Part 10: mRNA Mavericks and Everyware ~ Re-assembling Life via Ribocomputing

An Inconvenient Truth About COVID Injections

Part 10 of the Series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots”

“Of all the new frontiers opening up for computation, perhaps the most startling is that of the human body. As both a rich source of information in itself and the vehicle by which we experience the world, it was probably inevitable that sooner or later somebody would think to reconsider it as just another kind of networked resource . . . The motivations for wanting to do so are many; to leverage the body as a platform for mobile services; to register its position in space and time; to garner information that can be used to tailor the provision of other local services, like environmental controls; and to gain accurate and timely knowledge of the living body, in all the occult complexity of its inner workings . . . In every moment of our lives, the rhythm of the heartbeat, the chemistry of the blood, even the electrical conductivity of the skin are changing in response to [the] evolving physical, situational, and emotional environment. If you were somehow able to capture and interpret these signals, though, all manner of good could come from it . . . Doctors could easily verify their patients’ compliance with a prescribed regimen of pharmaceutical treatment or prophylaxis; a wide variety of otherwise dangerous conditions, caught early enough, might yield to timely intervention . . . The information is there; all that remains is to collect it. Ideally, this means getting a data-gathering device that does not call undue attention to itself into intimate proximity with the body, over reasonably long stretches of time.” (p. 48-49)

~ Adam Greenfield, author of Everyware: The dawning age of ubiquitous computing 

This is the final installment of a series I launched in December 2020 (see Endnote 1). Although I had intended to wrap up this series with a concentrated focus on transhumanism, given this topic saturation on the airwaves (see links in Endnote 2), I would like to circle back to what I touched upon (Singapore as a bioengineering propagator worldwide) in the Prologue and Part 1, and to which I promised I would return.

A Brief mRNA Refresher

In 2018, Moderna President, Stephen Hoge, stated, “Why are we so passionate about messenger RNA? . . . It starts with the question of life . . . And in fact, all life that we know flows through messenger RNA . . . In our language, mRNA is the software of life.” He elaborated that cells use messenger RNA (mRNA) to translate the genes of DNA into “dynamic” proteins, involved in every bodily function. 

Theoretically, mRNA prompts proteins to be made in our bodies — thereby placing drug factories inside us. In a 2018 interview with C&EN, Moderna’s Hoge asserted, “You could ultimately use mRNA to express any protein and perhaps treat almost any disease . . . It is almost limitless what it can do.”

According to pharmaceutical giant GSK — which, like Moderna, also manufactures vaccines based on mRNA technology — messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) is a biological molecule that is naturally produced in human cells and carries genetic code for the cells to produce proteins. The company purports that synthetic mRNA vaccine technology is a new platform for vaccines — which will disrupt the field of vaccinology. 

mRNA Mavericks in Singapore

For the record, I was not avoiding the most commonly discussed topic when it comes to the COVID injections — that of mRNA. Rather, I intended to complete this exploratory journey with discourse of mRNA, in my unique way, and I appreciate the patience exhibited by POM readers. 

As I implied in my Prologue, the task of penning this series was to examine what I referred to as the “alchemical marriage of synthetic biology and COVID,” and to provide evidence that biotech tinkerers were re-imagining humanity in a quest for re-genesis. I suspected early on that the impending injections would not only be mandated, but would represent a covert method of re-assembling nature, thereby possibly re-defining what it means to be “human.” COVID was simply a commercialized catalyst — akin to a pitch deck — in marketing advanced technologies that were waiting in the wings, with mRNA playing a pivotal role. My guess is . . . we have not seen anything yet — at least in terms of where they intend to take a human being. 

In reference to the slogan of the Great Reset — build back better — I posed the question, “Could building back — using a plethora of genetic modification projects — be a means to a dead end of humanity, and worse, to biological life itself?” I return to this question in this final installment, and to individuals who may have played (or continue to play) a central role in human genetic modification; and thus, may be considered progenitors of synthetic (or re-assembled) humanity, or perhaps may be more aptly termed “re-genitors.” 

There are many players in the emerging field of synthetic biology, and readers can get a peek at an upcoming gathering of them here. In their own words, “After two years of digital meetings, we’re bringing synthetic biology’s leading community of innovators, investors, engineers, entrepreneurs, scientists, thought leaders, policy makers and academics together to Build Back Better With Biology! (my emphasis) 

So, it seems my initial premise (to launch the re-design of humans with COVID as the kick-starter) may have been accurate — as implied by these synthetic biology thought leaders themselves. Below is molecular biologist Sydney Brenner speaking on the topic of synthetic biology (recorded in 1994, transcript provided).

“I think evolution will become an experimental subject which will be wonderful. I think with that sort of knowledge we will even start to make new animals, perhaps… I once gave a lecture on how to make a centaur by means other than transplantation surgery – which is the way the Greeks made centaurs – and what you would have to know in terms of developmental biology to create a six-limbed vertebrate, because that’s what centaurs are. But I think we will move on towards, I think, synthetic biology . . . So I think evolution is going to be the subject over the next 25 years. I think there are going to be amazing discoveries that are going to tell us quite a lot about the past, and I think we’re actually going to recapitulate the past. And that, I think, will be the most exciting thing, and I think it will bring a new kind of synthetic approach to the subject, which is now just being carved into smaller and smaller pieces. I think that in terms of the understanding of… I think the big subject that will develop, the subject that will have to be reinvented, is physiology. So that is, nobody knows how to connect up all these molecular events to the actual functioning of an organism, or an organ system, so I think physiology will have to be reinvented so that we can grasp how all this molecular stuff is embedded in the function of an organism. (my emphasis)

In multiple interviews, Brenner emphasized that genetics was all about sequence and code (how genes produce proteins and use messenger RNA as the intermediary), and that in the 1960s, the focus was on cracking the code that translates DNA codons into amino acids. Brenner professedly coined the word, “codon” — and jointly discovered mRNA — paving the way for genetic engineering. Below is a short, whimsical presentation featuring Brenner’s pioneering efforts in this area.

So as not to beat a dead horse (see here, here, and here), let’s turn our attention to a close colleague of Sydney Brenner — Louis Lim (reportedly deceased due to COVID) — who, likewise, was deemed a maverick in mRNA technology, and based in Singapore. According to a February 2021 article in the The Straits Times, Professor Lim was also a key player in designing and constructing Biopolis, Singapore’s biomedical hub (see more on Biopolis below). As reported in that February 2021 article, “[Louis Lim’s] postdoctoral research included a stint at Yale University where he contributed to a key finding in molecular biology that allowed mRNA, a genetic material that cells read to make proteins, to be cloned. This finding forms the basis of some Covid-19 vaccines (my emphasis).”

A 2021 tribute by A*STAR to Louis Lim was quite revealing, but as of today, I am unable to access the document (apparently blocked due to a “plug-in” issue?). However, I will attach it here in case readers have accessibility (see Footnote below).

Fortunately, several months ago, I transcribed much of the tribute on paper, and I include herein a few excerpts:

“After graduating in Biochemistry at the University of Malaya, Singapore (1964), Louis Lim fled to the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London for his PhD (1967). Dr Lim’s research career in molecular biology took off with a fellowship to Yale University with Evangelos Canellakis. In a paper published in Nature (1970) they reported that mammalian mRNAs curiously contained an extensive poly(A) tail. This insight allowed purification of mRNA from any tissue, free of contaminating rRNA and DNA, which could then be translated into radio-labelled proteins using reticulocyte lysate. Louis returned to London in 1971 as a lecturer at the Institute of Neurology, now part of University College London (UCL), and began to apply these methods to neuroscience. During this time Louis’ lab moved to Wakefield Street near Kings cross, where he remained. With the discovery of reverse transcriptase by David Baltimore (IMCB scientific advisory board 1998-2002), mRNA could be converted to DNA in the lab for subsequent cloning and sequencing.”

“Louis used the reticulocyte lysate system to investigate abundant brain mRNAs (primarily synaptic metabolic enzymes), then began sequencing many uncharacterized brain-specific mRNAs, which became the focus of his interest.” 

“Louis played a central role with another maverick Sydney Brenner, then Director of LMB Cambridge, in establishing and recruiting for IMCB from 1985 onwards. After IMCB was inaugurated Louis discussed with Richard Sykes, the Research Director of Glaxo PLC, possibilities for starting an R&D partnership in the biosciences. This led to the signing on 31 March 1989 of the ‘Glaxo-IMCB research venture’, together with the EBD headed by Philip Yeo. This was an early international collaboration with industry R&D to support basic discovery research aimed at identifying molecular targets involved with neurodegeneration. The Glaxo-IMCB group made seminal discoveries in the area of signal transduction and neuronal architecture (my emphasis).” 

Singapore’s Biopolis and Genetic Engineering “Stories”

As briefly referenced in the Prologue and Part 1 of my series (links above), this story of synthetic biology and bio-digital convergence (detailed in my ten installments) began — and now ends — with Biopolis in Singapore.

Biopolis is renowned as Asia’s premier biomedical hub. “With 13 buildings across 5 phases and a total floor area of more than 340,000 square metres, it is a thriving ecosystem home to more than 50 public and private biomedical research organisations such as Abbott, Procter & Gamble (P&G) as well as the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore’s lead agency for scientific research and development.”

It should be noted — in a rather timely manner — that one company residing in Biopolis is Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Takeda crossed the mainstream airwaves in late August 2021, with the publicized recall of 1.6 million doses of its Moderna COVID product due to “magnetic material contamination.” Subsequently, in September 2021, it was reported that another Takeda recall was instituted, due to two suspected related deaths and admission of “stainless steel contaminants” in the vials.

As stated by Pharma Boardroom In 2008, the biotech hub is the world’s “first integrated, purpose-build biomedical research complex, juxtaposing both public and private sector research laboratories.” Every new religion needs its Mecca,” says Philip Yeo, who was the main promoter of the Biopolis concept and chairman of A*STAR in 2003, when Phase 1 of the project was completed. Pharma Boardroom pronounced that Singapore has “been active in luring multinationals to locate their drug discovery facilities in the country.” 

A*STAR seems to have even more tentacles then DARPA does, in that it is supported by ST Engineering (see Endnote 3), and it should be noted that the Singaporean government is, and has always been, operated by scientists and engineers. Further, the intimate confluence of smart cities/digital tech and biotech/genomics/bioengineering is exemplified by Singaporean public-private ventures.

One intriguing tentacle was reflected, strangely enough, in 2011, with an article declaring to be “fictional” and featuring Philip Yeo and his A*STAR program. While claiming to be a fictional account, it is curious that the 2011 analysis of Philip Yeo speaks of Yeo as one of the first Singaporean superhumans, and that the aim of his A*STAR program was to create an elite force of super soldiers for homeland security purposes. The “fictitious” article implied that the goal was to select the most “genetically superior” Singaporeans and enhance them through artificial means. The article purports (again fictitiously) that Philip Yeo took over leadership of A*STAR with the goal of developing an army of 300 superhumans by 2020

In reality, what does go on at A*STAR with regard to genetic and bioengineering enhancement? This inquiring writer would like to know . . .

Since this series cannot end without some talk of transhumanism (and the Singularity), and certainly its presumed authentic connection to Singapore . . . In this regard, we look to Miriam Ji Sun, foresight researcher and Chair of the German Transhumanist Association who stated in 2011:

For many reasons, the tiny country of Singapore should be considered as a leading candidate to be the eventual epicenter of the Technological Singularity (my emphasis).

“In 2009, the Boston Consulting group scored Singapore as the world’s most innovation-friendly country. In regard to biotech innovations, Singapore is ranked in the top five according to a study by Scientific American. One contributing factor, besides considerable governmental support (the government plans to invest $3 billion in Biomedical Sciences research for the period 2011–2015), is the very liberal biotech-related legislation . . .

“Through its excellent position in biotechnology and chemistry, it is also heavily investing in nanotechnology, and has established an Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology.

Singapore also was accused in the 1980s of practicing a kind of eugenics, when Prime Minister Lee Kwan Yew made the remark that the ‘well educated should have more children than the less educated to maintain economic standards.’ Singapore quickly tried to distance itself from such statements, but the idea continues to live on in special dating services for academics (my emphasis).”

Sun continued, “Because longevity is seen as very desirable in societies deeply influenced by Chinese culture, as is the case with Singapore, large shares of the population are likely to support research and development of technologies aimed at prolonging healthy life. Due to Singapore’s high capacities in biotechnology and related areas, the country could become a leading innovator in regenerative medicine and anti-aging science and technologies from which the elite of the country, at least, will benefit.”

“Singapore may not be the first country to have a supercomputer that exceeds human intelligence—and human intelligence and knowledge may also be just too much valued—but it may be a country with early life extension applications, humans augmented by computer technology and cyborgs, advanced tissue and organ engineering, and possibly even genetic enhancements for improving health and intelligence (my emphasis).”

“A hybrid of human and machine intelligence may develop in Singapore—as well as in other East Asian countries—in a kind of yin-yang unity that achieves transhuman transcendence through the fusion of complements, i.e. what humans are good at combined with what machines are good at. It would not be surprising to see cyborgs in the future Singaporean society, along with genetically and bio-technologically enhanced (post)humans with improved intelligence, health, and longevity (my emphasis).

Everyware, Everywhere

To circle back to my lead quote for this essay . . . Greenfield’s Everyware reflects the concept of ubiquitous and “invisible” computing — computing that does not live on a personal device, but is literally everywhere. In 1998, Nicholas Negroponte, founder and chairman Emeritus of MIT’s Media Lab (whom I previously quoted in my Prologue), predicted that “like air and drinking water, being digital will be noticed only by its absence, not its presence.” 

Ostensibly, the everyware priests are implementing pervasive data aggregation and exploitation strategies in the name of health, defense, equity, sustainability, and resilience. In this context, according to Everyware’s author (Adam Greenfield), laptops and desktop computers will be phased out, and omnipresent computation will flourish, “becoming intimately intertwined with the stuff of everyday life.” As imagined by the bioengineers, wearable computing and body-implanted computing will be ever-present, such that it will not only be mobile (and invisible), but will connect all people, places, and things. Hence, the emerging phenomenon of everyware — which will be everywhere.  

So, can readers perceive the crux of this all-embracing digital interface — possibly enabled by injectable operating systems comprised of mRNA and nanoscale biosensors? Is it too far-fetched to conceive of these jabs as data-gathering (and possibly thought-controlling) biomedical devices networking digital citizens? As Greenfield discusses, everything will connect, which would be the epitome of bio-digital convergence. 

Discussed in March 2019, nano-bio-computing is one way to enable scientists the means with which to control biological processes: “Nanoparticles can be used as substrates for computation, with algorithmic and autonomous control of their unique properties . . .” To further elucidate, “Matter can be merged with computation . . . from the ability to algorithmically control the useful photonic, electrical, magnetic, catalytic and material properties of nanoparticles . . . nanoparticles equipped with computing capabilities can form nanoparticle circuits to autonomously perform complex tasks in response to external stimuli to combine the flow of matter and information at the nanoscale . . . An existing approach to use nanoparticles as substrates for computation is to functionalize the particles with stimuli-responsive ligands . . . The [cell] membranes can also allow parallel computing processes to occur and therefore materials scientists were inspired to rewire the biological phenomenon.”

It was reported on September 19, 2021 by Bloomberg that more than 5.95 billion doses of the deltoid-penetrated, nanotech-enabled COVID injections have been administered across 184 countries. That said, what I was attempting to convey in the syringe graphic (top of this essay) was the concept of a metaphorical injection. Accordingly, it is my position that there are numerous other ways we can also be (and may have already been) “inoculated” with biologically-altering digitalized sensors/software: from the air we breathe, to the water we drink, to the food we eat, and to the electronic devices we touch on a daily basis. As I have continually opined, the bioengineering sorcerers plan for the omnipresence of virtually seamless bio-digitalism, such that biological life will be fully immersed in a digitally convergent experience (AKA the Metaverse).

Due to their electronic and thermal properties, do graphene-based sensors — implanted in the human body — serve as the ideal nano-bio-computer interface (see here and here)? Indeed, graphene quantum dots have been used to enhance mRNA delivery platforms. Given my previous extensive coverage on graphene (despite contrary perspectives, including public refutations by graphene gurus), I will not belabor the issue herein. 

Ribocomputing with a Twist

So now that we see how mRNA and transhumanism (and the Singularity) connect back to Singapore, how does mRNA coalesce (more specifically) with synthetic biology and transhumanism? 

One hint may come from Twist Bioscience, a biotech company central to the COVID schemata, and also an industry member of the Singapore Consortium for Synthetic Biology (SINERGY):

“In response to the ongoing emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 strains, Twist has expanded its Synthetic RNA Control portfolio, adding the following controls that cover the new strains that are rapidly becoming the dominant variants around the world. These highly infectious strains of SARS-CoV-2 exhibit significant changes across their genomes including changes to the spike protein coding region. These changes can render some RT-PCR probes used widely in COVID-19 testing invalid for detection of the S gene. Twist has added four new Synthetic Controls that cover these variants. The Synthetic RNA Controls provide quality control measures for a wide range of applications including the verification and validation of diagnostic tests of both next-generation sequencing (NGS) and RT-PCR assays.”

Here is more background from Twist Bioscience in 2017:

“One goal of synthetic biology is to engineer life to recognize desired inputs and in turn respond with desired outputs. Biocomputing is the management of this input/output system, designing genetic parts that allow life to perform logic based decisions in a manner not dissimilar to the computer you’re using to read this article.”

“Researchers at the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering and Arizona State University, in a recent article in Nature, demonstrated a novel method of programming cells to operate like computers. They call their method ribocomputing because their engineered cells carry out complex logic-based computations exclusively using ribonucleic acids, more commonly known as RNA.

“Unlike the digital computers ubiquitous in the modern world, which use electricity to accomplish all higher-order functions, these ribocomputers perform logical operations on biological materials, such as proteins, toxins, and immune system molecules. Adding programmability to cells opens up exciting new possibilities for ways to control cells and their interactions with organisms and their environment. The ribocumputing researchers propose that using this new technique, cells and microorganisms can be programmed to accomplish tasks ranging from disease diagnostics and therapeutic drug delivery to green energy production and environmental cleanup (my emphasis).”

“Whereas coordinating diverse biocomputing elements to perform a computation is like herding cats, building operational circuits entirely from RNA is relatively simple and easy to scale into many different applications. All that’s needed to design ribocomputers is a careful circuit design and the ability to synthesize or express RNA in designated sequences (my emphasis).” 

A June 2020 article by Biotech Connection Singapore detailed the role of COVID vaccines and Moderna, in particular, in terms of emerging advances in synthetic biology, and how medicine and bioengineering (more specifically, gene editing) will be transformed:

“Another prominent example now is that of developing vaccinations and treatments for the Covid-19 virus. Synthetic biology companies are at the heart of this movement, with companies such as Moderna Therapeutics being the frontline candidates for developing novel vaccination candidates via their unique RNA platform technology. Such advancements showcase the increasing impact that synthetic biology has, and will continue to have, on our daily lives (my emphasis).”

We can glean more hints of this planned disruption from neuroscientist Shelly Xuelai Fan, who wrote for Singularity Hub in August 2017:

When it comes to biomolecules, RNA doesn’t get a lot of love. Maybe you haven’t even heard of the silent workhorse. RNA is the cell’s de facto translator: like a game of telephone, RNA takes DNA’s genetic code to a cellular factory called ribosomes. There, the cell makes proteins based on RNA’s message.”

“But RNA isn’t just a middleman. It controls what proteins are formed. Because proteins wiz around the cell completing all sorts of important processes, you can say that RNA is the gatekeeper: no RNA message, no proteins, no life.”

“. . . synthetic biology promises far more than just a party trick—by tinkering with a cell’s RNA repertoire, scientists may one day coax them to photosynthesize, produce expensive drugs on the fly, or diagnose and hunt down rogue tumor cells.”

So, within the context of ribocomputing and synthetic biology, Shelly Fan speaks of the “software of life.” I think we have all now become accustomed, since early on in the COVID project, to this (now) iconic phrase.

Fan continued in her 2017 analysis, This isn’t the first time that scientists hijacked life’s algorithms to reprogram cells into nanocomputing systems. Previous work has already introduced to the world yeast cells that can make anti-malaria drugs from sugar or mammalian cells that can perform Boolean logic. Yet circuits with multiple inputs and outputs remain hard to program. The reason is this: synthetic biologists have traditionally focused on snipping, fusing, or otherwise arranging a cell’s DNA to produce the outcomes they want (my emphasis).”

Fan sounded a few warnings:

“But DNA is two steps removed from proteins, and tinkering with life’s code often leads to unexpected consequences. For one, the cell may not even accept and produce the extra bits of DNA code. For another, the added code, when transformed into proteins, may not act accordingly in the crowded and ever-changing environment of the cell (my emphasis).”

“What’s more, tinkering with one gene is often not enough to program an entirely new circuit. Scientists often need to amp up or shut down the activity of multiple genes, or multiple biological “modules” each made up of tens or hundreds of genes.”

“It’s like trying to fit new Lego pieces in a specific order into a room full of Lego constructions. Each new piece has the potential to wander off track and click onto something it’s not supposed to touch.”

“Getting every moving component to work in sync—as you might have guessed—is a giant headache.”

Fan expounded, “Because RNAs bind to others so predictably, we can now design massive libraries of gate and trigger units to mix-and-match into all types of nano-biocomputers.”

“Although the technology doesn’t have any immediate applications, the team has high hopes.”

“For the first time, it’s now possible to massively scale up the process of programming new circuits into living cells. We’ve expanded the library of available biocomponents that can be used to reprogram life’s basic code (my emphasis) . . .”

But here’s the kicker (as expressed by neuroscientist Fan) . . . and the punchline to this entire mRNA programming story:

“Because we’re using RNA, a universal molecule of life, we know these interactions can also work in other cells, so our method provides a general strategy that could be ported to other organisms . . . Ultimately, the hope is to program neural network-like capabilities into the body’s other cells. Imagine cells endowed with circuits capable of performing the kinds of computation the brain does . . . Perhaps one day, synthetic biology will transform our own cells into fully programmable entities, turning us all into biological cyborgs from the inside. How wild would that be? (my emphasis)”

Technocide, not Genocide

Credit: Alison McDowell,

When I initially set out months ago to draft this final installment, I intended to title it “Baptism by Injection” to connote that those who were jabbed were initiates of a new cultish sect of religion — that of scientism. However, when watching two particular video clips, I surmise that many of the jabbed are not only initiated into a cult, but, rather, bewitched (accompanied by tribal fear and paranoia), and unfortunately, some may be unhinged. I know this is a strong declaration, but if you watch these two clips below, you may agree.  

Despite evidence of significant — and potentially irrevocable — physical harm, this may not be suicide by injection, nor even genocide by injection, but rather, technocide by injection. Here, I am defining technocide as a new means of eugenics via technological means — namely genetic engineering. Read this astute analysis (dated August 15, 2021), “mRNA ‘Vaccines,’ Eugenics, and the Push for Transhumanism” at Dissident Voice. The author highlighted the concept of Eugenics 2.0, and here is one takeaway from this important read: “The rush to bring mRNA vaccines into the mainstream . . . is not about health or protection, but rather a step towards a much more sinister goal, which is to attain control over the human body itself.” This reflects the new and improved iteration of Eugenics, in which implantable nanoplatforms — synced to our hand-held smart devices — will collect biological data and provide “continuous physiologic monitoring.” In essence, we will be instituting this Eugenics program on ourselves. When will people wake up to this? 

For those who think they are witnessing a massive culling operation and impending death camps, I would ask, where is the evidence? Moreover, could these fear-porn pushers be similarly hexed like their bewitched COVID-paranoid counterparts (as noted above)? Thus far, what I am observing is a highly advanced design-build project (or more accurately, a redesign-rebuild project), and our injected brethren are not being intentionally murdered, but rather, rebuilt from the bottom up, and the inside out — and yes, tragically, collateral damage seems to be occurring along the way. Nevertheless, why spend all this time, money, and effort, when mass murder could be a whole lot quicker and simpler?

While we may have been tiptoeing into a post-human future in which we could be managed like digitally-tagged livestock, this rush to inject the global population — come hell or high water, come cheesy commercial or burger-and-fries pimping propaganda — may have been the ideal tipping point into their long-coveted Singularitarian reality. Please read a relevant and insightful May 2020 monologue (articulating the merging of technology and humans) written by Clyde Lewis (host of Ground Zero) here.

Disruptive Lords of the Biosphere

Will you sync with the transhumanists as a post-human (most likely in an unknowing fashion), or will you consciously choose to swim against the transhumanist tide as a bonafide human “original?” If you choose the latter, moving forward, it will demand that you be proactive in your stance and deliberate in your actions. It may be time for non-Singularists to unite. 

It is my opinion that this injectable nano-biologic is a literal ticket into becoming a mechanized, mineable, and programmable commodity amidst bio-digital slavery, and the adjoining QR-coded geofencing passport is simply the window dressing. We are staring down the barrel of a loaded gun, and the ammo is the transhumanist cocktail leading in only one direction — toward imperialistic-steered extinction of currently-defined humans (a soft genocide, if you will).

Make no mistake, this presumably nanotoxin-laced, genetic-altering serum may be a novel baptism vehicle into a not-so-holy cult of transhumanism. The emerging technology platform may be poised to replace the sacred structured water that sustains us and our DNA — which seems to reflect the true science and source of life.

While I stated that I did not wish to be redundant in this essay, I feel compelled to return to one self-proclaimed professional biohacker, in particular, (whom I previously featured in Part 3). As Chairman and Co-founder of Genome Project-write (GP-write), Andrew Hessel is not only prominent and influential in the field of synthetic biology, he is a strong voice within the Singularity movement as well. He openly admits to desiring to rewire and reprogram organisms “to do jobs they can’t do in their natural state.” Hessel aims to merge human with machine via nanotechnology and programmable software (AKA synthetic messenger RNA). We should keep in mind that programmable RNA (of which mRNA is one form) is a living computational nano-device

In March 2021, Hessel had this to say on the topic of mRNA technology and how it “might kick-start a new age of vaccines”: “I wonder how people that are resistant to vaccines today would feel when they could potentially in a decade have a vaccine printer right in their home, and daily or regular updates to their protections, in much the same way as we get antivirus updates for our computer.” He continued, “So we can start to see a path where we have really precise detection, computational tools for automatic analysis and driving a design process that can produce vaccines, which are preventative or therapeutic for acute disease, pretty much as a value chain. And I think that’s just going to lead not only to better public health, better medicine, but the national defense against Mother Nature . . . (my emphasis)

On July 20, 2021, the Chartered Institute of Internal Auditors posted a high-tech virtual presentation by Hessel, titled “Human Genomics: Mapping the genome — programming our lives in the future.” Hessel opened the discussion with, “The world is digitizing . . . Our cells are actually quite digital as well . . . and they are programmable like our computers . . . If you drill into the cell, there’s digital code.” He continued, “So, in general, I think of biology as a self-assembling nanotechnology, that is alien in its sophistication; and all of the diversity that we have in nature . . . are expressions of biological software . . .”

Jade Prévost-Manuel of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) wrote in August 2021 in his article, “Meet Scientist Andrew Hessel, a Surfer Riding the Waves of Innovation in Synthetic Biology”: “It’s the potential for scientific advances that Hessel says is why he looks at synthetic biology as the next big field to serve humanity — a topic he explores in a new book he co-wrote with author Amy Webb called The Genesis Machine: Our Quest to Rewrite Life in the Age of Synthetic Biology. ‘Programming biology is just going to take us to the next level of manufacturing, recycling and producing materials that nature gives us the hardware to do essentially, but was never selected to do,’ he says. Synthetic biology isn’t without its critics, and no one knows that better than Hessel. Some would say that to dare to synthesize a virus or even consider rewiring the DNA of a bacterium is to play the role of a god. His answer? Playing deity is something we do all the time, and not just in biology . . . Anytime we take control of any system, we’re playing the gods,’ he says. ‘I wear glasses and without these, I’d be useless, so our technology gives us godlike powers, you know, to shape our lives and our world.’ (my emphasis)” 

In conclusion, we may be able to infer some final hints from notable transhumanist, futurist, and biotech entrepreneur, Peter Diamandis, executive founder of Singularity University. In his 2020 book (co-authored with Steven Kotler), The Future is Faster Than You Think, Diamandis reflects on the quickening that I sense we are experiencing in relation to the acceleration in bio-digital convergence: “In the 1990s, Ray Kurzweil, the director of engineering at Google and [my] cofounding partner in Singularity University, discovered that once a technology becomes digital— that is, once it can be programmed in the ones and zeroes of computer code — it hops on the back of Moore’s Law and begins accelerating exponentially.” Diamandis continued, “. . . formerly independent waves of exponentially accelerating technology are beginning to converge with other independent waves of exponentially accelerating technology. For example, the speed of drug development is accelerating, not only because biotechnology is progressing at an exponential rate, but because artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and a couple other exponentials are converging on the field. In other words, these waves are starting to overlap, stacking atop one another, producing tsunami-sized behemoths that threaten to watch away most everything in their path.” 

Heed my warning . . . Do not be swept away by the tsunami wave of disruptive innovation tempting the unsuspecting with talk of revolutionary bionanotechnology, with goals to combat Mother Nature. Do not become assimilated by this swarm of alluring gadgetry, with its explicit aims to converge biology and computers via digital genetic engineering.

In the words of John Robert McNeill in Something New Under the Sun — and in the context of what he described as the massive scale of human impact on the ecosystems in the 20th century (via science and technology) — he somberly asserted that through this unnatural human-dominated regime, we have become “what most cultures long imagined us to be: lords of the biosphere.” Who the heck gave us this right? One bio-technologically spellbound individual, Stewart Brand, put forth in his Whole Earth Catalog in 1968, “We are as gods, so we might as well get good at it.” Who deemed him a god?!

Instead, I suggest there may be natural and humble ways to build back better — or at the very least, fortify ourselves and our loved ones — and we can discuss these alternative means moving forward. I cannot see into the uncertain and potentially topsy turvy future being driven by techno-smitten humans, but I leave you with a recent quote from my dear friend, Alison McDowell: “I’m choosing to inhabit the space of possibility rather than inevitability.” In my heart, I know we got this, and I am confident we have each others’ backs. Onward we go . . . Hold steady and centered, and true to your heart and your nature-endowed humanity . . . 

Inspired by Alison McDowell

Footnote: MT provided a link (9/20/21) to the Louis Lim document:


1) Following is a complete list of the installments comprising this series, in addition to six stand-alone posts I wrote that are relevant to the topic of bio-digital convergence. 

Prologue: Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots ~ Emerging From the Rabbit Hole

Part 1: A Star is Born ~ Ascent of the Techno-S’pore and the Descent of Man

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

Part 3: Paradox of Contagion ~ “The Internet of Anti-Bodies”

Part 4: The Scent of Fear ~ Musings on Fear and Olfaction

Part 5: The Virtualization and “Thingification” of Children 

Part 6: Rise of the Cybernetic Wizard ~ Bio-Nanorobots to the Rescue?

Part 7: The Endgame ~ One Web to Rule Them All 

Part 8: Trust Codes, Vaccine Passports, and Scannable Humans 

Part 9: Tuned In ~ A Mother’s Intuition on Transmission from the Jabbed to the Un-Jabbed

Stand-alone posts (but no less relevant):

The Ghost in the PCR Machine: Plugged into the COVID Nightmare

Trojan horse here, Trojan horse there, Trojan horses everywhere

Mass Zombification via Remote Biohacking: The Farce Awakens

Confessions of an Engineered Nanoparticle 

Free Wally: Tracing the Spike Protein Drama to a Llama 

Meet the Graphene Industry’s Superhero, Mr. G: Friend or Foe? 

2) Accordingly, readers can explore these pertinent offerings regarding COVID injections and transhumanism: 

What is the real motivation for attempting to vaccinate millions of healthy people?

“According to Dr. Miklos Lukacs de Pereny, a research professor of science and technology in Peru, the COVID-19 pandemic was manufactured by the world’s elites as part of a plan to globally advance “transhumanism” — literally, the fusion of human beings with technology in an attempt to alter human nature itself.”

The Corbett Report: Episode 402 – Your Guide to The Great Convergence

Transhumanism: the big fraud-towards digital slavery

Moderna’s COVID Vaccine Is An ‘Operating System’ – Is This Transhumanism? 

Hybrid World | Full Transhumanism Documentary

How to track & trace every person, purchase, and protein on the planet & manipulate human behavior 

Alex Newman Interviewing Dr. Carrie Madej – Covid Shots, DNA & Transhumanism

Friday FARcast With Wayne McRoy – The Transhumanist Bridge With Autism

The Evil Twins Of Technocracy And Transhumanism (Patrick Wood)

3) Steven R. Leonard was founding CEO of SGInnovate, and is now CEO of Singularity University. According to crunchbase, Leonard was also Adviser at the National Research Foundation (NRF), a speaker at 5G Asia 2017, and a speaker at Internet of Things World Asia in 2018. He is still Executive Deputy Chairman at Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore (iDA) 

Incidentally, I had begun to research Singapore’s SGInnovate (and its partnership with ST Engineering) and Leonard in January 2019 — popping up on my radar with the reported incident of the Covington boy, Nicholas Sandmann. Do readers recall that story (see here and here)?  

In any case, as I had discovered in 2019, Nick Sandmann’s father, Ted, worked for VT Hackney, which is a VT Systems company (aerospace, electronics, land systems and marine sectors, including satellite-based IP communications technology and weapons/munitions systems.). Headquartered in Alexandria, Va., VT Systems operates globally and is a wholly owned subsidiary of ST Engineeringheadquartered in Singapore. So readers may grasp why I already had Singapore on the brain, so to speak; and may be curious, as I am, with regard to the potential connections (albeit by connecting a few dots) between the Covington boy event (and his dad) and the Singularity. In an uncanny (or planned?) way, these phenomena do seem to connect. 


Who Discovered Messenger RNA (mRNA)?” May 12, 2020

Biography: From grasshopper to grand old manNature, September 22, 2010 

A Most “Elegant” Experiment: Sydney Brenner, Francois Jacob, Mathew Meselson, and the Discovery of Messenger RNA,” October 6, 2016 by Leonard C. Norkin

“What was the most ‘elegant’ experiment ever? Many molecular biologists, who were active during the so-called ‘golden age’ of the 1950s and 1960s, might opt for the 1958 experiment of Mathew Meselson and Franklin Stahl, which demonstrated the semiconservative replication of DNA (1). My choice is the 1960 experiment by Sidney Brenner, Francois Jacob, and Matt Meselson, which established the existence of messenger RNA (mRNA) (2). The story behind the discovery is an appropriate topic for the blog since bacteriophage T2 had a key role to play. It is told here, largely through the words of one of its contributors, Pasteur Institute scientist and Nobel laureate, Francois Jacob (3)

“Imagine for the moment that we are back in the late 1950s, at a time when the precise role of RNA was not yet known. However, pertinent evidence was accumulating, which implied that RNA had a role in protein synthesis. For example, cellular RNA levels correlated with the levels of protein synthesis.”

“But what might the role of RNA be? The example of eukaryotic cells seemed to indicate that DNA could not directly serve as the template for protein synthesis. The DNA in those cells is contained within the membrane-bounded nucleus, whereas protein synthesis occurs in the cytoplasm. Might RNA then serve as an intermediate information carrier?”

A*STAR’s newest research institute, Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences, opens in the Brenner Center for Molecular Medicine,” 2007

Ribocomputing devices for sophisticated in vivo logic computation” (abstract only from a conference proceeding), 3rd ACM International Conference on Nanoscale Computing and Communication, ACM NANOCOM 2016 – New York, United States, September 2016 

“Synthetic biology aims to create functional devices, systems, and organisms with novel and useful functions taking advantage of engineering principles applied to biology. Despite great progress over the last decade, an underlying problem in synthetic biology remains the limited number of high-performance, modular, composable parts. A potential route to solve parts bottleneck problem in synthetic biology utilizes the programmability of nucleic acids inspired by molecular programming approaches that have demonstrated complex biomolecular circuits evaluating logic expressions in test tubes. Using a library of de-novo-designed toehold switches with orthogonality and modular composability, we demonstrate how toehold switches can be incorporated into decision-making RNA networks termed ribocomputing devices to rapidly evaluate complex logic in living cells . . . The compact encoding of ribocomputing system using a library of modular parts is amenable to aggressive scale-up towards complex control of in vivo circuitry towards autonomous behaviors and biomedical applications.”

A living programmable biocomputing device based on RNA: Can sense and analyze multiple complex signals in living cells for future synthetic diagnostics and therapeutics,” Kurzweil AI, July 28, 2017

“Synthetic biologists at Harvard’s Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering and associates have developed a living programmable ‘ribocomputing’ device based on networks of precisely designed, self-assembling synthetic RNAs (ribonucleic acid). The RNAs can sense multiple biosignals and make logical decisions to control protein production with high precision.”

“As reported in Nature, the synthetic biological circuits could be used to produce drugs, fine chemicals, and biofuels or detect disease-causing agents and release therapeutic molecules inside the body. The low-cost diagnostic technologies may even lead to nanomachines capable of hunting down cancer cells or switching off aberrant genes.”

“Similar to a digital circuit, these synthetic biological circuits can process information and make logic-guided decisions, using basic logic operations — AND, OR, and NOT. But instead of detecting voltages, the decisions are based on specific chemicals or proteins, such as toxins in the environment, metabolite levels, or inflammatory signals. The specific ribocomputing parts can be readily designed on a computer.”

“Ultimately, researchers hope to induce cells to communicate with one another via programmable molecular signals, forming a truly interactive, brain-like network, according to lead author Alex Green, an assistant professor at Arizona State University’s Biodesign Institute.

Wyss Institute Core Faculty member Peng Yin, Ph.D., who led the study, is also Professor of Systems Biology at Harvard Medical School.”

“The study was funded by the Wyss Institute’s Molecular Robotics Initiative, a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Living Foundries grant, and grants from the National Institute of Health (NIH), the Office of Naval Research (ONR), the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA).”

“A Nano-biosensors model with optimized bio-cyber communication system based on Internet of Bio-Nano Things for thrombosis prediction” (abstract only), Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 2020

“Thrombosis is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Out of four, one person is dying of thrombosis; yet, the seriousness of this disease is underappreciated. Its early prediction and prevention continue to be a dilemma that confuses researchers. Nevertheless, a light can be seen at the end of the tunnel; thanks to nanoscience which has led to the development of new generations of nanostructure with different applications in bio-medicine and bio-engineering. The key paradigm for the Internet of Nano Things (IoNT) has allowed for new medical data to be collected which potentially helps achieve more accurate disease prediction. It has enabled real-time health services and turned the physical space of a patient into a smart space. While an enabler for several applications, the artificial nature of Internet of Nano Things devices can be harmful where the implementation of Nano Things may lead to unintended health effects. To overcome this issue, researchers have suggested the novel paradigm of the IoBNT that combines nanotechnology with tools from synthetic biology to provide reengineering of biological embedded computing devices. IoBNT promises many medical applications, such as intra-body sensing and actuation networks, based on biological cells and their characteristics in the biochemical field. In this paper, a novel IoBNT-based model with an optimized Bio-Cyber communication interface that helps predict and analyze blood vessel clots is introduced. The model utilizes a bio-interface to collect information on the blood vessels and convert it into an electrical equivalent format. Furthermore, the optical or thermal responsiveness excites the release of definite nano-carrier molecules such as liposomes which may be devised across the bloodstream and enter the targeted area passively to stimulate suitable nano-devices to predict the clots. The Bio-Cyber interface is used for linking the traditional electromagnetic wave to the Bio-Signaling Network based on the bioluminescence concept. Lab-scale simulation analysis shows prominent outcomes in the prediction of blood vessel clots with 97.66% accuracy and 12.22% tolerance level in error rate.”

183 thoughts on “Part 10: mRNA Mavericks and Everyware ~ Re-assembling Life via Ribocomputing

  1. I believe this is all good inquiry. I sincerely do.

    But what I’m seeing (virtually, of course), is more akin to using “Covid” as an excuse to plant a steel-toed boot right on everyone’s faces.

    So what is it? Extermination? Re-engineering? Or both?

    Some broad in NSW was promoting a “Quaranteen Isolation Center” with capacity for 3000 individuals (presetly under construction) i.e. a Concentration Camp by any other name.
    Kanada I believe is currently building them too.

    Heathrow was turned into one too I believe, compete with chain link fences, armed guards, etc.


  2. A band with 46/years under their belt, litterally one hell of an achievement in its own right…could have left the world with a very uplifting and positive message.

    Instead they leave us with a hideous and grotesque “message” of:

    Hell On Earth.

    What an absolute letdown.


    1. Doesn’t take much research to find what the members of the band and people in their management are about and why they have enjoyed so much success. However they do have some fantastic metal tunes if you are into that type of music. One of the bands that had world wide fame but the radio stations refused to play for a long time. I remember when Ozzy and Metallica could not get played on any of the Rock stations, and now they play those bands everyday.


    1. Rastus,

      Since you referenced the analysis by “Peekay,” is it safe to assume your Kurzweil comment is sarcastic? Am I misinterpreting your comment? Given that Peekay concurs with my perspective that what is being displayed on the screen is a simulation (the woman is a stunt person, as is the guy who precedes her, and I spoke to that incident many months ago in this regard), it VERY clearly aligns with Kurzweil’s vision of the Singularity – as these hyper-real (AKA fake) incidents (being broadcasted on the “screen”) are inextricably tied to machine learning and AI. I suggest reading my first two POM posts on Sentient World Simulation ( and hyper-reality ( – and even my short essay on war gaming/simulation ( These staged events are a form of psychological warfare and reflect chaos theory/game theory (essentially, they are magic tricks designed to blur the lines of reality) – all in preparation for the merging of man and machine.


  3. There is a cloak of invisibility and silence that surrounds suffering. I discovered this on two occasions for myself, once when I was six, and a dentist pulled an absessed tooth without anaesthetic and years later when I underwent a surgery and the anesthetic wore off but the succinylcholine did not. My personal experience gave me the perception that suffering of those who are not seen or heard is invisible.

    Animals in factory farms, children tied to a loom weaving rugs, adults locked in an Apple Iphone factory or vats of engineered e-coli or yeasts churning out human insulin have this in common, in my estimation. Invisible and silent suffering is unimportant, expedient or essential to those who benefit. UK LeGuin wrote a story about this that haunted me since I read it 40 some years ago. .

    From the above quote from the appropriately named ‘Twist’ article:
    “Unlike the digital computers ubiquitous in the modern world, which use electricity to accomplish all higher-order functions, these ribocomputers perform logical operations on biological materials, such as proteins, toxins, and immune system molecules. Adding programmability to cells opens up exciting new possibilities for ways to control cells and their interactions with organisms and their environment.

    If they rearrange the foundation, the cells, don’t they rearrange the entire structure? Is this the more sophisticated form of slavery, Aldoux Huxley proposed with even the love of servitude eliminated? Maybe the verse from Revelation 9:6 makes more sense from the perspective of the VMAT gene removed, disease and death removed, the suitable subjects chained to the material world Matrix forever as its free energy source?

    From Andrew Hessel’s interview quoted above:
    Some would say that to dare to synthesize a virus or even consider rewiring the DNA of a bacterium is to play the role of a god. His answer? Playing deity is something we do all the time, and not just in biology . . . Anytime we take control of any system, we’re playing the gods,’ he says. ‘I wear glasses and without these, I’d be useless, so our technology gives us godlike powers, you know, to shape our lives and our world.’

    My incomplete impression is that instead of electricity, these creatures who believe they are gods want to harness and program life to serve them invisibly and silently. No complaints department for a cell, a ribosome, a mitochondria. Hessel’s equating the godlike power of eyeglasses to absolute power over life is ridiculous, but this fatuous, fallacious, flapdoodle is what passes for ‘science’. To regard all life including our own as an experimental programmable resource subject to the whims and curiosity of these creepy, disingenuous people as ‘gods’ is repugnant.

    Or maybe I’m reading too much into it. Perhaps, they are telling us a story that can only be as true as we make it?


    1. Waterproof –

      Your comment [“Perhaps, they are telling us a story that can only be as true as we make it?”] is very perceptive (with a twinge of hope), and pertinent to reflections from Andrew Hessel himself.

      In this post-human presentation (also hyperlinked above), which was 10 years ago (November 15, 2011), Hessel had this to say (starting around the 36 minute timestamp): “Combined with synthetic genomes, which can be literally implanted into eggs . . . you . . . can see where we’re going with this . . . Within 20 years, we could potentially be booting up synthetic humans or synthetic human cell lines. This is not science fiction. This is coming.”

      Hessel continued, “. . . cloning is organic, and having babies conceived naturally means you’re going to be doing batteries of tests . . . all sorts of developmental tests . . . we’re gonna start putting filters on that . . . and having naturally conceived children . . . and perhaps a home birth may be illegal because you’re putting the baby and mother at risk, and potentially putting a burden on society if there is any defect.” Yes, he really said this!

      To conclude – and more relevant to your comment – Hessel revealed around the 41 minute timestamp, “Science fiction becomes science fact because we load all of these ideas into kids’ minds, and there’s going to be a lot of people that already think that brain-machine interfaces, synthetic bodies, etc. aren’t that big a deal. And this is what they’ll be wanting to work on when they go to school.”

      So, this may help to explain the impetus for all the predictive programming in sci-fi movies and TV. They clearly imprint these visions into the psyche, in hopes that young viewers will grow up with the ambition to manifest these visions. Unfortunately, for those of us who wish to maintain our biological humanity, I think evidence points to this strategy as being a successful working model . . .

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Thank you, Stephers. What an incredible synthesis of man’s predicament. Too many gods, not enough ordinary, humble humans in this twisted inversion of the natural systems that have sustained us (and all lifeforms) for millennia. It is well worth mentioning that none of this power and control is possible without the Crown/City of London’s direction and approval. Exposing the command center in our current global-control system nightmare is essential to defending Nature, and ourselves from the threat of machines and the wetiko mindset.

    My friend Dean Henderson talks about (@ 16:14 timestamp) this in his most recent interview. I agree with him when he suggests that “ALL Royals need to go to jail…”

    We are many, they are few. Stand up now, or consent (overtly, or in silence) to your own demise. It’s always a choice. Choose wisely.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks Steve, that is a very interesting talk by Dean. He really is a fount of knowledge about the ubiquitous Crown and all its nefarious works. It seems like he walks the walk as well as talks the talk too, which you can no doubt confirm

      I’m pleased to say that I’m almost over my so called long covid, or maybe my post viral fatigue syndrome. And, despite all the current madness, I’m optimistic. Primarily because there is a mass awakening of consciousness happening right now. The covid psyop is waking people up at last, certainly here in the UK. The grounded folk have finally realised that they’ve been conned. The recent vaxx mania, and it’s increasingly obvious damaging impact, has been they tipping point. People have been fooled and don’t like it. A decent minority will not be fooled again that’s for sure. There are many other reasons too, not least the alternative, independent voices like yours at PoM. Forget media, listen to the people….

      My best wishes to you and Mark and Stephers


      1. So happy you have joined us again at the little blog that could. Amazing things are happening. I’ve been recovering the past few months too. Full knee replacement. Aiming for another ski season with ass-deep powder and all that goes with sliding down the mountain. Be well, my friend.


  5. “Humanity has reached a crossroad that should be addressed in fully informed disclosure, debate and consent on the basics if not some of the means of implementation (rethinking money) and not taken at the face value given as determined by a power elite disseminated through its power structure. A power structure that performs a simulated reality that is many times a simulation of former simulated realities dating back to the original reality that was a truth…..baring the idea that there was once a former reality labelled a ‘Golden Age.’ Be that as it may any ‘Golden Age’ is for humanity to recover through the recovery of an innate understanding of Natural Law. (imho)”

    I wholeheartedly agree with the comment snippet by “Brad” above, taken from a guest post over at Alison’s blog:

    Rec0very, it’s always part of the process of keeping the lights on. Be the light.


  6. Thanks for all this, Stephers. I will be working to follow all your links for weeks.
    Detox, in today’s world, is becoming a constant and daily necessity. If only we knew or had some way to assess all the nanobots that may have already been deployed.
    The scientistic technocratic cult mindset that is now driving the push toward forced injections is, for me, the scariest element of all this.


  7. But what if…
    What if there is no such thing as DNA or RNA(mRNA), or if…
    Or if they are something completely else, with entirely different function ?
    I was really trying to find some evidence of their existence in form of any photo.
    I encountered only a few, but they were so heavily pixelated, that forms in those photos could represent anything.
    All those stories about sequencing, decoding, etc. sounds to me like some “entity” sits in a lab in front of a PC and using one or several computer softwares “generates” something that doesn’t actually exists from nothing. What if…
    What if the whole story of genetics, DNA, RNA and manipulations with it is fraud ? The same way (we can now be pretty certain) “germ theory” is ?

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Ben,

    Very good question. The “discoverer” of DNA’s “double helix” was strung out on LSD leading up to and prior to the Nobel Prize Discovery! He was a drug addict at Uni that receives praise to this very day!

    You are 100% in tune to the BS, I can assure you. Your intuition is excellent 🙂

    Google Search “Francis Crick LSD” first page results:

    Francis Crick, DNA & LSD: Psychedelic History in the Age of … › psychedelic-press-blog
    May 5, 2015 — However, Crick was known to have used LSD later in his life. His biographer, having spoken to his widow, ascertained that although Crick claimed …

    The brain on LSD revealed: first scans show how the drug … › 2016-04-11-brain-on-lsd
    May 4, 2016 — Coronavirus (COVID-19) response. The Francis Crick Institute is working at the forefront of the scientific response to coronavirus, volunteering …

    Francis Crick: Discoverer of the Genetic Code | Matt Ridley › Books
    Crick was given (not sold) LSD on several occasions from 1967 onwards by Henry Todd, who met the Cricks through his girlfriend. Todd did know Kemp, with whom he …

    ‘francis crick lsd’? T… | Hacker News › item
    Crick had told him that some Cambridge academics used LSD in tiny amounts as a thinking tool, to liberate them from preconceptions and let their genius wander …

    Did Francis Crick take lsd? – Quora › Did-Francis-Crick-take-lsd
    Nov 5, 2014 — No. · The story appears to be a conflation of the fact that Crick occasionally spoke about LSD and the implications about consciousness, and the fact that Watson …
    2 answers

    4 votes:
    No. LSD was barely known at the time, and it was not a common recreational drug. The story …
    Why do Steve Jobs and Watson and Crick tell that LSD …
    3 answers
    Jun 13, 2015
    Who are some famous scientists who tried LSD? – Quora
    3 answers
    Sep 15, 2015
    More results from

    TIL that Francis Crick was high off of LSD, when he deduced … › todayilearned › comments › njoet
    Sep 17, 2015 — Pro tip, OP: use simple keywords related to your news in the “search reddit” bar before posting (you know, like “Francis Crick LSD”, which shows a similar …
    Franics Crick was high on LSD when he discovered DNA …
    Aug 13, 2015
    TIL, Francis Crick, who discovered the double helix, was high …
    Aug 13, 2015
    Francis Crick, the nobel winning scientist, was high on LSD …
    Aug 29, 2015
    If Francis Crick discovered the double helix structure on LSD …
    Nov 28, 2016
    More results from

    Was Francis Crick high on LSD when he discovered the … › questions › was-fr…
    FRANCIS CRICK, the Nobel Prize-winning father of modern genetics, was under the influence of LSD when he first deduced thedouble-helix structure of DNA …
    1 answer

    Top answer:
    Biographer, Matt Ridley, reported in the New York Times that Crick experimented with marijuana and LSD. In the book “Francis Crick: Discoverer of the …
    Related searches

    Liked by 1 person

  9. In support of Stephers’ brilliant writeup, and bringing graphene oxide a little more into the mix, here is an email I received from a friend, and my response.

    “Stumbled on another link about GO toxicity.

    Click to access a03f3bcb-90c3-480b-b640-6b4632e62284.pdf

    “If GO was introduced to the consumerism society few years ago, than its toxicity should be the first in the research for bringing up the symptoms of respiratory issues, blood clotting, etc…. Right? It’s obvious they’re employing the same tactics as uses in numerous cases before Covid – some new chemical is launched to the markets without any research into its devastating side effects on human health.”

    My response:
    “The link you sent is a good one, clearly spelling out specific damages resulting from the generation of “reactive oxygen species” due to exposure to GO, and the negative chain of events following that.  Of course we’re talking zebrafish, but among the few other studies on toxicity referred to in the introduction, lung cell cultures and literal lungs of rodents look to be especially vulnerable to damages from graphene oxide….which fact leads the alert person to notice the deliberate and coincidental dispersion of GO within our environment, and to correlate this dispersion to the development of the covid disease (primarily but not exclusively lung disease) during the time of this plandemic.

    What you bring up, GO exposure in the consumerism society, is what I’m referring to as coincidental.  Toxicity basically ignored or brushed over.  Like, if you wear a scuba outfit with graphene content, does GO leach from the suit into your body?  how much?, etc., and still ignoring the most basic realities (which, as you imply, should have been thoroughly studied long before this nanomaterial was included in anything) of a poison effect from this wonder material.  Countless safety questions remain unanswered re all of these products/usages.

    Deliberate dispersion (in order to promote/seed the development of covid disease) might include masks containing GO, swabs (pcr) containing GO, etc.  Other means of dispersion not even suspected yet, aerosol (chemtrail) dispersion?.  And all of this topped off by the “vaccines”, which may still contain other specific ingredients not yet “discovered”.

    A lot of alt people are screaming “intentional genocide”, etc.  My take is that damage and death due to GO acquired from the environment or from the jabs is simply viewed by the controllers as acceptable collateral damage, but not the primary goal in itself.  I think that we are seeing the pursuit of the wet dream of the transhumanists among the ruling class (think Klaus), who want to toy with and manipulate human biology, for the sake of control, profit, and (as near as possible) total domination. 

    Graphene (in the moment) is seen as the material that can help make that happen.  If a suitable level can be maintained in the human body (not so toxic that it kills everybody, but also not excreted too quickly), then its magnetic/electrical/conductive qualities can make it the link (within the body) to various methods of control/stimulation/monitoring/surveillance, etc. by sources external to the body, via various manifestations of Big Bro.

    Stephers latest post ( is an intense look at how intent these Klaus Schwab type characters are to “computerize” human life, to turn natural human bio into controllable and manipulable data driven bio machinery.

    There are many articles on the Orwell site (, where detection of GO in the vaccines by La Quinta Columna was first announced (

    The following video is an excellent summation and detailing, using many cited “science” papers, of much of the above re graphene and how it fits into a system of control.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I forgot about pdfs turning into their own window. If anyone wants to read that pdf more easily, the link is “”


    2. Just tossing questions out:

      The human body is already a bioelectric organism. There’s tons of research on that already. What purpose would “doping” (a legitimate term meaning to introduce a foreign substance into something) a human body serve? Perhaps to achieve a sensitivity to a certain range of frequencies …in which naturally occurring “sensitivity” is lacking? Or to “amplify” effects?

      I don’t know, just asking.

      Again, the body is already bioelectric with its own sensitivities.


    3. That’s interesting. I’ll have to do some reading I guess. Didn’t know about the GO toxicity and its impact.

      I do agree with the notion that GO may be present in many items already on the market. Airborne and in water supplies- yes, by industrialized process’ toxic releases from manufacturing sites. On the test swabs – very possibly too.

      However, regarding the proof of GO in the vaccine from Quinta columna team – if you check on the net, you can see some GO being sold for research purposes, like here:

      …it is completely black, non transparent liquid.

      If you check Covid jab vials for Moderna:

      …you can notice it’s completely transparent liquid, with no traces of any color.

      If the jab content was 99% GO as claimed by Quinta columna team, it should’ve been black and non-transparent. No? It seems reasonable to me. Or are Quintas saying that since GO in jabs is PEGylated, it changes its physical properties from black to transparent?


      1. MiniMe –

        To address part of of your question (I’ll get back to the transparency issue – no pun intended – in another comment) – RE: the amount of GO “content” and LQC’s claim . . . This is a comment I left on July 26 on my “Calling All Critical Thinkers” post (

        July 26, 2021 at 12:56 pm
        Mary –

        One final note . . . The Spanish group, La Quinta Columna clarifies here how they came up with their “percentage” (reflective of the amount of electromagnetic emission, NOT the amount of physical material present) of graphene in vials – in this case, a Moderna vial:

        It is crucial to understand how nanoscale materials operate, and to grasp that they are not molecular, as we have come to ordinarily know and experience physical matter. Thus, one would not be able to perceive with the five physical senses that there is graphene oxide present (in any amount, for that matter) without the use of advanced technology (such as an atomic force microscope).

        In this case, however, one way to “measure” the presence of graphene/graphene oxide (GO) – for purposes of qualification or quantification – is via spectroscopy. Here is more context to understand spectroscopy and how it can be used to characterize/determine the presence of graphene/ GO: “RAMAN SPECTROSCOPY OF GRAPHENE AND RELATED MATERIALS”


        1. MiniMe –

          On the issue of GO transparency . . .

          In mid-July, OregonMatt sent me this 2018 study with photos of clear graphene oxide solutions: In that instance, sodium dithionite was added to “reduce” the GO (remove oxygen in order to make it more transparent).

          There are other means to reduce GO to achieve transparency, with sonification being one (from 2015): As is noted in that 2015 paper (which also experiments with PEG as a way to attempt to make it more transparent), sedimentation of GO flakes is certainly an issue (even after achieving successful dispersion in an aqueous solution); and in this case, that is why the Takeda recalls (finding contaminants that are black/magnetic and look like stainless steel) may be highly revealing. Finally, it should be emphasized that pure graphene (not graphene oxide) is notable for being a transparent material: see here and here (also addresses issues of optical transparency with GO).

          On the issue of GO toxicity (which I have previously discussed) . . .

          A March 2021 study (in vitro and in vivo): “Graphene Oxide and Reduced Graphene Oxide Exhibit Cardiotoxicity Through the Regulation of Lipid Peroxidation, Oxidative Stress, and Mitochondrial Dysfunction”
 ” . . . in vivo experiments also revealed that GO or rGO treatment damaged the myocardial tissues and changed the activities of several myocardial enzymes and lipid peroxidation indicators in the myocardial tissues.”


        2. “…In that instance, sodium dithionite was added to “reduce” the GO (remove oxygen in order to make it more transparent).”

          Removimg oxide part from GO would reduce it back to graphene, which means we’re then discussing different material / chemical altogether. The focus being on GO allegedly found in jabs, I find it weak in argument against GO being black and non-transparent, especially in concetration of 99% of vial’s entire volume.

          “…one would not be able to perceive with the five physical senses that there is graphene oxide present (in any amount, for that matter) without the use of advanced technology (such as an atomic force microscope).”

          I strongly disagree. You can’t change physical properties of coloration by reducing particle’s size. If something is black, it’s black regardless of the size. Iay not be able to observe a single nano particle since it’s to miniscule to focus on withy eyes, but if I have a pile of nano particles in one stack, I can suddenly see some of its properties, like i.e. coloration, I can also weight it to study its specific weight etc.


          1. MiniMe –

            In reference to your statement: “You can’t change physical properties of coloration by reducing particles’s size.”. . . When it comes to nanomaterials, it may be quite the contrary: see here “Size effect of nanomaterials” (see p. 11-12 on “Optical Properties”), here “Nanoparticles Types, Properties and Uses”, and here “The Size of Matter: Why Properties Change at the Nanoscale”


          2. Minime-

            “especially in concetration of 99% of vial’s entire volume.” The percentage is not referring to the vial’s entire volume. From Stephers’ comment above: “La Quinta Columna clarifies here how they came up with their “percentage” (reflective of the amount of electromagnetic emission, NOT the amount of physical material present) of graphene in vials.”

            Ok, so we’re dealing with electromagnetic transmission, and a percentage of that, not a percentage of the total volume of the vial. So I take it that LQC is saying that the electromagnetic transmission was almost entirely produced by graphene.

            A question. How much of a nanoscale material (individual particles being invisible to the naked eye), no matter the color, must be put into a clear solution before the solution loses its colorless transparency? At this link (from above) figure 1 shows a CLEAR graphene oxide solution. Exactly how many nanoscale GO particles are present in that solution? We don’t know exactly, but we see that when sodium dithionite is added, within 45 minutes the GO has been reduced to many visible agglomerates of black graphene. Magic. Clear to black. I’d say that there could be a decent payload of GO in the transparent solution in that Moderna vial.


            1. I know you’re being slightly sarcastic with the magic claim. It made me smile, so I’ll start with this.

              OK, I admit – I’m not the all-knowing guy. At the moment, I can’t answer exactly what is going on in that experiment you’re referring in terms of mechanics. Since there’s no magic involved, there has to be a mechanical answer to what makes the change in coloration of GO solution.

              My line of thinking is along the fact that nano particles are measuring only a few nanometers are below the wavelength range of visible light (380 to 780 nm), but they can absorb light of specific wavelengths. It’s actually not absorbing, but channeling of charge=light wich is occurring. GO being a single layered material is possibly channeling visible spectrum instead of reflecting it. But I’m not that smart to be able to figure out what is the correct mechanism to properly explain this phenomenon.

              Also, the experiment says:

              “Figure 8. Reduction of graphene oxide through light emission. The camera flash converts the grey graphene oxide (1.) into black graphene (2.)”

              I really don’t appreciate appealing to authority or an author, but you can disregard my claim of GO being black, and choose authors’ claim of GO being gray in color. The claim of GO being transparent is lacking.

              “Figure 10. Left: graphene oxide has formed an aqueous suspension; right: graphene has formed a stable suspension within the paraffin”

              This picture shows black, non-transparent suspension.

              The next experiment from the same paper says, among else:”…The clear liquid is visually examined with a method utilizing the Tyndall effect…”

              The liquid they referred to is “aqueous demineralized graphene oxide suspension”. No percentage or other content of GO is provided. Also, the clear liquid claim is not backed with a picture of it. The first picture from your link shows the GO solution already mixed with two chemicals, namely “0.45 g sodium dithionate and 1.8 g sodium hydroxide are dissolved in 10 ml of distilled water are added…”

              Looking at the series of pictures, it is not absolutely clear whether black dots are being dispersed equally in the whole suspension, or are they slowly being released from the visible upper layer of unknown chemical composition floating on the very top of vials’ suspension.

              What I suspect is going on, is that in miniscule volume within an aqueous suspension, GO is not visible to human eye for reasons I don’t yet understand.

              Anyway, I’ll try to get a correct answer about the transparency issue of GO. It has triggered my curiosity. Merci beaucoup


            2. As an analogy, I’ll quote myself and expand on it: “What I suspect is going on, is that in miniscule volume within an aqueous suspension, GO is not visible to human eye for reasons I don’t yet understand.”

              When you look at the tap water poured into a glass cup, you can see through it. Tap water is transparent. However, it’s content is not only H20, but miniscule amounts of calcite, traces of minerals, salts and/or pesticides, fertilizers, etc. But the water is still visually transparent.

              As long as the percentage of suspended material in the water is low enough, water will appear transparent. The same logic applies to GO being suspended in the water – until enough of it is in that water, you won’t be able to notice it.


              1. Please take a $15 laser pointer, as used in skool or workplace (oh, how we love standing in front of a crowd of idiots with a laser pointer!), and shine on water in clear glass.

                I would be interested in what one sees regarding suspended material.


              2. “Also, the clear liquid claim is not backed with a picture of it. The first picture from your link shows the GO solution already mixed with two chemicals, namely “0.45 g sodium dithionate and 1.8 g sodium hydroxide are dissolved in 10 ml of distilled water are added…”

                A little correction here to what you said above. The first picture of figure 11 DOES show the clear GO solution, the chemicals not having been added yet. What you see in the second image is the same, but now with the 10 ml of distilled water (with dissolved chemicals) added. And then the magic show begins.

                I’m not playing graphene expert here, so I’m getting an education in this matter as well. There may be more to the story, but this example shows a clear GO solution, which is then ‘proved’ by the results of the chemical reaction reduction to a significant (quite visible) amount of graphene.

                You also said “What I suspect is going on, is that in miniscule volume within an aqueous suspension, GO is not visible to human eye for reasons I don’t yet understand.”…..The question I asked in my previous comment was how many invisible nanoparticles would be needed to colorize the solution? Now there might be processes (Stephers referred to a couple) by which GO could be rendered transparent. I haven’t investigated those. But, if they can “camouflage” the GO even to some extent, that would mean that even more (if desired) could be suspended in the solution.

                However, based on what we see in that figure 11, it appears to me that clear GO solutions are a real thing. And, based on the amount of black graphene that precipitated, it appears that there would be plenty of ammunition for the jab.


                1. You’ve overlooked the two pictures going against your argument, showing it completely black.

                  Yes, we agree on the most significant point – GO can exist in aqueous solution. Beside the question of how much of GO is needed in the solution to become visible, it raises much more significant question – how much of it is needed to enter our bodies to start producing harm?

                  Liked by 1 person

      2. The assumption that nano graphene must be black is false. Stephers posted a link a while back about the use of graphene to strengthen plexiglass, which is still transparent. Note that bullet proof glass can have aluminum added, which by itself is not transparent but the aluminum glass is. For centuries lead has been added to glass which although 18% to 40% lead is still quite clear.


        1. GO is black in color, this is no assumption, regardless of its state – powder or aquatic solution.

          Strength of bulletproof, ballistic glass is due to laminated production process and not because of metal composition of the glass itself. The reason it’s impenetrable is because of plastic sheets are added in-between glass sheets, layered on top one another.

          Adding metals to glass in the production process’ is antique way of coloring it, but this has no influence on glass’ strength.


          1. MiniMe –

            Depending on the method used to produce GO (and if colloidal or aqueous solution), graphene oxide is NOT always black. In fact, it is often yellow or brownish in color (when fully dispersed and without sediment or aggregation due to van der Waals forces): A paper I linked in response to you above also demonstrates a tube of GO dispersion that is yellowish in color. Have you personally worked with GO in a lab? If so, are you saying you always produce a black solution?


            1. No, I’m not saying I have personal experience with GO nor that I work in a lab.

              You can check the link OM has left in reply to me, it clearly shows pictures of GO being grey in color when they produce it. When they make suspension of GO in distilled water, it’s black and non-transparent when concentrated or lumped together in abundance.

              Like said above, depending on the size of a nanomaterial being observed, these nano particles will only reflect light when their size is within the spectrum of visible light. If clumped (or clotted) together, the same applies – their size becomes large enough to reflect certain wavelength of visible spectrum.

              Also, photons can be spun-up depending on the underlying charge channeling, which is i.e. the real reason why our sky appears blue in color despite atmosphere being a transparent mixture of gasses. It has nothing to do with Rayleigh scattering and mainstream explanation of the same lacks a real physical mechanism.

              Let’s not forget what was in focus of my initial thought – the claim of GO being in the covid jabs. If in quantities low enough, we can’t notice it without a spectroscopy or TEM. And even then, one has to know what to look for. Most likely, different nano sizes AND elements have specific EM properties and their charge channeling capacity is unique. This is completely new territory for me, so I’ll refrain from going to deep into the physics of it until I can comprehend what’s going on in Mathisian physical terms.


  10. Stephers, thank you for another interesting article in this series. There is a lot of rhetoric and pompous talk of “singularity” associated with these “bioengineering sorcerers”, but what have they actually accomplished? Where are the tangible applications that would justify their “high hopes”? Biottech has been touted for many years as a profitable investment, and so billions and trillions have been invested. Where are the results? What has “synthetic biology” actually synthesized? They are cashing in with the Covid scam, but all they have to offer seems to be snake oil in high-tech disguise.


      1. Agree, TILLANDSIAUSNEOIDES, however, I did think the resignations may indicate a shift in commitment to the narrative/hoax around the governments’ totalitarian “control measures.” The resignations may amount to nothing. Many are unaware, and “sell the imaginary virus” unknowingly. I do not know these two individuals, or their level of knowledge.


  11. All these Dr Frankensteins’ must need funding to do their experiments. And that makes this transhumanism business a money game, like everything else.

    The usurious monetary system must have exponential growth to survive. As there is now a total disconnection between productive economies and money printing, which for 18 months, on top of the past 108 years, has been created with interest like there is no tomorrow maybe some people in exalted positions have the idea there will be no tomorrow. And all the Bitcoins, Phoenix coins and Bail-ins won’t be able to put them back together again.
    They will be working on a way to prevent that, of course, but their eugenics policies won’t be working in their favour. So the music will stop, one day.

    Maybe after that happens mankind’s focus will shift to consciousness from materiality. He and she can then breathe some fresh air and dust off Antoine Bechamp’s workings. Soon after the archontic hackers may realise why, no matter how hard they tried to manufacture a bionic man, Pleomorphism with its power of morphology rendered their attempts useless.

    Then all mankind can chuck any remaining pretentions along with the digital distractions and go for a hike … in the buff. Skinny dip in a mountain stream. Live in their organic bodies and not abuse them.

    Maybe there is some message within the Ovid part of the C…Ovid.


    1. See Ovid, Metamorphosis, Book 1, line 9; Arthur Golding translation:

      “Of things at strife among themselves for want of order due.”


  12. Oh, the Graphene, or Grapheme Oxide!!
    Suspended solids, 2D material, Black or Grey??

    OK, listen up, please!!

    Until one describes Graphene’s *”FUNCTION**, then all masturbatory undertakings of the Graphene’s MECHANICS is pointless.

    In other words, one’s description of the Mechanics (which we appears to be current reading) fail to describe THE MECHANICS OF WHAT?!?!

    What is being described here?? Anyone??


    1. “Black or Grey??” How’s about clear, Rastus?

      Well, once we get the color (or lack of) right :), we’re describing a particular type of nanoparticle, one that has superb magnetic/electrical/conductive qualities, one that (once it gets inside the body) likes to mess with various organs (lungs, etc.), and it can even pierce cell walls if its edges become “frayed” from wear and tear as it tumbles about inside you.

      A nanoparticle that is being widely dispersed in our environment, and that the rulers would like to inject into everyone. That’s all.


      1. Not “you” you, Matt, I’m just tossing this out.

        Really!! “Rabbit Hole” doesn’t even come close to what is being discussed.

        There is a logical order which needs to be followed.

        Describe WHAT
        Describe How

        We have not even begun to discuss what and more importantly, for WHAT PURPOSE!

        Mark indicated as much in previous post, indicating an Accounting professional has his head screwed on right when it comes to Enginering.

        100% and kudos…really. Most people don’t even get that!

        -Mechanics of Function

        Radio: To Broadcast RF energy carrying information.
        Mechanics: Transistors, Diodes, Power Amplifiers, etc.

        Let’s clearly define Function of Graphene first, please, else we are wrapping ourselves around an axle


  13. One needs to describe/define the purpose of a Transmission before getting into the nuts/bolts of synchro rings, torque converters etc!

    You’re describing gears and synchro rings without even knowing the purpose of which you speak.

    For what purpose, please!


  14. We are not the makers of this harmful snake oil guarded by industrial secrecy. For us, this is an investigation into the unknown. All lines of thought that somehow make sense are legitimate.


  15. What if…
    Maybe… just maybe, the whole story of GO (graphene oxide) is launched by THEM thru controlled opposition, the same as G5 maybe is. What if… that there is nothing of importance concerning those hypes. That everything is thoroughly concerted to make us go the wrong way. It seems to me that too many theories are launched in past period with purpose to distract us from their real goal and many are falling to them. We are stuffed with new “conspiracy” theories daily, so that THEY can make us confused, look stupid, discredit us and hide their real goal. I just can’t clearly see what their goal is (yet), but…. the only thing that I see clearly in past 1.5 year, is that THEY are making billions of $, collapsing economies world-wide and successfully (for the time being) controlling and dividing masses. I just don’t know. Maybe… just maybe…those vaccines are nothing, pure placebo. And their function is merely to divide us. Maybe those adverse reactions that some have are just “conflict resolution” phase (GNM). I don’t know…. or at least I’, not sure. Any thoughts dear friends ?

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Too many references to the Matrix, not enough to Jurassic Park. If virologists are engaged in a shit storm of nonsense, self aggrandizing and completely driven by funding, why not the rest of these clowns? The quest … live free.


    1. Precisely.
      But it is so transparent. How come that they invented vaccines more than 200 years ago, for 2 centuries they have spent probably more than trillions of $ for all kind of researches, and today they can’t make a single one that can give you real (100%) protection from a freakin’ common flu ?
      How come that they “discovered” (identified) DNA more than 150 years ago, and again with trillions $ of funding and researching they came up with… ? With what ? With NOTHING !
      What happened with that thing… ah, “Hadron Colider”, again billions of $… and the result ? Where’s freakin’ result ??? NOTHING !
      Space research… and so on and on and on….
      All this time, they just sell us stories that they discovered something new, that they made unbelievable progress in this or that… but at the end… they got NOTHING !
      They are supposed to be some kind of scientists, vast number of them with “titles” and “honours”.
      And we are supposed to say “Yeah, they are the people of trust, scholars, distinguished, why not believe them.”
      And no one, no authority, not even those who funds their s*it… stands up and say “Whoo, wait a minute, where is the result of my (our) investment ?”. It’s unbelievable.
      I don’t know. Maybe I’m wrong.
      But it looks to me that they nothing more than artists of money-grab and lying.


      1. … and they’re all Phoenicians! lol (as you’re thread is reminiscent of ‘mileswmathis’, i just had to throw that line in as a nod to said source of black/gray/white propaganda! RGB-Y1 out!!!


  17. Thank you so much Steve. As a mother of three children (two big, one small) who are heading out in different manifestations in the world these days, I alternate between absolute almost paralytic fear and then some strange, internal calm that drives me forward. My entire modus operandi has become now to ensure that my offspring remain natural and not fall into this stream, and yet I shudder for the future, and wonder who will encourage them in later decades, when my husband and I are dead and gone. And then their children, and their childrens’ children, etc etc.. At which point will future generations forget where all this began? I feel despair; there truly seems to be no one coming to help us. We have allowed this digital prison to surround us and encase us, and the worst thing is, so many friends and family can’t even see it, can’t see that those of us who rail against it are not just some lunatic fringe people, but just people who want humanity to continue on pretty much as it has so far.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Here’s another link I found while searching for some answers: . Check out their other articles as well, they go deep and wide into many rabbit holes.

        At above link they too write about the vials contaminated with GO. I also learned about one Stu Peters there, who broke the story by making an interview with an alleged Pfizer (?) insider.

        They write:”The coupling of PEG to protein is also called protein polyglycolization, which is essentially a drug delivery technology. ” They then bring in the China angle, since these PEG poisons are massively produced at SINOPEG, but fail to mention that there arr tens of similar factories elsewhere, USA included.

        They mention Quinta columna as well, then list a few research papers and patents, making a very solid argument and giving this thought in conclusion: “The graphene nano-ribbons mentioned above, if you payed attention, are most likely what La Quinta Columna and others noticed on their microscopes.”

        In my opinion, the evidence presented is inconclusive without further analysis, but considering everything known about Bigpharma’s MO and their criminal record with poisons sold as medicines, this should be more than enough for everybody to demand a truly independent analysis of the jab before injecting themselves.

        Maybe here at POM we could raise a small amount, buy one or two vials and get it analysed? Full spectroscopy and a TEM analysis should be made to confirm these findings mentioned above. I wonder how much would it cost to have all that done? Which lab could be trusted for doing it?

        Thanks for bringing the subject to my attention. I appreciate it, even though I may have been previously aggressive in arguing against it. I wasn’t going to jab myself in any case, but knowing the facts is what could save many others.


        1. MiniMe, if you could figure out how to do such an analysis, I would be thrilled to contribute money to the cause. Mark’s decision not to monetize POM lends much to the site’s credibility, so from my perspective, raising money directly through the blog might be problematic. But if, in future comments, you can link me to an off-site place to contribute, I suspect I’m not the only one here who would contribute.


          1. Well, the “figure it out” part ought to be done by some lab professional… since I’m not one. If GO is in the vials, spectroscopy should show it, as well as TEM, maybe even a less powerful microscope would be enough, as shown at that German conference linked above.

            If this proof of concept is repeated in each of the countries infected with Mass Hysteria, maybe people would refrain from further poisoning themselves by jabbing. The problem with this important news about vials’ true content being suppressed should be solved too. This part can’t be bought though, so I have no idea how to reach masses on a grand scale.

            In fact, I do have an idea – hijacking the media’s channels in prime time and inserting this kind of real news into the program should do it. Sounds like a script from some sci-fi movie, but it could be done, imo. We’d very likely have thousands of insiders assisting the cause and we only need 5mins of airtime to win. Sounds epic if we could pull it off.


        2. MiniMe –

          I appreciate your brainstorming . . . If we were to attempt to collaborate in an investigation, I would be happy to provide samples of graphene oxide, reduced graphene oxide, and graphene nano platelets (which I currently have in my possession), with which to compare/contrast to vials of “vaccines.” For some reason, I have not yet seen a very clear, coherent comparison being made (except for some examples from LQC). I sense this is necessary to determine if what is being observed is truly indicative of such nanomaterials. Barring any expenses, we would need to find someone who already has the necessary tools for analyses: atomic microscope and various spectrometers/spectroscopes (TEM or otherwise). These are exorbitantly expensive, so best to gain access to someone (trustworthy) who already has these. Access to vials may not be expensive, but, rather, would entail finding a doctor and/or pharmacist (again, trustworthy, even if anonymous) willing to donate clearly labeled/tracked samples.

          That said – and while I am not opposed to such an undertaking – there may be some simpler strategies that we can each do individually . . . My suggestion is to perhaps put our hard-earned money to better (and more intimate and tangible) use, which could include persuading close friends and/or loved ones – who have been jabbed – to voluntarily submit to live blood cell analysis, and offer to pay (or pay for half) for this analysis (as it costs a pretty penny – from $150-$250 a pop). I submit that this analysis may not only be potentially revealing, but may prevent them from future jabbing (“updates” AKA boosters). If several of us could achieve this exploration (with the willing consent of the jabbed), then we may be able to pool our data together to present here at POM. For the record, I (unjabbed) am scheduled to get my own live blood cell analysis early this week (a follow-up to an analysis I had several years ago), and I hope to persuade a loved one (one who was jabbed) to do the same. The comparative results could be revealing.


  18. The “novel vaccines” for COVID (either DNA or mRNA) are nucleic acid-based:

    RE: Nucleic Acid Memory (NAM)

    “In collaboration with Will Hughes, Reza M. Zadegan, Victor Zhirnov (SRC), George Church (Harvard) and Micron Technology, Inc. DNA is being used to to store digital data in DNA.

    Micron Technology collaborates with DARPA as part of STARnet (launched in early 2013, with a focus on nanomaterials/nanostructures for computation applications and “swarm platforms”):

    “Working together, DARPA, along with companies from the semiconductor and defense industries—Applied Materials, Global Foundries, IBM, Intel, Micron, Raytheon, Texas Instruments and United Technologies—have established the Semiconductor Technology Advanced Research Network (STARnet). This effort builds a large multi-university research community to look beyond current evolutionary directions to make discoveries that drive technology innovation beyond what can be imagined for electronics today. The universities are organized into six centers, each focused on a specific challenge.

    On Micron Technology’s presence in Singapore:

    “Micron is strategically located in Singapore to efficiently and effectively accommodate its Asia customers, while also serving as the base of worldwide operations. Micron continues to expand its presence here, reflective of the fast-growing and expanding opportunities to serve its customers throughout the region . . . Singapore is also home to Micron’s largest manufacturing footprint with three fabrication facilities and a test and assembly facility. Micron’s presence in Singapore also includes a technology centre supporting innovation across the company . . .”

    Info on Dr. Gurtej Singh Sandhu, VP/Fellow of Advanced Technology Developments at Micron Technology (USA):

    GURTEJ SINGH SANDHU has been recognized as ONE of the TOP FIVE INVENTORs in the WORLD, as measured by number of U.S. utility patents (1,284 U.S. utility patents as of Dec., 2017). WIKIPEDIA read him as Indian inventor in the fields of thin films processes and materials, VLSI and Semiconductor device fabrication. Currently he is senior Director/Fellow of Advanced Technology developments Micron Technology, a $20 billion organization which has also been named Among Top 100 Global Innovators for Sixth Straight Year. Dr. Gurtej Singh Sandhu (top 4th World Rank Scientist) has also been declared the sole recipient of Andrew S. Grove award 2018 by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, USA.”

    It should be noted that Micron Technology is a leader in 5G and AI – see here:;
    and here:

    The company is also a central player in COVID relief – particularly in Singapore:

    Micron also aims to turn your bodily fluids into data:

    Keep your eye on Micron!


  19. On nucleic acids (RNA and DNA) and graphene . . . “Graphene/Nucleic Acid Nanobiointerface” (June 2015)

    “The integration of nucleic acids with graphene-based materials has been substantially advanced in the past few years, which achieved amazing properties and functions, thereby exhibiting attractive potential applications in biosensing, diagnostics, drug screening and biomedicine.”

    “. . . particular emphasis is directed to the exploration of their biosensing and biomedical applications, including small molecule detection, protein and DNA sensing/sequencing, as well as gene delivery and therapy.”

    “Although expected to be a single-layer or few-layer carbon sheet, the term graphene has been used loosely in the literature, which represents not only pristine graphene but also many other derivatives with some similar characteristics, all of which we include under the umbrella of graphene. In this review, most of referred graphene-related derivatives is graphene oxide (GO), which is obtained by deep oxidation of graphite and subsequent exfoliation of the resulting graphite oxide, which may contain a high proportion of oxygen, in some cases higher than that of carbon. Due to the ease of preparation in large quantities from available graphite, GO has been one of the preferred graphene derivatives as catalysts, sensing platform and other useful substrate.”

    “As the expanding of the applications of graphene-nucleic acids nanobiointerface in chemical/biomedical sensing and imaging, the general population is more likely to be exposed to graphene either directly or indirectly, which has prompted considerable attention about human health and safety issues related to graphene. So, before graphene-based bioconjugates can be safely used for in vivo biological sensor applications, especially when human bodies are involved, a large amount of work is needed to be done to clarify the long-term exposure effects and their methods of creation to different cells, tissues, and organs. Although considerable experimental data related to graphene toxicity at the molecular, cellular, and whole animal levels have been published, the results were often conflicting. Therefore, to establish standardized and reliable methods for evaluating the biological effects including toxicity of graphene-nucleic acids biointerface is needed but has not yet been developed, which would be of profound significance to in vivo and in vitro applications of graphene. Furthermore, so far, most of the measurements were carried out in ideal environment, such as pure buffer solutions. Clearly, the real physiological sample is far more complex and will absolutely draw into a range of interfering and fouling effects, which remains challenging in biomedical applications.* (my emphasis)” (p 55-56)


  20. In my “Mass Zombification” post about biohacking (, I quoted from Yuval Harari’s 2018 WEF presentation, “Will the Future be Human?”.

    Following is a detailed description of Harari’s 2020 WEF presentation on “hackable humans”: I pulled a few quotes:

    “We are no longer mysterious souls; we are now hackable animals.”

    “In the coming decades AI and biotechnology will give us godlike abilities to re-engineer life and even to create completely new life forms . . .”

    “After four billion years of organic life shaped by natural selection we are about to enter a new era of inorganic life shaped by intelligent design — our intelligent design is going to be the new driving force of the evolution of life . . . In using our new divine powers of creation, we might make mistakes on a cosmic scale.”

    “The result . . . might be a race of humans who are very intelligent and very disciplined, but lack compassion, lack artistic sensitivity, and lack spiritual depth.”


  21. Michael/B1:

    Even though the original document was deleted, the “Spartacus” letter can be viewed here: ZeroHedge had posted it yesterday (sans the References) and it is still there, which may give a hint as to its accuracy (or lack thereof) and its intentions.

    I encourage POM readers to take a stab at reviewing it, and hopefully take some jabs at it (feel free to comment in this thread), as there are some glaring issues right off the bat – in my opinion. I would rather not become too distracted with teasing it all out (despite having read through it a couple times). There is much discussion in the document implying there is a weaponized virus, with repeated implications of gain-of-function. After ALL this time, where is the evidence of this?

    Of course, within 24 hours of its “release”, this document (reinforcing a virus, which has NEVER been properly/officially isolated) went “viral” prior to being “deleted.”

    Yes, there are some tidbits about graphene oxide being in the injections, and some brief mention of transhumanist objectives (as well as Charles Lieber); yet even then, there are some inaccuracies and lack of validity in the author’s assertions.

    What purpose does this document really serve?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, Stephers. I did not read this Spartacus document past the summary. There are too many problematic claims that I associate with disinformation: there is bioweapon virus, made in a Wuhan lab, which causes a new disease (a blood vessel disease), which has evolved into a pandemic.

      As I see things, there is no virus, no new disease, and no pandemic, of course.

      Except the health issues, sometimes lethal, caused by the vaccines, and maybe stuff released into the public via other vectors such as masks or any sort of consumer products. Collateral poisoning, not biowarfare.

      Liked by 2 people

  22. Posted on October 2, 2021 by Ramola D, “Dr. Carrie Madej Reveals Tentacled Self-Aware Organism (Also Self-Assembling Nanobots & Nanolipids) in Moderna, Johnson & Johnson Vaccine Vials, Possibly Connected to Hydra Vulgaris ‘Model Organism’ and Human Genome Project: //

    “Dr. Madej . . . mentions that she found that the hydra vulgaris is being studied in cancer research in mRNA usage for drug delivery along with gold nanorobots and DNA-coated gold nanoparticles . . . “

    “Clearly, she says this opens up a new field of inquiry for all serious researchers regarding how these organisms are being used and studied in the Human Genome Project, their connections to the Humans 2.0 transhumanism project, and their implications for the current ongoing conversion of human biology to transhuman biology–a non-consented human-transformation project which really should be named a major scientific Crime Against Humanity.”

    “This latter, Dr. Christiane Northrup notes, is something that has been ongoing for a long time through the aerosols, the water, the chem trails: we probably all have these and other organisms, she says–both actual biological organisms and parasites at the micro level, as well as synthetic biology with AI-fibres or carbon nanotubes, Morgellons’ fibres–in our bodies and we all need to work on removing these parasites from our bodies. She mentions detox protocols from Gene Decode (Blessed 2 Teach) and alfalfa baths to draw out the organisms.”


  23. Ha, Academic Jones is back !

    If you don’t (piece of) mind, I’ll keep it short to save us all the necessary time to dedicate to our aSHIFT. ; active detachment from what we all (should) know, a System Which Is Hostile To Us.

    And after already the 10th (wow !) installment in your MIPS, some questions start Mississippi burning not only on my lips, but because of my objective approach there is always someone else who sees the same phenomenon ; we aLIGN.

    So, sparing us the need to wade through woods of word salad, let me ask you some general and specific questions such that we get to the core as quickly as possible:

    A – do you embrace a generic skeptic philosophy (= guidance, loving wisdom) and if so,what are your criteria, benchmarks by which you assess the validity of something you get from some carny online or offline ?

    B – what I and many others with me got out of “Fakeology” ; the study of psyops, is that what dominates, the red thread so to say, is the boasting, the peacocking of being bigger than they actually are. These Animal Farmers, the niggajews, are frat boys and gals, psychos, freaks who pose as having grandeur, but in actuality are only as powerful as you grant them to be (aSIDE. ; DETACH, DETOX, DEPROGRAM).

    In none of what I have read from you, and I don’t get piece of mind from going through yet more covert claptrap, you show this is the lesson you got out of it, quite the contrary.

    Are you open to recognizing this view ?

    more concrete
    C – do you believe in (the possibility of) space travel ?
    if so, what makes you do that and have you consulted my own personal unique points research about this most important existential question of humanity?

    D – how about Nukes (nuclear bombs, hydrogen bombs, the likes) and have you informed yourself with anything Rae West has shared about this?

    E – Nuclear Power, do you believe that is real? FYI: I visited Pripyat & Chernobyl in 2011 (when I still believed in atomic chain reactions), just before coming to Colombia, I have shared some of my photos @ Discord

    F – what about the V1 & V2 rockets and have you familiarized yourself with JLB’s work on it @ ?

    G – idem for ICBMs (“Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles”) ?

    H – Holocaust Story and have you consulted my vast research about that crucial part of twistory to understand the Coronacaust Story ?

    I – do you recognize the for internet truth standards mass psychosis psyop that is Flat Earth? Let me make it clear for all to understand ; those who believe the Earth is Flat are just as crazy as those who believe the Invisible Monster is real.
    They both fall for a mass psychosis psyop scripted by the military industrial complex.

    Seeing such a list of Military Industrial Propaganda Series exposed as myths, how much actual value is hidden in these intricate pieces of academic fear pr0n ?

    another important general question is related to my adventurous life here ; what is your elevator pitch ? What do you say to people who, like me and I am quite sure many of your earliest supporters who got bored with these waning walls of text, do not have the time or interest to delve into what you present as legit information ?

    I ask this because I literally have daily elevator pitches and with the guy I had one morning on the street shouting to me “TAPABOCAS SEÑOR”, I could have referred him to one of your pieces of shitful here, but I chose the more effective approach:

    “no sir, and neither should you. Oxygen is the source of life so restricting that is suicide”

    the man, some years older than me, jogged on and turned into a 12 year old teenage girl, giving his version of “talk to the hand”, crossing his fingers to “exorcise” me over his shoulder.

    Do you think in all earnest I would have had the joy of seeing a grown man being so crazy if I would have chosen your wordy weapons?

    I have better and more important news, better shared elsewhere, to not spoil the flow for the tiny fanclub you have loving this poisonous psyopathic spaghetti you serve us.

    I pass.

    in the meantime, enjoy the free for all more proactive, rather than reactive and passive New Normie stance you and too many others (still) lack (1.5 years on in the First World War, hellloooooo) with OUR WORLD ORDER

    *A + C – remember that Elena Freeland carny, who after 2 fecking minutes started blabbing about “Trump’s Star Wars Space Weapons”, not showing a lick of doubt if that sci-fi story could even be real. It does not necessarily invalidate her other claims, but it certainly shows she is not a critical thinker, so like you, dumps a bowl of unfiltered information on someone else and expects them to sort it out and certainly not be held accountable for the validity of…. anything, really. Which rests my case.


    1. Just to choose one (of the many) derogatory and insulting phrases included in this diatribe, you’ve given us “covert claptrap”.

      Your comment is flagrantly ego-driven “claptrap”. The sound of it is exactly what it’s worth. Nothing…except as an example of marvelous pomposity.


      1. ah, one of her handlers (haha, the self fulshilling prophecy !) already responds for her with a tu quoque fallacy.

        I demonstrate and share my views, how about you matty? Unable to answer a few simple questions?


        1. RE: Gaiasphere,
          It appears to me that you are projecting your own mental shortcomings on Stephers. You and your questions have not at all addressed the issues regarding the “everyware” software being introduced, nor the vast unknowns we all face with the introduction of nanotechnology.


          1. My questions touch upon the root of the problem here, getting to know if Stephers has any ability for critical thinking, which appears to be absent.

            Nanotech plays no role in your or my life. It is an idea introduced into you by military carnies. Who have a LONG history of mind control.

            Nanotech is just as real as Corona. They are Invisible Monsters and the only purpose of the narratives accompanying them is fear-based mind control.

            Lenon Honor has done excellent work on that.

            The vast majority of “surveillance” is psychological, not actual.

            This modern version of Alex Jones is keeping the myths alive. The exact wrong approach.

            Stephers is posting propaganda. She propagates military agendas without even taking a step back to check if this is actually real or another form of the Myth of the Invisible Monster.

            Nukes = Nanotech = Corona = Taliban

            if this is not clear from studying psyops I don’t know where you dedicated your time on. I used my “mental shortcomings” to uncover this.


            1. RE “Nanotech plays no role in your or my life. It is an idea introduced into you by military carnies.”

              You are making this claim, based on your opinion, that because there are other hoaxes nanotechnology does not exist. Your assertion is empty in the face of the vast evidence that nanotech is being invested in and is the subject of a lot of research work.

              I cannot say what percentage of the nanotech stuff is true, but it is not zero, as you seem to claim.


              1. Excellent, finally challenge, thank you Alan.

                You are making this claim, based on your opinion, that because there are other hoaxes nanotechnology does not exist. Your assertion is empty in the face of the vast evidence that nanotech is being invested in and is the subject of a lot of research work.

                I make the claim, with always the silent addendum “until I am proven wrong”. That is the same for the questions on the Impossibility of Space Travel or other topics. But I am not easily satisfied, an empty claim “there is vast evidence” is meaningless without assessing the quality of that evidence.

                Can we please establish the following:

                1 – nanotech is technology at nanometer scale (by definition)
                2 – afaik there are no household “nanoscopes” available, meaning
                3 – the confirmation or rejection of the existence of nanotech is solely in the hands of a select white cloaked few, a cartel is the word I use here, who can allegedly see this Invisible Monster….

                you see where I am going with this ?

                What is the difference between “there is a deadly virus out there, but only we can see it, be very afraid all” and “there are malicious nanobots out there, but only they can see it, and you have to trust us, and certainly not question, challenge or doubt in any way this narrative, be very afraid all” ?

                I cannot say what percentage of the nanotech stuff is true, but it is not zero, as you seem to claim.

                I claim that the relevance is zero. Because even IF it exists, is real, beyond research stages and not of the same “level” as “newly created elements that existed in our hermetically controlled lab for 9.11 milliseconds….”, it should be NPC. Not part of our world. Just like Global Terrorism, Corona, Evil Russkis, HIV, atomic bombs, mass gas chambers and other Myths of Invisible Monsters invented to trap us in.

                And that is the problem with this propaganda series, it is indoctrinating readers (like yourself, coming with armwaiving as “vast evidence”, ok, where, how do you know it is legit?) with the concept already.

                Mental poison.

                The only relevance at this moment in time should be resistance against this crazy Animal Farm. Not as a rabbit staring in the headlights and “trying to understahahahaaaand” (Stephers, really, get a grip on reality), but working around this Building of the Beast, rendering all those “nanotech” irrelevant ; aSHIFT.


                1. RE: Gaiasphere
                  It appears to me that you have constructed mental defenses to protect you from considering even the possibility of threats that are not obviously visible. So in your mind nanomachines cannot exist, and I wonder also if you might deny the ongoing development of the new class of electromagnetic weapons or the ubiquitous harms of electromagnetic pollution? The development of 5G may be inextricably linked to the nanomachine deployment. Is it possible you also imagine that the poisonous harms of pesticides are not happening, causing death and disease throughout the modern world? Since you can dismiss what is not right in front of your eyeballs as unreal hoaxes you have constructed for yourself an imaginary safe space.

                  I do not think it is my place to destroy the illusory safety of your imaginary world, or that anything I say could do so. I can only hope that your personal life or dreams may provide you with a way to escape your narrow view of the world. Perhaps some unexpected event can now open your eyes. I wish you the best of fortune, but I do not want to conduct a debate with you in the comments section of this article.

                  Liked by 1 person

            2. Gaia,

              The irony of you invoking Lenon Honor is not lost on me. Lenon is a man of integrity, who exudes humor, humility, eloquence, and compassion. He impeccably models critical thinking (despite the fact that we disagree on certain events; i.e. – he believes the JFK event was real; but in no way does that negate him being a critical thinker).

              I can say this with considerable confidence because I had the great pleasure of meeting him in 2015, immediately following his engaging and inspiring presentation on raising children to be sovereign in mind, pure in heart, and whole in spirit: At that time, we discussed – one-on-one for about 20 minutes – our mutual enriching experience raising children who were home-birthed, homeschooled, and unvaccinated – and yes, un-herded. Lenon subsequently shared the same respect and time with other conference participants.

              What stood out to me most – both from his talk and our private conversation – was his insistence (he walks his talk) on treating fellow human beings, and particularly women, with respect and civility.

              I can only guess you have not viewed this linked presentation; or if you did watch it, you completely missed the point. I suggest you listen intently to what Lenon has to say on authentically detaching, deprogramming, and detoxing, for if you truly absorbed his wise offerings, you would not only hesitate to use the derogatory language you have displayed toward me, you would never again speak the “n” word in the way you have (repeatedly, I might add) – as Lenon makes very clear in his talk how he abhors this debasing language.

              Gaia, I have to wonder if you speak to (and about) people in this way in your “real life” off-line, and how this is working for you in terms of your relations with those of the opposite sex and/or those of varying ethnicities and faiths. I submit that the use of such language is due to the very programming that you seemingly oppose.


      1. The inability masked as unwillingness to answer a few important, simple and pertinent questions seeing the unfiltered filth you have puked over this once beautiful place, says all I need to know.

        Mark, you have protected your blog from (military) psyops as Flat Earth, “chem”trails, global mudfloods, EGI and the likes.

        I joined this place for among that reason and the quality writings by Tyrone, Mark and you and the necessary scientific, truth seeking skeptic stance that Maarten Rossaert duly defended.

        With Fauxlex it went already downhill, but where did you dig this troll from?

        Unfiltered filth from military pockets and letting us sort it out is way worse than a couple of posts about the “forbidden topics” you had listed and has literally NOTHING to do with truth seeking

        This is poison, get rid of it.


        1. Gaia, please stay polite and consider the possibility that Stephers is bona fide and actually believes these stories about the possibilities of biotech and nanotech. I do not see the real-life honest success of biotech and nanotech and hence don’t trust this talk sufficiently to dive down into the depth of it and follow all these links. But Stephers may well do so.

          People are not all alike. I know people, mostly of the opposite sex, who worry a lot about the adverse effects of technology on their health. Worry about Wi-Fi in the room. Worry about 5G. Worry about tap water. This is actually pretty wide-spread.

          By the way, Lumi911 = Michael Ludwig, change due to WordPress account complications.


    1. The ego card again, which is ironically funny because of my focus on working together, instead of the egocentric approach; agorism vs egoism.

      There is no attitude, I am I, hence the name of the podcast. Where you can hear my confidence on what I research and humbleness in what I don’t know.

      But can I please defend the principles of truth seeking (=science, the art of knowing) on a truth seeking blog ?

      Since when get writers here a free pass in not having to defend their premises, foundations, criteria, benchmarks ? Since when did this place turn in yet another teenage girl groupie place where crucial questions dare not to be asked and challenged for?

      My observations are not only mine (again, there goes your egoism). From just the few comments I have read on Stephers carefully crafted military agitprop it was clear that many others immediately start questioning parts of the piece. That led me to my list of only reasonable, easy to answer questions.

      Go ask Maarten and see what he thinks of unfiltered noncritical push of military material for fear mongering purposes.

      I am not saying she is some shill, I don’t suffer from conspieparanoia, but she plays the role of one very “well”.

      I just ask for the Simon Shack view, going deeper, while we get Jewdy Wood here….

      good question what Stephers believes about that, but of course no answers and hiding behind “I feel offended” snowflakery. All to mask their inabilities.

      Good one steve; they are empty of themselves.


      1. and very simple, broken down to the absolute core, such that things become undeniable (I know, the subjects in question don’t like that, but Mark Twain said something very wise about that, gladly promoted by the other Mark T. who also is a fan of logic:

        A – 2 months or so ago, Stephers to gaia 1: “I like being challenged”
        B – first time back, easy to answer list of slightly challenging questions by gaia, Stephers to gaia 2 : “I don’t play “games” [neither do I]”

        So either she lied 2 months ago (A = false) or she lied this morning (B = false). Both cannot be true.

        Why do online people get a free pass with the same yardstick we should hold the Animal Farmers against ? How crazy has this world become?


        1. enjoy the read, thank you kindly, Ab the Fakeologist, for sharing this with the world @ :

          gaia grills Nik

          It’s been a while since I’ve saved a chat, but this one is worth it. Gaia takes no prisoners. Nik left the server after this exchange.

          It’s impossible to believe that AA would engrave their initials on even the smallest plane part. We’ve had many come to fakeologist claiming they were there in NYC on 9/11, and none has lasted more than a few days here. Are we too smart here?

          Is Ab “full of himself” steve or don’t you think at our level of thinking here, especially combined (bye ego III), we are at some “elite level” in this World of Maskedness (Ab’s gems shine !) ?

          aSHIFT. – the World of Maskedness – 6:33 with Ab the Fakeologist, free for all !


          1. I am not calling Stephers a liar, she lies and I take note of that.

            This is not an accusation, this is a fact, speaking from her own actions. And they are part of something bigger, see my latest post on exactly this. Good you read along, because what is the purpose of this self-demonstrated foul character?

            Is this 10th installment the right time to ask these fundamental questions or did you willingly turn into an unfiltered military psyop blog? That is fine, your choice, but then be honest about it.


  24. From October 6, 2021, “Dr. Zandre Botha was shocked after studying the blood of ‘vaccinated’ patients that were coming to her with a serious illness after being injected with the shots being called ‘Covid’:

    Info on Dr. Zandré Botha:

    For potentially relevant context: “Self-assembly of ‘patchy’ nanoparticles: a versatile approach to functional hierarchical materials”


    1. Does she mention which of the three “vaccines” she tested and/or her patients received? I watched most of the vid and didn’t hear this referenced, but may have missed it. This might be useful, unless the suggestion is that all three produce the same side effects. None of the people I know who have gotten the vaccine (which is most of the people I know) have, to my knowledge anyway, suffered symptoms like those described by Dr. Botha. I spend a lot of time every day with vaccinated people, and haven’t experienced the symptoms she’s talking about. I do feel very low-energy and borderline depressed at times, but given the depressing state of things, this doesn’t seem abnormal to me. I think there’s a danger of the non-jabbed developing psychosomatic symptoms blamed on contact with the jabbed if information like this isn’t really, really specific. Would you agree?


      1. ScottRC,

        It looks like the clip I linked was a partial clip and left out the beginning in which they explain that the vial tested was the J&J product – see this link: I do not recall specific information on which product her respective patients received.

        I am glad to hear that the people you know have not suffered symptoms, as she described. Thus far, we have known 5 people who have been hospitalized with severe post-jab symptoms – 5 of them with heart issues (one of whom coded twice, but survived), and one with micro clots in the brain. The individual with the blood clots in her brain is in her early 50s, and she was experiencing severe headaches and dizziness, which prompted her to seek diagnostics, and then ended up in the hospital. She is now anti-COVID vax. The other five are still pro-vax, and do not attribute their symptoms to the jab.

        Besides those hospitalized with the more severe symptoms, I have heard from about 8-10 people directly that they have symptoms (again, not attributing them to the jab) such as headaches, brain fog, general malaise, joint pain, and heart palpitations. Some of these symptoms lasted for 3-4 weeks, but seemed to eventually resolve.

        In terms of the un-jabbed experiencing symptoms around the jabbed, I think it is a mixed bag, and very hard to determine what could be “psychosomatic” vs. actually feeling the adverse effects of transmission (as in electromagnetic, due to a field emanated by an inorganic/synthetic bio component in the product).

        Even with myself, it is hard to decipher. I would say it could be a little of both (?). I have had significant symptoms (though I would not call them severe, nor long-term), and they are mostly hormonally related. I have heard of similar symptoms from a handful of my female friends (including one text just this morning), as well as a couple female family members. Of course, the online survey reports (RE: Northrup/Madej/Kaufman) indicate that nearly 30,000 women have similar complaints. So, I am not sure this is entirely psychosomatic.

        Incidentally, I did go this past week for a live blood cell analysis, and was quite surprised by what I observed and learned. It was clear that I am exhibiting signs of serious free radical damage, and my white blood cells are completely inoperable/defunct. That is not something I recall observing in my previous lab work that was done about 4-5 years ago. Unfortunately, I do not have those baseline photos in-hand, and I think they are unretrievable. Needless to say, I do not attribute this solely to being around jabbed people, but to being exposed to the type of covert technology (whether it be through geoeningeering or bioengineering, or both) I have discussed, as well as a heavy dose of EMFs (I admittedly submit that I use a smart phone throughout the day, especially when I am out and about). Most of the time, I use a laptop computer, but it is hard-wired. That said, we do have Wi-Fi on for some part of the day (always turned off at night) for other family members in our household.

        I am hoping – when I have more time – to getting around to writing here about my lab work in more detail, and displaying some of the photos, as it may be interesting and helpful for others to see. For the record, the doctor did not see anything that looked suspiciously like graphene oxide, but we did see the presence of heavy metals, which was not entirely surprising, as I have seen this in my prior lab work (in blood, urine, and hair samples).

        Hopefully this addressed your questions . . .


        1. ScottRC –

          I forgot to mention that I sent this same video testimony to my neighbor for his professional assessment. He has an MS in both biotechnology and molecular biology, and holds two doctorates – one in developmental genetics, and the other in biochemistry. He works with mRNA in the lab for cancer applications. In any case, it was his opinion that Dr. Botha’s evaluation is on-point, but he also cannot make any claims as to what she is observing. This same neighbor reported to me yesterday that his friend/colleague (who is an oncologist) urged his entire family to get the jab, and now his father-in-law and mother-in-law are in emergency with severe kidney issues and a stroke, respectively.


        2. It makes me wonder if certain regions or even demographics are targeted for more toxic jabs than others. I’ve been reading and hearing a lot about side-effects people have had from mRNA jabs. It’s possible that people I know have been having headaches, lower energy and other symptoms they haven’t talked about or I haven’t noticed. I’m pretty self-absorbed, so there could well be a lot that I’m not noticing. But heart attacks and clots… I’m just not seeing it or hearing about it in my area or among my people. There’s something vile in that corona juice, though–of that I’m sure.


          1. ScottRC –

            I have considered the same – that some juice, supplied to certain geographic regions, could potentially be different (or just more “vile”). Others have speculated that many are placebo concoctions. In fact, I was thinking this in my mind as I was replying to you earlier, but I chose not to put it in writing, as I simply have no evidence, except what seems circumstantial at best. I think the possibility should be on the table, though.


          2. Stephers, what do you think about this ridiculous business of Pfizer and BioNTech “unbinding” their “clinical trial” of their product by giving the product to the control group that received a placebo?

            When I first read about it, I thought it was just one more way to sow confusion and chaos while thumbing their noses at those of us who impotently question the “science.” And maybe that’s all it is. But I wonder if they’re not actually doing a different study, for their own secretive information. I wonder if they’re now giving the placebo group a different version of their product than the one they gave to the non-placebo group and studying it’s different effects, even as they unleash these variations on the global public?


            1. ScottRC,

              The practice of “unblinding” clinical trials is a messy one, to say the least. It is truly anti-scientific. There are multiple issues with this procedure, and Mercola points out some prominent ones here: In predictable fashion, the pro-vax community (ostensibly pro-science) came out harshly against Mercola’s remarks; yet not surprisingly, with very little scientific evidence, and instead, ad hominem attacks (from May 2021): That said (taking into account all of the issues that come with the unblinding of controls in “experiments”), “breaking the blind” seems to be common practice: “Breaking the Blind in Clinical Trials & Reporting to Health Authorities, Investigators & IRBs/Ethics Committees”(Jan 30, 2013)

              Your notion about giving the placebo group a different version than their counterparts previously received could be accurate. I really don’t know. I just don’t have enough information to speculate. We are in the dark on this one. Regardless, unblinding is a shady practice (no pun intended).


  25. It does, and thanks for the thorough response.

    I don’t question that people are having adverse affects from the jab. It’s also quite possible that some of the people I know who’ve had it are experiencing symptoms but not connecting them to the jab and not telling me about them. I know that none of them had the J & J product. But the jabbed people I’m closest to (sister, nephews, mother) and those I spend the most time with (intellectually disabled clients) show no obvious signs of the problems I’m hearing about. And I’m inclined to blame my own low energy days on wi-fi… but I don’t want to stick my head in the sand. I’ll be interested to hear more about your lab work.


  26. Mark, you see what is going on here at your blog in full sight??

    These are the archetypical snake creatures I encountered in my 25 years on the internet. When challenged, they hide behind fallacies, diversions, create strawmen puppets (like Alan does with “safe mental space”; it is not a mental, but a real or unreal question) and the cherry on the cake came with the latest form of suggestive fearmongering: “potentially relevant context”….

    What the hell does that mean and why do you spread this fearpr0n, generating more clicks and thus attention and power for the Building of the Beast?

    Since when is asking the right and necessary fundamental questions VERBOTEN ? Since when do get writers away here with blatant lying, deceiving, twisting words and other troll tricks from Hasbara 1.0…..?

    This smells like a typical case of don’t look there, look here; or the different door analogy Miles Mathis uses (and ironically amplifies, claiming to be the correct door in all things).

    Is it a coincidence that the same bunch who is heavily fighting the Invisible Monster Coronarrative (rightly so) is at the same time pushing yet another military psyop of “tiny things you can’t detect, but they are out there to kill you”, with the same non-sensical foundation behind it, just “trust us”…

    What is this bunch of non-truth seekers doing here? Other than circlejerking over their military propaganda “it does exist, you cannot possibly detect it, but trust us, it does exist and you should be very afraid!1!!!!11!!!!”?

    Pesticides can be detected with chemical tests, radiation can be measured with household Geiger counters, but the nanorealm always remains in the hands of those who allegedly can see it, something Alan tried to skate around.

    What the hell is going on here Mark? You have been silent and I hope reading along, but get your other writer’s views on this, because this infiltraitor gang you brought on now needs proper social reflection, especially because they lack self reflection.


    1. Guya,

      “Proper social reflection?”

      Never mind. I don’t want to know.

      “The nanorealm always remains in the hands of those who allegedly can see it.”

      You mean people who run the tests and do the magnifications? Are pesticides, then, only “in the hands” or people who use chemical tests to detect them? What in the hell are you even talking about?

      I really need to stop reading your comments. However, unlike you, I don’t think people that I disagree with require… “proper social reflection.” Whatever the hell that means.


    2. RE: Gaiasphere,
      When I started reading Stephers’ articles I knew nothing about the vast advances with graphene, but I followed almost every source she linked and was quite impressed with the variety of reports, both scholarly and layman from so many news sources. In my own field of expertise with air filter development I could see many indications that graphene is already being added to the fiber mix by many filter media manufacturers. The question regarding nano particles being shed from the media was immediately concerning to me because the sharp edged graphene particles could cause the very same type of lung symptoms being ascribed to Covid. The types of particle counters used to verify the ratings of air filters (as N95, for instance) would in no way be able to detect such shedding. So I believe there is an unknown hazard that may be present with synthetic fiber face masks, none of which are labeled with information on the filter ingredients. I have recently verified with industry contacts that my former lab compatriots were indeed looking at possibly using graphene laced filter media, for its germicidal or electrical properties.

      You are entirely welcome to stick your head in the sand if that pleases you. It is laughable that you may consider me to be a disinformation agent. This is no more insulting than my considering you to be a mentally disabled victim of your own cognitive dissonance.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. You are entirely welcome to stick your head in the sand if that pleases you

        No I don’t at all, this is exactly the independent verification that I was looking for. You are an expert in your field; until another air filter expert enters the room, you are the primus inter pares; the shaman.

        So, the solution is that we make our own non-nanotech filters. No need to delve more into THEIR “solutions”, yet immediately take the proactive route.

        Join the Discord and we can get things going with aCRAFT. here.

        In my own life I am going to use lots of filters and if making biological filters (with bacterial mats or funghi or so) is possible, you are the one to pioneer this and/or build on top of existing ones; the coral reef we BUILD together.

        The exact wrong path to take is to sit back, immerse yourself more with this poison, doing nothing against or around this poison and drag people in into this mess.

        Stay at the surface.
        Come up with solutions.
        Implement them among humans.

        then all those other Clownworld inventions do not matter.

        We humans do.


        1. The cloth filters are mostly useless, but I got 4 black ones in case a shooting war starts. I have 100 disposable face filters I got from China around March of 2019, and I use them absolutely as little as possible, not trusting them at all.

          Another reason one might add graphene to the filter formula is to get a thinner media to be as strong or even stronger, thus allowing the user to breathe with less effort.

          Stephers had answered one of my questions a few months back regarding what hand held instrument might detect the graphene. She pointed me to the Raman analyzer, for the moment outside of my price range…

          We are not trying to spoof you. We have been looking honestly at these difficult issues from the outset here at this blog.


  27. Back in the 1980’s I had an electromagnetics professor who had access to some serious insider knowledge. He mentioned offhand that EM waves passing through DNA would become eliptically polarized and could be used to read the code. So, even then, there must have been some instrumental means to do this.

    Getting back to the root topic in this thread, I do not find it impossible that cutting edge research may already be attempting to use biological structures for data storage or processing. Interfacing with 5G would at least require some sort of internal antenna, so the recent microscope videos indicating self assembling materials do look interesting. I do not regard this as a finished technology, but more likely a vast experiment where Moore’s Law is expected to exponentially improve results over time.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “EM waves passing through DNA would become eliptically polarized and could be used to read the code”

      I doubt it. What would be the spatial configuration to make this reading happen? We’re not dealing with orthogonal alignment here.

      This could be just more disinfo to endow the DNA sermon with more science magic to believe in. Some people, scientific outsiders, admittedly, reject the entire notion that DNA carries information. In the beginning of genetics, it was thought that proteins, which are much more complex than DNA, were the carrires of genetic information.

      Let’s not attribute too much power to this biotech circus. What have they actually accomplished? Where can you buy the awesome products that biotech has endowed us with? Where are the appliances and devices and gadgets? Where is the usefulness and purpose?

      Let’s open our eyes. We see digital technology growing and advancing everywhere, and biotech nowhere. They haven’t accomplished anything tangible, despite billions and trillions of dollars being invested. The whole endeavour seems to be a colossal failure that has to be monetized via a giant fraudulent scamdemic of planetary proportions.


      1. The same professor that informed me that phased array antennas were the future of antenna design in 1983, I know was certainly involved in highly classified areas. So he told our class at that time that DNA would elipically polarize laser light and could be used to read the DNA code, so at that time there must have been some means of measuring such polarization. Only one anecdotal data point here, but I suspect the tech has improved since then, although it may not have been made public.

        Glad to hear you have assessed Stephers research without having followed the links. This makes the value of your opinions a bit more clear.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I did follow some of Stepher’s links, but only some out of many. The more I read about it the stronger grows my suspicion that I’m dealing with fraudulent business.

          Highly classified reads highly suspicious in my book.

          What is the truth about DNA sequencing? Is it the next thing I’ll have to classify as a hoax? That is the big question.


            1. Steve, they’re talking about data, data, data and more data. I’m well versed in the computer aided production, selection and manipulation of data in all sorts of ways. Data is very flexible.

              I am not interested in data. I am interested in the scientific process that leads to the data. I can already see that the way they come up with the data is by having computers sort it out. The process of “DNA sequencing” (yes, quotes) is more akin to a computer simulation than to science. It is questionable to me whether the science bit underlying the computer simulation has any merit. By the way, they don’t call it “computer simulation” – they call it “in silico experiment”. What a laugh!


      2. Michael,

        I suggest you watch this presentation by Sofia Smallstorm (from 2012) – particularly starting at the 27 minute timestamp – as you will observe how biotech (synbio) has advanced considerably: To reiterate, this was nearly ten years ago. The technology is quite tangible, indeed. Unfortunately, although observed in real-time, the work of researchers like Clifford Carnicom and others, and the illness exhibited by Morgellons sufferers, have been relegated to hallucinations and delusions. This is so, because the biotech sorcerers would have you believe that they are working toward the good of humanity. Thus far, most of their efforts have been covert; and thus, it would seem their endeavors are solely for profit, when this is only a secondary gain. Of course, I can not prove anything, except to say that you may want to dig more into the work of Sofia Smallstorm, Elana Freeland and Clifford Carnicom (as well as multiple Morgellons researchers) for further concrete evidence of the presence of nanotech (quantum dots, nanoribbons, nanotubes etc) and synbio tech (hybrid filaments, polymers, etc) – already existing in human bodies. I agree, we need to open our eyes; but the biotech industry is not going to be forthcoming in this regard. This is work we need to do on our own, in order to discover what is already being done to alter the human being, without our knowledge and consent.


        1. Stephers, thanks for the Smallstorm pointer. I listened to her talk while making apple pie.

          Someone presented me with a Morgellons talk about half a year ago. It was a good laugh. Gotta admit: These con artists are creative. It’s amazing to what detail they’ll elaborate their nonsense. Like in a good novel. Do you really believe any of it?

          So this not so stormy Ms Smallstorm goes on about chemtrails. All we see is contrails blurring the sky, unfortunately, an overlay of a milky haze. Not nice, but not dangerous either. Formation depending on atmospheric conditions, of course.

          She also seems to worry about frequencies, citing 3 to 30 Hz as Nature’s Own Frequency Range, and blaming Evil Man for overstepping that range with Evil Technology. Well, what about natural light then, 555 nm wavelength, 555 THz frequency? Just providing catchy numbers here, there is a frequency range, of course.

          At 37:15 she talks about “heavy metals, such as aluminum”.

          If she is a con artist then not a very good one.

          “… the biotech sorcerers would have you believe that they are working toward the good of humanity. Thus far, most of their efforts have been covert …”

          I would say that most of their efforts have been futile, flawed and fraudulent. The success of their endeavour is nowhere to be seen. All the progress in medicine is due to real technology such as imaging devices and material sciences. The investments in so-called biotech are currently being monetized via a forced sale of snake oil in high-tech disguise to combat an imaginary virus produced by mass media.


          1. Michael,

            Before I attempt to reply, may I just clarify? Are you claiming the following?

            1) Morgellons is a hoax
            2) Chemtrails (geoengineering) are a hoax (ie – they do not exist, and all trails seen in the sky are contrails)
            3) There are no worries about any frequencies (ie – ELF/EMF), in terms of potential harm to living beings
            4) Heavy metals (ie – aluminum) are either a hoax (ie – not present in human bodies), or simply non-toxic


            1. Stephers,

              (1) Yes, morgellons is/are a hoax.

              (2) Except for extremely rare military or other testing, there are no chemtrails. There are all contrails. Ugly and annoying (depending on where you live), but not harmful, and not joyful either. So-called human geo-engineering is also a hoax. If you want to see true geo-engineering, tune in to the La Palma volcano. Man is powerless. Gaia rules, and she can be a tyrant.

              (3) I don’t worry about any frequencies from 50/60 Hz AC to radio kHz and MHz or digital GHz or solar THz. I don’t have any insight how some frequencies could be harmful. I would think it is down to the amplitude whether it may or may not be an issue. In general, it is more of an issue for technical interoperability than for living beings, e.g. cheap PSUs may disturb radio signal reception. I wouldn’t rule out that technical installations may negatively affect animal life such as birds or bats but I have no special insights into this issue. I do protect my skin from UV when there is a need. On the other hand, UV is good for my skin, and the lack of it in the winter at 53°N is less good.

              (4) Aluminium is not a heavy metal. It is notoriously light-weight. It belongs in the boron group in Mendeleyev’s table. The elements are not a hoax. They are the object of true science. Aluminium is suspect of being bad for our health because the human body does not seem to utilize this abundant element in any way. I would therefore avoid regular application of aluminium products to the skin, such as in deodorants. In fact, I simply stopped using them. I don’t need them.

              To sum it up, I don’t worry a lot about these things.


              1. Michael,

                First off, I think it’s wonderful and healthy that you do not “worry a lot about these things.” On my behalf, I am concerned (not overly) about my health when it comes to potentially toxic metals, potentially toxic frequencies, potentially toxic atmospheric aerosols, and even potentially harmful artificial/hybrid biology. As a holistic health professional (who specializes in detox) for the past 22 years, I am passionate about helping others determine root causes of their illness; and most often, this results in identifying toxins in their bodies/environment.

                I will start with #4 (RE: aluminum):

                Thank you for that clarification on aluminum (note to myself: avoid sloppy reporting . . . moving forward). It seems we agree that aluminum (let’s call it a highly suspected toxic metal) may be correlated (as I cannot say with 100% certainty it is causally related) with bad health. I, too, stopped using deodorant containing aluminum (more than 30 years ago); however, I still use deodorant that is free from aluminum and additional ingredients that may be toxic to the human body. That said, there are many other ways for the body to be exposed to aluminum (even if not via “chemtrails”):


                1. The only other person I know to avoid deodorant! I quit using it in the 1970s, not because of the ingredients, but rather because it was an advertising scam, to sell a product based on social anxiety. We sweat, often in pressure-related situations, but normally just a little bit, but we do not smell! The smell factor takes 24 hours or so for bacteria to take hold and ripen it up. I know this going into the backcountry where showers are unavailable and bathing is immersion in very cold water. When we emerged we would stink! I was usually alone with one other guy, and we must have each out stunk the other, as I do jot ever remember complaining about smell. And we were two men.

                  I have met people who smell bad, some kind of pheromone thing going on, entirely interpersonal. But generally, shower daily, even if you work hard and sweat, you’ll be fine. Skip the deodorizers, expensive nonsense.


                2. Michael,

                  On #3 (RE: frequencies):

                  May I reticently assume (I don’t like to assume!) that you have not read Arthur Firstenberg’s The Invisible Rainbow Have you reviewed this website: The BioInitiative Working Group discusses the health effects of wireless technologies, and has compiled a review of more than 3000 academic studies. Four years ago – as a 5G awareness “educator” (I hesitate to say “activist”), and as someone who has been considerably challenged with EHS ( – I invited the co-editor of the BioInitiative Working Group, Dr. David Carpenter (, to come speak to our local community. He was unavailable, but sent a surrogate, Dafna Tachover ( Here are notes I took from one of her presentations:

                  70% of cell phone studies show DNA damage from radiation
                  Oxidative stress is the mechanism by which radiation causes DNA damage and cancer
                  93 out of 100 studies show that cell phone radiation causes oxidative stress
                  NIH study: 47 people were exposed to cell phone radiation and all of their brain scans showed a biological effect such that there was an increase in glucose metabolism ~ indicating increased activity in the brain and demonstrating that the cell phone industry’s claims that there are no biological effects from use of cell phones are FALSE
                  Approximately 10,000 studies conducted by scientists who are not employed by the cell phone industry prove adverse affects from cell phone radiation
                  There is cognitive dissonance among the public because they do not want to know the truth
                  If we look at the facts, we do, indeed, have an epidemic of radiation sickness (more than 10 percent of the population)
                  Cancer is not the main adverse effect; it is actually electromagnetic sensitivity (EHS)
                  Our bodies (including our heart, brain and our nervous system) are electric, so clearly there are effects from this electromagnetic radiation
                  Although not sufficient, Israel has some of the strictest limitations on wireless in the world: bans use of Wi-Fi in schools up to the age of six; permits up to one hour after the third grade; permits 1-2 hours after the sixth grade
                  In a study that Dafna directed in Israeli schools, 206 children were medically evaluated and each one had symptoms of microwave illness (headaches, nosebleeds, noise sensitivity, exhaustion, cognitive issues)
                  There is evidence that indicates that ADHD symptoms may be caused by wireless radiation
                  Professor Martha Herbert from Harvard University has studied the link between autism and wireless radiation, and found a direct correlation in the increase in autism with the increased exposure to wireless technologies. She determined that the safety standards with regard to the use of wireless radiation in the US are inaccurate and obsolete.
                  The types of cancers that kill most children and young adults in the US are brain cancer, thyroid cancer, testicular cancer and rectal cancer — the very places on the body where people store their cell phones!
                  There is an increase in breast cancer in young women with no predisposition to cancer — and the shape of the tumor is the very same shape as the cell phone that they put in their bras! Bras are actually being sold with pockets for cell phones — extremely disturbing!
                  Numerous studies have showed that degeneration of the brain is being caused by cell phones, and the age for developing Alzheimers has significantly decreased due to this correlation.
                  5G is an infrastructure developed to support the Internet of Things — to connect all appliances; each appliance is equipped with sensors and antennae and transmits radiation and collects metadata that will be sold (data harvesting)
                  A McKinsey report indicates the IoT will be an $11 trillion/year industry!
                  The 5G infrastructure will transmit all of the data wirelessly, which makes it insecure and vulnerable to “attack”, so “security” measures need to be put in place — which is yet another $11 trillion/year industry! (Problem—Reaction—Solution!)
                  50% of children in the US have some variation of a chronic condition, and the medical industry makes money off of this! Being sick has become the “norm”!
                  5G is needed to support the plans for AI and self-driving cars
                  The lower frequencies used by 3G and 4G are not sufficient bandwidth to transmit all of the data necessary to support the IoT, so 5G uses millimeter waves
                  Dozens of studies (including one by the US Air Force and US Army) prove that these millimeter waves are biologically harmful (causing genetic problems and enzyme problems)
                  The 5G infrastructure is being developed without the consent of the people and with complete disregard to privacy; it requires small cell towers to be placed in neighborhoods among every 2-10 homes
                  People cannot legally object to cell towers being placed on their property based on health reasons (because of Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act established in 1996 by Congress — which is unconstitutional and gives the power to the FCC, taking away the power from the health industry and from the state) — and if a city’s constituent does claim this for health reasons, the respective city can be sued in court. This violates our First Amendment right!
                  In Ohio there is state legislation regarding cell towers that was hidden within a bill that legislated sex with animals — this is unconstitutional!
                  An omnibus bill was fast tracked recently by both the Republican and Democrat parties that allows the FCC to install these cell towers with NO requirements for environmental or health inspections nor adherence to any regulations for both thermal and non-thermal radiation
                  Harvard did a study called Captured Agency: How the FCC is Dominated by the Industries it Presumably Regulates (by Norm Alster); It indicated that last year Congress was paid $83 million by the wireless industry; It also reported that the former head of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, was prior to that, the head of CTIA (the lobbying association that represents the wireless industry) for 14 years — there is a revolving door between the FCC and the wireless industry and this is how our rights are being taken away
                  There are lawyers who are actually protecting the First Amendment rights of the wireless corporations rather than the First Amendment rights of individuals!
                  We need to come together to block this initiative that is being forced upon us! This infrastructure adversely affects our health and violates our privacy and our constitutional rights.

                  Following is a list of resources I compiled for community members who attended the presentations (Dafna gave multiple talks):

                  Recommended Resources


                  Samuel Milham, MD, MPH, Dirty Electricity: Electrification and the Diseases of Civilization. Bloomington: iUniverse, Inc., 2012.

                  Martin Blank, PhD, Overpowered: What Science Tells Us About the Dangers of Cell Phones and Other Wifi-Age Devices. New York: Seven Stories Press, 2014.

                  Nicolas Pineault, The Non-Tinfoil Guide to EMFs: How to Fix Our Stupid Use of Technology. N&G Media Inc., 2017.

                  Jason Bawden-Smith, In the Dark: New Ways to Avoid the Harmful Effects of Living in a Technologically Connected World. Australia: Major Street Publishing Pty Ltd, 2016.

                  Elizabeth Maxim, PhD, Riding the Waves: Diagnosing, Treating and Living with EMF Sensitivity. Elizabeth Maxim, 2012.

                  B. Blake Levitt, Electromagnetic Fields: A Consumer’s Guide to the Issue and How to Protect Ourselves. New York: iUniverse, Inc, 2007.

                  Paul Brodeur, The Zapping of America: Microwaves,Their Deadly Risk, and the Cover-Up.
                  New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. 1977.

                  Devra Davis, PhD, MPH, Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation. New York: Writers House LLC, 2013.

                  Daniel T. DeBaun and Ryan P. DeBaun, Radiation Nation: Your Complete Guide to EMF Radiation Safety. Icaro Publishing, 2017.

                  Ann Louise Gittleman, Zapped: Why Your Cell Phone Shouldn’t Be Your Alarm Clock and 1,268 Ways to Outsmart the Hazards of Electronic Pollution. New York: Harper Collins, 2010.

                  Katie Singer, An Electronic Silent Spring: Facing the Dangers and Creating Safe Limits. Great Barrington: Steiner Books, 2014.

                  Camilla Rees, The Wireless Elephant in the Room. National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy (NISLAPP)


                  “Public Exposure: DNA, Democracy and the Wireless Revolution” ~–DNA–Democracy—the-Wireless–Revolution-
                  “Resonance — Beings of Frequency” ~
                  TEDx Talk by Jeromy Johnson: Wireless Wake-Up Call ~

                  Organizations and Advocates:


                  What YOU can do:

                  Find cell towers near you at

                  Find a building biologist near you at

                  Get WIRED ~ Hardwire the electronic devices in your home/office utilizing Ethernet cables

                  Get SMART ~ Turn off your wi-fi router (if not hard-wired) when you sleep at night

                  Get GROUNDED ~ Stay off your electronic devices as often as possible, and go out in Nature!

                  Forward along these Resources to others to raise more awareness

                  Suggested resources should not be taken as an endorsement of any third-party products or services, and are provided for information purposes only.

                  Michael, are you open to reviewing some of this material, and perhaps re-considering your position? On a related note, do you live in a residence that has a wireless smart meter? Do you sense that smart meters are safe, or could potentially be physically harmful (aside from any privacy issues)?

                  Liked by 1 person

                  1. Stephers, thank you for this quite exhaustive reply, guess you could call it the full monty on the dangers of electricity and radiation. Please understand that I cannot reply in kind and will limit myself to some select points.

                    No, I do not know the book by Arthur Firstenberg. I found a copy on Telegram and I’m going to take a look at it. I am, however, very much in favour of electricity and technology.

                    I have no personal experience of electricity or Wi-Fi or GSM/3G/4G having any negative impact on my health. I now live in the countryside, but when I lived in Berlin and Hamburg, it was no different. In fact, when I’m visiting people in Hamburg with dozens of Wi-Fi networks all competing for bandwidth, I do not feel any difference from home where there is only one Wi-Fi network present.

                    I do not have any wireless smart meters nearby. I do not see them as a cause for concern for your health, but I dislike the privacy intrusion implications.

                    “DNA damage from radiation” – I have recently come to question the concept of DNA. It could be a misunderstanding, or a fraud, or something inbetween. Sometimes it’s difficult to tell, isn’t it.

                    There are a lot of things that affect my mind and my body, my body through my mind, or my mind through my body, but I do not count electricity and technological radiation among them. Instead, it’s stuff that enters mind and body through my ears, my eyes, my mouth.

                    My way of staying healthy is sports (mostly running in the winter, biking, and swimming in the summer) and I seem to need it for my well-being. I haven’t had a cold in five years or more and no fever of any sort for a very long time except twice when ingesting bad food.


                    1. Michael,

                      Meanwhile, on smart meters . . . While you do not “see them as a cause for concern for your health,” that clearly does not negate the notion that they are (or rather, should be) a concern, and one that needs to be further explored, revealed, and mitigated. I implore you to review this analysis:, which includes a video at the end featuring Dr. Sam Milham (referenced by me, as well as Alan). Moreover, as early as 1971, the Naval Medical Research Institute reported a plethora of adverse biological effects being attributed to microwave and radio frequency (non-ionizing) radiation: At this point, I do not think this should even be debatable.


              2. RE: LUMI911,
                People who inspect houses for EMF hazards often find that incorrect house wiring can lead to large misplaced ground currents. If the wire with enough amps goes near where you spend a lot of time in a bed or favorite chair, cancer can result. Living too near secondary high amperage lines has been epidemiologically linked to leukemia in children. These are definite 50/60 cycle hazards. Look up the effect of amperage in the farm soil on cows, who have feet more separated than a person, and no rubber shoe soles….

                Radio frequency noise or noise from multiple nearby switching power supplies can add hazard to a home or work environment. This can easily be filtered but must first be detected, hopfully prior to the cancer cluster appearing.

                Anyone working on antennas knows powerful ones can be hazardous, such that there are or ought to be precautions. Stuff adds up (electromagnetic superposition) so even though each device as tested separately was safe, pack enough equipment in one room and you have a hazard.

                Liked by 2 people

                1. With a gauss meter you can read the magnetic field strength (mine goes up to around 300 Hz, but most of what it detects is the 60 Hz grid). Chronic exposure to 2 gauss or more is generally regarded as hazardous. This is clearly the case in many neighborhoods near high amperage distribution lines. I certainly would not consider buying a house if the reading there were above 1 gauss all day and night.


                  1. Thank you, Alan, this sounds interesting. I actually might buy such a device. As for the hazards you named, they’re probably covered in that Firstenberg book I downloaded.


                    1. RE LUMI911,
                      The hazards I described were clear years ago and laid out in the 2010 book that was in Stephers’ reference list: “Dirty Electricity” by Samuel Millham, MD, MPH. He is a now retired public health officer. The hazards known 10 or 20 years ago are now becoming more clear, and the instruments to detect these known hazards are now more widely available, such as the 0 to 300 Hz magnetic field detector that I purchased from

                      Note that is is still quite hard to obtain inexpensive instruments to detect anything above around 6 GHz, but 5G is being installed now that goes beyond that threshold. Any digital signal laid onto a 5G carrier will contain even higher frequencies.

                      I found it quite interesting that the graphene laced plexiglass was absorbing terahertz waves, so if the graphene is being used for ambient energy harvesting, it may be doing so in a THz frequency domain that very few people are equipped to be detecting.

                      I was warning you about hazards from yesterday’s news. Today there is new stuff happening and we are all trying to catch up. Like a fish in water we have all grown used to our electrically polluted environment. Do not imagine you are unaffected or immune just because you have not yet developed a diagnosable disease. Dr Martin Pall presents convincing evidence that we are all experiencing cellular chemistry changes even if there are not yet disabling symptoms.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    2. The Milham “Dirty Electricity” book lays out two separate hazard domains. There is not only the 50/60 Hz magnetic field (amperage) hazard. He also describes in great detail disease clusters traced to radio frequency noise imposed on the local grid, which your house wiring can act like an antenna to broadcast into your home or work space. This can easily be filtered with plug in filters like the Greenwave, and the hazard can be detected with a sensor you plug into your outlets, such as the Stetzerizer.

                      The proliferation of small AC to DC convertors is adding to this type of home hazard. For every USB charger or “wall wart” DC power supply that you plug into your wall sockets an amount of noise is leaked back into the house wiring. This type of radio noise on the wiring was shown to be epidemiologically linked to a few disease clusters where it had become particularly bad. If you need to be convinced read Milham’s book.

                      This is still yesterday’s news, but still the proliferation of ever more new low power devices requiring AC to DC convertors means that our homes are increasingly populated with small switching power supplies being made as cheaply as possible.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    3. Alan at 5:54 PM,

                      “Do not imagine you are unaffected or immune just because you have not yet developed a diagnosable disease.”

                      But of course I do!

                      Whatever happened to the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave?


                    4. Alan at 6:28 PM,

                      I’m aware of the switching power supply ripple noise but I’d need an oscilloscope to actually notice it. In case of the real bad cheapies (bought some bad LED units on eBay with non-complient PSUs), they interfere with FM radio. But they don’t interfere with my mind.


                    1. LED blue light is produced in a very narrow frequency window very unlike natural light. Blue light disturbs the sleep cycle, and maybe any blue light exposure late at night would do this. Perhaps it also can damage the eyes but I find that part of the blue light hype less convincing, if one has the wherewithal to dim the screen in low light situations. Some of the warning hype is just people selling screens or glasses.

                      If you buy a well designed LED bulb it will have phosphors on the globe surrounding the LED emitters that should produce a range of frequencies a bit more like natural daylight, and these should be safer for the eyes than the unfiltered LED light or like with a cheap phone screen. A well designed LED bulb should allow for good color identification. Note how a better monitor like an IPS screen is so much easier to look at. It can’t be good if your monitor screen makes your eyes tired.

                      The electronic guts of the LED bulbs must contain tiny AC to DC converters so I would expect the quality of these circuits to vary quite a bit from one brand or model to the next. I would assume that each bulb would constitute yet another source of possible noise on the house wiring, just like each phone charger does.


                  1. The house is already wired and all I’m going to do is add more wires as needs arises. You’re not supposed to add them willy-nilly here in Germany, there are rules on how to do these things, and I guess it’s the same in the United States.

                    If the hazard is down to the actual amperage on the wire as indicated by Alan then I’m safe because there are no power-hungry devices that are permanently on. Due to the ridiculous climate change scam and the “green energy” scam, electricity is getting more and more expensive here, so power-hungry appliances are not a good idea.


              3. Michael,

                On #2 (RE: geoengineering):

                I think we can concur that this is a hotly debated topic. We may have to simply agree to disagree, as I can only guess that you have already explored in detail the following sites (including viewing the documentaries), and still think it is all fake (and just a conspiracy theory):

       (This also overlaps into Morgellons territory, which I will attempt to cover in the next day or two in a reply – it is getting late on my end. Thank you for your patience, Michael.)


                1. Michael/Alan,

                  I think what I find most intriguing when it comes to the history of geoengineering are the Brothers Vonnegut and their involvement with GE and Project Cirrus (and the “fictional” reveal in Cat’s Cradle): I imagine you have already explored this material. Nonetheless, I perceive new nuances each time I go back and look at these two curious individuals – Bernard and Kurt Vonnegut.


                2. As far as I can tell, I am not familiar with the links you provided, and certainly not in detail. But I may have seen material similar to the one in these movies as I’ve been confronted with the geoengineering topic before.

                  Thank you for the Vonnegut link. Really interesting. I do recognize there is such a thing as cloud seeding. But you must understand how much effort it takes to send an airplane up and seed some clouds and how limited and unreliable the effect is. If it were otherwise the Victory Parade on the Red Square would always be under a perfect blue sky, and yet it isn’t. So cloud seeding is not a method that can amount to any meaningful weather modification.


                  1. Michael,

                    It is my understanding that cloud seeding initiatives are fairly simple to implement (although costly), and much more common than you seem to acknowledge. Just watch this 2 minute clip (out of the UAE): It does seem, as you said though, that it may be challenging to distinguish how impactful the modification effort is in the overall scheme – in this case, the amount of actual rainfall that was produced directly from the cloud seeding intervention. I am probably not articulating this as well as I could, but I think you get the gist.


                    1. Michael,

                      I should add that cloud seeding does not only happen by sending airplanes up into the clouds. Apparently, in the UAE, they claim to use two additional methods: cloud seeding “by land” (ground generators that ostensibly shoot salt flares), and yes, of course, cloud seeding nanotechnology (“This new cloud seeding technology uses salt crystals enclosed in titanium dioxide nanoparticle veneers as opposed to flares. These crystals are then injected into the existing clouds to make rain particles in them denser and more likely to pour down as rainfall”):


                    2. Stephers, I got the gist of it that the UAE is a dry country with a small population and too much income so they spend it on stuff like cloud seeding, which does not change any of the aforementioned characteristics.


                  2. Michael

                    It’s way more than cloud-seeding at this point. First of all, for me, it was important to know whether I could believe my own eyes. I spend quite a bit of time outdoors, and am very observant, and what I began to realize is that my sky (Oregon) was regularly being blanketed and otherwise disfigured by formations of material looking cloud-like in color, yet not resembling the clouds I had grown accustomed to during my sixty+ years on earth. I knew these were being artificially produced, and I often observed the planes laying down the “lines” that then morphed into other shapes, but the constant refrain of the mainstream info gods would have me believe this is just the way contrails look these days. So I went looking for confirmation, wanting to believe my own eyes and intelligent observation, and found this:

                    Carnicom observed for himself what I described above in his own corner of the world, the southwest U.S., as far back as 1999, and he went looking for answers, and found some. Some of the ingredients that were apparently in these aerosols led him to theorize that one intention of the aerosol program was for drought inducement. That was a prescient deduction back in 2002, and harmonizes quite nicely with the mainstream-labeled “historic drought” of the American west that both he and I are now experiencing.

                    More can and should be said regarding the “aerosol program”, starting with it is very real. It is ongoing. There are likely many “uses” to which it is being put. The last three days I have watched the latest operation here as the heavy application of aerosols preceded and then stayed above the clouds of a front moving in, one that was supposed to give us a half inch of rain, but now has been downgraded to “possible showers”, with minor precipitation. Possibly a little drying effect from aerosols with low specific heat, resulting in atmospheric temperature increase?

                    Carnicom’s research started with trying to find answers for what he saw with his own eyes, and over the years led to much discovery regarding aerosol dispersion, morgellons, and more. Here is the library of his papers from 1999 to 2017, if you’re interested in seeing how his research unfolded.

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. Here, close to the continental divide, it’s always the same pattern, very large aircraft, flying way above the commercial air traffic, spraying something that lingers like no other exhaust on most days, ahead of every weather front moving through. We all know this is not nature at work. But it is not nothing. Good or evil, why is it a big secret? Full disclosure would go a long way, although I’ll never trust the U.S. Air Force, “Space Force” or any other violent, military group trained to kill strangers on command.


                    2. Thanks. I have seen this before. In order to actually understand what he writes, I would have to invest a lot of time to study the formulas. But is it worth while? He says (under 3 and 4) that “the time expected for contrail dissipation is relatively short, e.g., 2 minutes or less” and that dependence of contrail dissipation upon humidity is not evident.

                      Well, in my experience, there is no fixed time that you can expect a contrail to disappear in; sometimes and someplace they vanish very swiftly, and sometimes and someplace they get drawn out in cirrus like haze.

                      Humidity certainly plays a major role even though he says it is not evident.


                    3. OM, Steve, Stephers, Mark, MiniMe, anyone… any thoughts on the color of the sun? I’m apparently not the only one who remembers it as always appearing yellow or yellowish in the sky. Now it’s white. The scientific and psychological explanations I’ve read, like this one — –feel a bit like Mandela Effect bullshit to me. Would love input from smarter people.


                    4. RE: The color of the sun:

                      The ancient Greeks had different color palette in their descriptions than we have today. Some have suggested they were color blind, but perhaps the sun was actually a different color then.


                    5. Steve at 9:09, what kind of very large aircraft are they, flying way above commercial air traffic? They could only be military, right? Have you tried identifying them using binoculars? If they are such a common sight and leave such an ugly behind, others have certainly wondered what they are and tried to identify them, leading conclusively to their identification, i.e. machine and operator. Such things cannot be hidden from a technologically equipped and tech-savvy public.


                    6. ScottRC at 9:26 AM, the Sun is much too bright for me to look at, but I found this three part series on an alternative model of how the Sun and stars in general might work very interesting:

                      5 Reasons the Sun’s Fusion model is wrong – Sun Series 1/3
                      See the Pattern

                      Note in particular that rapid and drastic changes in a star’s intensity might occur and have actually been observed, and solar and stellar longevity and constance might not be all they’re advertised to be in the fusion model. Please don’t misinterpret this as fear-mongering. 🙂


                    7. @Michael, your words:

                      “Well, in my experience, there is no fixed time that you can expect a contrail to disappear in; sometimes and someplace they vanish very swiftly, and sometimes and someplace they get drawn out in cirrus like haze.”

                      With these words you perfectly laid out the difference between contrails and chemtrails, or aerosol trails. Contrails dissipate, as Carnicom’s science shows that they should, aerosol trails don’t. “They get drawn out in cirrus like haze”, and take many other striking poses as well.

                      Yes, contrails vanish swiftly, as water vapor does. Aerosols do not vanish or evaporate. I recommend a video Carnicom made in 2004, wherein this and much more is all nicely explained.


                    8. @ScottRC

                      I too have noticed this peculiarity of the sun, and I have thought of it as “brassy”, or metallic looking. I think the reason is simple, that being the massive increase of aerosol particulates now constantly being populated into our atmosphere. I recommend to you Carnicom’s video on this subject “”. At some point in the video he references this paper, where he details how NOAA, before the aerosol program got underway, made a change so that “the reporting system of visibility data was reduced from a former maximum of 40 miles to a limit of 10 miles”.

                      As he points out, this indicates that NOAA, in anticipation of the rollout of the aerosol program, knew that 40 mile visibility was about to become a dinosaur, and a dinosaur that they wouldn’t want to call attention to.

                      Referring again to the “brassy” sun…I have taken many photos of the sun shining through an aerosol haze. The metallic ring produced, complete with its metallic rainbow, can be quite striking, and very unnatural.


              4. Michael,

                On #1 (RE: Morgellons). . .

                Since you claimed that Morgellons is a hoax, I feel compelled to address this from my perspective. While I do not feel informed enough to attribute the confounding condition to any one specific cause, nor do I definitely believe it is related directly to the phenomenon of chemtrails/geoengineering, I can speak to its actual real-life existence from personal experience.

                In November 2013, my dog actually exhibited symptoms of Morgellons. Without going into great detail, one day on our way home from visiting family in CT, we noticed about 30 open, bleeding lesions along his head/spine. It was getting dark, so I did not have the ability to closely examine. The following day, he had close to 200 of these lesions all over his body – mostly along the spine, but also radiating outward. Most of these lesions were bloody (not pouring out blood, but oozing enough to dab), and on closer examination (with a magnifying glass, not a microscope), there were thin, red fiber-like threads coming out of them (like hanging out of the lesions). I took him to a vet to examine. She had never seen this before, but assumed some type of scabies/mange, even though there was no hair loss around the areas. I took him for a second opinion. That vet also had never seen these symptoms, and was quite confused by what she saw. She had no diagnosis, and no recommended treatment. Hence, I was left on my own to figure it out. After about 10 days of this condition (which was not changing, except to say that he was consistent with about 300 lesions, again, all oozing blood, accompanied by very tiny red threads), I considered this may be Morgellons (even though I had NEVER heard of this in an animal, let alone a dog). I treated him with food-grade diatomaceous earth, both internally and externally. Within a few days, the symptoms subsided. I continued with this regimen for a couple weeks, also adding in carbonized bamboo (like activated charcoal), and the condition cleared – never to return.

                Interestingly, I found a report from a veterinary surgeon, T.J. Dunn, describing a case of Morgellons in a Golden Retriever: Dr. Dunn’s 9-minute presentation was part of an April 2018 conference, the “CEHMDF [The Charles E. Holman Morgellons Disease Foundation] 11th Annual Medical-Scientific Conference on Morgellons Disease”:

                If you are not familiar with the academics who were involved in that conference, then you may not grasp that Morgellons could be a very real condition. Accordingly, there are a couple researchers I would like to highlight:

                1) Dr. Randy Wymore of Oklahoma State University (see,, and

                2) Dr. Ginger Savely (see,, and

                I highly recommend viewing the trailer for this 2020 documentary on Morgellons: The film is available to watch in its entirety on Amazon Prime:

                Again, while I concede that this curious condition may have little (or nothing?) to do with geoengineering (as the jury still seems to be out on that), and there is no general consensus on cause or treatment; I find it hard to believe that someone can still say it is all a hoax and a fabrication. It is frustrating enough that most mainstream doctors/researchers consider Morgellons to be completely delusional on the part of the afflicted person/animal.

                In any case, hopefully, Michael, you will take some time to look through the links I provided. It is only a start. There is much more to sort through to make heads and tails of it. Even so, there is very little funding for research on Morgellons – originating nearly exclusively from the Charles E. Holman Morgellons Disease Foundation (


                1. Congratulations on the therapy for your dog. Who knows what it was? Maybe glass wool?

                  I did watch that trailer you recommended. Didn’t know it was that much of a mainstream topic in the USA. At least, there seems to be more evidence for Morgellons than for the Coronavirus.

                  I heard about Morgellons half a year ago when someone in our local anti-Corona group posted a video (actually, just a talk) about it. It is in German, so it’s probably not worth while posting it here.

                  There is a lot of crazy propaganda stuff invented in the USA, and much of it gets translated and then appears over here, usually getting little or less traction than in the USA because we’re not yet so attuned to this sort of, ehm, culture.

                  I understood the talk was pure fear-mongering, of which I’ve seen plenty, and so filed it under “fear-mongering propaganda from the USA”. And that’s where it still sits and will probably stay. Which ist not to say that I didn’t find it entertaining.


                  1. Michael,

                    Actually, one of the most publicized stories of a Morgellons patient came out of Germany (from 2010):

                    There are some very active Morgellons support groups in Europe, and Germany, in particular.

                    I understand you place this topic under the banner of “fear-mongering propaganda,” but I would like to suggest it’s simply because you have not immersed yourself in the literature/research. I think it’s curious that you find it entertaining, particularly if real people are suffering greatly. How would you really know? Then again, when I analyze and mock staged shooting events and such, I suppose I look like an insensitive person as well. So, who am I to talk?!

                    All I can say is that I sense you have not done enough due diligence in this area to genuinely offer an informed and value-added opinion. I prefer to withhold my opinion about topics that I have not competently researched, which is precisely why I did not add my two cents with regard to the subjects that Gaia presented to me in his comment on this thread (RE: somehow to “challenge” me and ascertain my take on them). In any case, I can certainly accept if you have little interest in Morgellons and do not feel inclined to delve into it any further.


                    1. There’s a couple issues with the TZ article you linked to. First, it’s a suicide report. Suicides are not generally reported on as a guideline in order not to encourage people to follow the example. There are exceptions if there is a general public interest. We’ll see whether or not this case qualifies as such.

                      (Short aside on suicides: The current annual suicide number in Germany is 9000 to 9500. Around 1980, it was twice as high. That means on average 25 people per day commit suicide. The suicide rate is 12.3, which is higher than in Italy, Spain or the UK, but lower than in France, the USA or Russia.)


                      On with the article. There is no mention of any clinical evidence that she actually had this purported disease. Instead, she has been through a months-long psychotherapy.

                      The article states that the description of the disease is like from a bad science fiction novel. It also says that most doctors have never heard of the disease and that only in the USA some progress on the Morgellons front is being made where some universities are into research and the CDC has acknowledged the existence of the disease. (Now with the Corona scam, I guess we all have a clear picture of what to think of the CDC, and its equivalents in other countries such as the RKI in Germany.)

                      Lastly, it is said that the lady called Monika B. is 55 years of age yet her photo, undated, sunglasses and bad quality, shows a lady of at least age 65.

                      So does this case qualify as a suicide worth while reporting on? I don’t think so. I still think that this is part of a fear-mongering propaganda campaign made in the USA and kindly exported to ideologically annexed countries.


                2. I listened to the first twenty minutes of the talk Dr. Ginger R. Savely gave on April 6-7, 2019 at the 12th Annual Medical-Scientific Conference on Morgellons Disease held by the Charles E. Holman Morgellons Disease Foundation (Youtube v=zsBnyos2bQ8, linked to above).

                  I found it interesting how she described that her curiosity was spurred by people’s talk about the alleged disease. She does not ever state having seen any symptoms herself. The closest she came to doing so was saying something like “I’ve seen things no one should really have seen”. Well okay, but this is allegedly a medical-scientific conference, and all she does is telling stories of other people telling stories. In fact, she does not appear to be addressing a medical-scientific audience at all.


                  1. Michael,

                    On the contrary, Ginger Savely has not only had direct Morgellons patient contact (as can be seen at the very beginning of this trailer, and elaborated in this 2017 discussion; it seems Savely has had more direct experience treating patients with this curious condition than any other medical practitioner in this country. She is not only renowned in the Morgellons community for her keen clinical examinations/assessment; as of 2017, she had already worked with over 1,000 patients exhibiting Morgellons symptoms (as revealed around the 14-minute timestamp in the linked interview above).


                    1. From the trailer, around 0:55:

                      “Several of my patients would have these strange fibers coming out of them …”

                      There is uncertainty in grammar and wording. Why not: Several of my patients had fibers coming out of them which consisted of so and so.

                      “And we need to educate young doctors that Morgellons disease is real.”

                      Catch’em while they’re young!

                      Okay, in that other video you linked to (I watched from 13:00 to 17:00), she says that she has actually seen patients with filaments, and that they are very difficult to remove, although she does not elaborate on what methods she has tried for removing them. As she is not a physician, she’s probably not allowed under US law to try using a sharp knife. But yes, she does claim that she has seen patients with filaments.

                      And I do not reject any notion of a psychosomatic disease. Our modern societies and ways of life are unnatural and that might explain a good deal of what’s going on.


                    2. Michael,

                      I found a free online copy of Ginger Savely’s book: Perhaps scroll down to the description of the filaments, showing multiple photos, and where she explains the challenge of removing them. When I saw these fibers in my dog, I did not attempt to remove them. I simply used a magnifying glass over the lesions to examine them. Subsequently, hearing how painful it can be, I am glad I did not proceed to try to extract them (ie – by tweezers, as I do not think a surgical knife would be necessary). That said, the filaments have been examined in labs (hence, the determination that they are composed of keratin, and in some cases, cellulose), so it is fair to say that they have been extracted in some way from some patients. I do not know precisely how this was done.


                    3. If these filaments consist of keratin, chances are you might also call them hair. If they consist of cellulose, that would point to a vegetable origin. You can tell the difference by simply burning them and deciding with your nose.


  28. Yes, SMJ. I had stumbled upon the NovaSeq 6000 machine, sold by Illumina, when trying to find out how DNA sequencing is done, which I encourage everyone to do in order to assess whether or not the process, as described, makes sense, is plausible, and capable of producing meaningful results.


    1. It is strange how illumina’s machines can sequence the genome of something that doesn’t exist. But i reckon it does makes sense according to the narrative seeing as Alphonse Dochez was Oswald Avery’s boyfriend.


  29. On air pollutants and chemtrails:
    By weight the worst I saw was carbon dust near a train station. Beta Attenuation Monitors in large cities show air thick as pea soup in Beijing or New Delhi. L.A. is bad but nowhere near these places in the Orient. The real hazard is said to be PM 2.5; By weight, the particles between 2.5 microns and 0.03 microns. The smaller nano particles are generally disregarded as insignificant by weight, although the Beta Attenuation Monitors are probably picking them up also. These monitors put out a filter plug loaded with particles once per hour and the mass of the particles collected is assessed by how much a beta radiation source is blocked.

    Clif Carnicom, who pretty much broke the chemtrails story, claimed that historical data showed atmospheric conductivity had increased significantly over the past 100 years. This allowed bigger lightning bolts or larger air gaps being needed to insulate high voltages. He did not respond to my emails which did not add confidence to my estimate of his science. He reports that mass spectrometry was used to measure metallic particles falling from the sky, but no answer forthcoming when I asked about the raw data, or labs being used, etc.

    I cannot see how one could ever know if the particle that lands on the ground were sprayed from a jet or fell from outer space or was picked up from a pit mine by the wind.

    Call it rumors: If barium, said to be in the chemtrails, were in the dust then hit by sunshine, it is reported that an area of sky might be ionized. This might be equivalent to semiconductor doping. If this area were then hit with EMF, like from HAARP, this might modulate a far larger current between ground and ionosphere, similar to putting voltage on a transistor gate. If this were a weapons application or for weather control, perhaps that would motivate some team of lunatics to be spraying this or that into areas of the sky. But I did not have the lab data to cast much light on these rumors.


    1. Miles Mathis speculated that chemtrails were simply a means of disposing of fly ash. He stated this to be true from the certainty derived from his omniscient truth sense. He could be right, I suppose, but I was not convinced. He did not respond graciously to my emails to him on this topic. From his perch on Olympus he had made his pronouncement and was done with the chemtrail topic.


        1. Stepher’s Thanks for the J. Marvin Herndon link, this was a great deal more informative than anything that Mathis wrote on it.


        2. I remember having heard or read J. Marvin Herndon talk about fly ash as the cause of what people call chemtrails. Okay. But it’s just an industrial waste product and nothing special or specific. I don’t think it can be sprayed, but it could be dumped into the atmoosphere using an appropriate facility. Maybe that has been tried in the USA to see whether it has any interesting effect, and maybe not. It’s not so different from a volcano projecting ash into the atmosphere, just nowhere near the volume a volcano can produce.


    2. I tried to get funding to look into the atmospheric nanoparticle issue around five or six years ago. Mostly I was looking for metal particles that would increase atmospheric conductivity, although I see now that microscopic bits of graphene might also have this effect. Interestingly, links left here by Stephers indicate that carbon waste flash heated has become a method for the industrial production of graphene. Could it be that fly ash sent through jet engines might be producing nano graphene in the atmosphere?

      Funding was denied with the comment that “if we don’t look then we won’t have any potential for increased liability”. I am not currently working in that field, but have had some spare time to mull over what I saw then.


    3. What on earth would be the point of a U.N. weather-weapon treaty if there was no intent/problem. The solution is, of course, in the wording. “Peaceful purposes” does nicely, no?

      The United Nations 1976 Weather Weapon Treaty:


      The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law concerning such use.
      The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of scientific and technological information on the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes. States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international organizations, to international economic and scientific co-operation in the preservation, improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.


      1. “What on earth would be the point of a U.N. weather-weapon treaty if there was no intent/problem.”

        Even if the article you quote mentioned modification of weather or meteorology (which it does not) that would not prove the existence and effectiveness of modification techniques that would qualify as weapons.

        The official name is not Weather Weapon Treaty, but Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD), formally the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques.

        It is funny how the English Wikipedia boasts about banning “weather warfare” and then proceeds to point out that it is controversial whether the convention also bans spraying Agent Orange. (Now there’s a real chemtrail, at last!)


  30. OREGONMATT on October 18, 2021 at 11:05 pm

    It was a picture perfect Sunday in Northern Germany, blue sky and no clouds, high pressure for the moment keeping the humid Atlantic air at bay. Contrails dissolved quickly. Now do you think this was due to airlines conspiring or convening not to spray today or due to meteorological conditions?

    I watched that 2004 Carnicom movie you recommended (not until the end yet), and it is well made: the music, the images, the voices, the emotional appeal.

    I do agree that contrails criss-crossing an empty sky are an ugly sight. It does not happen where I live because we usually get a fair share of cloudy weather in various forms coming in from the West and we don’t have many airplanes in the sky. The nearest airport is Hamburg and it is not a major one.

    I am not familiar with the meteorological conditions in Oregon, Wyoming, Montana … What I’ve seen is Seattle in February and cloud-wise, that was not unlike Northern Germany. I assume meteorology explains contrails and chemtrails in your part of the planet as it does in mine. If not, then something is happening there that is not happening here.


      1. Well, I think it is unsubstantiated fear-mongering. We simply do not agree on the chemtrail issue.

        For the record, here is the Morgellons talk video (in German) I was referring to in my comment from October 17, 2021 at 5:36 pm, and which I found entertaining horror sci-fi but equally unsubstantiated:

        Dagmar im Gespräch mit: Harald Kautz-Vella #001 – Morgellons und Transhumanismus – YouTube


  31. So, it looks like Andrew Hessel (whom I featured in this installment) has co-authored a new book slated to be released in February 2022: The Genesis Machine: Our Quest to Rewrite Life in the Age of Synthetic Biology I find one opening/promotional statement, in particular, to be curious (and actually quite revealing) given the narrative of a scary, deadly virus for the past 2 years (see the 5th bullet point):


    How soon (years? decades?) you’ll be able to control your own genetic destiny
    Whether humans will start to live ultra-long lives, and the impact that could have on society
    That the freshest sushi on the planet might soon be grown in a Nebraska lab
    That cells can be programmed, much like computers
    And that viruses aren’t necessarily bad –– they’re just containers for genetic code
    How investments will shape the bioeconomy as it is being formed
    Which companies could be the biggest winners
    The fascinating story of Golden Rice, and how misinformation killed a once-promising food source

    The co-author of the book is Amy Webb. Here is her bio: Following is a very short clip of Webb at the WEF (reading from a script):


  32. “Shedding, Vaccines and Graphene Machines” (February 22, 2022) by Dr. Sam Bailey – just under 20 minutes

    Seems Dr. Sam is going deeper than Tom, Andy, and Stefan — steadily inching closer to my premise/analysis (?).

    She’s not all the way there yet, but getting much warmer . . .

    I still think I need to dig deeper into the potential pheromone connection . . .

    I am exploring further the work of Leor Weinberger (whom I have previously referenced with respect to transmissible “vaccines”) and his TIPs (, as well as his work in stochastic noise (

    Most important, we need to get away from any notion of physical “shedding”; and, instead, lean into transmission via inherent/engineered/hybridized circuitry, electromagnetic resonance ( and semiconductors/NEMS ( — proteins may play a role in this regard, as they can be exploited/tweaked (


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