PAUL GUERCIO is co-founder of THE MERLIN PROJECT(r). MERLIN is the
first, scientifically-based forecasting technology that combines
equations derived from celestial phenomena with past historical data
and blends that information into a "timetrak(r)" that accurately plots
the chronology of future events. (Source: CNN, NPR, JOURNAL GRAPHICS)
THE ART OF ANTICIPATION
Surfing the Waves of Change in your Future
by the creators of The MERLIN Project -- Paul Guercio and Dr. George
In a world where timing often spells the difference between
success, MERLIN gives you a hedge on the Future. Think of it as a
crystal ball through which you glimpse forthcoming periods of intense
that indicate the best (and worst) times for launching projects,
sealing business deals, getting married, scheduling non-emergency
moving, taking on a new job -- in short, when to deal with major life
MERLIN is equally applicable to people, companies and countries.
MERLIN combines the exactness of planetary mathematics with
historical cycles to create snapshots of time by using a single moment
starting point. These "chronographs" are highly individualized
tracings in time that begin when we are born or a key event occurs.
chains of activity that are twofold: external factors (career matters,
work or live) and internal factors (health, relationships, emotional
MERLIN pinpoints three elements about such periods of activity: the
intensity, and the duration. It's the Next Step beyond The Celestine
While relating celestial movements to human events has long been a
controversial subject, MERLIN's track record of timely and accurate
speaks for itself. Notable forecasting successes include: the acquittal
Simpson, the collapse of the Clinton presidency and the ascendancy of
Leno's underdog triumph over Letterman, the emergence of JFK Jr., the
National Health Care and the Republican Revolution, the timetable for
breakup of the Soviet Union, and many others.
Overall, MERLIN's accuracy has approached 80 percent. In one
experiment coordinated by a group of scientists and skeptics, MERLIN
accident dates to their respective victims with an accuracy rate that
outperformed chance odds by 30,000 to 1.
First conceived in 1989, the MERLIN Project came to national
1991 when the NBC Nightly News broke the story of MERLIN's uncanny
of the stock market plunge in November of that year. Subsequently,
been featured in magazines and newspapers around the world and its
have been guests on CNN's LARRY KING LIVE three times in the last three
In the upcoming book, MERLIN will not only document its own
make new predictions for coming years, but it will also provide readers
several related tools, enabling them to make their own personal
Among the tools immediately accessible will be a Year-at-a-Glance
highlighting days in the coming year best suited for initiating
A more extensive Book-of-Days provides the reader with a ten-year
of activity that originates on each day of the coming year. An easy to
guide is included which alerts readers to specific days likely to be
or troublesome to them. The book employs the easily understood example
and surfing to clearly explain how to use MERLIN.
Besides providing readers with highly customized personal timing
MERLIN will also present a clear conceptual framework which for the
will provide a firm foundation for "legitimizing" traditional
systems like astrology. At the same time MERLIN will lay the groundwork
entirely new 21st century science of pattern, information, intelligence
consciousness unlike anything which currently exists. A science as
revolutionary as quantum physics, and as far reaching in impact.
There will be options available for readers to contact The MERLIN
directly for highly specific, personalized chronographs related to
personal activities. These options will include an nation-wide 800
computer disk or CD-ROM which could accompany the book and beginning in
1996 direct INTERNET access.
Direct spin-offs from the book will include an annualized version
Book-Of-Days. With its highly useful timing information for personal
professional planning, it could easily become a yearly purchase akin to
Information Please or Farmer's Almanac.
about the authors:
Dr. George Hart is an SDI (Star Wars) physicist who specializes in
application of supercomputers to the mathematical modeling of systems
exhibiting extremely complex behavior. In 1992, he received the
British RANK Prize for his work in laser technology (for) "..benefiting
mankind, especially in eye surgery" for inventing the excimer laser.
Paul Guercio is a nationally-respected futurist and a long-time
traditional and esoteric predictive systems. His 25 years of research
Psychical Sciences and subsequent collaboration with Dr. Hart directly
in the creation of the MERLIN Project. His clients include many
business people, politicians and celebrities.
The MERLIN Project has been featured in the Boston Globe, Boston
TODAY, the Associated Press and foreign press, CNBC, CNN, Larry King
TalkBack LIVE, the NBC Nightly News, NPR, ABC TalkRadio and MajorTalk.
Copyright 1996 by Paul Guercio and Dr. George Hart All rights
Some thoughts about.. TIME and the FUTURE
From the creators of The MERLIN Project(r) Paul Guercio & Dr. George
"MERLIN" is a computer-based forecasting technology that combines
derived from celestial phenomena with past historical data and blends
information into a "timetrak(r)" that plots the chronology of future
is the brainchild of Boston-based futurist Paul Guercio and excimer
inventor, MIT physicist Dr. George Hart. Since 1991, The MERLIN
been a regular feature of CNN/Larry King LIVE.
MERLIN sifts through an immense field of tidal intervals in the
looking for points of convergence and resonance patterns. In essense,
it is a
very sophisticated (pattern) detection system (the particular patterns
been taught to identify are at the moment, proprietary, for obvious
What we have discovered, however, suggests that "time" has a kind of
like code and behaves much like a musical score.
Think of it this way. Time, in conjunction with your DNA coding
the relative likelihood of you developing (for instance) early onset
artery disease or cancer while not being the ultimate cause/effect
Our research suggests that "time" may have a similar genetic-like
when vectored from a particular point in the past and then projected
unique "wave-form" composed of it's own, original array of tidal
little like a symphony. Events as we know them, may be a convergence
a series of unseen clocks that you helped set into motion (or were set
motion) years before and are now (all) "chiming" simultaneously. The
of the resulting "event" may be determined by the number and sheer
interval/duration of the converging curves. The more clocks chiming,
the event that occurs.
MERLIN was designed to "keep track" or these various tidal clocks
output a picture of the resulting convergence pattern in the form of a
with "realtime" correspondences. A kind of "timetable of the future!"
MERLIN doesn't make predictions anymore than weather computers do.
keep track of converging weather systems, giving the meteorologist a
off point to speculate (often badly) about tomorrow's weather. MERLIN
same thing with Time! We then attempt to draw conclusions about how
will playout in the real world. So far, our ability to pinpoint actual
realtime events and individuals lives, has been pretty remarkable.
But, it's the TIME SCHEDULE of change, its duration (and often
magnitude) that MERLIN finds. Not the particulars of circumstance.
For those of you who are Market-oriented, it would be like having
NYSE (market) volume charts, in advance. You'd know the time
coordinates of the
change and it's size, just not the direction!
And that suggests another intriguing possibility. We may affect,
control to some extent, the particular circumstances that occur, just
time schedule (or relative impact.)
Along those lines, I should mention that MERLIN is unable to give
equivilent amount of information in every situation. That's because
system-driven. In perhaps 3 out of 10 instances (2 out of 10 at best,)
won't identify much of anything useful. That may be because we are
working with an experimental version of the program or because it will
deliver more than 8 out of 10. We're not sure yet. George and the
team are still tooling up for the next generation of the program, but
be awhile yet before it's up and running. Even then I'm not sure we'll
the hit percentage much, certainly no more than 5 or 10%. Then again,
can see even 70% ahead with any consistency, that's something to smile
about especially when the best alternative at present is a coin toss!
It should be pointed out that when we saw the graphs for East
USSR, Romania, etc. in the late summer of 1989, we didn't know it was
be the "end of Communism." Hell, it could just as easily been WW III
and we were
worried it might well be. My point is that the graphs would have
identical. There would have been no way to differentiate one from the
In fact we looked at each other and agreed (that) we WERE seeing one or
other -- both of which seemed quite preposterous at the time, in case
What we now know about the output of the system suggests that the
composed of a number of (seemingly) unrelated factors and that the time
appears to operate independently of the circumstances that occur. The
seems to be governed by a kind of tidal clock-like mechanism and the
the state of consciousness of the person or people(s) involved or by
factors that MERLIN is not designed to identify.
None of the MERLIN program is off-the-shelf. It was written
this purpose including the orbital mechanics portion of the software,
by a team
of underemployed SDI physicists. The program queries you for a
moment" (a beginning time,) a local "scan from" date and the frequency
output desired (how often: daily, weekly, monthly, etc.) That's it.
generates a portrait of the "time patterns" from that moment forward,
particular attention to the time frame requested.
We're often asked how much of the output requires human
derive a projection or forecast. That varies from about 40 - 60% which
roughly what the weather bureau also has to contend with. MERLIN only
raw data, albeit in a highly compiled form. It only indicates points
converging "timepatterns" and determines the number and size of the
involved. That is eminently useful in developing a working scenario or
conversely, eliminating possible scenarios, but the system is never
in that sense. It just makes the practice of "going out on a limb" a
less of a crapshoot than it might have been otherwise. Scary but
Also, just a brief word to those of you who think we're just
obvious predictions. It's not so much a matter of the particular call
but how long ago we made it and the precision of the TIMING in the
event. When we said on CNN/LARRY KING in December (1991) that there
a major change in the Pope's situation/wellbeing commencing in late
we didn't know what form it would take, just WHEN it would put in an
He could have died (almost did) or retired or had someone else take a
him. The Vatican could have become embroiled in some massive scandal
implicated in the death of his predecessor (not an unlikely possibility
someday.) The same thing holds true about the prediction for Saddam
would be BACK, which has now come to pass) or for Larry himself. Who
Ross Perot would turn the KING Show into a staging area for a third
The point is MERLIN isolated the correct time frame and level of
found it a year or two or three before it happened.
I think part of what intrigued George about my work was that it
elegant and system-driven. The variables are always the same and the
points are always obvious. You don't have to do handstands to find
George and I can see a day where MERLIN is an element in a more
comprehensive forecasting technology, perhaps utilizing AI and things
"fuzzy logic" and not coincidentally, the insurance industry's acturial
database to really do some fancy prognosticating. For now, MERLIN is
more than a good (albeit high-tech) bloodhound, sniffing out
"scents." It accounts for no more than perhaps 50% of any forecast we
release. The balance is at present represented by a healthy grasp of
events and some serious historical knowledge and perspective. In short,
Why is only (say) 50% of the forecasting (at best) done by the
Because time, in and of itself can't predict circumstance, even if your
timepiece is very sophisticated and pinpoints the location of (call
anomolies or abberations. All you know is that a sizible "rip" will
within a particular time window, plus or minus about 90 days. Weather
forecasting, which operates by the same principles (if not the same
is often less accurate -- lots often. That doesn't seem to stop us
straining to hear tomorrow's "weather report," though. Even though
the program is not based on classical astrology, the system does, on
fundamental level, share the same paradigm. However, MERLIN uses
principles for putting that paradigm into practice.
The basic paradigm both astrology and MERLIN use for trying to
future involves finding a core set of correlations between a pattern
the relationship between a number of scientifically predictable natural
and future events that the subject of the prediction will experience.
Astrology is based on the assumption that these correlations are
known or can be learned from existing literature in the field. A given
zodiacal positions for the sun, moon and planets is assumed to
particular human activity in a certain way. There is no scientific
these traditional correlations are accurate, but the system is so
most of its practical applications are really metaphysical rather than
scientific, so the whole question of "proof" is completely irrelevant.
MERLIN doesn't rely on a pre-existing set of correlations between
events and human activities. It is based on decades of first-hand
involving specific "time patterns" and then devising a sophisticated
using those time patterns to make predictions.
Here's how one might design such a system. First, you would
database describing the fluctuations of the set of predictible natural
you'd chosen. Next, you would lay out a time-line for the human
were analyzing, recording all the dates in the past on which major,
events took place. Then you'd compile a chart that showed what each of
natural events was doing on a specific date. Next, you'd attempt to
pattern that held consistent (within preset limits) for each date. If
one, then you'd compile a chart of all the dates on which that pattern
occurred and compare that back with the timeline of the human activity
how many times it had occurred on dates with no significant happenings
the subject activity. If the number of "misses" was below a pre-set
could conclude that you had a significant correlation, and proceed to
prediction of future "important" events on that time-line by simply
the dates when the pattern re-occurred.
This is actually a fairly simple paradigm, consistent with the
characteristics that MERLIN exhibits. We're not going to elaborate
about what specific predictible natural events MERLIN employs, because
system works, the identity of these events is our most valuable
can be protected only by secrecy, since it can't be patented or
This idea is a fairly easy one to understand, if one frames the
analogies. Imagine, for example, time as a road running up and down a
of hills. Obviously, it's easier to travel faster when you're going
So "important" events might tend to happen whenever time is "going
Now, if one could just identify where the hills were by finding
natural events that were traveling on the same "road".. you get the
In a sense, MERLIN follows the lines of what we might call
tinies" or "probable futures." Consider this. Suppose you have a
capable of winning the triple crown. It is his "potential destiny" but
he is trained and entered in the proper races. He will win if he gets
the potential remains unexpressed if he is put out to pasture or stud
being raced. As MERLIN sees it, the future or destiny is not fixed,
sets of potentials with subsets of variables or factors which can
decrease a specific potential.
Here's an interesting reality-based variation on that flight of
has actually been employed by a client of ours for the past couple of
She owns, breeds and races horses and has used MERLIN to determine
"genesis dates" for a foal might produce a champion (in their two and
year old years -- the racing years) based on the emerging trendline at
point in their development.
In the two years she has tried this as a model, the horse so
in fact turned out to be a major stakes winner in those years although
unable to afford them as "weelings." Now she's wondering if you could
mare on a time-schedule that might allow a foal to arrive at the right
catch that kind of curve. Smart lady!
It's interesting that historically it's been the 'non-scientists'
researchers that have pioneered the major breakthroughs. Oh, maybe not
in the last few years when official credentials have determined who
but over the centuries. Science, as we now perceive it was not yet
toddler in the scheme of things and who knows, it may revert to that
again! Imagine metaphysics being required reading right along with
theory. Try not to laugh too hard because that day may be coming if
going to progress past this dead zone we're in. Even the most hard
physicists I know keep whispering that "..there's magic down there!"
Here's a quote I'm fond of..
"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out
strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done them
The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; who's face
marred by dirt and sweat and blood. Who strives valliantly, who errs
comes up short again and again, but who knows the great enthusiasms.
devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause. Who at best, knows in
end the triumph of high achievement and who at worst, fails while
greatly. So that his place will never be with those cold and timid
know neither victory or defeat."
- Teddy Roosevelt
With MERLIN, we have merely expanded our universe of reference
include many more of these known clocks in an attempt to discover if
episodes of time could give us a way to "tag" each moment, so as to
it from any other. Before one can attempt to view time as a variable
precipitation of circumstance, you need to have a way to capture it and
"Time-lapse" photography seems to be a good model. Individual
taken over a long enough interval and then chronogically compared can
remarkably intricate story of what "time" did (actually what the
to the "thing" you captured on film.
But consider this. If you (say) took away every other picture in
sequence, you could still make a good guess at what happened in between
frames. If you took away the final frames and had enough previous
could still make a very good guess at the outcome. Problem is, you're
to the pictures actually taken. You could speculate on what happened
first one or after the last one but you'd be limited to the sequence of
covered by your actual universe of pictures.
Time clocks aren't limited unless our corner of the Milky Way goes
up. That's how come we can "predict" the arrival of Fall or the return
Halley's Comet. It's how come (when) Voyager2 arrived in the vicinity
Neptune, Neptune happened to be there. What we've never done is to
all of those time functions that celestial mechanics creates into a
comprehensive clock and then see what kind of time it tells. The more
we include, the more precisely we can slice-up moments.
That's part of what "MERLIN" does, but only part. I like to think
of it as
"applied astronomy," number-crunching for more than the sake of
Then the fun starts. If moments can be distilled down to a unique
"signature," what happens when you bounce one moment against another.
it this way. Suppose time is like music and each moment (subdivision)
unique chord. Those of you know who ever studied piano know that if
a chord and hold down the pedal (which holds the note for those who
you can then play successive chords, some of which are pleasing in
with the first one (the one you're holding) and others which are not.
argue whether that issue of pleasing/displeasing is a subjective one
fact remains that each combination would be, at least, different.
is essentially that; a notation of sounds bouncing against sounds.
MERLIN displays a "musical score" of moments bouncing against
sort of motion picture of (the flow of) time from a given moment
Each moment would interact with all successive moments in a unique
producing a "symphony" from that moment on into the future. If that
and you could track it (or forecast the "score" in advance) you could
when that moment would climax in some crescendo or where the quiet
would be or where the tempo would change.
That still would leave the issue of circumstance. Ok, so maybe
forecast time as a kind of wave form. That wouldn't explain the form
would take; whether they would be -- good or bad. Exactly, and if
about time having at least an acausal effect, it suggests that the
appearance of "uncharacteristic activity" or what I call "heightened
eventfulness" is fixed in time by the genesis of the activity. In
the beginning moment starts a clock that has an orderly pulse to it and
successive events are related to the initial event in more than
A system built around this premise would allow you to locate the
approximate "time coordinates" for successive events, perhaps even
intensity (relative to what preceded their arrival or followed their
appearance) but not the qualitative circumstance that might occur.
To do that one would need to know the various emotional and
factors impinging on the situation or person being tracked. That is
judgement call, non-scientific and entirely interpretive. If you knew
what those subjective factors were, you would probably still make the
call occasionally. That would, in all likelihood, never be an exact
As Edward Lorenz, the father of Chaos Theory discovered with weather
can never have data precise enough to make exact predictions. No
device is sufficiently sensitive nor would you ever have enough
For those of you who know who Lorenz is and are therefore jumping
conclusion that MERLIN has ties to chaos theory let me correct you now.
There is no connection other than the fact that modern computers
"invisible" to become, visible. I have been working on this theory for
than twenty five years and computers simply made the validation process
possible by making the patterns visible. It's our suspicion that
civilizations in their magic and ritual forms, recorded similar
this cosmology. They just didn't know what they had found.
TIME.. will tell, if we're right!
In terms of planetary equations both real and imaginary, it
doesn't much matter which ones you use. They're all largely
the sense that they are a substitution for the actual phenomenon. The
the consistency of the system you choose and the consistency of the
order you apply to it. If there is an error factor built-in; it's
in. Real systems and symbolic ones will generate equivilent
information if they
set to work observing the same (or a common) phenomenon, provided you
confuse the rules that govern one with the rules that govern the other.
How come these patterns haven't been codified by now? Probably
most of the data has been accumulated by practitioners of soft (or what
like to call pseudo) sciences. No one looked or for the most part,
how or where to look. Nor did they get much help from practitioners in
areas, partly because of the contempt each camp has for the other and
because there is no common channel for communication. They don't speak
language the other can or is willing to try to understand. That's
been true for at least the last hundred or so years. Hell, look at the
strife erupting all over Eastern Europe. How could this still be going
all these years? Same reason.
A real system vs a symbolic one? For puposes of discussion, money
real system. Checks or credit cards are symbolic ones. If you hand
check or a credit card to pay your phone bill it represents money
money. (Of course, money/currency is in itself symbolic --
representative of a
level of confidence in a nation's economy by its citizens.)
Planetary motion is a real system; clocks are symbolic. But
motion may be itself representative of a (kind of) "heartbeat" of the
The tidal effects we can see (and there are hundreds, perhaps
likely to be outnumbered by those we cannot. James Gleick ("CHAOS")
following in a recent book (with nature photographer Eliot Porter.) He
"..There are flows in Nature well beyond our perception that are
slow or too grand to encompass."
We may have prematurely "decided" that time is nothing but a
devised form of abstract measurement when in fact it may be "a
breathing out process in the Universe.." That when collated can define
episodic periods. How would we know? Look what we're using for
and how little recorded history we have to work with. If the history
Solar System were a 24 hour day, we appeared in (what) the last 3
The celestial events we include in MERLIN are used only to
are not in any way proposing a cause/effect relationship between
events and human events. If you're going to compare moments of time
standpoint of moments being unique, you need some common denominator so
can differentiate one from another. Our forms of timekeeping are too
and repetitive to provide the scope needed. Therefore we have expanded
universe of "clocks" we're including. Each addition allows for a more
"fix" on a moment to be developed.
Then, working with the idea that all "clocks" provide an "on-off"
or replicate a seasonal rhythm, we turned a team of physicists loose on
problem of detecting points of convergence of the theoretical cycles
various "clocks" might time.
Then, we turned the resulting program loose on a particular moment
happened to mark the beginning of some momentous human event) to see
of a graphic it would generate. Also, to see if the resulting pattern
way paralleled the actual sequence of circumstances of the event we
begin with. And to everyone's surprise and delight, it did!
The "height" of the measurement is generated by the program in
the number of cycles cultminating at that particular instant and not
of history. The program has no idea that the beginning moment chosen
historical inportance or the sequence of the historical event that it
If there are parallels, they are unconnected by any mechanism we are
And there are parallels!
An ordinary clock is very limited and unsophisticated for
If, instead, you use all of the planets in our system, you have 9
therefore 9 reference frames. The more you include, the more precise
becomes, provided you choose your "timekeepers" carefully.
Before Newton and others defined gravity, people had explanations
basically guesses about gravity but they didn't accurately describe it.
Astrology is a guess. MERLIN is set up with rules, equations and
Before Newton, there was no 'science' of gravitation; before MERLIN,
no 'science' of historical event timing.
The reason we don't use a Fourier analysis on a historical event
is simply that we have no objective way of knowing which events are
which "in time," since that is the variable we're using. All L.A.
for instance, may not be related, even though they're all in the same
zone or on the same fault line. That's the problem of using events as
they were related. It's how come market analysis using past
performance data as
your forecasting gauge invaribly breaks down. There is an assumption
they're connected, when in many cases, they're probably the result of
factors that aren't consistent.
MERLIN is working in a much purer "environment;" watching various
functions" and not the entrance or exit (or repeat refrain) of the Ross
In other words, if you knew how to design your "sort" (which
include, which were redundant, so on) the essential pattern would
problem is knowing how to apply it.
Lots of factors could effect the onset of a California earthquake
not related in-time. MERLIN only finds those that are related in-time.
certain stresses within plates follow long time curves, the intervals
are of too long a duration to match any commonly accepted time frames.
sure; we haven't spent a lot of time looking at earth movement. (A
funding; sound familiar?)
Instead of complex equations, MERLIN is using even more complex
In one domain, we may find the equations for the data complex and
while in another domain, the equations become simple and precise. That
reason we switch domains. What cannot be modelled in the time domain,
modeled in the frequency domain or in MERLIN's case, the celestial
The sky pattern, perhaps inadvertently is (or seems to be)
elements of what Dr. Hart likes to call "..a dance of pattern," that
hints of a
new science. Our attempts at describing it are admittedly crude but
pronounced order and organization.
It's probably the realm of mandalas and music and information
the impact of consciousness on concrete reality; subtle but
In George's model, the "A world" is one of cause and effect;
steady-state repeatibility. The "B world" is one of pattern
representational reality, where the symbol is the object. Where
manipulates rules (or creates them.) Where like attracts like; where
is king and information lives a life of it's own.
I'm told that when you approach the "outer limits" of quantum
rules start to behave strangely. Particles appear and disappear with
aplomb and without explanation. We've assumed that we merely don't
the rules. It may be that we've arrived at the transfer point between
world and "B." The place where expectation affect outcome, directly.
We think that we've stumbled onto a form of "bridgework" between
realities. That's why it's so difficult to find a paradigm for it;
really isn't one. And, that's why we can't easily put a standard
to it. How do you explain a "dance of pattern."
Some folks say that if you're superstitious, you notice
easily. What if noticing coincidences (or better yet, cataloging them)
increases the rate at which they manifest themselves. Or if it is
that they become more noticible, exactly how come they are so
number suggests some other explanation. And the more you notice them,
freakier they become almost to the point of absurdity. Except, you
validating them as they occurred and none of it is a figment of your
By "A" world rules; you're a nut case. But, what if them ain't
rules? And George and I have found a straight-forward
formula for analyzing them.
Perhaps an "outsider" can get us to the crux of this matter.....
Let's phrase it in the form of a question:
Do those of you who are skeptical of MERLIN
conceive each moment of time as being qualitatively
identical to every other moment of time?
It seems as though you do, else you would not be so hostile to
But what Paul is saying -- and what MERLIN apparently charts -- are the
QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES among various moments in time.
This notion is not nearly as "radical" as y'all try to make it
Space is not homogenious. A point in space at the top of a mountain is
qualitatively different from a point in space at the bottom of the
Both are qualitatively different from most of the points in space
that lie in
If the three spatial dimensions are not qualitatively
are hard, some are soft, etc.), then why should the time dimension be
is no reason in the world that it should and, in fact, our experience
both space and time hints very strongly that moments in time are not
with one another in a qualitative sense.
In colloquial terms, we might describe this as a "good day" or a
Or a "time of war" versus a "time of peace." A "lucky time" vs. an
time." Etc. Yes, in some ways those descriptions are subjective and
psychological -- because they are qualitative. Yet that doesn't mean
they're not very REAL differences -- in the same way, for example, that
differences between two people's personalities are qualitative, but
Besides, is not time itself largely a psychological phenomenon to
with? Or perhaps more accurately: Is not our PERCEPTION of time (the
day" vs. the "bad day") primarily psychological in nature?
Time, as I understand Paul to be speaking of it, is not simply the
factor that you plug into your equations. That "equation" view of time
that every moment in time is identical to every other moment in every
some purposes, those points in time may well be identical to one
in other ways, they are obviously not identical.
What Paul is saying, as I understand him, is that these
differences among various moments in time are 1) significant and 2)
I believe the way he expressed it is as the "terrain of time."
Think of time as having a "terrain." As you move through time,
you are not
moving through an uninterrupted, unbroken, straight-line "sameness";
you're experiencing a "texture," just as you do as you move through
go up over hills, down through valleys, sometimes through solid
land), sometimes through liquid material (in a lake or the ocean),
through gaseous material (in the air). That, I believe, is the core
Like I said, to me, this concept seems extremely common-sensical.
I have a rather minimal knowledge of modern physics, the concept also
fit into some very scientific (or "scientifically accepted") theories
time is and how it works. If you can grasp that basic concept -- the
qualitative differences among various moments in time -- then you'll
be able to understand what Paul's trying to tell you, and thereby be
examine MERLIN on its own terms.
By contrast, if you can't grasp that concept, then all this hot
air is for
naught, because you'll be asking the wrong questions and using the
criteria for judgment.
The questions you should be asking are: 1) are these qualitative
differences among moments of time actually quantifiable in some way?
And 2) if
they are indeed quantifiable (or at least "graphable"), then does
quantify/graph them in a useful, realistic manner?
Seven years of on-the-record research, strongly suggests that it
Copyright 1996 by Paul Guercio and Dr. George Hart All rights
TO: A certain Network president, correspondents, producers,
journalists, editors and political operatives i.e. you.
FROM: The MERLIN Project(r) Research Group
SUJB: The Joint Chiefs of Staff "White Paper" released: 7-18-95
Date: Monday, July 29, 1996
You received the attached pages (you're mentioned in the report by
name -- Chechnya section) right after the Joint Chiefs did. A year ago!
A formal report they specifically requested on terrorism and trouble spots
and which was subsequently forwarded to JCS/J-5 at the Pentagon in December
Remember? And in that same 20 page report we highlighted:
Take a look! Or ask us for another copy. You undoubtedly recall the
afternoon of the OJ verdict. Who doesn't. We spoke that afternoon. You
were amused that we had also (correctly) forecast the outcome of that
trial (on CNN/TBL December 29, 1994.) We called to see if you had received
your copy of this very same JCS report. Remember? Did you save it?
- The timetable for conflict/resolution in Bosnia. We indicated the
end of 1995. The peace accords were signed in December 1995.
- And the duration of the Chechnyan conflict -- about 18 months.
It lasted 17.
- And the timing of a dramatic rise in US-targeted domestic and
imported terrorism (by November 1996.) We missed it by 94 days.
Dhahran barracks/June 25, TWA-800/July 17, Atlanta/July 27 and
lots more to come in 1997-8.
- And we only addressed four topic areas. The fourth being North
Korea and the jury is still out on Kim Jong Il, don't you agree?
Don't mind us but what exactly is it going to take, in a world where
pundits are (nearly) always more wrong than right, for some of you to notice,
without being reminded, that this "witchcraft" is regularly beating the pants
Copyright 1996 by Paul Guercio and Dr. George Hart All rights reserved
WHO KNOWS ABOUT MERLIN? (A partial listing)
John Hockenberry (NBC/NPR) knows. He knew before almost anyone except
Jack Anderson and Alan Colmes. Hal Bruno (ABC) knows. So does Mark Nelson
(NIGHTLINE) and Michael Guillen (GMA) and Tami Haddad (SNYDER) and Tom Brokaw
and the late Fred Briggs (NIGHTLY NEWS) and Shad Northshield (CBS.)
Larry King and Mary Tillotson know, as does their boss, Tom Johnson (CNN)
and Susan Rook. Upclose and personal. So does Richard Perle (Reagan's point-
man for SDI) and some very high level folks at the CIA and the Pentagon (JCS)
that even we don't know. Hi fellas!
Tina Brown (THE NEW YORKER) knows. Even before she knew she had a "job
change" (1992) she knew about MERLIN. (MERLIN spotted it two months before it
was announced.) So does the fellow who has her old job, Graydon Carter
FAIR) and his boss S. I. Newhouse and Sidney Sheldon and Stephen King and
Ferrell (OMNI) and literary agents Scott Meredith and Bill Adler and the late
great superagent Bob Woolf.
George Harrison (yes, that George Harrison) knows and (former) White
counsel David Gergen and Doug Bailey (THE HOTLINE) and Jeffrey Rubin (TIME)
and Debra Rosenberg (NEWSWEEK) and Sue Brown (PEOPLE) and Mike Miller and Paul
Carroll (WSJ) and Rich Dubroff (WSW) and Peter Lynch (WORTH.)
Physicist Jack Sarfatti knows; ditto Phillip Morrison. Senators Dole
and Cohen should know but won't say. Roger Ailes (FOX) knows. So does
John Stossel (20/20) and Stone Phillips (DATELINE) and David Wyss (DRI/McGraw-
Hill) and Tom Squitieri and Michael Zuckerman (USA TODAY.)
Verdine White (EW+F) knows and his buddy Arsenio Hall. So does movie
producer David Blocker and Mark Frost (TWIN PEAKS) and John McWethy (ABC
Even Bill Moyers (PBS) knows..
And now YOU know, too!
Isn't it nice to know you're in such good company!
Copyright 1996 by Paul Guercio and Dr. George Hart All rights reserved
THE MERLIN PROJECT
The RetroPsychoKinesis Project does not support or associate itself in any
way with the Merlin Project. We simply find it amusing.