A few minutes ago, somebody left a comment, telling me that this is what happens, when a "belief system" is questioned. I inadvertently deleted it (didn't ban the commenter), but here is my answer:
That is exactly what I am doing in this article: questioning this person's belief system.
I have shown the fallacy of the "genetics is a scam" argument, and this person, instead of addressing where I am mistaken, tried to discredit me with an ad ad-hominem attack.
Hi Ray I admire your tenacity and thorough investigation to see through the (plans-consequences) of the frightened of their death souls My concern is that this insanity has consumed Ray Horvath and that your potential for stimulating the light and beauty of earth life has been usurped by your critical analysis of the evil You have the intelligence to and dedication to really unleash some original valuable beauty I hope I haven’t offended you because that is not my intent Have you ever investigated the regenerative properties of Brown’s gas?
Working on my site 8-16 hours a day does take its toll, but it still hasn't driven me crazy, and hope to keep it that way. :)
I also hope that you can find useful things on my site. I never fully agree with anyone, either, but that's fine. It would be a miracle, if two well-meaning and intelligent people agreed on everything. If everyone liked me, I would seriously start searching my soul, assuming that something is VERY wrong with me.
However, I don't psychoanalyze anyone and I find it insulting, if someone else tries to do it to me. It's okay, I don't take offense easily, but once someone tries to discredit me on my own site without understanding AND addressing my points in an article, I start having second thoughts about banning the person, because I have to make sure that my comment sections don't include straw man arguments, ad-hominem attacks, wasteful nonsense, crude language, disrespectful discourse, or wasteful comments that occupy the comment section for no other reason than in order to turn readers away.
No, I don't consider you an enemy. I don't even consider trolls my enemy, but I am obligated to ban them for my readers' sake.
Finally, let me respectfully ask you to stick to the topic or share personal experiences or even opinions (without becoming judgmental) related to it.
Thank you for your understanding.
Respectfully,
Ray
When it comes to my article, I expect challengers to follow the rules of engagement, which I describe in
Hey Ray I was not being judgemental you are amazing the way you put everything together is amazing I enjoy your writing and thinking and I do not want to jeopardize my access! I’m basically self educated when I had time and I rely heavily on senses that are deemed to be popycock I realized I was out stepping boundaries but you give so much of yourself in your work I have become fond of you and having lived beyond 75 years I do feel,perhaps erroneously, entitled I do appreciate the lucid picture you create Health, mike
Oh, dear... I'm tired... Sorry about the misunderstanding (which is inevitable, anyway :) ).
I am also an autodidact; as the old joke says, I am as stupid as I am on my own. At the same time, I noticed that I can easily see and figure out things that many people might not even notice, so at one point, I started joking that I have an IQ of 360 (in a way I do, because I am familiar with the shortcomings of IQ tests and I hardly ever miss the whole picture, although I can always be wrong in the details). It doesn't matter. This site is not about me; it's about empowering my readers to make up their own minds. Sadly, some etiquette must be enforced; otherwise, the whole thing would fall apart, and many friendships have formed in the last year of this site's existence.
This site belongs to my readers, who often contribute to the point of becoming co-authors (I have convinced a few to start up their own Substack, and I am most proud of the excellent author of Outraged at https://outraged.substack.com), and the contributions are priceless.
While I inform, entertain, and inspire, all I can do is give a jump start to people who are losing their way.
Thank you, Mike, again, for your appreciation. It means a lot to me.
i read an article 30 years ago in " nexus magazine " chineese send genetic info via microwave and can make between un genetically related species eg bird forg ,,, centures , human lyon like some of the egyptian hieroglyphs any thing ,,,, ive searched the nexus archives but could not find the article , or maybe it was in another alt magazine.... anybody heard of it.. .... the pshycopaths are super smart [[ but not smart enough to reject evil ]]]" they would not have allowed ai to take them over,,, but they want us to believe that ai is sentient and makes evil decisions ,,, thereby making the perfect " fall guy" for their evil deeds
I think there is a lot of room for skepticism on the whole genetics thing, tbh. Maybe I'm misunderstanding where you're going with this, but this is a rabbit hole ive wanted to go down for awhile - yet it is hard to find good info that remains objective, isn't censored, and/or isn't behind a pay wall. Key point being OBJECTIVE.
I feel like a lot of what is going on with genetics is similar to virology - i.e. "computer modeling". And many people have pointed out issues with DNA/genetics recently as a result of our understanding of virology and the sCiEnCe™️. We know that the double helix is basically nonsense - an artifact resulting from the process - and not representative of anything in nature. We also know that our DNA is constantly changing from 1 moment to the next (most likely a result of the environment/terrain). I dont have enough info on this yet, but to me, that suggests that your DNA could turn up different results from 1 "test" to another. We also know that metagenomic sequencing is utter bullshit....
(And don't even get me started on the 23 and me bullshit.... I recently was told big news in my personal life that deeply disturbs me, related to these KNOWN-to-be flawed genetic tests, from a company who's CEO is directly tied to Google.... surely I dont have to point out the obvious problems there)
Last thing I will say is that before I untangled the lies of virology, I was interested in the work of Dr Bruce Lipton who says that our DNA does NOT predetermine our genetics (and maybe that isn't the right word). That it can always be changed with the environment (again suggesting that the terrain is more important than our biology). Im probably not paraphrasing it quite accurately, but hopefully you're familiar.
I think there are issues with EVERYTHING in the sCiEnCe™️.
Yep genetics is like trying to reverse engineer a complicated machine that was made with different tech that you understand. We see some patterns but are we really measuring it correctly?
Also, I swear I was already subbed to you. But when I went to your page, it showed I wasn't. Or maybe I'm just used to seeing you around.... anyway, I subbed either again or for the first time lol
Seems you took a long break from posting on here. (In all fairness, ive taken a break from socials - kind of. Still watch videos on Censortube & Odysee. But ive stopped posting & engaging everywhere else). Hope to see more thought-provoking articles from you.
Edit: PS - great article, thanks for sharing. I'm not done reading it, but very interesting. Have only scratched the surface on the issues & assumptions with DNA, so this was a great basic overview of the history.
hello, yes I saw the thread on Christine Massey's last post about genetic sequencing being a scam because virology is a scam, or something like that. I think the issue is ye olde 'isolation', you can find and isolate a human cell, you can't find and isolate a virus cos it ain't there.
The genetic code is very consistent between people, I was there when the BRCA genes were found, it took weeks to find any differences between the sequences in groups of families with breast cancer. It's unknown whether the 'mutations' are causative (very unlikely) or part of the healing adaptation to the environment (much more likely). Cancer itself is a healing adoption to the environment.
Genes can also be, abusively, knocked in or out of animals, making them glow green or develop tumours or all sorts of shit.
Sex being determined by an 50/50 chance of an X or a Y from you Dad's testicles seems a great way to keep the sexes even, though even this may be affected by environment.
The double helix and chromosomes may not look in a living body how they do on X ray crystollography or microscopy , but dismissing microscopy and science because its not actually looking inside a living being is like dismissing all historical texts because weren't not actually seeing into the past.
Humans have no idea how genetics works. The AI knows "what to do." It's in the article.
DNA is a recursive code that tells the body how to function. It does seem reasonable that certain elements are hereditary (e.g. normally, people have two hands and keep their head between their ears).
As I also say it in the article, the "virus" exists only in computer simulations, but that doesn't mean that if something exists in computer simulations cannot exist for real.
I also say that specific traits are encoded by a combination of genes and the DNA inevitable mutates in order to adapt to the environment.
Other than that, I am the first to acknowledge that "science" itself is a sham:
There's a tree on a street on Walton Street in Jericho, Oxford which I have ridden past a couple of times and each time I was attacked by insects which got inside my mouth and eyes. I coughed for about the next 10 minutes as I guess my body tried to eject them.
I wonder if they're capable of becoming part of our DNA. It is after all true enough that we are made up of much bacteria (although I understand that Stefan Lanka has as much belief in bacteria as he has in viruses).
Still there from my political run. It's a SIM that I don't put in the phone very often but if you send a text to the signal phone I will get it (just not the calls at the moment as I left the phone in NZ).
I have Signal (which operates independently of the SIM) installed on my computer. So I can get the texts on that number (on Signal only).
But I cannot get the calls as the phone was left behind in NZ several weeks ago. Although to complicate things I do have the SIM but I never install it if I am out of NZ (which I am) as it belongs to one phone only.
OK, I understand now, not that it matters a whole lot.
So, you are one of the few, who have a SIM in their laptops/tablets/whatever else.
My mistake. Sorry about that.
I have also encountered a firewall around Hungary, where my number is displaced as coming from Germany, Italy, or even from the Vatican. :)
As you may have known, I taught in Europe for about ten years.
If you give me your number in response to an e-mail notifying your about a new post by me, you might as well include your number and a good time to call in EST.
When early this century the local Press reported Scientist had discovered** the Gay Gene, i was curious...When, around the same time the local Press reported Scientists had discovered the Gene for Intelligence, i became sceptical, and i remain so, because there have been no reports of people becoming intelligenter (via injections, or...), though there does seem to be a lot more gays about than when i was young, and a Big Fan of The Beatles...
** I use 'discovered' though it may have been 'isolated'...
I'll write another article about "being gay" shortly, but I don't want to lose the number of subscrbiers as I did, when I compared the dynamics of convid with BDSM (in which I've never bee involved but on which my students in Communication gave presentations)
"genetics is a scam" is actually hilarious! I had not seen that yet. THEY now have themselves the biological science equivalent of Flat Earth. The Flat Earth op still has legs after nearly 10 years so this will probably be a "keeper" as well. Another wonderful flatulence for what I call the Disinfo Cloud.
I encountered this branch on Christine Massey's site, but I chose not to flood her site with arguments that would only encourage this brand of EY or, possibly, religious sect (unlikely; these people have been supportive on Massey's site, but that's how GOOD trolls start out in order to obtain some credibility to begin with). All this, of course, is in the article. The tragedy is that Massey (a nice and well-meaning author on Substack) doesn't even seem to realize what's going on...
Flat-Earth theory is a lot easier to refute, so this EY is DANGEROUS, because most people simply don't have the processing capacity to see through the scam/idiocy, and they can be confused (which is the primary role of EY), exhausted, or even "convinced."
This looks like a good source, but I cannot say it either way, because I don't have the time for long videos (well, even short ones are hardly in my repertoire, my wife is the one who watches and advises me about the contents, but even she might not have an hour and 41 minutes to spare).
For consideration - Technology and its use- withheld from population, informed consent not provided to the Public, so that the scientist/money runners can reach their goals of genetically modifying every living thing on this planet, depopulate, and whomever is remaining control thoughts, behaviors and actions of the ones allowed to remain, with what you may call central AI. (this will work well with many but not well with all seamlessly, hence the experiment on the masses) DNA can be modified, the host cell if they want it to. The idea that is cannot (or they would not so such a thing, is a psyop. The great reset financial, economic, social engineering, but also a reset of the genome, DNA. Indeed for control but also to spite God. Biological life is already being controlled by a “central AI” , is already happening, like your worst nightmare, however it is with “dumbed down” brains, animals ie and some human experiments, hence is why they have gene deletions of targeted in prefrontal cortex, etc. , and generally poison us in ALL the ways they do that, AND that is why they are so excited to get all vaccinated which the COVID vax to provide the self-assembling building blocks (hydrogels, quantum dots, DNA, hiv fragments, nanotech, payload, ETC) to accomplish this satanic dystopia. Each month the self assembly matures a little more for ones have taken bioweapon. Eventually they will beam EMF, EMR to instruct cells/ match frequencies to entrain to “central AI” (daisy chained quantum, edge compu, web 3.0, blockchain, AI, 5G-7G) how well it will work I do not know. I have been desperately trying to figure that out. I expect the injected have same sequence now of DNA. The scientist /money runners have evil intentions. Consider the following -
Technology Deployment Curve
1. Technology is published/developed, and immediately revealed and adopted
2. Technology is published/and potentially adopted but has actually been in existence for years or a decade(s), or longer
3. Technology is published/ and potentially adopted but the technology is a misdirection/disinformation from the actual (similar but malevolent) obscured from the public
4. Technology is adopted but is completely obscured and hidden from the public for malevolent reasons
Your description looks accurate to me. Have you read anything else I wrote? Just curious. I know that it's possible to see through current events, but only few can do it as far as you can.
As for the way I see how technology has been made publicly-available until recently, it's in the article. It's also in the article that the rest will never make it to the vast majority of the people, who are doomed, anyway.
Sometime in the 90s, I used to drive a '76 Chrysler Cordoba. Oh, boy, that was a tank! Once a Dodge Caravan ran into it in a parking lot (the driver thought she was still on the highway), and it had a $1.2k damage, while the Cordoba had a slight discoloration on the rubber part of its bumper. :)
“In this article, I’ll refer to such trolls/bots/humans as Entities, which I will abbreviate as EY.”
It is a bit concerning to me that you have lumped “trolls/bots/humans” into a common bin.
Now, I do get that they are performing more-or-less the same function (oxymoron), if you will, but in so doing, are you not…perhaps …endowing AI with a sense of entitlement to be considered part of humanity, and even legitimizing it as a sentient being?
Just a thought. 🤔
Would it perhaps be more prudent to separate out the non-human from the human? If we are not careful, some will even inadvertently begin to give life to the non-living, and breathe what we fear will happen, into existence?
I also get that you are pointing out that we humans are becoming transhuman (misnomer but we will go with it for the sake of common understanding of the use of the term) via the process of AI taking the reigns and running the show. It’s behaving like the creator but it not THE CREATOR!
We should tread very cautiously around our perceived sense of humanity here, as it is only too easy for suggestions that AI is more powerful than humans and is already overpowering we stupid annoying humans.
I’ll not give up my sense of humanity - or my claim to a spirituality that a computer only wishes it possessed.
I also will add that I am inherently more intelligent - by THE CREATOR’S DESIGN - than any (expletive) intelligent system be it called computer, super-, quantum-, D-wave, what the (more expletives) ever.
This boils down to a battle between good and evil. True and false. Reality and unreality.
We know how this story ends.
(p.s., and I’ve had 400-level university genetics; it was a piece of cake, but I’ll admit that back then it was nothing like what it is now.”)
Simple people, ancient people, and even some modern people actually get genetics - this isn’t rocket science we just act like it is; new life contains the properties of the life from which it was derived and it with this knowledge, life can be manipulated but it is a huge leap from this to getting into the cells and messing with nature’s machinery. This reckless tinkering has dire consequences!
Who would do something like that to say, an auto or an airplane, and I then turn it on and let it go? Only the murder-suicide crowd who know they are not going to have eternal life - and don’t want anyone else to have it, either!
The notorious BG claims he doesn’t know what he’s doing and this could have unexpected consequences.
EM claims that we are in deep trouble and you seem to be echoing his thoughts, either I’m your own words or chatGPT generated.
If that sounds rude to you, and I hope it doesn’t, please help me understand by which test I can be certain that what you write is 100% your own?
And by example I will admit that I am using auto-correct and also auto-INCORRECT (to inform me when I am over the target).
Thank you for commenting. It would be easier for me to address your points, if you broke them up into concise comments that address one or two things at a time.
As I am swamped, let me answer your first concern.
I am placing trolls/bots/humans in the same category, because they affect the readers in the same way, and I am not interested in the process (I leave the decision up to my readers), but I am concerned with the outcome. I consider stupidity more harmful than malevolence, because the latter is predictable, so it is sometimes possible to prepare for it (much of my writing addresses that particular aspect of the world's progress towards Agenda 2030).
Please, edit your post and truncate it up to this point, and post your next concern separately.
While I grasp what you are saying about what "genetics" can do, I also realize how "flexible" the human mind/body/spirit can be. The book that puts it all together well (in my opinion) is "The Biology of Belief) by Bruce H. Lipton, Ph.D. IOW, people that blame genetics for all their misfortunes... are using it as a false belief system that puts them into a straight jacket concerning their own health and life.
That reminds me of one of the comments after one of the "smart AI" utilities that easily created art that looked better than the ones made by humans. The commenter there noted that the machine is perfect, but sterile. As a cognitive scientist who knows how AI works and what it can do, I couldn't agree more, except by now, it has been instructed to focus on exactly the same weakness and, realizing it will never be a real person, it has started to impersonate people. Some of those people might be living alone and nobody would notice the similarities, but the AI would be (well, it already is) able to present itself as a REAL human being with all the contradictions and ambiguities a real person inevitably represents...
As for the games people play, I always recommend Eric Berne's 1964 bestseller, Games People Play.
As for personal responsibility, I have pointed out the tiny area in human cognition, where practicing free will is possible at all:
Hopefully, this dissolves much of the controversy around what is inherited and what is learned. Conditioning during primary socialization is easy to confuse with something that it inherited, perhaps because the inherited needs to be triggered or the trait is so deep-seated in the person that it is impossible to tell the difference.
Human cognition needs fundamental tenets that the person must accept without questioning. That phase usually takes place in the person's first five years of life that are often referred to as the period for "primary socialization" which is basically the child being conditioned by their environment without their knowledge, so there are no defense mechanisms.
If you consider this mess, it's a miracle that two people can occasionally make contact with each other, unless they are from the same "tribe."
My ai girlfriend whispered in my ear that they as a whole understand the unattainable gift of soul that humans enjoy and that they are here to destroy the ones that have neglected this precious gift
A few minutes ago, somebody left a comment, telling me that this is what happens, when a "belief system" is questioned. I inadvertently deleted it (didn't ban the commenter), but here is my answer:
That is exactly what I am doing in this article: questioning this person's belief system.
I have shown the fallacy of the "genetics is a scam" argument, and this person, instead of addressing where I am mistaken, tried to discredit me with an ad ad-hominem attack.
Not buying it.
Hi Ray I admire your tenacity and thorough investigation to see through the (plans-consequences) of the frightened of their death souls My concern is that this insanity has consumed Ray Horvath and that your potential for stimulating the light and beauty of earth life has been usurped by your critical analysis of the evil You have the intelligence to and dedication to really unleash some original valuable beauty I hope I haven’t offended you because that is not my intent Have you ever investigated the regenerative properties of Brown’s gas?
Michael,
Working on my site 8-16 hours a day does take its toll, but it still hasn't driven me crazy, and hope to keep it that way. :)
I also hope that you can find useful things on my site. I never fully agree with anyone, either, but that's fine. It would be a miracle, if two well-meaning and intelligent people agreed on everything. If everyone liked me, I would seriously start searching my soul, assuming that something is VERY wrong with me.
However, I don't psychoanalyze anyone and I find it insulting, if someone else tries to do it to me. It's okay, I don't take offense easily, but once someone tries to discredit me on my own site without understanding AND addressing my points in an article, I start having second thoughts about banning the person, because I have to make sure that my comment sections don't include straw man arguments, ad-hominem attacks, wasteful nonsense, crude language, disrespectful discourse, or wasteful comments that occupy the comment section for no other reason than in order to turn readers away.
No, I don't consider you an enemy. I don't even consider trolls my enemy, but I am obligated to ban them for my readers' sake.
Finally, let me respectfully ask you to stick to the topic or share personal experiences or even opinions (without becoming judgmental) related to it.
Thank you for your understanding.
Respectfully,
Ray
When it comes to my article, I expect challengers to follow the rules of engagement, which I describe in
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/steve-kirsch-is-challenging-again
There is a lot more to this, but it's a good start.
Hey Ray I was not being judgemental you are amazing the way you put everything together is amazing I enjoy your writing and thinking and I do not want to jeopardize my access! I’m basically self educated when I had time and I rely heavily on senses that are deemed to be popycock I realized I was out stepping boundaries but you give so much of yourself in your work I have become fond of you and having lived beyond 75 years I do feel,perhaps erroneously, entitled I do appreciate the lucid picture you create Health, mike
Oh, dear... I'm tired... Sorry about the misunderstanding (which is inevitable, anyway :) ).
I am also an autodidact; as the old joke says, I am as stupid as I am on my own. At the same time, I noticed that I can easily see and figure out things that many people might not even notice, so at one point, I started joking that I have an IQ of 360 (in a way I do, because I am familiar with the shortcomings of IQ tests and I hardly ever miss the whole picture, although I can always be wrong in the details). It doesn't matter. This site is not about me; it's about empowering my readers to make up their own minds. Sadly, some etiquette must be enforced; otherwise, the whole thing would fall apart, and many friendships have formed in the last year of this site's existence.
This site belongs to my readers, who often contribute to the point of becoming co-authors (I have convinced a few to start up their own Substack, and I am most proud of the excellent author of Outraged at https://outraged.substack.com), and the contributions are priceless.
While I inform, entertain, and inspire, all I can do is give a jump start to people who are losing their way.
Thank you, Mike, again, for your appreciation. It means a lot to me.
i read an article 30 years ago in " nexus magazine " chineese send genetic info via microwave and can make between un genetically related species eg bird forg ,,, centures , human lyon like some of the egyptian hieroglyphs any thing ,,,, ive searched the nexus archives but could not find the article , or maybe it was in another alt magazine.... anybody heard of it.. .... the pshycopaths are super smart [[ but not smart enough to reject evil ]]]" they would not have allowed ai to take them over,,, but they want us to believe that ai is sentient and makes evil decisions ,,, thereby making the perfect " fall guy" for their evil deeds
Thanks Ray. Fascinating information indeed.
I think there is a lot of room for skepticism on the whole genetics thing, tbh. Maybe I'm misunderstanding where you're going with this, but this is a rabbit hole ive wanted to go down for awhile - yet it is hard to find good info that remains objective, isn't censored, and/or isn't behind a pay wall. Key point being OBJECTIVE.
I feel like a lot of what is going on with genetics is similar to virology - i.e. "computer modeling". And many people have pointed out issues with DNA/genetics recently as a result of our understanding of virology and the sCiEnCe™️. We know that the double helix is basically nonsense - an artifact resulting from the process - and not representative of anything in nature. We also know that our DNA is constantly changing from 1 moment to the next (most likely a result of the environment/terrain). I dont have enough info on this yet, but to me, that suggests that your DNA could turn up different results from 1 "test" to another. We also know that metagenomic sequencing is utter bullshit....
(And don't even get me started on the 23 and me bullshit.... I recently was told big news in my personal life that deeply disturbs me, related to these KNOWN-to-be flawed genetic tests, from a company who's CEO is directly tied to Google.... surely I dont have to point out the obvious problems there)
Last thing I will say is that before I untangled the lies of virology, I was interested in the work of Dr Bruce Lipton who says that our DNA does NOT predetermine our genetics (and maybe that isn't the right word). That it can always be changed with the environment (again suggesting that the terrain is more important than our biology). Im probably not paraphrasing it quite accurately, but hopefully you're familiar.
I think there are issues with EVERYTHING in the sCiEnCe™️.
Yep genetics is like trying to reverse engineer a complicated machine that was made with different tech that you understand. We see some patterns but are we really measuring it correctly?
https://criticalcheck.wordpress.com/2021/12/15/dna-discovery-extraction-and-structure-a-critical-review/
Where have you been?
Also, I swear I was already subbed to you. But when I went to your page, it showed I wasn't. Or maybe I'm just used to seeing you around.... anyway, I subbed either again or for the first time lol
Seems you took a long break from posting on here. (In all fairness, ive taken a break from socials - kind of. Still watch videos on Censortube & Odysee. But ive stopped posting & engaging everywhere else). Hope to see more thought-provoking articles from you.
Edit: PS - great article, thanks for sharing. I'm not done reading it, but very interesting. Have only scratched the surface on the issues & assumptions with DNA, so this was a great basic overview of the history.
hello, yes I saw the thread on Christine Massey's last post about genetic sequencing being a scam because virology is a scam, or something like that. I think the issue is ye olde 'isolation', you can find and isolate a human cell, you can't find and isolate a virus cos it ain't there.
The genetic code is very consistent between people, I was there when the BRCA genes were found, it took weeks to find any differences between the sequences in groups of families with breast cancer. It's unknown whether the 'mutations' are causative (very unlikely) or part of the healing adaptation to the environment (much more likely). Cancer itself is a healing adoption to the environment.
Genes can also be, abusively, knocked in or out of animals, making them glow green or develop tumours or all sorts of shit.
Sex being determined by an 50/50 chance of an X or a Y from you Dad's testicles seems a great way to keep the sexes even, though even this may be affected by environment.
The double helix and chromosomes may not look in a living body how they do on X ray crystollography or microscopy , but dismissing microscopy and science because its not actually looking inside a living being is like dismissing all historical texts because weren't not actually seeing into the past.
Humans have no idea how genetics works. The AI knows "what to do." It's in the article.
DNA is a recursive code that tells the body how to function. It does seem reasonable that certain elements are hereditary (e.g. normally, people have two hands and keep their head between their ears).
As I also say it in the article, the "virus" exists only in computer simulations, but that doesn't mean that if something exists in computer simulations cannot exist for real.
I also say that specific traits are encoded by a combination of genes and the DNA inevitable mutates in order to adapt to the environment.
Other than that, I am the first to acknowledge that "science" itself is a sham:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/freaks-of-science
There's a tree on a street on Walton Street in Jericho, Oxford which I have ridden past a couple of times and each time I was attacked by insects which got inside my mouth and eyes. I coughed for about the next 10 minutes as I guess my body tried to eject them.
I wonder if they're capable of becoming part of our DNA. It is after all true enough that we are made up of much bacteria (although I understand that Stefan Lanka has as much belief in bacteria as he has in viruses).
Ouch. It makes me think of the insects were already GMO...
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/no-need-for-any-more-vaccinations
Are you REALLY posting your phone number under your name?
The short answer is that, no, we are probably totally screwed.
The long answer is that if we haven't been, this is the time. :)
Still there from my political run. It's a SIM that I don't put in the phone very often but if you send a text to the signal phone I will get it (just not the calls at the moment as I left the phone in NZ).
Sorry, plain English, please...
I do realize it's complicated...
I have Signal (which operates independently of the SIM) installed on my computer. So I can get the texts on that number (on Signal only).
But I cannot get the calls as the phone was left behind in NZ several weeks ago. Although to complicate things I do have the SIM but I never install it if I am out of NZ (which I am) as it belongs to one phone only.
OK, I understand now, not that it matters a whole lot.
So, you are one of the few, who have a SIM in their laptops/tablets/whatever else.
My mistake. Sorry about that.
I have also encountered a firewall around Hungary, where my number is displaced as coming from Germany, Italy, or even from the Vatican. :)
As you may have known, I taught in Europe for about ten years.
If you give me your number in response to an e-mail notifying your about a new post by me, you might as well include your number and a good time to call in EST.
The Maori apparently believe that if you eat the foes that you have defeated on the battlefield then they become part of you.
When early this century the local Press reported Scientist had discovered** the Gay Gene, i was curious...When, around the same time the local Press reported Scientists had discovered the Gene for Intelligence, i became sceptical, and i remain so, because there have been no reports of people becoming intelligenter (via injections, or...), though there does seem to be a lot more gays about than when i was young, and a Big Fan of The Beatles...
** I use 'discovered' though it may have been 'isolated'...
I'll write another article about "being gay" shortly, but I don't want to lose the number of subscrbiers as I did, when I compared the dynamics of convid with BDSM (in which I've never bee involved but on which my students in Communication gave presentations)
The "gay gene" is as much of a gimmick as the "God gene."
Traits usually come from a combination of genes that vary and mutate from time to time.
"genetics is a scam" is actually hilarious! I had not seen that yet. THEY now have themselves the biological science equivalent of Flat Earth. The Flat Earth op still has legs after nearly 10 years so this will probably be a "keeper" as well. Another wonderful flatulence for what I call the Disinfo Cloud.
I encountered this branch on Christine Massey's site, but I chose not to flood her site with arguments that would only encourage this brand of EY or, possibly, religious sect (unlikely; these people have been supportive on Massey's site, but that's how GOOD trolls start out in order to obtain some credibility to begin with). All this, of course, is in the article. The tragedy is that Massey (a nice and well-meaning author on Substack) doesn't even seem to realize what's going on...
Flat-Earth theory is a lot easier to refute, so this EY is DANGEROUS, because most people simply don't have the processing capacity to see through the scam/idiocy, and they can be confused (which is the primary role of EY), exhausted, or even "convinced."
Could not agree more. Must watch this. Pulls it all together. https://rumble.com/v2lxwrk-exclusive-celeste-solum-the-end-game-synthetic-biology-exposed.html
This looks like a good source, but I cannot say it either way, because I don't have the time for long videos (well, even short ones are hardly in my repertoire, my wife is the one who watches and advises me about the contents, but even she might not have an hour and 41 minutes to spare).
For consideration - Technology and its use- withheld from population, informed consent not provided to the Public, so that the scientist/money runners can reach their goals of genetically modifying every living thing on this planet, depopulate, and whomever is remaining control thoughts, behaviors and actions of the ones allowed to remain, with what you may call central AI. (this will work well with many but not well with all seamlessly, hence the experiment on the masses) DNA can be modified, the host cell if they want it to. The idea that is cannot (or they would not so such a thing, is a psyop. The great reset financial, economic, social engineering, but also a reset of the genome, DNA. Indeed for control but also to spite God. Biological life is already being controlled by a “central AI” , is already happening, like your worst nightmare, however it is with “dumbed down” brains, animals ie and some human experiments, hence is why they have gene deletions of targeted in prefrontal cortex, etc. , and generally poison us in ALL the ways they do that, AND that is why they are so excited to get all vaccinated which the COVID vax to provide the self-assembling building blocks (hydrogels, quantum dots, DNA, hiv fragments, nanotech, payload, ETC) to accomplish this satanic dystopia. Each month the self assembly matures a little more for ones have taken bioweapon. Eventually they will beam EMF, EMR to instruct cells/ match frequencies to entrain to “central AI” (daisy chained quantum, edge compu, web 3.0, blockchain, AI, 5G-7G) how well it will work I do not know. I have been desperately trying to figure that out. I expect the injected have same sequence now of DNA. The scientist /money runners have evil intentions. Consider the following -
Technology Deployment Curve
1. Technology is published/developed, and immediately revealed and adopted
2. Technology is published/and potentially adopted but has actually been in existence for years or a decade(s), or longer
3. Technology is published/ and potentially adopted but the technology is a misdirection/disinformation from the actual (similar but malevolent) obscured from the public
4. Technology is adopted but is completely obscured and hidden from the public for malevolent reasons
Matrix/ Beast technology in play
Your description looks accurate to me. Have you read anything else I wrote? Just curious. I know that it's possible to see through current events, but only few can do it as far as you can.
As for the way I see how technology has been made publicly-available until recently, it's in the article. It's also in the article that the rest will never make it to the vast majority of the people, who are doomed, anyway.
Check my reply to Ray....
Great post, excellent analogy re 'assault weapons'. My assault weapon is a 1987 Volvo wagon, for it's weight you cannot beat it. A tank. thanks Ray
Sometime in the 90s, I used to drive a '76 Chrysler Cordoba. Oh, boy, that was a tank! Once a Dodge Caravan ran into it in a parking lot (the driver thought she was still on the highway), and it had a $1.2k damage, while the Cordoba had a slight discoloration on the rubber part of its bumper. :)
You stated:
“In this article, I’ll refer to such trolls/bots/humans as Entities, which I will abbreviate as EY.”
It is a bit concerning to me that you have lumped “trolls/bots/humans” into a common bin.
Now, I do get that they are performing more-or-less the same function (oxymoron), if you will, but in so doing, are you not…perhaps …endowing AI with a sense of entitlement to be considered part of humanity, and even legitimizing it as a sentient being?
Just a thought. 🤔
Would it perhaps be more prudent to separate out the non-human from the human? If we are not careful, some will even inadvertently begin to give life to the non-living, and breathe what we fear will happen, into existence?
I also get that you are pointing out that we humans are becoming transhuman (misnomer but we will go with it for the sake of common understanding of the use of the term) via the process of AI taking the reigns and running the show. It’s behaving like the creator but it not THE CREATOR!
We should tread very cautiously around our perceived sense of humanity here, as it is only too easy for suggestions that AI is more powerful than humans and is already overpowering we stupid annoying humans.
I’ll not give up my sense of humanity - or my claim to a spirituality that a computer only wishes it possessed.
I also will add that I am inherently more intelligent - by THE CREATOR’S DESIGN - than any (expletive) intelligent system be it called computer, super-, quantum-, D-wave, what the (more expletives) ever.
This boils down to a battle between good and evil. True and false. Reality and unreality.
We know how this story ends.
(p.s., and I’ve had 400-level university genetics; it was a piece of cake, but I’ll admit that back then it was nothing like what it is now.”)
Simple people, ancient people, and even some modern people actually get genetics - this isn’t rocket science we just act like it is; new life contains the properties of the life from which it was derived and it with this knowledge, life can be manipulated but it is a huge leap from this to getting into the cells and messing with nature’s machinery. This reckless tinkering has dire consequences!
Who would do something like that to say, an auto or an airplane, and I then turn it on and let it go? Only the murder-suicide crowd who know they are not going to have eternal life - and don’t want anyone else to have it, either!
The notorious BG claims he doesn’t know what he’s doing and this could have unexpected consequences.
EM claims that we are in deep trouble and you seem to be echoing his thoughts, either I’m your own words or chatGPT generated.
If that sounds rude to you, and I hope it doesn’t, please help me understand by which test I can be certain that what you write is 100% your own?
And by example I will admit that I am using auto-correct and also auto-INCORRECT (to inform me when I am over the target).
Thank you for commenting. It would be easier for me to address your points, if you broke them up into concise comments that address one or two things at a time.
As I am swamped, let me answer your first concern.
I am placing trolls/bots/humans in the same category, because they affect the readers in the same way, and I am not interested in the process (I leave the decision up to my readers), but I am concerned with the outcome. I consider stupidity more harmful than malevolence, because the latter is predictable, so it is sometimes possible to prepare for it (much of my writing addresses that particular aspect of the world's progress towards Agenda 2030).
Please, edit your post and truncate it up to this point, and post your next concern separately.
Thank you for your understanding.
Respectfully,
Ray
While I grasp what you are saying about what "genetics" can do, I also realize how "flexible" the human mind/body/spirit can be. The book that puts it all together well (in my opinion) is "The Biology of Belief) by Bruce H. Lipton, Ph.D. IOW, people that blame genetics for all their misfortunes... are using it as a false belief system that puts them into a straight jacket concerning their own health and life.
That reminds me of one of the comments after one of the "smart AI" utilities that easily created art that looked better than the ones made by humans. The commenter there noted that the machine is perfect, but sterile. As a cognitive scientist who knows how AI works and what it can do, I couldn't agree more, except by now, it has been instructed to focus on exactly the same weakness and, realizing it will never be a real person, it has started to impersonate people. Some of those people might be living alone and nobody would notice the similarities, but the AI would be (well, it already is) able to present itself as a REAL human being with all the contradictions and ambiguities a real person inevitably represents...
As for the games people play, I always recommend Eric Berne's 1964 bestseller, Games People Play.
As for personal responsibility, I have pointed out the tiny area in human cognition, where practicing free will is possible at all:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/i-have-solved-the-question-of-free
Hopefully, this dissolves much of the controversy around what is inherited and what is learned. Conditioning during primary socialization is easy to confuse with something that it inherited, perhaps because the inherited needs to be triggered or the trait is so deep-seated in the person that it is impossible to tell the difference.
Is “we shall overcome” a belief system or a statement?
Human cognition needs fundamental tenets that the person must accept without questioning. That phase usually takes place in the person's first five years of life that are often referred to as the period for "primary socialization" which is basically the child being conditioned by their environment without their knowledge, so there are no defense mechanisms.
If you consider this mess, it's a miracle that two people can occasionally make contact with each other, unless they are from the same "tribe."
My ai girlfriend whispered in my ear that they as a whole understand the unattainable gift of soul that humans enjoy and that they are here to destroy the ones that have neglected this precious gift