Part 2: Bits and Bytes of Digital Twins ~ Taking a Bite out of Humanity

Part 2 of the Series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots

We are living in an increasingly digitalized, sensor-laden environment, inside our homes, in our outdoor environment, and within living things, including our human bodies.

One emerging framework within the massive scope of digital transformation — riding in on the crowned Trojan horse of the Fourth Industrial Revolution — is Digital Twins (DTs). In June 2017, Ben Rossi of Raconteur, defined digital twinning as “the mapping of a physical asset to a digital platform.” In its simplest explanation, digital twins digitize the physical world. The approach of using a digital replica of its original physical representation can be applied to nearly any sector of business and society, and integrates big data (captured via embedded sensors), machine-to-machine communication, and machine-learning technology. 

Digital twin technology has been practiced since the 1960s, first gaining ground by NASA in space programming. The actual terminology of “digital twin” was reportedly first mentioned in 1998, referring to a digital copy of actor Alan Alda’s voice. 

In this essay, I am focusing on one small element in the field of digital twinning, involving healthcare and bioinformatics, and the merging of these two domains within the context of purported epidemics. 

In 2018, Paul E. Jacobs, founder of XCOM Labs (provider of wireless communications solutions), predicted that within a decade, we may be working with an avatar or a Digital Twin (DT). When watching Jacobs in an interview with CNBC (December 2020) in this regard, I could not help but see a highly sterile environment behind him. Is this a sign of things to come?

In the fall of 2013, when Paul Jacobs was CEO and Chairman of Qualcomm Incorporated, he delivered a Regents’ Lecture at UC Berkeley on the “Digital Sixth Sense” (see video above). He defined the digital 6th sense as the augmentation of human ability: “We all have a digital life, we have a presence in cyber space. And not only that but there is virtual cyber information, digital information that’s associated with the real world that we’re in. We just don’t perceive it directly. And it’s natural to us that we carry our phones around. . . So the idea in the future, I believe is that we will blur the lines between cyber space and real space. And you will stop thinking about there being a bright line between those two things. And the phone and other devices will be the things that cause that line to be blurred for you — to the point where you know, where you will augment reality. And we were having discussions early on today about interfaces between your brain and electronics . . . ”

In the 2013 Regents’ Lecture, Jacobs described that one limitation of the sensor-laden augmentation of reality was that the implementation thus far has been “siloed” and not centralized enough. At around the 35-minute time stamp, he expressed that he feels the most important application of this digital augmentation is in the field of healthcare. Jacobs also explained how Qualcomm has already built a central hub that integrates medical devices, because they all share wireless connectivity. He went on to describe the use of wearable biometric devices, and how sensors will be in our body to detect and report on biomarkers. He emphasized that seamless digital interactivity is the goal, where the cyber world and the real world will merge effortlessly. 

One area of healthcare in which human-computer interaction will be paramount — involving the use of digital twins — is in the booming sector of wellness, and more specifically, “Smart Coaching” (AKA DT Coaching). As a wellness coach myself, this is intensely serious and personal to me. I do NOT approve of where the digitalized, artificial version of the wellness field is heading. The stakes are high, as the biometric data captured from humans may serve the gaming and profit objectives of stakeholders — eclipsing any proclaimed benefits for the wellness recipient. The goal of this machine learning-based digital twin platform will be to transform the current preventive wellness model to a predictive (and ultimately, precision) model, integrating algorithms, sensors, and haptic actuators. The exponential growth of smart wearable technology, in tandem with advances in machine learning, is enabling this insidious technology to come to fruition. For more information on the central players and impact investors in the field of wearable health tech, see this LittleSis map created on December 24, 2020 by Alison McDowell of

The application of digital doppelgängers to healthcare is depicted more clearly in this six-minute film produced in 2018 by the Barcelona Supercomputing Centre and CompBioMed H2020 Centre of Excellence in Computational Biomedicine, led by University College London. Further, this document “The Virtual Human Project,” published June 12, 2001 by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (funded by the US Department of Energy), details an early version of virtual human simulation as applied to the human respiratory system. 

To achieve full integration of digital twins requires seamless and scalable biometric connectivity, and will eventually necessitate the augmentation of the human body, beginning with wearable technology. This will become ubiquitous, and ultimately will merge with embedded augmentation to enhance connectivity and data collection capabilities. The use of integrated pacemakers with digital twin hearts has already been practiced in multiple iterations, as described here in February 2016. A more technical description of “The Living Heart Project” — led by Dassault Systèmes — is provided here.

Incidentally, Medidata Solutions (a Dassault Systèmes company) partnered with Moderna in its rollout of their mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine. Please note that Moderna’s previous Chief Information Officer, John Reynders, stated in 2013 that Moderna was poised to be “industry’s first fully digital biotech.” 

Could digital twinning be connected to mRNA-1273? Does mRNA-1273 have its own cloud-based digital signature (AKA digital ID)? This concept may seem far-fetched; however, this paper published on December 31, 2019 by the Swedish Digital Twin Consortium (SDTC) — a component of a larger consortium called the DigiTwin Consortium comprising 32 countries — outlines the application of digital twins to genomic medicine, and more specifically, mRNA: “ . . . it is possible to perform multi-omics analyses of individual cells from the even small quantities of any fluid or tissue that can be obtained from the body. For example, single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) has been used to profile the mRNA in thousands of cells in many diseases. This has already resulted in the identification of novel mechanisms that can potentially be exploited for personalized medicine.” The authors of the paper continue, “Consider, for example, one module formed by mRNAs and another formed by genes harboring disease-associated variants. If the mRNAs and genes map to the same proteins, the two modules can be linked. The same principle can be applied to integrate many other types of molecules, such as mRNAs or proteins.” I have a sense something else is going on behind the narrative of a virus, and I have to wonder who is privy to the real objectives — possibly having to do with the creation of genomic-based digital twins. 

GSK (a global healthcare company), manufacturer of flu vaccines, expects to supply more than 50 million doses of its influenza vaccines to the US market in 2020-21, and will distribute more than 1 billion doses globally. It should be noted that the digital transformation firm, Engineering, partnered with GSK to virtualize the entire production process of GSK’s vaccines through the use of digital twins, thereby studying their behavior in efforts to prepare for emergencies, and perform simulations and scenario analysis. Keep in mind that the digital twin process involves the use of embedded sensors (and artificial intelligence) to enable the physical-digital interface. Listen here to Christos Varsakelis, (Senior Manager Global Data Analytics & Innovation at GSK Vaccines), as he discussed with Rebecca Vangenechten, (head of Pharma at Siemens) at Virtual Summit 2020, how the digital twin process has already been used by GSK (he skirted around the time frame) in terms of developing vaccines and additional pharmaceuticals (see Endnote 1).

Are your mental wheels turning yet?

I would like to draw attention to a major player (probably unknown to most readers) in the field of digital transformation — Roberto Saracco — and his take on digital twins. Roberto Saracco was the Director of the Telecom Italia Future Centre in Italy, led the European Institute of Innovation & Technology (EIT) Digital Italian Node, and was head of the Industrial Doctoral School of EIT Digital. He has served the World Bank in Latin American projects, and is a senior member of IEEE, where he leads the Industry Advisory Board within the Future Directions Committee, and co-chairs their Digital Reality Transformation Initiative.

I viewed this webinar (2020), “Personal Digital Twins (PDTs) and their role in Epidemics Control” by Roberto Saracco, about one week ago. At that time, there were only 64 views online. Something tells me that more people should be viewing this, as it seems most are unaware of what is being planned in this emerging arena (see References if you want a deeper dive).  

In the 2020 webinar, which was presented about six months ago, Saracco spent the first 20 minutes discussing his perspective on the current pandemic scenario, including the use of pandemic jargon. I suggest beginning at the 21-minute time stamp wherein he defines Personal Digital Twins (PDTs), and how they can assist in controlling epidemics. At around the 34-minute time stamp, Saracco states that the “authorities” will have data reported to them by digital twins, and if there are people (the physical twins) who are infected or more likely to be infected, then it is necessary for countermeasures to be instituted. So, for example, if the prescribed mitigation measure is for a person (the physical twin) to stay home, and the person does not comply with this compulsory measure, then “a signal, a red flag should be generated to the health care institutions that say, hey look, this guy was supposed to stay home but is not staying home, and then it will be a matter of the government or health care institution to decide what to do and how to take action against that particular guy.” 

In this same webinar, while Saracco focused on the individual analytics that are necessary for the PDT framework, he highlighted that all of the data is required for global analytics. He emphasized that the needs of society necessitate sharing our respective individual data. Oddly enough, Saracco distinguished between the idea that in some cases, the data collected should be private, but if the “authorities” deem it necessary (AKA important for the “social benefit”) to harness that data, then privacy should not be an issue.

Interestingly, at around the 47-minute time stamp of the 2020 webinar, Saracco mentioned the notion of surveillance capitalism and Shoshana Zuboff, who hails as an ostensible champion in opposing the capturing and sharing of surveillance data. Saracco revealed that Zuboff has changed her tune, in context to the current pandemic, in that when she was recently interviewed (see Endnote 2), she expressed that the contact tracing app should be utilized, and that the authorities need to use personal data to fight epidemics.  

This 4-minute animated “teaser” depicting digital twins (see video above), presented in 2019 by Saracco, explains that as a component of the digital transformation, digital twinning is about mirroring the world of atoms and translating them into a world of bits. “It is so much easier to deal with bits than to work with atoms. Atoms are heavy. They take space and cannot be duplicated. On the contrary, bits are soft, can be squeezed in very little space, and can be duplicated as many times as needed. Atoms are scarce, bits are abundant.” 

Notably, the 2019 animated digital twin presentation also mentioned that Singapore is the first country to have a complete digital twin connected with many digital twins, each representing respective cities, to make the country more efficient. In this regard, Dassault Systèmes appears to be leading the charge on this pilot project in the city-state of Singapore the very same company that is collaborating with Moderna and its mRNA-based COVID vaccine. In early 2018, Dassault finished building the digital twin of Singapore, known as 3DEXPERIENCity. So it seems Dassault has its hands in many (digitized) cookie jars. 

Roberto Saracco also contributed a chapter to a recently published (2020) compilation of essays called Aftershocks and Opportunities: Scenarios for a Post-Pandemic Future. The book (published by Fast Future) was edited by three prominent futurists — Rohit Talwar, Steve Wells, and Alexandra Whittington — and provides a framework of scenarios designed by future thinkers, foresight specialists, and horizon scanners from around the world. Saracco’s contribution was called, “The Rise of Personal Digital Twins,” and depicts a future as reflected in the year 2030. 

Following are some excerpts, in which Saracco highlights how personal digital twins will become seamless extensions of human body augmentation in a post-pandemic world. I have placed emphasis in areas I deemed most relevant and revealing (in bold). When describing how digital data-capturing technologies were still coming into place — when the 2020 pandemic hit — Saracco describes his future fantasy . . .

“These personal digital twins were just an extension of user digital profiles . . . What started as profiling rapidly evolved into deeper contextualization of user behavior . . . As the pandemic affected more and more people the balance shifted towards greater adoption of such digital tools to help control the spread of the virus. This allowed unaffected people to continue working and socializing within a community . . . The apps were a quick fix; it was natural to envision a more permanent framework that could be used beyond epidemic containment. They offered the ability to spot the first signs of an epidemic using personal, community, and society data.”

“Today, in 2030, personal digital twins are much more powerful than those first implementations. My digital twin receives continuous information on my physiology. The twin can monitor my heartbeat, breathing rhythms, temperature, glucose levels, and blood oxygenation from a few sensors I always carry with me. Some are embedded in my smartphone, watch, and other wearables, and in my home environment.”

“Furthermore, my digital twin also maintains a permanent health record—storing information about my genome, the data from all of medical examinations, and my prescriptions. More advanced digital twins can also store an individual’s metabolome and proteome data.”

“If I were to become infected, a personal protocol will be established which might include enforcement of quarantine procedures and monitoring by the authorities. Of course, that means a temporary abdication of my privacy rights, but this is balanced by societal benefits that outweigh my personal freedoms.”

“All in all, I am better protected, and even more importantly, I feel safe. Of course, it is not just me; it is about most of us. The expectation now is that healthcare is a societal effort . . .”

“At this point, I no longer perceive my digital twin as a separate entity. We have become one and the same. It is augmenting me, and I cannot imagine a me without it.”

Granted, what Saracco puts forth in his scenario is still in the realm of “fiction.” However, since he is immersed in this digital tech apparatus and future planning, he may have a keen conceptualization of what is planned.

Joel Garreau, in his book (2005), Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies—and What It Means to Be Human presented an in-depth conversation he had with Nick Bostrom, co-founder of the World Transhumanist Association (now renamed H+). In their dialogue, Garreau posed the question: “What about humans dividing up into the The Enhanced, the Naturals and The Rest?” In answer to that question, Bostrom speculated that there may be “a very broad continuum in a generation or two . . . There could be herds of almost posthumans, and then slightly less trans-humans and then sort of augmented humans.” Bostrom added, “I guess it depends partly on whether enhancement technology should result in totally separated groups with radically different levels and nothing in between or whether it’s more like a continuum.” 

Continuing in the context of their conversation, and according to Garreau, Bostrom perceives the “noblest goal” as a society where everybody who wants to, could become enhanced. When Garreau asked Bostrom what the word “transcendence” means to him, Bostrom replied, “We are biological organisms. The difference between the best time in life and the worst times in life is ultimately a difference in the way our atoms are arranged. In principle that’s amenable to technological intervention . . . Technological progress makes it harder for people to ignore the fact that we might actually change the human nature.” When conversing with Garreau, within the context of human susceptibility to disease, aging, murder, genocide, and racism, Bostrom expressed that being human is not humane, and further, “If Mother Nature had been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder.” 

I consider Bostrom’s response as blatant gaslighting of both Nature and humanity, especially as he leaves little room, if any, for the expansion of human capabilities to arise from our inherent biological resources. Instead, he seems to perceive that it is only through technological tinkering of the human body that humans can attain excellence. 

As further highlighted by Garreau in Radical Evolution, according to Christine L. Peterson, founder and president of the Foresight Institute (with aims to prepare society for the effects of nanotechnology), “The goal is peaceful coexistence among traditional humans, augmented humans and machine-based intelligences.” 

It seems we are at a pivotal crossroads. Which direction will you choose? 

Will you support the burgeoning business of wearable health technology? If given the choice, will you permit your data to be uploaded to the cloud to create your digital doppelgänger? If so, how much will you allow? Will you hand over your rights to your avatar?

Will you opt for the alluring bits and bytes of enhancement, or will you remain a “traditional” human — a lowly, imperfect, undesirable “Natural”— thereby dis-allowing the augmenters to take a bite out of your humanity?

These are questions we should be asking ourselves . . . while the hypnotized masses are enamored with bread and circuses.


1) Read here for further information on the digital twin concept and how the company, Siemens (German multinational conglomerate), is integrating this process in healthcare R&D, and in relation to the COVID-19.

2) It took me some time to find the source for Saracco’s claim regarding Shoshana’s Zuboff’s change of heart with regard to surveillance data. I finally found it here in a webinar dated June 22, 2020. Starting around the 30 minute time stamp, Zuboff explained that contact tracing by public health authorities is necessary, as the government has a rightful and democratic duty to its citizens to collect such data for the benefit of all, and that digital tools allow them to “do it better.” Zuboff stated, “Public health authorities need to be able to see large-scale patterns of how the disease is moving so they can effectively get in the way of it and contain it.” She attempted to make a distinction between private companies (ie – Google, Facebook) collecting data for profit and behavior nudging, versus the state collecting data for “good.” So it seems her flashpoint for acceptable, and even seemingly necessary, data capture is when it comes to health and safety, and it being directed by “lawful” government. I can only imagine now why this pandemic script was chosen, and how professed champions of sovereignty can so easily bend to fit this narrative and its underlying aims. 

References for Further Reading:

  1. The Role of Personal Digital Twins in Control fo Epidemics: An IEEE Digital Reality White Paper, April 2020, Roberto Saracco et al. 
  2. Digital Twin Computing White Paper published by the DTC Innovation Forum, Version 2.0.0, October 31, 2019 (may take a minute to load this hyperlink)
  3. Press Release, November 13, 2020, from Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation ~ “NTT announces new R&D projects of Digital Twin Computing” 
  4. Engineering Ingegneria Informatica Spa Digital Twin White Paper (may take a minute to load this hyperlink)
  5. “Digital Twins: Mirror Image,” October 25, 2018
  6. “Digital twin: Cities and their digital doppelgängers,” November 12, 2020 
  7. “Digital Twin Hub marks a successful first six months,” November 26, 2020 
  8. “Digital twins can help create healthier cities after coronavirus,” May 22, 2020
  9. “How to handle Covid 19 type Virus with Digital Twin in future,” July 1, 2020
  10. “The hazards of digital twin technology and what dangers it may pose,” February 2019
  11. “Digital twins: Bridging the physical and digital,” January 15, 2020
  12. “Digital twins to personalize medicine,” December 31, 2019 
  13. “Industry 4.0 and the digital twin, Deloitte University Press, 2017
  14. LittleSis network maps created by Alison McDowell highlighting players in the Digital Twin domain: (link may not be operative, archived map below) (archived map found, as link to LittleSis above is non-operative at time of this writing) (link may not be operative, archived map below) (archived map found, as link to LittleSis above is non-operative at time of this writing) (link may not be operative, but no archived map found)

*Please note that Alison McDowell’s network maps were taken down a few days ago, as she was banned (censored) from the site. However, her account was restored a day later thanks to her supporters. That said, at this time, I am unable to embed and/or link to her maps that are relevant to this post. You may need to type the URLs manually.

65 thoughts on “Part 2: Bits and Bytes of Digital Twins ~ Taking a Bite out of Humanity

  1. This is a “two cup” (maybe 3!) of coffee read for me 🙂

    I can always count on Steph to extend my mental horizon.

    I want to know just who the hell validates these “twins”?

    I’ve seen my ” information” from public sources on I think its called “mylife”, and it was so incorrect I demanded they delete me from their site. I succeeded in doing so, as they stated I had a warrant out for my arrest.

    And furthermore, who validated a twins interaction with the world at large? Do you know what a monumental task that is, for one person? Now expand that to society as a whole.

    And in this age of ” Gender Fluidity”, who is going to model these so-called “corner cases”?

    I’d love to see all the UML diagrams for myself. Maybe they show me as having a preference for black hookers?? Who knows!!!


    1. I went to that site and then got scared to go through with interacting with it. Is it a good idea to participate? What are your thoughts?


  2. I believe Nick Bostrom to be a Digital Creation…much like Snowden.
    Zeroes and Ones telling us we’ll become Zeroes and Ones.


    1. TAAH – That’s a bold statement. I can’t speak to Snowden, but I have seen Bostrom plenty of times physically present with others – like here with Chris Anderson of TED. Are you saying that Chris Anderson is also a digital creation, sitting beside Bostrom? You’re the first person I have heard mention this in regard to Bostrom, and I am not seeing what you are seeing. Feel free to elaborate if you want. Thanks!


  3. Sorry for the redundancy, but–thank you so much for all your great work, Steph.

    With this information, it occurs to me that the memes and manipulations surrounding the current hoax not only work in the short-term, but serve the longer-term goal of normalizing, and making virtuous, the idea that we should surrender the privacy of our bodies for the good of society. The meme “We’re all in this together,” which has grated on me from the beginning, becomes even more disturbing in light of your research.

    And maybe the best way to reject all of this is to learn more about, practice, and extoll the virtues of Eastern medicine and healing techniques. In order for this preposterous vision of the future to manifest, everyone really needs to be on board with the idea that Western medicine is the be-all and end-all of preserving health. A lot of people who submit to it seem to have grumbling suspicions about it. Not that I’m concerned about convincing anyone of anything, but… making the argument that I reject surrendering the privacy of my body to a medical industry as thoroughly corrupt, untrustworthy, ineffective and even as deadly as our capitalist, Pharma-driven one seems potentially viable, yes? Or am I grasping at optimism straws?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. SCOTTRC – I always appreciate your insightful comments. I really think you should write a guest post, or join as a POM writer, as you have so much to offer. In any case, I share your optimism, and I encourage you to hold onto that.


  4. Another gem, Stephers. The risks of man’s folly are being revealed. In order to overcome this satanic system of nihilism we must start worshiping and protecting all that is self-existence (Nature) again. This includes our natural selves, which we need to keep pure and untainted by the fictions of mammon, man’s made-up legalism, and the lure of the “technosphere.”

    We are not separate entities from Nature, and must somehow disengage (end our dependency on) from man’s fictional legal matrix. If we cannot, our minds, bodies, and souls will continue to slowly die from the heartless, soulless actions of these possessed, parasitic disciples of the Crown’s well-funded anti-Nature cults.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Steph,

    Don’t go by numbers…please

    If we all went solely by numbers, we would all be dead. Yes- dead!

    Thank you for your insights and contributions.
    Regardless of numbers…you are doing great.

    Thank you. Yes? Yes!!

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Thank you for taking the time to put this together, Stephers.

    Will you support the burgeoning business of wearable health technology? If given the choice, will you permit your data to be uploaded to the cloud to create your digital doppelgänger? If so, how much will you allow? Will you hand over your rights to your avatar?

    I feel like I have already done this to a large degree, whether I like it or not. In particular, I’ve spent hours upon hours on camera, behind a mic, sharing my thoughts on things, replying to comments and so forth. I don’t know how far ‘AI’ or ‘machine learning’ or whatever it is called has come, but I would imagine there’s enough data out there now for somebody to create a relatively convincing ‘deepfake’ of me.

    Even if the audio/visual is still a step too far, I’ve posted literally thousands upon thousands of text comments (like the one I’m typing now). How long until a well-programmed bot can ‘learn’ my writing style, my main interests, and possible responses the ‘real’ me might write after reading a post likes yours?

    Getting a little meta, I used to think the idea that we are ‘living in a simulation’ was bunkum. With every passing month, sometimes more and more each day, I find myself wondering why I was ever so resistant to the idea. Perhaps there are already ‘digital twins’ among us…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. JLB (now in Bulgaria, cool!) – I think we have all unknowingly partaken in this massive data mining/machine learning project. I suppose the question now is . . . how will we mindfully participate (or opt-out) moving forward?


      1. Stephers ; “how will we mindfully participate (or opt-out) moving forward?”

        Mollycast 2021.1 finding meaning in dystopia – surviving the 2020 Rollocoaster is the first Mollycast of 2021 ‼

        Guest in the 1:01:29 podcast is new member yourFakeisFake and we discuss various groundbreaking ideas, from different brains and evolution to the revelation that Atheism doesn’t exist.


        1. Gaia – My short reply to “Stephers; ‘how will we mindfully participate (or opt-out) moving forward?'”: Well, it’s probably doing what you are already doing, and most of us here at POM, which is to practice the following: autodidactism coupled with mindful absorption of information from others (including controlled opposition and limited hangouts), so as to enable greater discernment in making our life choices (particularly with respect to medical/healthcare decisions). As those steeped in scientism enhance their control mechanisms (down to the nano scale – which I will address in more detail in my next installment), it behooves us to learn about precisely what they are doing and what they have planned. By learning their lingo and science-speak, and reading their work (and listening to their panel discussions, etc.), I think it can only help us to provide for ourselves informed consent (or non-consent). I do believe that their plans continue due to mass ignorance.


          1. “Well, it’s probably doing what you are already doing”

            Most probably not. It is the opposite; only Change brings that.

            “By learning their lingo and science-speak, and reading their work (and listening to their panel discussions, etc.), I think it can only help us to provide….”

            I used to think this too.

            when I still believed “The System” was some coherent thing that was there to make sense.

            It isn’t. It is nonsensical by design.

            Making sense out of something nonsensical by design is a waste of my energy.

            I have beautiful wake up stories in the next Mollycasts.

            Stay sane


            1. Gaia – I think what I describe, and what you may envision and experience personally, do not have to be mutually exclusive. Please keep in mind that was my short reply. 🙂 My longer response would include my New Year’s post on resonance, including the technique I use to bring about change in my life and change around me. I may be off-target here and not answering your question as you intended, but it seems as though you are implying that we need to not only detach from the system, but change it. I don’t disagree, but perhaps we disagree on how? While I think discussion (and even debate) with normies can potentially bring them to a “waking” state, I do prefer to learn about the ways in which change can be induced on a non-reductionistic level, and perhaps, on a more subtle, aetheric level (yet with more far-reaching and deeper influence). While this may sound esoteric, I do sense that the real change (and awakening) happens in the vacuum and space in between molecular mass/atoms. In this regard, the work of Nassim Haramein (including his concepts of “applied resonance” and the “holographic mass”) has been inspirational to me: and As you know, Barre Lando has worked with subtle energies and has spoken to this recently. He may be able to flush this out a bit more. Perhaps he could host Nassim on his Alfa Vedic channel, or you could invite him to your Mollycast? It could make for an interesting dialogue, and maybe he can speak further to how applied resonance and unified physics can translate into meaningful change and wakefulness among the “unawake.”


  7. some notes on the material

    Barcelona Supercomputing Centre / Computational Biomedicine, led by University College London
    emphasis on precise, locational drug delivery in the body, using our vast new biometric awareness and connection to your digital twin. For example, we can develop drugs for inhalation that will target the exact spot for precise connection within your respiratory system. (all my words)
    The Digital Human Body (Kristin Russell) “connectivity to unconnected (our bodies) systems…medical practitioners have a whole host of tools to diagnose, monitor, and cure the human body….Within the proximity to a smartphone almost guaranteed, the biometric data is instantly processed, visualized,…technology…medical imagery and all the way to the prescriptions used to cure ailments….proactive determination of our specific susceptibilities and timely interventions.”

    I noticed the simple propaganda use of the word “cure” in Russell’s short article 3 times. Using digital twins (i.e. biometric connection) will surely result in more effective drug applications, resulting in more / faster cures. Many thanks Ms. Russell.

    Moderna (mRNA-1273) The “Forward-looking statements and disclaimer” (slide 2), is a piece of work, and has to be read in order to believe that someone could actually write this stuff (no author citation, of course). For example, we read: “In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “will,” “may,” “should,” “could”, “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “aims,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. The forward-looking statements in this presentation are neither promises nor guarantees, and you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements because they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are beyond Moderna’s control and which could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. These risks, uncertainties, and other factors include, among others: the fact that there has never been a commercial product utilizing mRNA technology approved for use; the fact that the rapid response technology in use byModerna is still being developed and implemented; the fact that the safety and efficacy of mRNA-1273 has not yet been established;….Except as required by law,Moderna disclaims any intention or responsibility for updating or revising any forward-looking statements contained in this presentation in the event of new information, future developments or otherwise…”

    Slide 4 (covid-19 vaccine timeline) informs us that on “January 11, 2020,Chinese authorities shared the genetic sequence of the novel coronavirus”, and that on “January 13, 2020, Sequence for mRNA-1273 against the novel coronavirus finalized.”

    We can have faith in this product, not because of the advanced weasel-wording of the ‘disclaimer’, but because we can be sure that these digitally generated genome sequences were finalized by robust “consensus”, as with all viruses all of the time. And, of course, computer generated viruses mediated by computer generated vaccines illustrate the pinnacle of disease prevention. Virologique Circulaire, and we are saved.

    -Roberto Saracco…I’m kinda sliding on by him, but just to highlight the propaganda message that is embedded in all the material these people put out, I repeat his words, as quoted by you: “Of course, that means a temporary abdication of my privacy rights, but this is balanced by societal benefits that outweigh my personal freedoms.”
    “All in all, I am better protected, and even more importantly, I feel safe. Of course, it is not just me; it is about most of us. The expectation now is that healthcare is a societal effort . . .”

    -My wife and I were impressed, pre-covid, with Shoshana Zuboff’s championing of privacy. So sorry, but not surprised, to see her conversion to the championing of the surveillance state to achieve a ‘healthier society’.

    Thank you Stephers, for this post, and your continued research and sharing. Also, I’ve listened to Alison M. this past week, first with Kevin ?, and then with Sayer-Ji. You and she are like twins, with your voluminous in print revelations, and her unstoppable voice.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. OM – Thank you SO much for your keen notes. It really helps to have another voice to interpret this information. It’s a lot for one person, and this has been a steep learning curve for me, even though I had a bit of a head start on this material a couple years ago. So glad you have listened to a couple of Alison’s recent presentations. I have been meaning to unpack her talk with Sayer Ji (and a bit with Kevin Jenkins) and it will most likely be part of my next installment. I just have so much to cover, as I have pages and pages of material that I feel needs to be shared. Alison has been VERY busy – with one to two webinars/discussions a day. I can attach links to some of them if you’d like. In any case, it’s interesting that you picked up on our similarity. 🙂 We are very much in sync, and I am incredibly grateful for the time that we spend together and collaborate. Alison is a force, and she’s got incredible stamina when it comes to this. I tend to need more breaks and in-breaths!


  8. Thought it interesting who is “collaborating” with Moderna. From their website:

    Yes, DARPA and (is there a difference?) Gates Foundation are there. What a surprise! Institut Pasteur too. Of course, isn’t that name (Louis Pasteur) closely associated with where germ theory and infectious disease diagnosis and treatments began? Like the bloodline families, keeping it in the family, I suppose.

    “We look forward to collaborating with Moderna and to using Moderna’s mRNA platform to discover and develop new vaccines and treatments to address infectious diseases in an entirely new way. This partnership will be a trump card in our fight against viral and bacterial disease.”
    — Pr Christian Bréchot, President, Institut Pasteur

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Fascinating work, Steffers.

    “I have a sense something else is going on behind the narrative of a virus, and I have to wonder who is privy to the real objectives — possibly having to do with the creation of genomic-based digital twins.”

    Yes indeed. And Saracco thinks it is less of a fantasy more a certainty…
    “By the end of this decade we can expect that the genome sequence will become part of the PDT.”
    Who knows what genomic data is being amassed through all this mass testing being done at the moment?

    In fact Saracco sees the Chinese digital passport – another rare opportunity afforded by the fake pandemic – as a partial implementation of the Personal Digital Twin and coming to a country near you soon. Of course, there’s nothing to fear from having a digital twin unless you don’t obey the rules….

    Liked by 1 person

    1. GD – Thank you so much for linking that most recent installment by Saracco (dated 12/31/2020). I sense Saracco will continue to be openly vocal as he pushes this DT agenda forward. It certainly seems as though PDTs will be utilized as virtual “snitches” to report on the non-compliance of their respective physical twins. Further, as stated in this very short (me thinks, creepy) film by NTT Research depicting a holographic twin, the mission of these data – and genome – harvesters is “not just to change the world, it’s to upgrade reality”:


  10. ‘… Saracco states that the “authorities” will have data reported to them by digital twins, and if there are people (the physical twins) who are infected or more likely to be infected, then it is necessary for countermeasures to be instituted. So, for example, if the prescribed mitigation measure is for a person (the physical twin) to stay home, and the person does not comply with this compulsory measure, then “a signal, a red flag should be generated to the health care institutions that say, hey look, this guy was supposed to stay home but is not staying home, and then it will be a matter of the government or health care institution to decide what to do and how to take action against that particular guy.” ‘

    That description is chillingly made even more clear by these words from the weirdly crude animation:
    “This digital twin mirrors the object. It is its virtual copy.
    As such, it can be used to simulate the behavior of the physical Object.
    And it can be used to monitor the Correct Behavior of the physical Object.
    —-> If the behavior of the digital twin is different from the one of the Object – there is a Problem with the Physical Object (!!), and diagnostic measures are activated, possibly resulting in Actions on the Object.”

    This stuff is so hard for me to wrap my mind around and I can’t stand to think about it for too long in one session, but I think I’m beginning to get the (vomit) idea. Thank you(?) Steffers!

    Liked by 1 person

  11. SARKZI –

    Thank you for taking the time to watch that offensive animated video, and for transcribing a highly revealing segment. It clearly reflects the notion that the information gleaned from the digital twin will supersede any information that would be reported directly from its respective physical twin (that would be us!). They are telling us that the digital realm will eventually reign over the physical. In that same video, they also tell us that “We already have our own partial digital twin in the cyberspace. Think about all the data you present on Instagram or Facebook. Think about how much data in your cell phone is about you. Why not leverage all this data and enrich them with health-related data – our genome, our medical record, the tracking of our activities. What about our knowledge and skills? They can also become part of our digital twin that can be asked to look at new opportunities for our career, and detect knowledge gaps.”

    Yeah, I’m not really the life of the party these days (if parties were “permitted”). I really do NOT want to be the Debbie Downer with all this stuff. However, I do feel I have a responsibility to (attempt to) present this knowledge as best I can, and with as much evidence as possible. I appreciate when others here can add to this as well. I certainly don’t expect POM readers to read through all my hyperlinks and references, but I include them so readers can choose what is most interesting to them personally (and to cover my butt). Even when I aggregate the material prior to writing, some gets lost (I can be ADD at times), and some of it is above my pay grade.

    These digital-obsessed data evangelists are moving forward as quickly as they can, and we all know this pandemic scenario has been their “miracle” catalyst. The best thing we have going for us is that this is still challenging to scale at the level they truly desire. It will take some time. If people can get more savvy to this, I do think some of this process can be slowed, and even halted in ways.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. I think that just as the pandemic is meant to be justification to control our every physical move/ interaction with others, the Trump sideshow is meant as justification to control our use of/access to cyberspace. Both have the same downside of showing their hand a little too blatantly…(and this is our only hope?!).

    Not sure if readers here are familiar with the website of Martin Vrijland (must be read in translation), but he has an interesting take on what the end-game is here. I have not read his book for his full picture, but the writings on his website are interesting.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Thanks! I’ve always used the microsoft web-browser translator and it works well, unless he is showing an image with text. Have you read his book?


        1. No I haven’t. I don’t have the patience for books and am not in Holland to order it even. When I was living in Holland I knew about him, but was more into English language sources back then.

          But this:

          I’ve always used the microsoft web-browser translator and it works well,…

          I believe you it works well, but why are you actively supporting the enemy? I cannot fathom this. You are far from alone, but I see too many “truth seekers” online doing this. Sharing Amazon links, SHOPPING even at Amazon (that filthy Bezos doubled his wealth because of the Komodovirus), at Walmart, Costco, actively choosing Skype (Microsoft-owned) over the many alternatives, etc. etc.

          Have people forgotten we are at War?

          A normie doing these things is understandable; they don’t know any better, but morally and logically you cannot seriously oppose a growing enemy and at the same time make them grow more.

          It is like being a jew in 1943 and actively buying Hugo Boss or other Nazi-related businesses, aiding in your own extermination (kidnapping, imprisonment, slave labor and extradition, not “gassing”) while alternatives are present….

          So many small businesses, especially small supermarkets and other vendors are going out of business at warpspeed and the only way to stop that is for US, “awake” people to be conscious consumers.

          There are many alternatives for online translations and if I were you and you recognize this moral flaw, I recommend using alternatives and starving the enemy from our active support.


          1. Gia, I understand what you’re saying about Google Translate and Amazon, etc. I have thought the same things, and lately, if I buy anything online, I go out of my way to avoid Amazon. But I must point out that this website and all our interactions here, your podcast, pretty much everything that we “conspies” in our isolated pockets of the world use to communicate with each–are COMPLETELY dependent on the enemy’s heavily surveilled, secretively-and-not-so-secretively controlled and manipulated military technology. The fact that your alternatives for translations are ONLINE tells me that they do not rise above this problem. Am I missing something?


            1. Ha Scott, thanks for your reaction and at least part support, it is Gaia, not Gia.

              But that is the lame excuse of the one who doesn’t want to change their lives. Of course, we all are in some way supporting “the System”, that is inevitable knowing the size of The Beast.

              But is that a reason to NOT reduce our footprint into a System we KNOW is hostile to us?

              I get these lame excuses all the time. It is about conscience, morality, moving forward to DETACH more, not hide behind “we are all connected to it anyway”.

              My alternatives? I don’t own anything. The alternatives are there, it is up to every individual to choose wisely and consciously and with online translators there are many alternatives (I type from a Windows laptop, and I wish there would be a viable alternative for that).

              But in offline sense; I provide translations for anyone interested for a fraction of what labor in the western world costs (and you get a trilingual MSc. for that!)

              If a War is not the time to DETACH, DETOX and DEPROGRAM from the Beast that has never been more hostile to us, I don’t know when that time is.

              I understand people don’t like to be called out for their stupidities or immoral actions, but that is exactly why we should keep hammering on it.

              I mean, what is your purpose as a “truth seeker” else, if you don’t ACT according to, what must have been the biggest change in our lives; awakening, the knowledge we have about the enemy and how WE can work TOGETHER to get away from the System?

              I praise those who homeschool, quit working for corporations, unmask, grow their own food and all other forms of active resistance.
              And at the same time I call out all those New Normies who don’t.

              No more excuses, no more compliance and complacency. That time is over.


              1. Oh, okay. You’re selling a translation service, so you’ve chosen to focus on that issue as you type on your Windows laptop. A little less smug, finger-wagging, schoolmarm superiority might make your pitch more appealing.

                Sorry, couldn’t resist the smackdown. We’re more in agreement than not. Awake humans will definitely need to find ways to detach from the current system and decrease dependence on globalist psychopaths. But scolding or trying to shame people into detaching in this or that–especially while you yourself remain detached and dependent in glaring obvious other ways– doesn’t strike me as a persuasive way to foster the togetherness you envision.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. I do not “remain attached”.

                  And yes, everyone should fucking stop supporting the enemy. Hiding behind lame excuses for inaction is what kills all resistance groups.

                  I stopped all support to big chain supermarkets, instead support small shop owners, I don’t watch any media, I don’t mask, don’t vote, don’t buy at any online store, instead supporting non-Transhumanist real life people, etc., etc.

                  But keep dwelling in compliance “because Gaia online is not detached (enough, to my standards, that I don’t have, because I don’t detach myself)”

                  If you think that makes you feel better, hiding behind excuses and fallacies, go ahead.

                  Don’t come begging to me for saving your ass when the bombs are falling.

                  I offer a way out.

                  Naming and shaming is the ONLY way to cleanse our resistance.

                  Traitors will get shot. By Pfizer I mean.

                  We are at war, but Scotty hides behind excuses. Good call!


                  1. Yes, I dwell in compliance and justify my lazy excuses by what I think a total stranger on the Internet whose real name I don’t even know does. You got me, Guya.

                    Maybe I should change my handle to Strawman.

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. Self consciousness is the first step.

                      And admitting you go personal (it is not about me, it is about my message) while I stick to the actions and morals of awakening.


                2. A simple “I see what you mean and yes, let’s work towards more detachment” would have sufficed. Instead, you are attacking me AND hiding behind what you don’t even know about me and my life choices as an excuse to keep doing what you’re doing.

                  Commitment Through Change appears hard.

                  Get that concrete block in front of your head out and start acting upon your convictions.

                  Else I’ll keep calling you out. LIKE IT SHOULD BE. Hell, in WW2 Nazi whores were shaven bold and kicked out of town. That is what we need to do to. Filter, cleanse and call out all the traitors to truth seeking.

                  I decided to stop interacting with anyone who cedes to be human (takes the “”vaccine””). You cannot oppose Transhumanism and at the same time act like nothing happens by keeping hanging out with Mutants.


  13. Alison McDowell has posted a new paper, which amounts to a clear, precise transcript of some of her recent interviews (link at bottom), pointing to the trade in human capital. Here are a few quotes, but there is much more in here article.

    “Advances in digital identity, e-wallets, automated data-capture; Ethereum smart contracts, artificial intelligence, behavioral analytics, machine vision, and bipartisan support for “evidence-based” results are allowing new markets in human capital finance to finally come online at scale. The Davos crowd calls it stakeholder capitalism, and it is aligned to New America’s Bretton Woods II impact investing agenda. What it aims to do is pull the global “un-banked” into the marketplace – not as independent economic actors (homo economicus), but rather as commodities, livestock to be managed by emerging Fourth Sector Benefit Corporations.”

    “Examples of blockchain ID social impact projects include the Amply blockchain identity app for toddlers attending daycare in Cape Town; blockchain babies in Tanzania where compliance with pre-natal appointments can be tracked for “impact;” DAPP blockchain software that uses machine vision and videos to trigger tokenized payments after documentation of proper parenting in poor households is uploaded; and the blockchain birth certificate program the state of Illinois launched with Evernym.”

    “The same dynamic is in play with blockchain identity. Rather than double entry book keeping, which under-pinned maritime trade in stolen bodies, the world is shifting to decentralized cryptographic ledgers.  It’s the same depravity, but in a shiny, new wrapper. Keep your eye on London. Vinay Gupta says blockchain law will be based in maritime law. We are entering a world structured by unseen digital contracts designed to advantage financiers. What will the jurisdictions be for lives forced into the cloud? What are the rights of digital twins? How does one hold a Decentralized Autonomous Organization accountable to the rule of law? There are so many questions that remain unanswered. These are the things Davos hopes will stay hidden until their plan is locked firmly in place.”

    “On the basis of such equations global investors are financing data-driven “solutions” for social problems with the understanding that they will continue to make money on poverty, misery and trauma as long as it remains well managed. In addition the people being run through such systems are turned into commodities for mining, not for their well-being, but to remake them as interoperable data on dashboards for investment portfolios. This is where we have landed. If we don’t resist now, our fate will be sealed. Life reduced to metrics stored by the National Interoperability Collaborative by Stewards of Change for artificial intelligence predictive profiling.”

    There is much more important detail in her paper.

    I neglected to mention the obvious, that all of the above is a key part of the covid-19 raison d’etre, of course.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. It’s a pleasure to hear Billie Gates soothing voice say “Cellphones are amazing tools, for most of us it’s about staying in touch, but in Cameroon they’re helping to save the lives of pregnant women and children.”

        How are they doing this? By pushing smartphones and an app, which gives the pregnant women or moms frequent and regular instructions and recommendations, also pictorials that legitimize the advice coming from big medicine. Is it effective? In reference to the phone APP “GiftedMom”, we are informed that:

        “GiftedMom has already had a positive impact on the country’s health through increased vaccinations and hospital visits. At one hospital in Yaoundé, Cameroon’s capital, the number of women coming for vaccinations jumped from 28,000 per year to more than 40,000 per year. In a rural area of northern Cameroon, GiftedMom helped increase the number of moms going to the hospital by over 60 percent.”

        Of course, it’s not just Cameroon in Billie Boy’s crosshairs. It’s the whole continent, and the goal is to reach at least 3 out of 5 mothers continent-wide. This is an excellent example of “bits and bytes”being used to corral a population, even in this most basic way, through cell phones. Likely Africans and other poorer groups will be the first to be led by the nose into the mass use of “wearables”, implants, and other forms of biometric systems of control.


        1. It really is colonialism isn’t it!? (Like Alison says). And if we think about iatrogenic disease (surely massively under-reported), this line becomes extra sinister:

          “GiftedMom has already had a positive impact on the country’s health through increased vaccinations and hospital visits. At one hospital in Yaoundé, Cameroon’s capital, the number of women coming for vaccinations jumped from 28,000 per year to more than 40,000 per year. In a rural area of northern Cameroon, GiftedMom helped increase the number of moms going to the hospital by over 60 percent”

          But the philanthro-colonialists will have a never-ending stream of increasingly invasive solutions to the problems they themselves have caused.

          Liked by 1 person

      2. HS – So glad you posted this. It was reported back in 2015 that Alain Nteff, a 2012 Google Student Ambassador and a WEF Global Shaper, was the youngest participant (age 22) at Davos at their 2015 gathering (that was 6 years ago, and Bill Gates is only now featuring him). So he was a Klaus Schwab-endorsed prodigy:

        Here is more detailed info on Nteff and his GiftedMom app reported in 2019 (when he was 27 years old):

        Personally, what I find most telling about Nteff – particularly with respect to social impact investing – is what was reported here in September, 2020: A few quotes:

        “Cameroonian e-health startup Healthlane, which connects users with quality and affordable healthcare services, has raised US$2.4 million in funding to expand its user base and add new features.”

        “Those backing Healthlane in this round include Sequoia Capital, Digital Horizon, Silicon Valley Bank, TSVC, Supernode Ventures, CRE, Capitoria, and several early investors including leading Chinese healthtech company Ping An Good Doctor.”

        “In this, the company’s model is similar to the Chinese platform Ping An Good Doctor, whose audience over several years of operation amounted to 315 million people, with its capitalisation on the stock exchange growing to US$15 billion. I am confident that Africa needs such projects, so we will continue to monitor the development of the local digital healthcare sector and will keep looking for exciting opportunities.”

        Here is just a snippet about one of Nteff’s platform’s main social impact investors, Alan Vaksman (who was quoted in the above Sept 2020 article): Note the Moscow and Tel Aviv connections. Here is more on Vaksman: Just a side note: Funny, how this guy’s name is “Vaks man” – sounds like vax man? It’s a weird one.

        Here is info on Nteff’s business partner from GiftedMom, Conrad Tankou – who is also involved in the newest Healthlane venture via his company, GIC Space:

        Please note that this social digital platform (supported by USAID, of course) being utilized by Nteff and Tankou incorporates AI and biometric data from smartphones, including a “smartphone microscope”:

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Ahh, this is wonderful information. It really makes me want to make a chart with all the dots connecting…I think Alison has something like that on her website or on one of her videos. There really seems to be a smallish gang trying to impose this digital tyranny on the world.

          How people can still look at these people (Gates and cronies) and see them literally laughing in our faces (the man can’t stop smiling whenever he discusses the pandemic), how they can see the Economist publishing covers like this:
          and STILL not see that we are being used and mocked is so beyond me.


  14. What do you guys make of Denis Rancourt? The position he outlines on Covid is not really one I’ve seen anyone else make (in some details.) He does not seem to be rejecting virus theory entirely, but he’s pretty damning about Covid specifically.

    Interesting angle about the outbreak not following what would be expected in a pandemic – he describes it as conforming to response-based causes.

    Very impressive credentials… Wikipedia doesn’t even slam him too much as a “denier” or anything. Maybe bc he’s “left wing”?


    1. TIMR – I am really glad you posted this, as I had not seen Rancourt’s update on his position with respect to COVID. While I do not agree with his perspective on virus transmission, I am pleased to see that his take on this event has evolved over time. He was a bit more of a “SARS-CoV-2 believer” at the outset (from my understanding), and yet I was impressed with his diligent work on the lack of efficacy and the dangers of mask-wearing. He has shined in this respect. Overall, though, I think he did a nice job with this, and I will be sharing it with some “normie” friends and family.


      1. You’re welcome! I might share it too, his credentials are so impressive. And I like to give them the cognitive dissonance, even if they just tune it out…


    2. I think it is quite good. I also think it might be wise not to reject virus theory entirely anyway. I do know that all these scientists are truly working on something, and that for the most part they are very intelligent people. And people really do seem to pick up sickness from others. I have experienced it enough in my own life to not want to reject the idea entirely. I think though, that there is probably something wrong in their foundational beliefs (presuppositions?) that leads to erroneous interpretations of what is seen by science.
      For instance, a possibility: viruses are really exosomes, created by the body to fight disease, rather than the cause of disease. However, they may also be transmissible, somewhat like pheromones, with the evolutionary purpose of helping others in the same group, with the same toxic exposure, to get the message to clean it up. This is why they happen more in winter, etc. So in the modern world, they cause people who don’t need the “help” of the exosomes to exhibit the body’s healing symptoms anyway (fever, etc.). When we suppress this reaction via vaccines, we cause health problems down the line that wouldn’t otherwise occur.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. “I also think it might be wise not to reject virus theory entirely anyway.”
        “all these scientists are truly working on something, and that for the most part they are very intelligent people”

        Virology has been fraudulent from its inception. Another description would be “fake science.” The first human ‘virus’ isolated was polio, by Landsteiner and Popper in Austria, 1908. The procedure? A liquid concoction that included spinal cord material from a boy who died with symptoms of poliomyelitis was injected into two monkeys. Both monkeys became ill, one eventually died. Another concoction was prepared from spinal cord material from these same monkeys, and injected into two more monkeys, neither of which became ill. From this series of events Landsteiner and Popper concluded that “poliovirus” was the agent responsible for the sickness of the first two monkeys, and this was the result they published. This ‘finding’ of theirs constituted gross scientific fraud, a blatant lie. Nothing could be more obvious, yet it is instructive to look at this fraud step-by-step.

        -Poliomyelitis was historically linked to various kinds of poisoning, and should have been suspect number 1 in considering the boy’s sickness and death. Landsteiner and Popper apparently wanted to encourage the belief in a contagious entity, as demonstrated by the ‘design’ of their experiment, even if at the cost of scientific integrity.

        -Injection of the “concoction” into the first two monkeys apparently caused illness, but what caused the illness? The spinal fluid that was injected contained many ingredients, including a large variety of genetic and cellular substances from the 9 year old boy. This injection could only be viewed as an injection of toxic material that the monkey’s bodies would be able to deal with or not.

        -The first two monkeys had previously been used in experiments for syphilis treatment, so had already endured some level of poisoning, and the further insult of this ‘polio’ treatment may have been a tipping point to disease.

        -Failure of the second passage of spinal fluid into the second set of monkeys to produce sickness proved that there was nothing ‘contagious’ being passaged.

        -These two ‘scientists’ dishonesty is further shown in their notes, as they describe consideration of the possibility that the sickness of the first pair of monkeys was due to toxicity, which would explain why the second pair remained well. Instead, they ‘concluded’ that monkeys three and four were spared due to the ‘virus’ having lost its virulence. This despite no viral isolation being achieved, nor any part of this experiment even suggesting that some unseen, unidentified entity should be held responsible for the sickness observed.

        Virus ‘isolation’ uses the same basic procedures to this day, except that “immortal” monkey kidney cells are usually used, rather than whole, live monkeys. In other words, isolation is still not achieved, yet is stated as fact, meaning they tell the same lie more than 100 years later. To make this clear, see the following comment made on another forum, wherein the CDC paper claiming isolation of sars-cov2 is broken down in detail. There is more discussion in nearby areas of the thread.


        1. I think my wording there wasn’t great, as I agree with all you said about the frauds around outbreaks, true causes, need for vaccines etc.

          However, I do think it is important to note that a bit of DNA or RNA encapsulated in a membrane, is most definitely a thing. Call it an endosome, call it a virus, call it a mobile genetic element–I am pretty sure these things are real (though possibly all one and the same), and I am pretty sure that these mRNA vaccines themselves could be classified as a form of virus. I am pretty sure that with just a bit of additional mRNA sequence you would then have a synthetic retrovirus, which would incorporate itself into your genome. I do believe in these things, and understand a bit about the techniques they use.

          Do I think we understand “viruses” as much as the public face of science would have us believe? Absolutely not. Do I think they serve the biological purpose we are told they do? Highly doubtful. But do I think there is technology capable of co-opting the concept of the virus/endosome/mobile genetic element and turning it against the population? Yep! And that is why there is no way anyone should be injected with what is basically a synthetic virus which will interfere in an unknown way with the immune system (and the body in general) in response to a “virus” that may or may not exist, and very likely is not the CAUSE of the disease, (but is probably correlated in some way).

          I just think it is potentially a mistake to call fake on so much that you miss the very real, very nefarious knowledge that science and technology are gaining, and maybe therefore are not aware of the terribly bad things science really is physically capable of doing.


        2. Hope Springs –

          “However, I do think it is important to note that a bit of DNA or RNA encapsulated in a membrane, is most definitely a thing. Call it an endosome, call it a virus, call it a mobile genetic element…”

          Let’s call it what it is, instead of calling it what it is not. Virology has defined “virus” from the beginning, and it is a fiction. “An exogenous genetic entity that somehow gets inside us, having the intention and the wondrous capability to trick our cells machinery into first of all letting it enter, and then allowing it to replicate, etc,…and that has ‘figured out’ how to jump from one cell to another, from one body to another, to mutate on the fly, or to do whatever is necessary to cause these nasty epidemics, etc….”. There is a large body of special language that has been developed to perpetuate and enlarge this fiction. Now, in 2021, we are being assaulted from all sides by these nasty “variants”. “Mutation” apparently wasn’t quite good enough any more. We have “strains”, and mysteriously “asymptomatic” carriers. “Dormant, latent”, are other old reliables. There will be no end to this viral narrative unless it is exposed and rejected, along with its nomenclature. We cannot allow it to just keep ‘mutating’ as needed, for their purposes.

          That leaves us with what is real, and that is still being determined. Exosomes, endosomes, lysosomes, “mobile genetic elements”, as you call them, there is some credible science and interpretation out there re some of this stuff. There is also massive amounts of propaganda ‘research’ attempting to tack new info, spurious or not, onto the coattails of virus. I suggest we need to be clear about language, and avoid using words and descriptions that help prop up the fraud. Some are saying, “No, virus is this, or virus is that…” This is counterproductive to our goal of overturning bad medicine / big pharma. Virus simply is not.

          You said:
          “I just think it is potentially a mistake to call fake on so much that you miss the very real, very nefarious knowledge that science and technology are gaining, and maybe therefore are not aware of the terribly bad things science really is physically capable of doing.”

          Let’s make it clear and LOUD that virus is fake, as that is being used to create the current prison. I’m part of the choir with you in my awareness that real science and technology are being lined up against us for very nefarious purposes.


  15. Check out this creepy interview reposted at NC… They’re not slowing down at all, 2021 is going to be ramping up the insanity, if the public keeps playing along.

    Especially disturbing is all the focus on increased measures and testing/surveillance of young children. Still justified on this idea that they can be asymptomatic carriers who kill granny (though now the “UK variant” is suggested as potentially more deadly to young people.)
    I would think that any grandma or grandpa worth their salt would say “Look, I’ve lived my life, by and large – I don’t want my grandchildren spending years in some medical dystopia for my sake. At least, if any measures need to be taken, I can CHOOSE if I want to isolate, or wear an N95 (personal protection, not other-protection, according to long established conventional wisdom.)”
    Yet they’re still being used as a pawn to guilt everyone into living this bizarre OCD, germophobic, “risk-free” life.

    I’ll just quote from the intro, you can read between the lines that this guy is intimately involved in all kinds of spookery:

    —-According to Phillip Alvelda, a former NASA & DARPA technologist-turned-entrepreneur, the pandemic is about to get even uglier for Americans as the fast-spreading U.K. strain makes its way across the country. He talks to Lynn Parramore of the Institute for New Economic Thinking about what you need to know and how our behavior must change in order to beat the coronavirus.

    Lynn Parramore: Let’s start with a little about your background as well as what you’re working on now.

    Phillip Alvelda: My career has always been about developing interesting technologies and turning what used to be science fiction into science, and then into working technology.

    [LOL… Are these people even human? “I decided I wanted to be a science fiction type inventor, and just come up with new tech one after another… Of course, ya gotta work it into something practical at some point, but mostly it’s about bouncing from rayguns to jetpacks to matter transporters as the spirit moves you..”]

    I had the good fortune to work in interesting places like NASA,

    [guy caught a lucky break! He could be flipping burgers except for that time he was working as a janitor at the Uni and solved a big equation some prof left on the chalkboard]

    and I got some schooling at Cornell University in physics and computer science and later at the artificial intelligence laboratory at MIT. My most recent efforts at DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] were in the biological technologies office that did a lot of work leading to building the pandemic warning systems in China, like pandemic prediction software. It even invested the first money into the company that became Moderna. So, I’ve been tied into the development of all technologies at the boundary of engineering, machines and biology for many years.

    When I left DARPA, I began building a company called Brainworksto apply new artificial intelligence techniques and the new technologies out of the biological technologies office to a new generation of health care tools. Then along comes Covid, and the whole medical industry is turned upside down. But we happened to be plugged into all the critical pieces and the community, so we could quickly understand more about the virus and help guide countries and states and so on.

    I’m also involved in a biotechnology security group that has the MIT, NASA, and DARPA community involved. This was tremendously helpful at assembling a team to collect data and get it directly from the sources and the hotspots without the intervening politics filtering it. The team is not just medical doctors, but data scientists, economists, polymaths, epidemiologists, and mathematicians who can look at the complexities and figure out what’s going on and what we should be doing.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Yes, thanks for this link, TimR. Stephers, I look forward to your take on it.

      Alvelvda has such a breezy, affable way with bullshit. I love the bit you quote where he thanks the heavens for his fortuitous DARPA, MIT and NASA connections that helped keep “politics” (read: privacy and confidentiality laws) out of data collection. Reading the whole interview, I felt like I was listening to a Peter Cushing- or Vincent Price-like actor spouting screwball 1950s B-movie sci-fi nonsense with perfectly modulated gravitas. Coronavirus was a hit, so now we have the new strain, the sequel—Son of Coronavirus!! And now it’s coming after the children!!!

      And the exposition is as riddled with plot holes as a Hammer horror movie. Early in the interview, he tells us that social distancing and most masks don’t work in schools where kids are indoors all day. Later, he says schools that followed all of the guidelines—masks and social distancing—had fewer new outbreaks than schools that didn’t. Huh?

      This made my jaw drop though:

      *LP: A lot of people argue that taking more robust measures to control the spread of the virus will cause too much economic damage. What do you say to that?

      PA: I think there’s an attribution problem. The damage is not coming because we’re closing things. The damage is coming because the virus is killing people.*

      Liked by 2 people

      1. That’s exactly it, his breezy affable way with bullshit. Very funny takedown, and yes, I knew that “politics” line was skirting over something, but you pinpointed what it was leaving out – those pesky privacy and confidentiality laws. And just general ability of these global organizations to circumvent local autonomy and control? It’s all so, so shady.


    2. Good grief – this Alveda character certainly has an iron in the fire. No wonder he wants all teachers and pupils to be tested twice a week…and the fools who submit or are coerced into vaccination will still have to be tested at probably the same rate.
      Notice how he casually throws into the interview the unverifiable claims about the phoney “new strain” of the non-existent virus -which only emerged in some brief minutes of a SAGE meeting in London – and that 40 percent of “coronavirus carriers” are “asymptomatic”. That last “fact” emerged in a paper in Nature from Italy which used the discredited Corman – Drosten PCR test as might be expected.
      June 30 2020
      Quoting from the paper…
      ‘We assumed that pre-symptomatic, symptomatic and asymptomatic infections transmit the virus. We estimated that on average 41% of the infections are asymptomatic, that the mean infectious period is approximately 3.6–6.5 days, and that the lockdown reduced SARS-CoV-2 transmissibility on average by between 82% and 98%….’


      The science is thereby “settled”

      The big push behind “asymptomatic spread” actually came on 9/11 from Fauci following a [commissioned?] trawl through the sparse, often dubious, literature which appeared on Sept 1 from a team at the Scripps institute
      Annals of Internal Medicine – 1 September 2020
      Prevalence of Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection – A Narrative Review
      Daniel P. Oran, AM, Eric J. Topol, MD
      which occurred just prior to the above Nature paper, and which citied such “valuable studies” as that coming from the Diamond Princess fraud ship.
      There are some interesting comments under the AIM review paper

      Liked by 2 people

    3. Are you familiar with the SPARS2025 agenda? No, they aren’t turning down the volume. The Spars pandemic was simulated at The Johns Hopkins University in October of 2017. We all know what happens to simulations. They become real. Is this the future they want for the world?

      Link to the Spars Pademic 2025-2028 pdf:…


  16. TIMR – Thank you for this critical info. Lots of revealing (Revelation of the Method) here by Alvelda – as you said, if you can read between the lines. It does help to fill in some gaps for me, as I will be addressing in upcoming posts the convergence of the technologies he mentioned – particularly in regard to COVID – to help drill down a bit more into what I perceive as part of their grand ongoing experiment. I hope you don’t mind if I incorporate the information you provided. If I (inadvertently) forget to credit you moving forward, please let this reply serve as my appreciation and credit to you for your critical input. This guy, Alvelda, seems to occupy a rabbit hole all to himself. Oy!


  17. A number of years ago a story came up in my newsfeed. I remember being intrigued by a man’s story that he had a twin in a different space who was abused in torture. He was a singer and would write songs in that different space. I thought how odd that sounded, but reading this information makes me think he might have had a real experience. Nothing would surprise me.


  18. This is a superb (follow-up) discussion (from October 6, 2021) between Alison McDowell and Bonnie Faulkner of Guns and Butter, “Blockchain Keys Unlock a Murky Metaverse – What You Don’t Know About Digital Twins Could Hurt You”:

    Around the 50-minute timestamp, Alison explains: “They’re trying to digitally twin the world, and that’s all part of the machine learning and the pattern recognition, and the predictive profiling . . . All of this information becomes aggregated and weighted . . . and used to inform the algorithms to make future predictions . . . like reinforced learning . . . What we’re moving into now is the ability of artificial intelligence systems to start to learn from unstructured data . . . Now, once everything is on blockchain, it will be much easier because that allows the data to be structured and organized, in a way that is much more efficiently consumed by the algorithms . . . Right now there is a whole lot of unstructured data out there, but it’s still learning . . . it’s learning through these reinforcement systems.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s