and maybe I'm very

(01:03:55):
special. Then I might be strange because to me
it's been natural to think that way. That this
world is one day we won't have any borders, we
won't have any this or that, no races and not
even any money. Eventually we're just going to be
here and do things because that's why we're here,
to do things and experience things together,
invent things, you know, have feelings that's the

(01:04:21):
reason why we're here. We're not here to build
borders and governments and bureaucracies and
civil servants and, you know, install these kinds
of jobs that people have, meaningless jobs.
That's not why we're here. It's crazy. Can't you
think that, can't you feel the same way sometimes

(01:04:42):
that it's strange that we're still doing this?

Yes. Especially on the bureaucracy front because
it just seems to perpetuate itself and it's never
going to solve. Bureaucracy doesn't solve
problems. It doesn't.

No.

You know, it doesn't have any vision. It's just.
And it's self generated, it's functionary and it
just, it just exists to expand itself and take
over. And I. Yeah, but at the same time, I feel
like there's always where we are in our conscious
evolution. We, we need a little friction. I mean,

(01:05:18):
I have, I've been pushed to do some of my best
work when I've come up against really annoying
people.

Yeah.

And then I break through with an idea I wouldn't
have had without that person.

Yeah.

Or even the work we're doing now if we didn't
have that old way to push back on.

Yeah.

But. Yeah, then at what point does it. Do we not
need that anymore? We can just sort of exist.
Because I think, you know, we can wrap up on this
topic. I just, I think it's super interesting,
like what's happening in the United States right
now. So I'm Canadian, I live in the US So I have
this kind of front row seat. But I'm not, I'm not
involved. I can't vote. And I see just in the

(01:06:03):
area of health, there's a new Health and Human
Services Secretary in the United States who five
minutes ago was public enemy number one. Talk
about jumping from mainstream to alternative.

It's happened fast nowadays.

You never know what's going to happen. But now I
feel like, okay, we're in this place where we
were just so angry, pushing back on the
establishment. Like, oh, they're so terrible.
They're doing this stuff. They're doing that to
us. And now it's like, okay, now we have the. Now
we have the floor. It's like building or making
the change or supporting people and it's gonna be

(01:06:42):
messy. Cause that person is right about food, but
they don't know anything about this. And this
person's talking about vaccines, but they don't
know anything about light. And everyone's got
there becomes territorial and it gets really
messy. And it's like, okay, now we, now we are
out in the, you know, in the ring, so to speak.
We're not no longer on the sidelines. And what

(01:07:05):
are we going to do? How's it going to go? I don't
know.

Like I said, it's very interesting. It's
fascinating that it's happening. And I think
that, like, exactly as you're describing it,
these people that are now being placed in
different positions in this new administration,
they're being vetted and they're being checked
and they're being scrutinized much, much, much
more than they would normally be in normal,

(01:07:32):
quote, unquote, or ordinary administrations, be
it from the left side or the right side, doesn't
matter. It's been, I mean, it's been more or less
the same, regardless of party controlling it for
50 years or something like that. But now it is
something different. It is something completely
different. And people are freaking out because
they don't know what's happening. They don't

(01:07:53):
understand these people. They don't understand
how people like this can be placed in these
positions. So they're being vetted a lot. Maybe
it's a good thing that they are. But anyway, it's
really. And speaking of the secretary that you
were just referring to also in this country and
in Europe and I think all over Western Europe and
Americans should realize this, that what's

(01:08:16):
happening now in the United States is so, it's so
many people are watching this and it's polarized
here as well. Many people are freaking out and
thinking that this is the beginning of World War
Three or something. And they're just horrified.
And they are only reading the newspapers that are
depicting it in that way as well. So they don't,

(01:08:40):
you know, get to really understand what could be
said about it from the other side. But also a lot
of people are hoping, putting a lot of hopes
around this figure in HHS now. And because there
was also a lot of controversy around the

(01:09:01):
pandemic, the vaccines, the lockdowns, face masks
and all of those things here in Europe as well.
Sweden was one of the few countries that didn't
have lockdowns, which I was very grateful for.

That's right.

Yeah. That was a good thing. So we could, we
could.

Yeah, your poor guy who made that decision, he
was like getting hammered. He stuck to it, didn't
he?

Both. And I mean, but he was also very, he was
also very adamant that the vaccines were the best
thing that had happened since sliced bread. Since
sliced bread or something like that. So, I mean,
he was. It was. I think he kind of felt that he
had to be that and he had to say those things.
But when it came to lockdowns and face masks, he

(01:09:46):
just followed the science because it's common
sense. We can't close schools. Why would you
close schools when we have this infection that is
a thousand fold or 2000 fold more dangerous for
people over 70 than for kids? It. It's not
dangerous for kids. Might be dangerous for 70
years olds. And I mean, they should have the
vaccine perhaps, but. Or whatever, whatever you

(01:10:08):
should call it. The, the medical intervention,
the experimental medical intervention. So. Yeah,
but people are, as I said, also watching this
very closely, even in Europe. So what is
happening?

Yes. No, there is an energy ball unfolding in the
United States right now that is super fascinating
and I think will have ramifications around the
world and who knows what's going to happen or how

(01:10:44):
things are going to play out. But I do feel like
it's our time to step up. And you know, I. What I
hear you saying too is like, be flexible in. In
how we take in information. Be discerning. Trust
our. Trust our own intuition. Like, how does. How
did this land? How did this make me feel? Am I

(01:11:07):
feeling outraged or am I feeling like, oh, okay,
that's good to know. Like all these different
things.

Yeah.

So is there anything that you would like to share
before we wrap up? Anything that's coming to you?

No, just that emphasize what you just talked
about here, that trust your own judgment and your
discernment. And don't follow the news 24 7. You
can follow it a little bit if you want to know
what's happening, but not too much because it's
not good for your health. And also check things

(01:11:43):
for yourself if you have the time and think for
yourself and take some time off just to do
nothing once in a while. 10 minutes here, 10
minutes there, meditate or just do nothing. It
will be good for you and you will have better
discernment of what's going on out there in this
messy time.

All right, thank you. Very good advice. And I
encourage everybody to check out anders podcast
and YouTube channel. It's Mind the Shift on
YouTube and on all of the podcast, all the places
where podcasts are. And your website is anders,

(01:12:29):
anders bowling.com. okay, so that's. We'll put
that link in the show notes as well. It's A N D E
R S B O L L I N G dot com. Thank you so much for
being here. We'll have to do this again.

It was really fun, Meredith. It's been true Joy
speaking to you today.

Yeah.

Thank you for what you're doing also with your
podcast and the other work that you do.

Appreciate it.

All Episodes

123: Anders Bolling - Escaping Misery Bias: How This Journalist Found Truth Beyond Mainstream Media

5 Key Takeaways

Memorable Quotes

Connect with GUEST

Resources Mentioned

QBC Resources

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}123: Anders Bolling - Escaping Misery Bias: How This Journalist Found Truth Beyond Mainstream Media