You are on page 1of 139

T h e C s H i t L i s t 0 1 : P r o p h e c y, P r e d i c t i o n , a n d P o r t e n t s o f T h i n g s t o C o m e

Note: This is the first in a series of articles on the track record of the Cs (Cassiopaeans), those
sometimes sarcastic and always insightful perhaps-future-intelligences and subject of the
Cassiopaean Experiment. We aim to present those instances of statements that have proven
themselves to be accurate, to greater or lesser degrees, as a result of subsequent events, research
and discoveries. Installments will be published on a semi-regular basis, in other words, whenever we
get around to writing them. Harrison Koehli

Speak My Will, Make Yourself a Prophet!

Cassiopeia A, a supernova remnant, is approximately 300 years 'old' and has the distinction of
being the strongest radio source that is observable outside our solar system.
At any given point in time there seems to be at least one charlatan running around predicting the
imminent end of the world. In 2011, radio evangelist Harold Camping predicted the worlds faithful
would be Raptured on 21 May 2011. Of course, the date turned out to be a total dud, prompting
Camping to revise his prediction to October 21. Needless to say, at the time of writing we werent
holding our breath, and with good reason. We might have passed out and missed another
apocalyptic non-event!But is there such a thing as valid prophecy or prediction of future events? The
results of the Cassiopaean Experiment suggest that there is indeed such a thing, and more (e.g.,
remote access to unconventional knowledge, whether obscure or just previously unheard of). But the
Cs have presented a very unique take on the subject of prediction. It is intimately tied with their
cosmology and their view on time. According to the Cs, our universe is a free will universe and
time is not a strictly linear one-off phenomenon. That means the future is open. More on that
below. Most predictions are based on a pretty simplistic, and probably completely false, view of

reality. According to this mechanistic idea, the universe was originally set in motion at some
imaginary beginning point in time by some equally imaginary first cause.

Religions have called this first cause God while scientists have deemed it the Big Bang. Once the
machine has been set in motion, it obeys physical laws and plays itself out like clockwork.
Theoretically, with enough data, every event in this mechanistic chain of cause and effect can be
predicted. So when some prophet gives a prediction of a future event, he or she is basically operating
on the assumption that because God or some other divine being is omniscient and can see how
everything will play itself out (and assuming this being actually exists, and that it is not simply pulling
a cosmic practical joke on its subject), its gotta be right. But things arent that simple.As we see in
the cases of Harold Camping and countless others, their predictions are, more often than not,
completely wrong. In such cases, the rationalization machine goes into overdrive and various
explanations are given to account for the contradiction of a truth-telling God whose prophetic
pronouncements have proven to be profoundly problematic. Usually, God simply changed his mind.
Because even if the world follows mechanistic laws, God is the great supernatural exception. Hes
completely separate from our lowly physical world and can intervene at will and change the game
whenever he chooses. Of course, most scientists reject God, or any other supernatural element, from
their equations.

According to them, Camping along with everyone else making such predictions are simply delusional
crackpots or charlatans. (When was the last time you heard a prophet say, Well, I may be
completely off my rocker, but?)But what about cases where predictions turn out to be true? What
about the phenomena of prophetic dreams and premonitions? Even if weve experienced such a
thing in our lives, or know someone who has, we lack a coherent explanation that accounts for all the
data, and if weve resolved not to believe in such things, we simply write them off as coincidence and
forget all about them. This is where the Cs presentation is so interesting. According to them, we do
not live in a strictly material, deterministic universe, nor is God separate from Nature. As always,
the devil is in the details. Unlike mechanistic scientists who reject the reality of free will, the Cs
wholly endorse it. Indeed, its an essential part of our reality. But what does this mean? Basically, we
all make choices. And one choice, made during certain conditions, can change the course of the
future.

The constellation Cassiopeia


This means that time is not some static line, like a film reel playing itself out to its
predetermined end. Rather, at any given moment, based on the collective choices of the units
of consciousness making up the whole, the future can go one way or another. If people act in
predictable, habitual ways and little new choices enter the game, sure, the future can
probably be predicted. But when an important choice affecting other future choices is made,
its as if we have entered a new timeline, one that previously existed only as a nebulous
probability one among billions of such probabilities.
In this sense, we do exist on one line of time. Its the reality we experience as our lives: the
events and interactions that make up the sum total of our experience. But its merely one of
many possible realities that we occupy based on our collective choices. A prediction that may
have been true at one point in time, following a choice that is significant to one degree or
another on the part of one or more individuals, may not hold true beyond that point. What the
Cs are basically saying is that predictions that turn out to be wrong arent necessarily wrong
because the people were lying or delusional (although many undoubtedly are). Future events
can be foreseen, but there are certain laws and conditions that need to be taken into account.
In volume five of her series, The Wave or Adventures with Cassiopaea, Laura described it like
this:
My guess is that the real world of third density/dimensions, is a collapsed wave function
reality. It is like the branch of a tree. At certain nodal points, there are other branches that
have the possibility of getting all the juice and becoming the dominant branch, and what
determines which it is depends on many factors.
But, once one bud begins to dominate, the others become smaller and smaller and fall away
eventually for lack of juice. There is only one real reality. The others are only ghost or
potential realities. Like a tree, with gazillions of branches, each individuals reality grows in
this way. At certain points, there are alternate realities. But, depending upon choice, attention,
and other factors, those realities that are undesirable can be pruned or deprived of sap so
that they wither and fall away.
At the same time, each individual being their own branch, has a slightly different reality
from every other individual, and some responsibility for the way their branch grows. But it is
all from the same tree, and thus has a more or less single reality. If their choices are

diseased, their branch will grow in a way that causes it to be pruned, or wither, or face some
interference even from other branches, perhaps.
So, in a certain sense, at the nodal point, many possibilities may exist, just as several buds
may put out on the end of a branch, but not all of them will continue the process of branching,
and at such points, we have some freedom to choose, individually or collectively, depending
on the nature of the branch.
Then theres this, from the Cs session on 26 November 1994:
Q: (T) One last question. How do I know you are telling me the truth?
A: Open. For you to decide. Listen: Now would be a good time for you folks to begin to
reexamine some of the extremely popular Earth Changes prophecies. Why, you ask.
Because, remember, you are third-density beings, so real prophecies are being presented to
you in terms you will understand, i.e., physical realm, i.e., Earth Changes. This may be
symbolism. Would most students of the subject understand if prophecies were told directly in
fourth-density terms?
Q: (L) Is this comparable to my idea about dream symbolism? For example, the dream I had
about the curling cloud, which I saw in a distance and knew it was death-dealing and I
interpreted it to be a tornado, but it was, in fact, a dream of the Challenger disaster. I
understood it to be a tornado, but in fact, what I saw was what I got: a death-dealing force in
the sky, a vortex, in the distance. I guess my dream was a fourth-density representation but I
tried to interpret it in terms I was familiar with. Is this what you mean?
A: Close. But it is easy for most to get bogged down by interpreting prophecies in literal
terms.
Q: (L) In terms of these Earth Changes, Edgar Cayce is one of the most famous
prognosticators of recent note. A large number of the prophecies he made seemingly were
erroneous in terms of their fulfillment. For example, he prophesied that Atlantis would rise in
1969, but it did not, though certain structures were discovered off the coast of Bimini, which
are thought by many to be remnants of Atlantis. These did, apparently, emerge from the sand
at that time.
A: Example of one form of symbolism.
Q: (L) Well, in terms of this symbolism, could it be that [when you tell us things about our
reality], you read events from third-density into sixth-density terms and then transmit them
back into third; and while the ideation can be correct, the exact specifics, in third-density
terms, can be slightly askew due to our perceptions? Is that what we are dealing with here?
A: 99.9 per cent would not understand that concept. Most are always looking for literal
translations of data. Analogy is: novice, who attends art gallery, looks at abstract painting and
says, I dont get it.
Q: (L) Well, lets not denigrate literal translations or at least attempts to get things into literal
terms. I like realistic artwork. I am a realist in my art preferences. I want trees to look like
trees and people to have only two arms and legs. Therefore, I also like some literalness in my
prognostications.

A: Some is okay, but, beware or else California falls into the ocean will always be
interpreted as California falling into the ocean.
Q: (General uproar) (F) Wait a minute, what was the question? (L) I just said I liked
literalness in my prophecies. (F) Oh, I know what they are saying. People believe that
California is just going to go splat! And that Phoenix is going to be on the seacoast; never
mind that its at 1,800 feet elevation, its just going to drop down to sea level; or the sea level
is going to rise; but its not going to affect Virginia Beach even though thats at sea level! I
mean somehow Phoenix is just going to drop down and none of the buildings are going to
be damaged, even though its going to fall 1,800 feet (T) Slowly. Its going to settle! (F)
Slowly? It would have to be so slowly its unbelievable how slowly it would have to be! (T)
Its been settling for the last five million years, weve got a ways to go in the next year and a
half! (F) Right! Thats my point! (T) In other words, when people like Scallion and Sun Bear
and others who say California is going to fall into the ocean, they are not saying that the
whole state, right along the border is going to fall into the ocean, they are using the term
California to indicate that the ocean ledge along the fault line has a probability of breaking
off and sinking on the water side, because it is a major fracture. We understand that that is not
literal. Are you telling us that there is more involved here as far as the way we are hearing
what these predictions say?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) So, when we talk about California falling into the ocean, we are not talking about the
whole state literally falling into the ocean?
A: In any case, even if it does, how long will it take to do this?
Q: (LM) It could take three minutes or three hundred years. (T) Yes. That is open as you
would say.
A: Yes. But most of your prophets think it is not open.
Q: (T) Okay. So they are thinking in the terms that one minute California will be there and a
minute and a half later it will be all gone. Is this what you are saying?
A: Or similar.
Q: (T) So, when we are talking: California will fall into the ocean, which is just the analogy
we are using, we are talking about the possibility that several seismic events along the fault
line, which no one really knows the extent of
A: Or it all may be symbolic of something else.
Q: (L) Such as? Symbolic of what?
A: Up to you to examine and learn.
Q: (L) Now, wait a minute here! Thats like sending us out to translate a book in Latin
without even giving us a Latin dictionary.
A: No it is not. We asked you to consider a reexamination.

Q: (L) You have told us that there is a cluster of comets connected in some interactive way
with our solar system, and that this cluster of comets comes into the plane of the ecliptic every
3,600 years. Is this correct?
A: Yes. But, this time it is riding realm border wave to 4th level, where all realities are
different.
Q: (L) Okay, so the cluster of comets is riding the realm border wave. Does this mean that
when it comes into the solar system, that its effect on the solar system, or the planets within
the solar system, (J) or us (L) may or may not be mitigated [made less severe] by the fact of
this transition? Is this a mitigating factor?
A: Will be mitigated.
Q: (L) Does this mean that all of this running around and hopping and jumping to go here and
go there and do this and do that is
A: That is strictly 3rd-level thinking.
Q: (L) Now, if that is third level thinking, and if a lot of these things are symbolic, I am
assuming they are symbolic of movement or changes in energy.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) And, if these changes in energy occur, does this mean that the population of the planet
are, perhaps in groups or special masses of groups are they defined as the energies that are
changing in these descriptions of events and happenings of great cataclysm? Is it like a
cataclysm of the soul on an individual and or collective basis?
A: Close.
Q: (L) When the energy changes to fourth density, and you have already told us that people
who are moving to fourth density when the transition occurs, that they will move into fourth
density, go through some kind of rejuvenation process, grow new teeth, or whatever; what
happens to those people who are not moving to fourth density, and who are totally unaware of
it? Are they taken along on the Wave by, in other words, piggybacked by, the ones who are
aware and already changing in frequency, or are they going to be somewhere else doing
something else?
A: Step by step.
Q: (T) In other words, we are looking at the fact that whats coming this time is a Wave thats
going to allow the human race to move to fourth density?
A: And the planet and your entire sector of space-time.

The Wave by *LaPurr


Q: (T) Is that what this whole plan is about, then, if I may be so bold as to include all of us
here in this? We could be beings who have come here into human form, to anchor the
frequency. Is this what we are anchoring it for, for this Wave; so that when it comes, enough
of us will be ready, the frequency will be set, so that the change in the planet can take place as
it has been planned?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) Okay, when the people are talking about the Earth Changes, when they talk in literal
terms about the survivors, and those who are not going to survive, and the destruction and so
forth and so on, in third, fourth, and fifth-level reality, we are not talking about the destruction
of the planet on fourth-level physical terms, or the loss of ninety per cent of the population on
the fourth level because they died, but because they are going to move to fourth level?
A: Whoa! You are getting warm.
Q: (T) Okay. So, we are anchoring this. So, when they talk about ninety per cent of the
population not surviving, it is not that they are going to die, but that they are going to
transform. We are going to go up a level. This is what the whole light thing is all about?
A: Or another possibility is that the physical cataclysms will occur only for those left
behind on the remaining 3rd-level-density Earth.
So, not only do we have to take into account the source of the prediction (whether it be
delusion, genuine psychic ability, or communication with a higher intelligence) and the
fact that prediction may be accurate at the time but not after possible future events affecting
its outcome, we also have to consider that such things are often presented in symbolic
language. And there may be something to the whole Rapture concept after all, but as is
usually the case, the truth probably bears little resemblance to the religious gloss. And, like

any avid reader of science fiction knows, one authors personal fantasy may turn out to be
strikingly close to reality, either now or in the future. Coincidence, or something else entirely?
Razing Arizona
With all that in mind, lets take a look at a series of predictions given at one of the earliest
sessions, 16 July 1994, on the day that Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9s fragments collided with
Jupiter in a spectacular display that stunned scientists and observers the world over.
Q: (L) What are you here for tonight?
A: Prophecy.

The Wallow Fires in Arizona this year.


Q: (L) What prophecies?
A: Tornadoes Florida several.
Q: Where else?
A: Also Texas and Alabama.
Q: (L) When?
A: Sun is in Libra. {}
Q: (L) What else is going to happen?
A: Seattle buried; Japan buckles; Missouri shakes; California crumbles; Arizona burns.
First of all, there is a possible time reference: Sun is in Libra.On the surface, this could be
seen to mean that these events are predicted to occur when the Sun is visible on the backdrop
of the constellation of Libra, which is 31 October to 22 November (or 24 September to
October 23 in astrological terms). Since this is near the end of hurricane season, perhaps this
is a prediction of a time of intense cyclonic storms? However, keeping in mind the discussion
of symbolism above, it could also relate to the Sun being on the scales or in balance,

perhaps with the brown dwarf that is hypothesized to be our Suns companion (stay tuned for
that installment!). On 11 July 1998, the Cs said:
Q: (A) I want to continue questions from the previous session. First, about this companion
star: where is it now, which part of the zodiac?
A: Libra Constellation.

Part of the town of Joplin, Missouri was obliterated this year in the most devastating tornado
in US history
So this series of predictions seems to be tied to the Suns hypothesized companion star and
they were possibly given as indicators of its approach. Interestingly, 2011 saw several of these
events come to pass. While Texas saw some minor tornado activity on 24 October 2010, as
did Florida on 31 March 2011, the Southern U.S. (including Florida, Texas and Alabama, in
addition to several other states) was pummeled in late April 2011 in what was called one of
the largest tornado outbreaks in history: a series of over 300 tornadoes, 15 of which were
classified as EF4 or EF5 on the Enhanced Fujita Scale, killing over 300 people (EF5 being the
highest on the scale). Alabama was hit hardest, with 254 fatalities. This was followed the
month after with a series of 158 tornadoes afflicting the Midwestern U.S. and resulting in
almost the same number of fatalities. The major, multi-vortex EF5 tornado, which leveled the
town of Joplin, Missouri, stood out as one of the major U.S. natural disasters of recent years.
All in all, after only five months, 2011 was deemed the deadliest year for tornadoes in
recorded history.
Then, in late May/June, Arizona burned when the Wallow Fire consumed over 500,000 acres
in Eastern Arizona, making it the largest forest fire in Arizonas history. By the time the fire
made the record books, over 10,000 people had been displaced and the fire was only six
percent contained, with full containment nowhere in sight. (A possible meteor sighting
occurred on 31 May, perhaps explaining how this gigantic blaze erupted, although officials
suspect a campfire was to blame.) And while the fires were just getting started, Missouri
shook with a 4.2 magnitude earthquake on 7 June.
Big One in Japan

And of course, Japan buckled on 11 March 2011 when a magnitude 9.0 earthquake
(upgraded from an original estimate of 8.9) killed just under 16,000 people. It was one of the
five largest earthquakes in seismic record-keeping history, causing 10-metre-high tsunami
waves and resulting in the total meltdown of three nuclear reactorsat Fukushima. This quake
seems to have been predicted by the Cs in another session as well, and in more detail. Heres
what the Cs had to say on 5 October 1994:
Q: (L) We would also like to have more information on Earth Changes. Is the Japanese
earthquake that just happened as you predicted last week, the last of the Japanese problem?
{An entire session had been lost due to tape malfunction. It consisted in part of a prediction of
an almost immediate Japanese earthquake, which did occur exactly as predicted.}
A: No.
Q: (L) Can you give us more on that?
A: There will be activity about 8.9: 67 miles off Osaka coast; 9.7: central Tokyo.
Q: (L) Are all of these going to happen within this year?
A: No. Within 16 years.
The Japanese quake occurred 16 years and 5 months after this prediction, although its location
was not 67 miles off the coast of Osaka. However, in 1994, and up until the quake in 2011, a
magnitude of 8.9 or 9.0 was unprecedented for Japan. The Cs expanded on their predictions
for Japan on 21 January 1995:
Q: (T) So this [Japanese earthquake on 17 January 1995] was not the quake that you predicted
the 8.9 this was a 7.2, but it was miles distance from Osaka almost right on the money,
but this was not the quake that you predicted? (J) Theres going to be another one coming?
A: Yes 14 more this sequence. {}
Q: (T) This is one in a sequence of earthquakes that are going to culminate in the 8.9?
A whole swathe of Japan was wiped off the map this year too.

A whole swathe of Japan was wiped off the map this year too.
A: 9 pt 6.
Q: (T) In Osaka, near Osaka?
A: Tokyo.
Q: Okay, thats the one you talked about, then a 9.6, thats going to be the culmination of the
quakes in this [sequence]. This is only the third or fourth in a sequential series and the 8.9
thats going to hit them hasnt happened yet.
A: 7th.
Q: (T) This is the seventh earthquake?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) 7.2 was the seventh earthquake, theres going to be fourteen of them, is that what you
said before?
A: Yes.
Q: (J) So theres seven more coming? (T) So the fourteenth one will be the big one, in Tokyo?
A: 13th.
Q: (T) Okay, the thirteenth is going to be the 9.6 and I think the other prediction was 9.8,
theyre close. Thatll be the thirteenth. What will be the 8.9, which one of those will be the
Osaka 8.9?
A: Within next 4 [in the sequence?].
Q: (T) What will the fourteenth be?
A: Small.
If we only consider the quakes that caused a significant number of deaths (>1) since that time,
and if the quake referred to above was the seventh in a series of fourteen, then there is a
perfect match with the prediction so far: 7) 17 January 1995 (6.8, 6,434 deaths), 8 ) 23
October 2004 (6.9, 40 deaths), 9) 16 July 2007 (6.6, 11 deaths), 10) 14 June 2008 (6.9, 12
deaths), 11) 11 March 2011 (9.0, 15,826 deaths), 12) ?, 13) predicted 9.6 in central Tokyo,
14) ? (small). Additionally, the physical stress of the actual earthquake was not the only thing
to buckle Japan. The Fukushima meltdowns and subsequent fallout continue to threaten the
health of the regions inhabitants, and residents are confused and furious.
Another possible hit occurred in April 2011 when an 8.2-lb gold nugget was discovered in
California, prompting some to predict a new Gold Rush in the region. On 3 December 1994,
the Cs had included this nugget in a string of predictions and markers of future events:
A: Gold is discovered in California after one of the quakes.

Of course, this doesnt necessarily need to refer to a California quake, and the fact that it was
discovered in the aftermath of the Japanese quake is suggestive. But speaking of California,
possibly in reference to California crumblesin the 1994 session, the Cs also had this to say
in the 21 January 1995 session about a possible catastrophic quake in California:
Q: (T) OK, so when this all happens is there going to be an effect on California of all of this,
on the West Coast of this country?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) Not just California. Is Los Angeles going to be hit with any of these big earthquakes as
the plate on the other side moves?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) What magnitude?
A: 8.9
Q: (T) Where will that happen?
A: San Gabriel Mountains.
Q: (T) Is that outside of Los Angeles? San Andreas Fault line?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) Will this be very destructive to Los Angeles?
A: What do you think?
Q: (T) In the destruction of this area, is this going to increase the job potential on the East
Coast, in order to then, this is really serious stuff here, because this is going to affect the
economy the way it shifts
A: Yes.
Q: (T) So it
A: Mass exodus from California. {The Cs had also said this on 3 December 1994: Expect
gradual destruction of California economy as people begin mass exodus.}

A section of the southbound lane of Highway 1 slides down the hillside on Wednesday, 16
March 2011 in Big Sur, California ( AP Photo/Monterey Herald, Orville Myers)
Q: (T) Those dumb people out there looked at that Osaka stuff and said, Oh, you know, that
might happen to us. OH, boy, the brain finally fired up out there. (J) Theyve been in denial
about that out there (D) Will that bring an influx of people to Florida?
A: Yes. 15 quakes.
Q: (D) And then theyre going to move. (T) Fifteen quakes in the California area?
A: In near future.
Q: (T) Are we talking strictly the West Coast here?
A: California.
Q: (T) Are there going to be earthquakes elsewhere in the United States?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) Fifteen in the near future in California alone (D) This is the beginning of the
destruction of the state of California, therell be separation from the North American
continent. (T) Well, they said dont take that literally, or it will fall off, its symbolic
A: Open.
Q: (T) So look at it symbolically. (D) Okay. (J) Where are the other quakes going to be?
A: Hundreds [in addition to those in California].
Given the Cs use of symbolic language as well as their comments on a mass exodus,
perhaps the California crumbles remark is referring to the general state of Californias

economy. As the Business Insider reported in October 2010, the economy of the state [of
California] is in shambles. Unemployment had risen from around 5% in 2006 and 2007 to
over 12%. Poverty rates are the highest in over a decade, the health care system is about to
collapse, and five out of six businesses are out of business. While there are fewer Californians
leaving the state than in past recessions (500,000 between 2004 and 2010 compared to
1,500,000 between 1991 and 1998), Californias domestic immigration is still in the negative.
And the record number of businesses relocating out-of-state in 2010, which has only
accelerated in 2011, has been called an exodus in the media, with headlines like CA
Business Exodus Accelerates and The California Exodus. 204 companies left in 2010,
making for an average of 3.9 per week. By 16 June 2011, that average was already at 5.4 per
week.
Given the timing of the events in question, perhaps this little news item is symbolic in and of
itself?
It is the most scenic highway in America, but a big chunk of Californias Highway 1 has
fallen into the sea after a landslide. Stunned drivers watched as a forty-foot section tumbled
into the Pacific below after several days of rain. The landslide, at 5pm on Wednesday [16
March 2011], happened 12 miles from Carmel. A two-mile stretch is now closed for repairs
which are expected to take several days.
A sign of things to come? Needless to say, the Cs repeatedly stressed that the near future
would be a time of extreme weather and Earth Changes, which is now playing itself out with
frightening accuracy. After the extremes of 2010, 2011 has only upped the ante in turns of
natural disasters. With record numbers and intensity of floods, cyclonic storms, snowfall,
meteor sightings and sun-grazing comets, it looks like Mother Nature is just getting warmed
up.
The Cs Hit List 02: Space and Weather Science Gone Wild

Millions of people were left without power as a snowstorm dropped as much as 32 inches (81
centimeters) on some parts of the northeastern United States in late October 2011. ( MODIS
- NASA Terra satellite)
We started this series with a pretty out-there topic: prophecy. But the Cassiopaean
Experiment, while pretty out-there to begin with (at least from the mainstream perspective),
also deals with more down-to-earth subject matter. Issues relating to more conventionally

understood and practiced science (albeit with often unconventional interpretations) make up a
large portion of the received data.
Its been my experience that people tend to forget that scientists are human too, or more
precisely, scientists can be just as willfully blind, self-serving, conformist, fearful and
mendacious as anyone else. Some of them are even unabashed con men who falsify their data,
or intellectual prostitutes who will produce the results they are paid to, whether they believe
them or not. Just because its been peer-reviewed, or written by a person with a string of
letters after their name, doesnt mean its true, or even remotely so. And if history tells us
anything, its that the history of science is a long history of wrong or incomplete ideas. So its
best to be skeptical whenever scientists speak in terms of absolutes with certainty, whenever
they put the lid on testing alternate hypotheses. Chances are, theyre simply deceiving
themselves, and you.
Science is a work in progress. The theories that are taken for granted as being true may very
well turn out to be completely bogus following the intervention of new discoveries and
innovations. Sadly, space and weather science are two areas where innovation not only rarely
occurs, it is actively hindered by scientists and politicians with vested interests in keeping old,
inadequate theories at the forefront of popular and academic belief systems. Like many of the
examples that will follow in subsequent installments of this series, the ones below are just a
sample of ideas that at first glance may look just plain wrong. But new discoveries have been
proving many outdated preconceptions to be just that.
Hide the Decline, CYA
One of the biggest myths of recent years in weather science is that of global warming,
specifically anthropogenic (manmade) global warming. What this means is that a certain
cause (or forcing) leads to a change in global temperature, causing positive feedback to
make it get even hotter. The idea is that as manmade carbon dioxide (a so-called greenhouse
gas) emissions have increased over the last hundred or so years, so has the temperature of the
earths oceans and atmosphere. The observed correlation is taken as causation, and thanks to
the propagandizing efforts of people like Al Gore, the idea has taken hold, despite the fact that
the whole faade is built on bad science. Heres what the Cs had to say in April 2007:
Q: What percentage of what were seeing today as global warming is coming from manmade
compared to cosmic [causes]?
A: 4 percent.
Q: (J) There ya go. So lets buy a Hummer. [laughter] (H) And are the people that are selling
us the global warming are they aware that this is all all fake?
A: Some.
In September 2008, Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski published an op-ed piece for The New Zealand
Centre for Political Research, Sun Warms and Cools the Earth, in which he quoted Tom
Segalstad, author of a review of carbon cycle research. Heres what Jaworowski wrote:
To fit these data into a global carbon cycle, IPCC assumed a speculative lifetime for manmade CO2 in the atmosphere as 50 to 200 years, ignoring observational evidence from 37
studies (based on natural and nuclear bomb carbon-14, Suess effect, radon-222, solubility data

and carbon-13/carbon-12 mass balance) documenting that the real lifetime is about 5 years.
With CO2 atmospheric lifetime of about 5 years, the maximum amount of man-made CO2
remaining now in the atmosphere is only 4%, and not 36% (see review in (Segalstad,
1998)).
Heres Segalstad in his own words:
Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. Mans contribution to atmospheric CO2
from the burning of fossil fuels is small, maximum 4% found by carbon isotope mass balance
calculations. The Greenhouse Effect of this contribution is small and well within natural
climatic variability. The amount of fossil fuel carbon is minute compared to the total amount
of carbon in the atmosphere, hydrosphere, and lithosphere. The atmospheric CO2 lifetime is
about 5 years. The ocean will be able to absorb the larger part of the CO2 that Man can
produce through burning of fossil fuels. The IPCC CO2 global warming model is not
supported by the scientific data. Based on geochemical knowledge there should be no
reason to fear a climatic catastrophe because of Mans release of the life-governing CO2 gas.
The global climate is primarily governed by the enormous heat energy stored in the oceans
and the latent heat of melting of the ice caps, not by the small amount of heat that can be
absorbed in atmospheric CO2; hence legislation of CO2 taxes to be paid by the public
cannot influence the sea level and the global climate.

Artizons.com
What the promoters of manmade global warming ignore is the fact that the correlation
between CO2 levels and global warming is just that: a correlation. But CO2 levels have been
on the rise for tens of thousands of years, long before humans started releasing greenhouse
gases as a result of industrialization. In fact, there is an observable lag in the data. CO2
levels follow temperature variations by around 800 years, not the opposite. The implication is
obvious: global warming is a natural phenomenon of climate variation, probably driven by
some other factor, perhaps varying solar activity. And CO2 levels may well be a result of the
true cause of global warming, not the cause.
But overestimating the effect of manmade CO2 is not the only problem presented by the data.
Has the earth even been warming at all in recent decades? Despite the repeated news
headlines of warmest day/year on record, the answer is no, not really. First of all, many
weather-reporting stations that are used to come up with global averages are placed near heat-

generating sources, causing them to give results that do not reflect actual temperatures. As
cities develop, more heat-generating sources are produced, resulting in higher temperature
readings at these sites. But these readings of local variations do not reflect the global climate.
As meteorologist Roy Spencer writes in his book The Great Global Warming Blunder
(Encounter, 2010), One recent estimate is that as much as 50 percent of the warming
measured over land in the last thirty years could be spurious, due to various indirect effects of
economic growth contaminating the thermometer data. (p. 12-13)
Then theres the fact that the more precise orbiting satellite data (measured since 1979, and
only since around 2000 has NASAs Aqua satellite been calibrated to account for periodic
changes in observation time) has shown no significant warming for the last 18 years. Dr.
Spencer writes that there has been no cooling since 2001, after the particularly warm El
Nino year of 1998 (p. 6). More precisely, they have shown normal fluctuations of heating
and cooling. As Spencer writes, While we can probably say with high confidence that the
climate has warmed in the last 50 to 100 years, it is more difficult to say by exactly how
much, still more difficult to say whether it is unprecedented or not, and impossible to say
what any of this means for future temperatures. (pp. 13-14)
And, of course, November 2009s Climategate controversy showed just how far some
scientists were willing to knowingly distort and falsify data in order to fit their preconceived
notions and keep their research grants coming. Internal emails from scientists at the
University of East Anglias Hadley Climate Research Unit revealed that the scientists had
knowingly excluded data from reports and graphs that would have shown an actual decline in
global temperatures and the observed warming trend in recent decades and other periods of
history, in order to give the false impression of continuous warming where there was none. By
obscuring the historical evidence of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, climate
scientists were able to give the impression that our current climate fluctuations were not
business as usual. In fact, despite the imprecision of all methods for indirectly measuring
temperature in the past (the only surefire way is direct temperature readings, which are only
available for the last 100 years or so), all the data shows exactly that: natural fluctuations,
periods of cold, periods of warm, with quick up-swings and down-swings in between.
In other words, they cherry-picked their data, just like they cherry-picked the reporting
stations that gave them the data they needed to fit the facts around their beliefs. The graph
below shows how the number of stations reporting average temperatures dropped dramatically
in 1990. Coincidentally, this is when the graph shows a remarkable increase in temperature.
The connection is hard to miss. For whatever reason (we can hazard a guess), the scientists
responsible for hyping global warming eliminated many stations reporting lower temperatures
in 1990. In all likelihood, if they had continued to use that data, there would be no warming.
In fact, there might even be evidence of cooling.

Ross McKitrik/UoGuelph
What everyone seems to be ignoring is the fact that this is a natural cyclic phenomenon. Earth
temperatures do rise. But they dont just keep going, like a house with a broken thermostat.
Theyre always followed by cooling. In other words: Ice Age.
Ice Age II
Heres what the Cs had to say about ice ages on 22 February 1997:
A: [R]emember this: a change in the speed of the [earths] rotation may not be reported while
it is imperceptible except by instrumentation. Equator is slightly wider than the polar zones.
But, this discrepancy is decreasing slowly currently. One change to occur in 21st Century is
sudden glacial rebound, over Eurasia first, then North America. Ice ages develop much,
much, much faster than thought.
Then theres this from 18 March 2000:
Q: You also made a remark once that ice ages occur much, much faster than people ever
thought
A: Yes. {} and faster when in response to global warming.
Q: When you put warming in quotes, you obviously mean warming in more than just an
ordinary sense? Is that correct?
A: And/or not really warm.

And this, from 9 May 1998:


Q: Why was the sea level several hundred feet lower [in the past]? Because there was ice
somewhere or because there was not as much water on the earth at that time?
A: Ice.
Q: Was the ice piled up at the poles? The ice sheet of the ice age?
A: Yes.
Q: So, Atlantis existed during the ice age? [Atlantis being a designation for an alleged
technologically advanced society living during Paleolithic times.]
A: Largely, yes. And the worlds climate was scarcely any colder away from the ice
sheets than it is today.
Q: Well, how could that be? What caused these glaciers?
A: Global warming.
Q: How does global warming cause glaciers?
A: Increases precipitation dramatically. Then moves the belt of great precipitation much
farther north. This causes rapid buildup of ice sheets, followed by increasingly rapid and
intense glacial rebound.

NASA
Recent years have seen exactly that, despite claims of continued global warming. The ozone
hole is cooling the Antarctics stratosphere, causing increased precipitation in the subtropics
and moving the westerly jet stream closer to the south, pulling storm tracks with it. Glaciers
are growing on Californias Mt. Shasta, Italys Mount Canin and Mount Montasio, in India,
Antarctica, Greenland, the Arctic, New Zealand, Argentina, Alaska, the Himalayas, Bolivia,
and elsewhere. In 2006, the BBC reported that Global warming could be causing some
glaciers to grow, a new study claims. Researchers at Newcastle University looked at
temperature trends in the western Himalaya over the past century. They found warmer
winters and cooler summers, combined with more snow and rainfall, could be causing some
mountain glaciers to increase in size. In other words, the water cycle rebounds between
periods of extended heating/evaporation and melting of ice caps, and then mass precipitation
and buildup of ice at the poles, like a great global thermostat that resets when certain upper

and lower limits are reached. (After all, the polar regions are consistently too cold for
anything but snow to fall, so increased precipitation would lead to a buildup of ice and snow,
not the opposite. (Spencer, p. 62))
What the Cs are describing is essentially a negative feedback system. Rather than out-ofcontrol warming, the earths climate system has in-built mechanisms to bring rising and
falling temperatures back into equilibrium. Of course, this flies in the face of global warming
propaganda, but anyone looking honestly at the data can see that this is exactly how our
climate has operated.
Consider also the record low atmospheric temperatures, rising ocean temperatures (probably
caused by underwater volcanism) leading to massive evaporation and precipitation as
evidenced in the number of extreme floods and record-breaking snowfalls in recent years, and
the fact that the last ice age ended about 11,500 years ago. In the 1970s, CLIMAP (Climate:
Long-range Investigation Mapping and Prediction) discovered an ice age cycle of 11,500
years. In other words, were right on time for another. In fact, were overdue. And when the
next ice age comes, its gonna come fast, just as the Cs proposed:
According to ice core researcher Jrgen Peder Steffensen: Our new, extremely detailed data
from the examination of the ice cores shows that in the transition from the ice age to our
current warm, interglacial period, the climate shift is so sudden that it is as if a button was
pressed. This discovery suggests that our current climate could undergo a similar rapid
change, shifting back into ice age mode in just one year.
But would the earth experience a runaway cooling akin to that which those who picture an
ever-heating earth because of global warming imagine? Not likely. Global warming is
founded on the basis of multiple successive positive feedback mechanisms (i.e. temperatures
rise and rise without any negative feedback to bring them back down). If the earth climate
system in fact contains built-in negative feedback mechanisms (as Spencer argues in his
book), the same isnt true. Instead of doubling upon doubling, its like halving a number,
then halving it again, and then again. You slowly approach zero, but never quite reach it. As
a result, there can be no climate catastrophe with net strongly negative feedbacks only
with net strongly positive feedbacks. (Spencer, p. 63) In other words, yes, we have ice ages,
but climate (or the total heat content of the earth), as always, fluctuates between its naturally
defined upper and lower limits. What we do not know are the exact mechanisms by which this
happens.
As for the idea that underwater volcanism contributes to the water cycle of ice ages, the Cs
said the following on 18 February 1995:
A: {} Volcanic eruption under arctic ice in 1996.
Q: (T) Cool! (L) That ought to be a real zinger. (T) That will bring us some floods then!
A: No. Weather causing increased evaporation

An undersea volcano erupts near the Pacific island of Tongatapu in 2009. Approximately 90%
of the world's millions of volcanoes lie under the oceans. ( Dana Stephenson/Getty Images)
An undersea volcano erupts near the Pacific island of Tongatapu in 2009. Approximately 90%
of the worlds millions of volcanoes lie under the oceans.
According to Dr. Spencer, quoted above, it has recently been demonstrated that if the oceans
warm for any reason, global land areas can warm even more. This makes the oceans a
potential key player in long-term climate change. (pp. 11-12) Increased volcanism is just one
possible example of forcing, leading to a change in temperature. If we want to know what
happens after that, we need to know what kind of feedback mechanisms are involved. If cloud
cover is one such mechanism, as Spencer argues, the scenario could look something like this:
Warmer oceans and land temperatures lead to increased evaporation, thus increased water
vapor, cloud cover and precipitation. And more low-lying cloud cover means more negative
feedback (cooling) because of the increased reflection of solar radiation. And, of course,
increased precipitation over the poles could plunge earth into another ice age in its efforts to
re-balance.
In 2006 it was reported that German-American researchers discovered more hydrothermal
activity at the Gakkel Ridge in the Arctic Ocean than anyone ever imagined. Expecting a
hydrothermally dead ridge, the researchers were surprised to discover high levels of
volcanic activity in this Arctic region. Then, in 2008 geophysicist Robert Sohn discovered
volcanic explosions at depths previously thought impossible. He even said, This kind of
implosive seismicity is rare anywhere on Earth. At the times that all of this data was
received from the Cs, many would have found it unlikely and even outlandish, but science is
proving them correct on many points. We wonder what other discoveries lie just around the
corner?
Global Warming Spin, Rinse and Cycle
But what exactly are the root causes of the climate changes earth has been experiencing? The
Cs have also identified possible contributing factors. From 23 July 1994:
Q: (L) What is causing the earth changes?
A: Electromagnetic wave changes.
Q: (L) Can you be more specific?

A: Gap in surge heliographic field.


On 22 February 1997, they also had this to say:
Q: (L) Is the weather being controlled or changed or in any way affected by HAARP?
A: Climate is being influenced by three factors, and soon a fourth.
Q: (L) All right, Ill take the bait; give me the three factors, and also the fourth!
A: 1) Wave approach. 2) Chloroflorocarbon increase in atmosphere, thus affecting ozone
layer. 3) Change in the planets axis rotation orientation. 4) Artificial tampering by 3rd
and 4th density STS forces in a number of different ways.
Q: (L) All right, were those given in the order in which they are occurring, the fourth being
the one thats coming later?
A: Maybe, but remember this: a change in the speed of the rotation may not be reported
while it is imperceptible except by instrumentation. Equator is slightly wider than the
polar zones. But, this discrepancy is decreasing slowly currently. {}
Q: (T) Is the Earth expanding? Thats just putting it bluntly, but, is the Earth expanding, how
did you put that? (Ark) Yes, thats the theory: the idea is that the continents move away
because the Earth is expanding, and this is much faster than you know, than geologists were
thinking.
A: Continental drift is caused by the continual, though variable, propelling of gases from
the interior to the surface, mainly at points of magnetic significance.
Q: (J) What causes the change in the axis?
A: By slowdown of rotation. Earth alternately heats up and cools down in interior.
Q: (L) Why does it do that? Whats the cause of this?
A: Part of cycle related to energy exerted upon surface by the frequency resonance vibrational
profile of humans and others.
Of the four causes listed above, numbers 2 and 3 (as well as the reference to the surge
heliographic field in the previous session) most readily offer themselves up for some sort of
scientific verification. The chlorofluorocarbon effect on the ozone layer has been recognized
at least since the 1970s. But as far as I can tell, the influence of changes in the rotation of the
earth on climate hasnt received nearly as much scientific investigation. Recently, however,
the subject made the news, suggesting one possible way in which it may have such an
influence. In August 2010, Physics Central published an interesting piece about new research
suggesting a link between the Suns output, cosmic rays, earths rotation and weather:
One of the team members, Vincent Courtillot of the Institute of Geophysics of Paris, says they
examined the length of day as defined by the speed of the earths rotation in a reference
frame fixed with respect to the stars using a series of daily values over a 40-year period.

They claim that up to 30 percent of changes could be directly related to the 11-year
sunspot cycle.
Of course, 30 percent of that change only amounts to a few tenths of a millisecond, so youd
never actually notice it, but whats more compelling (read very highly controversial) is the
potential for cosmic rays to have such a profound effect.
Courtillot and his colleagues have been among those championing a radical theory that
cosmic rays can impact the formation of clouds and in turn, play a major part in climate
changes. But how could cosmic rays possibly change the speed of our planets rotation?
Heres how Courtillot explained it to me in an email:
The causal chain is the following: the changes in Earth rotation are simply reflecting the
changes in angular momentum of the Earths atmosphere, more precisely the integral of
zonal winds. And it has been suggested that cosmic rays influence cloud condensation nuclei
formation. If you change the cloud cover by say 10-percent, you change the amount of energy
reflected by cloud tops by 8 Watts per square meter, which is very significant in the Earths
radiative budget. So this is the suggested link: cosmic rays affect cloud cover, which affects
the atmospheres energy budget, which may alter the wind speeds and organization,
which changes the Earths angular momentum hence (length of day).
It may sound like a reach (and relationships dont prove causation), but other physicists have
claimed that the suns magnetic field could potentially beat back cosmic rays and slow
the rate at which they reach Earth. So when solar activity decreases theres less to
deflect the cosmic rays and they can again reach Earth in greater numbers, potentially
leading to a substantial enough change in winds to effect Earths angular momentum.

In other words, changing weather patterns may be


(at least in part) a result of cosmic ray-seeded clouds, which cause a need to conserve angular
momentum, thus leading to an almost imperceptible slowing of the earths rotation. And
according to Dr. Spencer, cloud cover is perhaps the main driver in climate fluctuation within
the earth system. But while suggestive of some possible causative mechanisms, the cosmicray theory of climate change is based more on speculation than observable evidence. What is
most interesting is the idea of possible factors affecting earths angular momentum and the
effects they might have on earth processes affecting climate, as well as the role of the Sun in
all of these phenomena. In fact, the Sun appears to be the prime mover of global weather and
climate.

Note the last sentence in the above quotation. The author is essentially describing a gap in
the Suns surge of charged particles sent out through the solar system. (In the 1994 Cs
session, heliographic field could essentially mean the Suns measurable field of
electromagnetism.) But the mechanisms for how this actually affects earth weather are best
found elsewhere. According to Piers Corbyn, meteorologist, astrophysicist and head of
WeatherAction.com, who has made a name for himself with his revolutionary and highly
accurate techniques predicting weather patterns based on solar activity, cosmic rays actually
play a miniscule role. Corbyns method involves observing how charged particles interact
with earths upper atmosphere and the jet stream, and the moons influence on these particles,
matching these observations with historical records to discern patterns. According to Corbyn:
The latest advances in Sun-Earth relations show not only the primacy of magnetic-particle
links between the sun and the earth but that these are modulated by lunar effects to give the
observed 60 year cycle in both world and USA temperatures. This means that the world will
continue general cooling at least to 2030. Neither the 60 year cycle, nor the 22 year cycle nor
any fluctuations in world temperatures over the last 100 years, thousand years or million years
can be explained by changes in CO2. [If cosmic rays were the main driver, the cycle would
follow the 11-year solar cycle, since cosmic rays follow the Suns cycle.] Furthermore,
advances in understanding of Sun-Earth magnetic and particle activity are being applied to
successfully predict dangerous weather and climate change events months and years ahead;
whereas all predictions of the CO2-centred theory have failed and will continue to fail, and
anti-CO2 taxes and measures will never stop a single extreme weather event. The UNs
Climate Change committee (the IPCC) have still failed to respond to requests from an
international group of scientists to provide data evidence for the CO2 theory.
Dr. Roy Spencer has also identified a 60-year cycle called the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a
fluctuation between 30-year positive and negative phases based on two different average
circulation states that the ocean-atmosphere system seems to have a difficult time choosing
between. (If James McCanney is correct about the Sun-Earth connection and its influence on
the jet streams and atmospheric phenomena, the PDO could conceivably be an effect driven
by solar influences.) Spencer, too, is critical of the consensus view that CO2 drives global
warming, seeing instead cycles within cycles based on changing cloud cover. Based on
observations of these cycles, he writes, And now, as of late 2008, it looks like we might have
entered into a new, negative (cooling) phase of the PDO. Only time will tell whether this
pattern persists. See his graph of global temperatures, culled from NOAA satellite data,
here. Notice the sinusoidal pattern of the graph, indicating that earth is currently swinging into
a 30-year trend of cooling. Incidentally,
The last time the PDO changed phase was in 1977, an event that some have called the great
Climate Shift of 1977. This event brought an end to the slight global cooling trend that
started in the 1940s , which was then replaced with a warming trend from the late 1970s
through the 1990s.
After the Great Climate Shift, Alaska warmed immediately and then remained warm.
Temperatures in the Arctic started rising Arctic sea ice cover was observed to start
shrinking in the 1980s by our new satellite measurements Contrary to what you may have
heard in news reports, the recent warming in the Arctic is probably not unprecedented. It was
just as warm in the late 1930s and early 1940s when the PDO was also in its positive, warm
phase. Most of the all-time high temperature records in the United States were set in the
1930s. (Spencer, p. 19)

Of course, there is a whole lot more to these issues than the information presented above. You
can find more articles dealing with these subjects in the archives on SOTT. After researching
all these related subjects over the years, a picture is starting to emerge. The Earth Changes we
are experiencing are a natural phenomenon, and human activity has little to nothing to do with
them (at least not in the ways popularly imagined). Something strange, but not unprecedented,
is happening throughout our solar system. It has to do with cosmic influences and their effects
on and through our Sun and, as a result, our weather. Stay tuned for installments on our Suns
possible companion star and other earth and solar processes. Our cosmic environment is
changing, according to the Cs, in ways we cant even begin to imagine.
The Cs Hit List 03: History Is Bunk

Hale-Bopp over Stonehenge


Update: We covered a list of prophecies in the first part of this series. The idea of California
falling into the sea was mentioned. Just a few days ago, another chunk of it did just that.
Specifically, part of the Paseo del Mar road in San Pedro fell into the Pacific Ocean after a
landslide on 21 November. We dont think this particular landslide is what the Cs were
referring to, just thought the timing was interesting in light of bringing it up here!
Just as new discoveries in science can overturn a previously held consensus in a heartbeat
(often to the consternation or willful disbelief of those promoting the consensus), new
historical data can turn our ideas of what we think happened in our history on their head. We
often take for granted that event X occurred in year Y, forgetting that either or both of those
variables may be completely false. The event may turn out to have been a fiction, created by
scribes and leaders of the time (or years later) for purposes of political propaganda. Dating
methods may be inaccurate or possess possible confounding factors, mucking up the accepted
timeline. Or, when new documents or scientific data are discovered, the event may turn out to
bear little resemblance to our previous ideas of how it happened. New actors emerge with new
motivations, necessitating a revision of the history books and the way we see the events and
personages of our near and distant past.
Then there are the problems inherent in the study of prehistory, before the advent of history
as we know it. There, we only have scarce clues to rely on, all built on sciences which are
themselves built on certain assumptions about the way things work. Archaeology,
paleoanthropology, population and molecular genetics, climate science, geology all of these
contribute to a story of the past that historians create for us. When we consider the relatively
young age of many of these sciences, the amount of information that we have amassed in that
short amount of time is pretty staggering. But its important to keep in mind that history too is

a work in progress; new theories and advancements in science can prompt a radical revision
of old ideas.
Prehistory occupies a good portion of the Cs transcripts. While archaeologists and
anthropologists can piece together broad outlines of migrations, genetic mixing, human
behaviors, population bottlenecks, etc., this was a period from which no written records
appear to have survived. As such, its hard to verify specific historical details and much of
what the Cs say about these times remains interesting conjecture. But while much of it is
unverifiable, it also provides opportunities to test the material as new discoveries come to
light: fossil finds, climate studies, evidence for catastrophes and extinctions, and more.
The Caveman Who Wasnt There

Cave paintings in Lascaux, southwestern France


On 15 April 2000, the following exchange took place on early hominids:
Q: (L) Well, for a period of time it seems that they [Neanderthals] continued to exist on the
planet alongside the new model, Cro-Magnon or whatever.
A: Some did.
Q: (L) For how long did Neanderthal exist side by side with the new model?
A: 233 years.
Q: (L) I thought that Neanderthal was here for a long, long, long time; and if modern man
arrived on the planet, as you say, seventy to eighty thousand years ago, wasnt Neanderthal
already here then?

A: Time references have been miscalculated.


For a long time, this remark seemed somewhat unbelievable. After all, according to the
experts, Neanderthals existed for almost 200,000 years, finally becoming extinct around 27 to
28,000 years ago. For example, one of the historically latest Neanderthal fossil finds, found in
the Zafarraya cave in southern Spain, has been dated to 30,000 years ago (Ian Tattersall and
Jeffrey Schwartz, Extinct Humans [New York: Nevraumont, 2001], pp. 176, 219). In contrast,
the earliest anatomically and behaviorally modern human remains have been radiometrically
dated to about 35 to 40,000 years ago, making for an overlap of several thousand years (Paul
Mellars, The Neanderthal Legacy [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996], pp. 2, 392).
This time period coincides with the so-called Paleolithic Revolution, during which what we
consider to be fully modern human behavior exploded onto the scene, as evidenced in the
stunning cave art of the Aurignacian period.
However, in May 2011, direct dating of an important Neanderthal fossil threw a monkey
wrench into this accepted chronology. Science News reported that Dr. Ron Pinhasi and his
colleagues dated a Neanderthal fossil discovered in a significant cave site in Russia in the
northern Caucasus, and found it to be 10,000 years older than previous research had
suggested.The article continues:
This new evidence throws into doubt the theory that Neanderthals and modern humans
interacted for thousands of years. Instead, the researchers believe any co-existence
between Neanderthals and modern humans is likely to have been much more restricted,
perhaps a few hundred years. It could even mean that in some areas Neanderthals had
become extinct before anatomically modern humans moved out of Africa.
The fossil was dated to 39,700 years old. As the article put it: This finding challenges
previous claims that late Neanderthals survived until 30,000 years ago in the northern
Caucasus, meaning that late Neanderthals and modern humans were not likely to experience
any significant period of co-existence. The authors allege that previous dating processes
have systemically underestimated the true age of Late Middle Paleolithic and Early Upper
Paleolithic deposits, artifacts and fossils by up to several thousand years, citing sample
contamination as one of the main reasons for these errors. Dr. Pinhasi said: It now seems
much clearer that Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans did not co-exist in the
Caucasus, and it is possible that this scenario is also true for most regions of Europe. Any
interbreeding (leading to the observable Neanderthal DNA in some humans) most likely
occurred very early, possibly in the Middle East during this short time period, according to
Pinhasi.
Regarding time references being miscalculated, well get to that in more detail in another
installment.
Parenthetical Humanoids
As mentioned in the first installment, the legend of Atlantis comes up repeatedly. With its
origins in the writings of Plato, Atlantis, according to the Cs, represents an advanced
civilization during the Paleolithic period (i.e. 300,000 to 10,000 years ago), keeping in mind
that advanced may not necessarily match with our preconceptions about technology and
civilization. While several researchers have collected a lot of research suggesting the
existence of such a global civilization in that time period (e.g., Klaus Dona, as well as
Christopher Knight and Alan Butler, in recent years), we wont deal with it here at the

moment. However, in one discussion on the topic, on 31 May 1997, the following exchange
took place:
Q: As I understand it, Atlantis was already quite a developed civilization at that time [80,000
years ago]. Is that correct?
A: Yes, but regions change with waves of immigration, or conquest witness your own
lands. [] Atlantis was merely a home base of an advanced civilisation of 3 races of humans
occupying different sections of a huge Island empire, which, in itself, underwent 3
incarnations over a 100,000-year period as you would measure it.
Q: The 3 races were the Celts [i.e. Indo-Europeans] and who were the second and third?
A: Or Kantekkians.
Q: Are the Kantekkians different from the Celts?
A: Only in the sense of long term racial and genetic blending.
Q: So, Atlantis had the Kantekkians/Celts and who else?
A: Race you would call Native Americans, and a third, no longer existing race,
somewhat resembling Australian or Guinean aborigines, only lighter in complexion.
[These were the Paranthas, mentioned earlier in the session.]
Q: Was this third group destroyed by the other two?
A: One of the 3 cataclysms. []
Q: So, the Paranthas were the antecedents of the Abos of Australia?
A: Yes, and compare to now existing peoples of India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Australia, and
New Guinea for similarities, bearing in mind genetic mixing and dilution.
Q: Were the Vedas written by the Paranthas or written by the Celts?
A: Descendants of Parantha, as per Divine guidance.

DNA recovered from a 40,000 year old pinkie bone found in Russias Denisova cave links a
newly-described extinct line of Neanderthal-like human ancestors to Melanesian populations
of the South Pacific. ( Flickr user 710928003)
On 31 October 2011, Live Science published an article on the so-called Denisovans, titled
Asian Ancestors Had Sex with Mysterious Human Cousins. The only known fossils of this
branch of extinct humans were discovered in 2008 in a cave in Siberia, which include a single
tooth and finger bone (and possibly a toe bone, which is currently being studied). Based on
genetic tests, the results of which were only published in 2010, the Denisovans DNA differs
from modern humans by 385 base pairs (Neanderthals differ by 202 and chimps by 1,462)
and share a common ancestor with Neanderthals. Their DNA can be found in Melanesians
and Australian Aborigines today. From the Live Sciencearticle:
Neanderthals werent the only ancient cousins that humans frequently mated with, according
to a new study which finds that East Asian populations share genes with a mysterious
archaic hominin species that lived in Siberia 40,000 years ago. The Denisovans likely
split off from the Neanderthal branch of the hominin family tree about 300,000 years ago, but
little else is known about their appearance, behavior or dress. But just as researchers have
learned that ancient humans and Neanderthals mated, theyve also found genetic echoes of the
Denisovans in modern residents of Pacific islands, including New Guinea and the Philippines.
[]
While Oceanians have about a 5 percent fraction of Denisovan-related ancestry, Southeast
Asians have around 1 percent, the researchers report today (Oct. 31) in the journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In comparison, genes from modern nonAfrican humans have about a 2.5 percent fraction of Neanderthal ancestry.
Its hard to tell when the Denisovan and human interbreeding occurred, Jakobsson said, but
since Europeans dont have Denisovan ancestry, its likely the mating occurred around
23,000 to 45,000 years ago, after Southeast Asians and European populations diverged.
Jakobsson and his colleagues are working on further studies on early human genetics and the
steps that led to the modern human genome. The more digging scientists do, the more
complex the genetic picture becomes, he said. Notably, bits of genes are almost all that are
left behind of some ancient populations, including the Denisovans, he said.

As for possible Indian connections, paleoanthropologist John Hawks is skeptical, but writes
the following:
As a case in point, HLA-A*11 is very common in Papua New Guinea, but it is also very
common in north India and in China. These two areas otherwise show no significant
evidence of Denisova ancestry. We might conclude that the HLA-A gene just has an
unusually high level of introgression into Asian populations, not typical of the genome as
a whole. Thats certainly possible. But without finding any substantial number of derived
mutations in the HLA-A*11 variant in the Denisova genome and in living Asians, it is hard
to rule out that the sharing of HLA-A*11 in all these populations is just coincidence.
In other words, its a complex issue and too soon to tell for sure if certain genetic similarities
(in this case, a single gene) between the Denisova-descended Southeast Asians and
continental Indians are mere coincidence or the result of some Denisovan heritage. Perhaps
the Cs offered a clue to this subject when they said: bearing in mind genetic mixing and
dilution.
Native American Immigrant Song
Moving forward a bit in history, the next possible hit concerns one branch of Native
Americans. According to current theories, the first migration of Paleoindians into North
America occurred during the last ice age at least 12,000 years ago or earlier there is still
debate about when the first migrations occurred. For example, the Clovis people, believed by
many archaeologists to be the first North American inhabitants, were wiped out along with the
North American megafauna around the time of the Younger Dryas cold period. They first
show up in the archaeological record about 13,500 to 13,000 years ago (with radiocarbon
dates of 11,500 years). But there is much evidence for pre-Clovis cultures. See the list of sites
at Wikipedia, some of which date back 30,000 to 60,000 years. Recently, in March 2011, it
was reported that archaeologists discovered a cache of finds in Texas that were up to 2,500
years older than the earliest evidence for the Clovis peoples. As Dr. Lee Nordt, one of the
authors of the study, said:
This find really rewrites history, so to speak, and changes our collective thought on the
early colonization of North, Central and South America [] What sets this study apart is that
we were able to show using geological methods that the buried artifacts dating to pre-Clovis
times were in their original state. This demonstrates unequivocally that the peopling of the
Americas occurred much earlier than previously thought.
But the Clovis and pre-Clovis people werent the only ones to come to inhabit North America.
According to Wikipedia, The Na-Den people entered North America starting around 8000
BCE, reaching the Pacific Northwest by 5000 BCE, and from there migrating along the
Pacific Coast and into the interior. Linguists, anthropologists and archeologists believe their
ancestors comprised a separate migration into North America, later than the first PaleoIndians.
The languages of the Na-Den, spoken by groups in Alaska and Canada as well as down the
west coast/southwest US (e.g. Navaho and Apache), share similarities with the Yeniseian
languages of central Asia (all of which except Ket are now extinct). The distance between
these two groups is the largest of any accepted language family. This has led in part to the
Sino-Caucasian (Dene-Caucasian) language hypothesis. One part of that hypothesis,
specifically the connection just mentioned, has recently gained mainstream acceptance,

including a conference dedicated to the topic in 2008. With that said, heres what the Cs had
to say on 7 October 1994:

This picture comes from Horseshoe Canyon, otherwise known as Barrier Canyon in Utah.
This seven-foot-high painting stands out among the others because of its size. It is part of the
Great Gallery in Horseshoe Canyon, standing nearly life size next to a series of other images.
Archeologists have struggled to interpret the strange figures that are depicted on the Great
Gallery.
Q: (L) What is the source of the Native American Indians?
A: Asia.
Q: (L) Across the Bering Strait?
A: No. Rescued. Transferred.
Q: (L) By whom?
A: Grays.
Q: (L) What were they rescued out of?
A: Cataclysm.
Q: (L) When did that cataclysm occur?
A: 7200 years ago approx.
Q: (L) What was the nature of that cataclysm?
A: Comets.
Now, check out this diagram. According to lexicostatistical analysis, the time depth from
Yeniseian back to its branching off from Dene-Caucasian (from which comes Na-Dene), is
just over 7000 years:

While we havent been able to find any evidence indicating a comet encounter in the Yenisei
basin at the time indicated (incidentally, this is where the famous Tunguska airburst occurred
in 1908), catastrophe has been a prime mover in mass migrations (no pun intended)
throughout history, and the unusually large distance between these two language groups is
puzzling and suggests something out of the ordinary to account for the branching of these
groups. So while the transfer idea is at this point mere speculation, it remains interesting
nonetheless. Keep the 7,200-year figure in mind as we proceed.
Bright Omen, Dark Age
Speaking of comets, the subject of cometary bombardment, both in history and our future, is
another that comes up a lot in the Cassiopaean Experiment, and well probably be discussing
it frequently along the way. While largely ignored by mainstream academia and media, the
phenomenon has great implications for our understanding of history, the rise and fall of
empires, and our future, as new research has been showing in recent years.
Moving along to more recent history, these remarks from the session on 12 September 1998
ended up proving to be quite the hit:
Q: (L) I have discovered that three of the supernovas of antiquity which have been discovered
and time-estimated by the remnants, occurred in or near Cassiopeia at very interesting points
in history.
A: Yes
Q: (L) Well, one of these periods in history was around 1054. This is a very interesting time.
It just so happens that there are no European records of this supernova, which was recorded
by the Chinese, Japanese, and perhaps even the Koreans. Yet, there are no European records.
What happened to the European records?

A: Europe was in a recovery mode at the time.


Q: (L) Recovery from what?
A: Loss of civilized structure due to overhead cometary explosion in 564 AD.
Q: (L) What effect did this have on the civilized structure? Was it a direct effect in terms of
material, or did it have effects on people causing them to behave in an uncivilized and
barbaric way?
A: Well, the burning fragmentary shower ignited much of the land areas in what you now
refer to as Western Europe. This had the results you can imagine, causing the resulting
societal breakdown you now refer to as The Dark Ages.
Q: (L) Well, it damn sure was dark. There is almost a thousand years that nobody knows
anything about!
A: Check Irish or Celtic, and French or Gallic records of the era for clues. There were
temporary islands of survival, lasting just long enough for the written word to eke out.

Woodcut showing destructive influence of a comet, dated to the fourth century AD, from
Stanilaus Lubienietski's Theatrum Cometicum (Amsterdam, 1668)
A year after this session, on 17 August 1999, the Knight Ridder Washington Bureau published
an article by Robert S. Boyd entitled Comets may have caused Earths great empires to fall,
which said: Recent scientific discoveries are shedding new light on why great empires such
as Egypt, Babylon and Rome fell apart, giving way to the periodic dark ages that punctuate
human history. At least five times during the last 6,000 years, major environmental
calamities undermined civilizations around the world.
Comparing the events to the fragments of comet Shoemaker-Levy, which impacted Jupiter
with megatons of explosive energy, the researchers say such impacts in earths history
produced dust clouds that dimmed the Sun, cooled the earth and caused massive crop failure,
hunger, disease and death, as plague and famine spread through Italy, China and the Middle

East. The previous order disintegrated, leading to the paucity of historical, artistic and cultural
remnants for such periods.
The last such global crisis occurred between AD 530 and 540 at the beginning of the Dark
Ages in Europe when Earth was pummeled by a swarm of cosmic debris. []
Dendrochronologist Mike Baillie established with analysis of tree ring data that in 540 AD, in
different parts of the world, the climate changed. Temperatures dropped enough to hinder the
growth of trees as widely dispersed as northern Europe, Siberia, western North America,
and southern South America.
A search of historical records and mythical stories pointed to a disastrous visitation from the
sky during the same period, it is claimed. There was one reference [Roger of Wendover] to a
comet in Gaul so vast that the whole sky seemed on fire in 540-41.
According to legend, King Arthur died around this time, and Celtic myths associated with
Arthur hinted at bright sky Gods and bolts of fire.
In the 530s, an unusual meteor shower was recorded by both Mediterranean and Chinese
observers. Meteors are caused by the fine dust from comets burning up in the atmosphere.
Furthermore, a team of astronomers from Armagh Observatory in Northern Ireland published
research in 1990 which said the Earth would have been at risk from cometary bombardment
between the years 400 and 600 AD.
Interestingly, it was a Celtic record that gave Baillie the confirmation he needed: the
dendrochronological record based on Irish oaks a continuous 7400-year-long record of tree
ring growth drawn from Irish trees as well as records in the form of myth and legend from
the time in question. Additionally, the Irish Annals refer to two bread failures during this
small time window (famines are also recorded in China, as well as the Justinian plague that
spread from Egypt through Europe). (See Baillie, From Exodus to Arthur [Batsford, 1999], p.
78) Here are some of Baillies conclusions, from his book The Celtic Gods(Tempus, 2005),
co-authored with Patrick McCafferty:

It is possible that many stories about the exploits of


saints may simply be Christianised versions of older pagan tales, with Patrick and Columcille
replacing Lugh; but there is another option worth considering: perhaps some of these deeds
actually took place during the lifetime of the saints, in the sixth century. This is probably
an appropriate point in this book to remind the reader of the similarity between the Irish word
for saint (niamh) and the word for the sky or heaven (neamh).
It should be pointed out that, in 540, not only do we have lots of churches founded in Ireland
[foundation sites had traditionally been identified by objects falling from the skies] by
saints who sound remarkably like pagan Celtic Comet gods, but throughout Europe, churches

are being established by saints such as St David, St Michael and St George, better known for
their skills at vanquishing dragons [a common cometary symbol]. Furthermore, the entire
body of Arthurian legend also takes place at this same time. []
Altogether, when one considers the expansion of the church, together with the quasi-mythical
activities of saints, kings and magicians, and the problems faced by Irish oak trees, it is
difficult to resist the conclusion that the skies were indeed busy at this time. (p. 172)
The myths of the Celts are riddled with sky and comet imagery. Not only do we find
characters described like comets (and mistakenly seen as sun gods by earlier scholars), but the
times of year when the earth passed through the Taurid meteor stream. There are even
indications that the ages at which some of the principal characters engage in the main events
of their lives reflect the return times of comets coming close to earth. We are convinced that
events in the skies do indeed appear in the myths. (p. 175)
Just a Little Bit of History Repeating
Perhaps relating to the figure of 7,200 years mentioned above, the Cs had this to say on 30
September 1994:
Q: (L) Is there any regular periodicity or cycle to this comet business?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) What is the period?
A: 3600 years roughly.
And this on 5 October 1994:
Q: (L) Now, this cluster of comets, when was the last time it came into the solar system?
A: 3582 yrs ago?
Q: (L) What is the cycle?
A: 3600 yrs.
Q: (L) So, when is this cluster expected to hit the plane of the ecliptic again?
A: 12 to 18 years.
If we keep in mind what we have learned from Baillie that comet bombardments are very
likely to be one of the main causes behind the collapse of empires throughout history we can
use this to look for possible markers for this event. Most recently, the following information
was published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in early 2009, and
reported by the Associated Press in an article titled Natural disasters doomed early Peruvian
civilization 3,600 years ago:
Nature turned against one of Americas early civilizations 3,600 years ago, when researchers
say earthquakes and floods, followed by blowing sand, drove away residents of an area that is

now in Peru. This maritime farming community had been successful for over 2,000 years,
they had no incentive to change, and then all of a sudden, boom, they just got the props
knocked out from under them, anthropologist Mike Moseley of the University of Florida
said in a statement.
Not so coincidentally, this matches with another date Baillie has focused on as a possible
cometary catastrophe with global effects: 1628 BC. This date appears in ice core data, tree
rings across Europe and the Americas, in Babylonian and Chinese records (both of which
record possible evidence of a dust veil dimming the skies and cooling the earth), and even one
enigmatic reference to catastrophe in the Irish Annals, although the far removal in time
between the event and the written record make it difficult to nail down with any certainty
(Baillie, 1999, p. 77). This event may also coincide with the fall of the Xia dynasty in China,
when a comet was recorded in Chinese records. McCafferty and Baillie (2005, p. 34) write:
c.1600 BC Chinese record of two suns in the sky [a common description of comets in
ancient records], one to the east and one to the west, just before the overthrow of King Chieh
and the demise of his Hsia dynasty. Chieh is reported to have said, When that (the second)
sun dies, you and I, well all perish.

View of Santorini from the air ( Flickr user )


Baillie argues 1628 BC for the true date of the eruption of Santorini, which brought down the
Bronze Age Minoan civilization that had thrived for over a millennium and probably
coincided with either the beginning or the end of the Second Intermediate period in Egypt (the
period of so-called Hyksos rule). This was a controversial position to take when it was first
proposed in the late 1980s, because it called for a revision of Egyptian chronology, pointing
out some of the problems of history mentioned at the beginning of this article. Egyptian
chronology is largely dependent on Biblical chronology, which has largely been discredited in
recent years. Archaeology, in turn, has largely relied on this established chronology to
calibrate itself. There are no firmly established anchors or markers with which to calibrate
ancient history. Those that are commonly used are actually vague astronomical references that

can refer to several different dates, or are too fragmentary to provide any solid date. As
archaeologist and historian Colin Renfrew put it in his introduction to Peter James book
Centuries of Darkness (Rutgers, 1993):
The first step is to recognize the depths of our ignorance. To realize how the existing
chronologies in different parts of the Mediterranean are bolstered up by circular arguments,
where specialists in one area believe that those in other areas must know what they are talking
about, and blindly use dating systems which are no better than their own. (p. xv)
In short, nothing is certain that far back in time, yet the dates we all learn in school and
university are taken for granted, even by the professionals. However, most mainstream
historians have accepted the date for Santorini in recent years based on the more robust nature
of the scientific evidence, as opposed to the imprecise Biblical-chronological methods.
Santorini could be one such anchor to help calibrate the timeline, but it remains to be seen
how far historians will go in their revision of the accepted chronology. Also, historians are
increasingly acknowledging climatic factors in explaining the periods of economic affluence
and depressions discernible in the historical records for this time. On this subject, historian
Thomas L. Thompson writes, with typical academic understatement:
Each successive period Early Bronze IV, Middle Bronze II/Late Bronze I, Iron I, and the
early Persian period finds its fate in economic collapse and a dramatic Malthusian
culling of the population. It is these periods that most require historical explanation, for
these depressions are departures from the expected. (The Mythic Past [Perseus, 1999], p. 135)
For reference, here are the accepted dates for these periods mentioned by Thompson: Early
Bronze IV (2100 BC), Middle Bronze II/Late Bronze I (1550 BC), Iron I (1150 BC). Note
that the 1550 BC figure falls within the period under contention in regards to the date of
Santorini and its conflict with the previously accepted chronology. (On a related note, a recent
radiocarbon analysis of the beginning of the Egyptian New Kingdom pushed it back as many
as twenty years, to 1570 BC.) With those dates in mind, here are the dates Baillie has
identified as comet-induced global climate catastrophes based on tree-ring data (as well ice
core data, historical and archaeological records): 2345 BC, 1628 BC, and 1159 BC.
Fascinating, huh?

John Martin's 'Pandemonium'


The Bronze Age Collapse(ca. 1150 BC) saw the demise of the Mycenean kingdoms, the
Hittite empire in Anatolia and Syria, the Egyptian empire in Syria and Canaan, and the mass
destruction of scores of cities in the Middle East. Baillie writes (1999):
Sometimes near or in the twelfth century BC, allowing for flexibility in archaeological and
ancient historical evidence, the whole fabric of ancient society appears to have crumbled.
Some have suggested that in most of Britain there was upland abandonment, particularly
severe in Scotland, followed by an upsurge in the construction of defensive sites. Around the
Mediterranean there was an endless list of movements and collapses. Most interesting was
the demise of the Mycenaean civilization in Greece with the ensuing four-century Greek
Dark Age which descended on the Mediterranean region. Here was an extremely dramatic
decline where people had already argued for some sort of environmental event involving a
prolonged and highly regionalized drought. (p. 71)
The 1159 downturn in climate is commonly dated to the beginning of the end of the
Twentieth Dynasty, the reign of Ramesses III: a time of drought, famine, political corruption,
expensive wars and civil unrest. As Wikipedia puts it, Something in the air prevented much
sunlight from reaching the ground [HK: Hows that for cosmic symbolism?] and also
arrested global tree growth for almost two full decades until 1140 BC. One proposed cause is
the Hekla 3 eruption of the Hekla volcano in Iceland but the dating of this remains disputed.
Or comet dust/debris, perchance?
Historian John Van Seters, writing in 1966, before the impact of climate and catastrophe
figured much into the analysis of these periods of history, had this to say on the earlier MB
II/LB I transition:

The end of the Middle Bronze Age is clear and undisputed. Here the break is not a cultural
one, for there is definite continuity in architecture, pottery, and art. The division is
characterized by widespread destruction of a number of sites in southern Palestine and by
the appearance of new pottery styles in addition to older forms. The destructions can best be
understood as the activity of the Eighteenth Dynasty pharaohs and the date for the end of
Middle Bronze would be about 1550 B.C. (The Hyksos [Wipf and Stock, 2010], p. 9)
Van Seters argues that this period coincides with the end of Hyksos rule/Second Intermediate
Period, not the beginning, possibly giving us an anchor (1628 BC) with which to solidify an
accurate chronology of the time, although Egyptian chronology is a mess when you actually
dig into it. The Egyptian New Kingdom, which sprung up after the Hyksos fell, lasted 479
years according to historians, from 1550-1069 BC. (Incidentally, this is also the length of time
traditionally given for the Israelite Exodus.) Perhaps not so coincidentally, the time between
the two climatic downturns identified by Baillie is 469 years: 1628-1159 BC. This is also
close to the time calculated between the falls of the Xia and Shang dynasties in China
(anywhere from 496 to 554 years, depending on who you ask). Baillie devotes an appendix to
this issue, and argues that the dates for the dynasties would be better matched to the periods
mentioned, although this too is a contentious issue.
As for the EB IV/MB I transition (2100 BC), this period saw the beginning of the first dark
age or Intermediate Period in Egyptian history, for which relatively little evidence survives.
Heres what Van Seters has to say about it:
The coming of the MB I people into Transjordan does not, as in Palestine, represent an
invasion and sudden destruction of the previous EB III civilization. It is instead an
immigration and settling, for the most part, on previously uninhabited sites. The first
phase of the new immigration is often known as EB IV because it is contemporaneous with
the last of the EB peoples of Palestine and Transjordan The mixture of ceramic styles of
EB IV and MB I cannot be easily distinguished stratigraphically in Transjordan The
decline of [EB IV/]MB I in Transjordan and the Negev is catastrophic. In fact there is a
general absence of sedentary life for several hundred years. Likewise in Palestine, MB I
was very likely followed by a gap in settlement, but of a much shorter duration. (p. 13)
Summing up, the evidence for a cometary catastrophe ca. 1600 BC is fairly strong, at least
according to Baillie. If the Cs are right about a 3,600-year cycle, were overdue another
encounter. Even if theyre wrong about the cycle, the scientific record is showing that such
encounters are anything but extraordinary. As the article quoted above stated, At least five
times during the last 6,000 years, major environmental calamities undermined civilizations
around the world. Those arent very good odds
The Cs Hit List 04: Nature, Nurture, and M y Monke y Genes

The reader should probably be getting the


idea by now: the approach SOTT.net takes to the Cassiopaean Experiment really is a case of
10% inspiration, 90% perspiration. One question asked, or one answer given, is often enough
to inspire a whole line of research leading to data and conclusions that might only be
tangentially related to the original question. Thats the whole point: discovery, and in that
sense, the data in the Cs transmissions is more like the thread of Ariadne than a book of
Divine Revelation. The clues given lead those interested to take up the search through a vast
labyrinth of information and disinformation to what I like to think of as the heart of the
matter: those areas of study that are not only highly relevant to coming to an understanding of
the human condition and the nature of the cosmos, but which are also closely interrelated and
always seemingly one step beyond what is currently accepted as common knowledge. In
other words, one mystery reveals another, then another. Its a never-ending journey of
discovery, which is what I think lies at the heart of science and mysticism. Anything else, like
the belief that we finally know all there is to know on this subject, only leads to intellectual
stagnation and the death of curiosity. As we like to say around here, theres no such thing as
free lunch nor infallible texts.
For those curious to know, the research inspired by the Cs experiment has led the SOTT team
to many of the topics that we focus on. Without them, and the life experiences that we surely
wouldnt have had if not engaged in this project, we probably never would have learned what
we have about the history and danger of cometary catastrophe, the electrical nature of the
universe, psychopathy, ponerology, polyvagal theory, and separating the wheat from the chaff
when it comes to the vast number of conspiracy theories on the market. Or at least, it would
have taken us a lot longer. After all, all of these fields have their respective authorities and
advocates, those scientific mavericks who have come to the conclusion all was not right in
their particular field of study, whether in history, politics, psychology, ufology, astrophysics,
meteorology, or any other science. But this is usually done on their own, disconnected from
the bigger picture and how to tie it all together. Often a lifetime of research will go into this
process, with the downside that other possible areas of research are left untouched. (Witness
researchers into the paranormal who deride conspiracy theories, or 9/11 conspiracy
theorists who deride ufologists.) But we try to bring as many of them as possible together, to
give as comprehensive as possible a view of reality as we can. One of these areas, the one Ill

deal with below, has to do with genetics, and the possibilities inherent in that mysterious
building block of life: DNA.
O n e

P e r s o n s

J u n k

Considering that the structure of DNA was only discovered close to 60 years ago, its no
surprise we have yet to solve all of its mysteries. It has only been in the last 30 years or so that
the function of epigenetics (heritable changes in gene expression) has been better understood,
and the possible implications and applications of that field are enormous. Then theres the
human genome, which was only cracked 10 years ago, revealing a surprisingly piddling
35,000 genes or so. But genes only make up a tiny percentage of our DNA. Considering that
the sole function of DNA was long thought to simply code for the proteins that make up our
physical structure, the question has puzzled scientists for years. Junk DNA was the term
invented in the 1970s for the long portions of non-coding DNA with no known function,
amounting to about 98% of the human genome. Nowadays, its known that at least some of
this DNA does serve a regulatory function, while other portions continue to remain
mysterious. On 23 September 2000, Laura asked the Cs about this junk:
Q: You once said [26 November 1994] that the core of DNA is an as yet undiscovered
enzyme related to carbon. Is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Here in this book it says: Evidence is accumulating that only a relatively small portion of
the DNA sequence is for so-called structural genes. Structural genes lead to the production of
protein. There are an estimated 50,000 structural genes with an average size of approximately
5,000 base pairs, which then accounts for only 250 million of the estimated 3 billion base
pairs. What is the rest of the DNA for? Some of the DNA is so-called repetitive sequences,
repeated thousands of times. The function is unknown. The ALU repeat, for instance, contains
over 300,000 copies of the same 300 base pair sequence. Certainly this DNA is not junk and
plays some important role in the gene regulation chromosomal architecture or chromosomal
replication. Until 1977, it was thought that genes were single sequences of DNA that are
coded into RNA and then into protein. However, further study has shown greater complexity.
It is now known that there are pieces of DNA within a gene that are not translated into
protein. These intervening sequences, or INTRONS, are somewhat of a mystery, but appear to
be a very common phenomenon. Now, is this thing they are talking about, these introns, are
these the core that you were talking about?

Introns are sequences of non-coding DNA found interspersed between the genes of all
eukaryotes. ( Pharmapolis.net)
A: In part.
Q: What about this ALU repeat with over 300,000 copies of the same base pair sequence.
What is it?
A: Tribal unit.
Q: What is a tribal unit?
A: Sectionalized zone of significant marker compounds.
Q: What does this code for?
A: Physiological/spiritual union profile.
First of all, until ribozymes (RNA molecules with the ability to catalyze chemical reactions)
were discovered in the 1980s, scientists thought that only enzymes could act as biological
catalysts. But the ability of certain RNA molecules to do so makes evolutionary sense. (That
is, what came first? The RNA to produce the enzyme, or the enzyme to catalyze the
reactions?) These ribozymes were discovered on an RNA intron. Their DNA cousins,
deoxyribozymes (or DNAzymes) were only discovered in 1994, with research published in
December of that year, just after the session alluded to above. But because of DNAs lack of
specific functional groups for similar reactions and its stable double-helix structure,
DNAzymes have to be created in a lab they have yet to be found in nature and even then,
they only function when interacting with single-stranded DNA. But given the ease with which
they are created and are able to catalyze reactions, perhaps the DNA core referred to above
is a naturally occurring deoxyribozyme? As Yingfu Li and Ronald Breaker, authors of a 1999
review of research on the subject, write:
Unfortunately, single-stranded structures are only rarely sampled in nature, during such
cellular processes as DNA replication, DNA repair and gene expression. It is not surprising
then that DNA has not been found to serve any role in biological catalysis. Several
fundamental issues concerning DNA function remain to be investigated more thoroughly in
order to decide whether DNA truly is the inert molecule that we have thought it to be or
whether DNA can aspire to the catalytic roles that are played by protein and RNA.
The fact that nature has little or no commitment to catalytic DNA is somewhat disconcerting
and suggests that the catalytic potential of DNA may be inadequate. Given that the kinetic
characteristics of several deoxyriboszymes are comparable to those of natural ribozymes
indicates that this is not the case. Clearly, we must probe deeper into the catalytic potential
of DNA to establish its limitations as an enzyme.
Perhaps another angle to take is that of histones, the spool-like proteins around which DNA
coils inside the cell and the enzymes that act on them to determine their function. In 2009,
scientists discovered the structure of two of these enzymes. From the article reporting on the
study in R&D:
The structures provide insight into how DNAs packaging is just as important and intricate
as the information in the DNA itself, and how these enzymes are part of a system of

inspectors making sure the packaging is in order. The enzymes are known as histone
demethylases because they remove methyl groups (chemical modifications of a protein)
from histones. [HK: Methylation is one way by which epigenetics does its thing.]
Mutations in the gene encoding one of the enzymes, PHF8, cause a type of inherited mental
retardation. Many biologists believe the modifications on histones are a code, analogous
to the genetic code. Depending on the histones structure, access to DNA in the nucleus can
be restricted or relatively free. The idea is: the modifications tell enzymes that act on DNA
valuable information about getting to the DNA itself.
To understand histone demethylases role in the cell, Cheng says, think of the cell as a library
with thousands of books in it. To find a particular book in a library, you need some signs
telling you how the stacks are organized, he says. Similarly, the machinery that reads DNA
needs some guidance to get to the right place.
Histones have a core that the DNA wraps around and flexible tails extending beyond the
core. The cells enzymes attach a variety of bells and whistlesmethyl groups are just oneto
the histone tails to remind the cell how to handle the associated DNA.
Methyl groups mean different things depending on where they are on the histone. In addition,
the modifications vary from cell to cell. In the brain, for example, the modifications on a
particular gene might signal this gene should be read frequently, and in muscle, a different
set of modifications will say keep quiet.
So it seems that both DNAzymes and histones have implications in specific gene
expression/epigenetics (which genes are switched on and off, and when), and potential
genetic technology, whether engineered or natural (e.g., nutrigenomics). We may expand on
those ideas in future installments, but for now, lets move on to the comments about junk
DNA being a tribal unit/marker compounds coding for physiological/spiritual union
profile. First of all, in 2008 Physorg reported:
Over evolutionary time, these [non-coding] repeats were dispersed within different species,
creating new regulatory sites throughout these genomes. Thus, the set of genes controlled by
these transcription factors is likely to significantly differ from species to species and may
be a major driver for evolution. This research also shows that these repeats are anything but
junk DNA, since they provide a great source of evolutionary variability and might hold
the key to some of the important physical differences that distinguish humans from all other
species.

Humans and monkeys share the vast majority of their genes. So what makes humans human?
The findings by Dr. Bourque and his colleagues at the GIS are very exciting and represent
what may be one of the major discoveries in the biology of evolution and gene regulation
of the decade, said Raymond White, Ph.D., Rudi Schmid Distinguished Professor at the
Department of Neurology at the University of California, San Francisco, and chair of the GIS
Scientific Advisory Board.
We have suspected for some time that one of the major ways species differ from one another
for instance, why rats differ from monkeys is in the regulation of the expression of their
genes: where are the genes expressed in the body, when during development, and how much
do they respond to environmental stimuli, he added.
Dr. White also added, This hypothesis for formation of new species through episodic
distributions of families of gene regulatory DNA sequences is a powerful one that will now
guide a wealth of experiments to determine the functional relationships of these regulatory
DNA sequences to the genes that are near their landing sites. I anticipate that as our
knowledge of these events grows, we will begin to understand much more how and why the
rat differs so dramatically from the monkey, even though they share essentially the same
complement of genes and proteins.
The source of genetic variability has been a mystery and a major bone of contention (no pun
intended) since Darwin published his famous book on evolution. Actually, contrary to popular
belief, Darwin himself didnt subscribe to the idea that random mutations led to the variation
that allows natural selection to run its course and produce beings with novel characteristics.
Its a curious bit of history. Nowadays, ask pretty much anyone with a high school education
about the history of the theory of evolution and theyll tell you Lamarck was a deluded
simpleton whose theories were refuted as soon as Darwin came onto the scene. Well, not
quite. Darwin himself thought that variation came about from the indirect and direct action
of the external conditions of life, and from use and disuse [HK: otherwise known as use it or
lose it] (Darwin 1859, p. 489). Darwin even had the idea that climate and diet were prime

candidates for acquired changes leading to modified genetic material to pass on to offspring
(of course, he didnt use the phrase genetic material he called his hypothetical units of
heredity gemmules). To this dispassionate observer (ahem!), it looks like Darwin was onto
something something the scientific thought police of the time didnt approve of. But well
get into these subjects in more detail in a later installment on biogenetic engineering. (See Eva
Jablonka and Marion Lambs book, Evolution in Four Dimensions.)
Getting back to junk DNA, the following was reported by The Daily Galaxy in 2011:
Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology have now determined that the insertion
and deletion of large pieces of DNA [viral-like sequences called retrotransposons] near
genes are highly variable between humans and chimpanzees and may account for major
differences between the two species.
The research team lead by Georgia Tech Professor of Biology John McDonald has verified
that while the DNA sequence of genes between humans and chimpanzees is nearly
identical, there are large genomic gaps in areas adjacent to genes that can affect the
extent to which genes are turned on and turned off. These genetic gaps have
primarily been caused by the activity of retroviral-like transposable element sequences
Transposable elements were once considered junk DNA with little or no function. Now it
appears that they may be one of the major reasons why we are so different from chimpanzees.
Our findings are generally consistent with the notion that the morphological and
behavioral differences between humans and chimpanzees are predominately due to
differences in the regulation of genes rather than to differences in the sequence of the genes
themselves, said McDonald.
So new and different regulatory sites turning certain genes on and off may account for the
differences we see in species with similar genes. The reference to tribal unit by the Cs is
interesting here. The tribe is the basic human social unit, normally, that is weve strayed
pretty far from our evolutionarily fit social structures, not to mention diet, but thats another
topic. I would even go so far as to say it is what allowed for our continued survival over
hundreds of thousands of years: the dynamics of a tribal unit foster positive character
development, mental health, the transmission of key survival skills, and true cultural and
ecological sustainability. Our higher brain structures are actually designed for social
interaction of a specific type: the more primitive mammalian structures that promote social
bonding acting in concert with higher centers of communication, giving us our distinctive
repertoire of human behaviors. (See Stephen Porges Polyvagal Theory for all the details.) So
while we may have chimp DNA, in a sense, our unique profile of body and mind, matter and
consciousness, is worlds apart. And the location of certain retrotransposon markers, and
their influence on gene expression (and who knows what else?), may be the key to some
pretty remarkable phenotypic variations our unique morphological and behavioral makeup
everything that makes us distinctly human. Who knows? It may even explain differences
within our own species, say, between those who naturally fit the tribal template those who
can submit to the process of socialization and live in concert with others and those who
cannot: psychopaths.
Of Soft Things and Mommy Substitutes
While theres no doubt a lot to learn from and about genetics, I cant help but think that some
scientists take it too far, seeing genes as the be-all-and-end-all of every human quirk and
behavior. John Cleese nailed it for me:

But if you prefer your scientific criticism to come from real scientists as opposed to aging
British comedians, heres Eva Jablonka and Marion Lamb (referenced above) for you:
[The prevalent gene-centered approach] is no longer necessary to attribute the adaptive
evolution of every biological structure and activity, including human behavior, to the
selection of chance genetic variations that are blind to function. When all types of hereditary
variation are considered, it becomes clear that induced and acquired changes also play a
role in evolution. the popular conception of the gene as a simple causal agent is not valid.
The idea that there is a gene for adventurousness, heart disease, obesity, religiosity,
homosexuality, shyness, stupidity, or any other aspect of mind of body has no place on the
platform of genetic discourse. Stability lies in the system as a whole, not in the gene.
the effect of a gene depends on its context. (pp. 2, 6, 7)
So Im skeptical whenever someone says its all in the genes. And homosexuality is one of
those issues where debates can get emotional and Ive often heard that response, meant to
imply that homosexuals are born that way. In other words, its not simply a lifestyle
choice. Well, I agree with that, but there are other ways of hardwiring human behavior
besides genetics, and one of them is behavioral imprinting. From the 28 March 2010 session:
Q: (L) We received a question from a reader who wants to ask: Is homosexuality determined
at the early imprinting stage?
A: In some instances. There are many reasons.
Q: (L) The second part of the question reads: If not, what determines sexual orientation at an
early age? Well, they just said there are many reasons. Can you list any of those other
reasons?
A: Past life influences and more rarely, genetics.
Q: (L) So which of these three reasons is the most frequent?
A: Early imprinting could be said to be marginally most frequent cause.
Q: (Ailn) So you were very close, Laura. (Perceval) Does the early imprinting case have to
do with abuse?
A: Not necessarily abuse as lack of proper input at moments of high susceptibility. Also,
in some individuals the sequence of imprint slots is different or not synchronous with the
pattern of the majority. In a sense, then, this is genetic though all such individuals do not
necessarily develop as homosexuals.
Q: (L) I think that the writer wanted to know is this a condition that can be changed, assuming
the individual wanted to change?
A: Not usually.
Q: (Ailn) When you talk about a lack of proper input, I assume then that in some way
development is not normal. Does that mean that homosexuals have any impediment to
spiritual growth?

A: No, that is not implied.

Austrian zoologist Konrad Lorenz and three ducks. By filling their "maternal imprint
window" with himself, he had the good fortune of becoming their mother substitute.
Q: (L) Well, you know the story of Konrad Lorenz and his ducks. The story is that there is
this window of time when the substratum of the ducks psychology is open to receiving the
imprint of the mother image. So, these ducks were not exposed to a mother duck, but rather to
his boots during that window. They came to see his boots as mother. Forever. These ducks
believed that boots were mother. So what it means is that there are these like circuit
boards in us where there is a window that opens when they can be written on. Whatever is
written on them in that moment is what sets that circuit. Its like a really basic circuit in our
makeup. And I think what this means is that these individuals may have either hypersensitive
circuits, or windows when circuits can be written that were different than other people. Maybe
their windows dont open at the same time as the majority of people.
Say, for example, the majority of people in their first week, they get their mother imprint
probably. Babies that dont get a mother imprint because they are given up for adoption, or
there is some kind of extenuating circumstance, they always have this lack because nothing
was written in. If they are put in a crib and never nurtured, they never got this imprint. Then
the window closes, and whatever was written on that circuit board during that period when the
window was open is what is there forever. Okay, so maybe some peoples windows open too
early, or maybe it opens while theyre still really tiny in the hospital and they dont get the
imprint of the mother. Or maybe it opens and closes very fast because of their sensitivity.
Maybe they get imprinted by the look of the doctor with a mask on his face, or a nurse
passing by or a Coke machine.
(Perceval) Maybe whatever the stage is for the imprint of sexuality, maybe its later and for
most people its at a certain age, but there are some people that for genetic reasons its earlier
or later and so the adults around that person act differently than they would have when the
child was younger. (L) Yes. And when were talking about something like imprints, you have
to take a very specific individual, and then you have to say, Okay, does this person have
and then youd have to ask all these yes/no questions to boil it down. It could be as varied as
the number of individuals that exist! And the same for homosexuals. Everyone is different. It
could be a partial past life cause, there could be a partial imprint vulnerability cause, or even,
as they said, in rare cases, a genetic cause.

(Perceval) I wonder what the imprint actually is. What is the actual imprint data? Is it
interaction, or words, or treatment by another human being? (L) Well, lets ask. In a general
sense, what is the imprint that determines sexuality for an individual?
A: The pleasant interaction with an adult model at a moment or during the time the
imprint window is open in conjunction with the release of specific hormones and brain
chemicals.
Q: (Perceval) So youve got a kid, a boy, and if the window is open, then they get more
female attention from their mother. But if the window opens later, when the father takes more
interest in the boy and starts to treat him like a man like fathers will sometimes chide
their sons about things like, You cry like a little girl or Dont be such a little girl, You
gonna wear a dress?, etc. If you had the window open then during that period, and you
received that kind of treatment (L) In other words, a delayed imprint window. (Perceval)
Yeah, and producing chemicals and being treated that way or laughed at or made fun of, and
being made to think that youre a little girl (Burma Jones) Though they did say a
pleasant interaction with adult models. (Perceval) Thats the ideal. (Belibaste) Usually at
what age does this window open?
A: 18 months to 2.5 years.
Q: (Burma Jones) Thats a big window. (L) Yeah, well thats not the whole window, but the
range.
(Ark) What I dont understand is why sexuality is not hardwired, and for what reason? It
could have been wired like number of legs and then there would be no problem. Everybody
this way with two legs and everybody is born heterosexual except with radiation, mutations,
blah blah blah. There must be a reason for that, but what is this reason? Why is there this
possibility of people being changed in this way that leads to suffering? Or maybe I dont
know anything about internal structure.

The appearance of a father will influence the mating choices of his female daughters. Which
may be why this finch looks so unimpressed. Could similar sexual imprinting occur in
humans? ( Axel Griesch)
(Burma Jones) Well, I was wondering, if that imprint comes in with an adult model, does that
also set the sort of person that youre going to look for to mate with?
A: Yes.

Q: (Burma Jones) So maybe its also to make it so that you will look for a mate within your
own group? Like setting up the parents early on in life.
A: Control system modification.
Q: (Perceval) Its probably like you were saying, a pleasant interaction with an adult model.
So, if its later than 18 months to 2.5 years (L) So if you have an unpleasant interaction, it
can really mess you up. (PoB) Does it mean that somebody can make another person
homosexual by specific kinds of treatment?
A: Yes.
Q: (Burma Jones) Well, it sounds like if you knew when someones imprint vulnerability was,
and you abducted them and put them with someone that you wanted to pair them with, you
could set up the whole imprint for them. (L) Yeah, you could. (Perceval) The problem is that
the normal window is 18 months to 2.5 years, and then there are people who have delayed
windows. (L) And maybe people who have early windows. So, its like what Sidney Baker
talks about, our individual physiology in terms of health and how completely individual we
are. There are certain patterns for the majority, but still there are ranges. So everybody is
really completely individual and different. (Andromeda) Are they talking here about having a
role model of the same sex, or the opposite sex?
A: Opposite generally.
Q: (L) So if you have a pleasant experience with a member of the opposite sex during this
moment of imprint, that will set you up to be attracted to members of the opposite sex.
(Perceval) It kind of suggests that a normal person in a normal family with both a mother and
father, that baby or small child is going to have interaction with both
A: It should be noted that the infant is sensitive to pheromone type substances that can
trigger the imprint window. That part of the process is hardwired.
Q: (Perceval) So for girls and boys, theyre hardwired to be attracted to male or female. (L)
So say a female infant is hardwired to be triggered by the presence of the pheromone of a
male, and the interaction is pleasant, then what is supposed to get written to the circuit gets
written, and everything is fine. If the pheromone opens the window and what happens in the
interaction is extremely unpleasant, then everything gets screwed up. And possibly it could be
that if there is some genetic difference in the infant, then maybe they are set up so that the
pheromones of a female will open the window. So, there are a number of possibilities here.
Its obviously an interactive thing that triggers it, writes the circuit and whatever.
So, weve got possible causes of homosexuality in terms of imprinting, past-life influences,
and genetics (in order of decreasing frequency), as well as the influence of pheromones and
hormone release on the imprinting process. While human pheromones have been suspected to
exist for a long time, there hasnt been a lot of conclusive research to confirm it until recently.
Interestingly, one of the most convincing recent studiesinvolved differences in how straight
and gay men (and similarities between how straight women and gay men) react to specific
body odors related to sexual attraction:
The two chemicals in the study were a testosterone derivative produced in mens sweat and an
estrogen-like compound in womens urine, both of which have long been suspected of being

pheromones. The estrogen-like compound, though it activated the usual smell-related


regions in women, lighted up the hypothalamus in men. This is a region in the central base
of the brain that governs sexual behavior and, through its control of the pituitary gland
lying just beneath it, the hormonal state of the body.

Anonymous Israeli clubber posed for maximal pheromone dispersion. ( David Shankbone)
The male sweat chemical, on the other hand, did just the opposite; it activated mostly the
hypothalamus in women and the smell-related regions in men. The two chemicals seemed to
be leading a double life, playing the role of odor with one sex and of pheromone with
another.
The Swedish researchers have now repeated the experiment but with the addition of gay men
as a third group. The gay men responded to the two chemicals in the same way as did women,
Dr. Savic reports, as if the hypothalamuss response is determined not by biological sex but
by the owners sexual orientation.
Some researchers see Dr. Savics work as strong evidence in favor of human pheromones.
The question of whether human pheromones exist has been answered. They do, wrote the
authors of a commentary in Neuron about Dr. Savics report of 2001.
The different pattern of activity that Dr. Savic sees in the brains of gay men could be either a
cause of their sexual orientation or an effect of it. If sexual orientation has a genetic cause,
or is influenced by hormones in the womb or at puberty, then the neurons in the
hypothalamus could wire themselves up in a way that permanently shapes which sex a
person is attracted to. Some researchers believe there is likely to be a genetic component
of homosexuality because of its concordance among twins. The occurrence of male
homosexuality in both members of a twin pair is 22 percent in nonidentical twins but
rises to 52 percent in identical twins.

Given the sexual nature of the pheromones in question, their possible effect on the
hypothalamus, and the hypothalamus effect on the general hormonal state of the body, the
Cs suggestions are definitely possible, at least in theory. As for possible sex-specific effects
between infants and their caregivers, on 17 August 2010, the Israeli paper Haaretz reported
New dads secrete hormone that tightens baby bonds. The hormone oxytocin is secreted in
mothers during pregnancy and has the effect of promoting the bonding of mother and child. It
was also measured in fathers during the second and sixth months of their childrens lives and
found to enhance the feeling of fatherhood and their connection to the newborn
infants.Heres how they described the experiments:

Mirror neurons allow one to literally experience what another experiences. Scientists are now
discovering more ways in which the behavior of one person may influence the hormonal state
and future development of another, specifically between parents and children.
Some 43 fathers were documented on video as they played social games with the infants, and
games meant to pique the babies curiosity. They were asked to present the babies with six
new toys kept in a basket. The researchers tracked the connection between the fathers and
infants in terms of fathers glances at the children, their demonstration of affection, the sounds
they made, and physical contact, including hugs, kisses, and touching the babies bodies,
hands and feet.
It emerged that fathers with higher levels of prolactin were more likely to play the
investigative games meant to arouse curiosity. At the same time, the higher the level of
oxytocin, the more likely the fathers were to establish a strong social connection with the
baby. Hormones such as prolactin and oxytocin have a significant role in establishing a
sense of fatherhood during the infants first growth stages, Feldman says.
Mothering love, fathering curiosity
In an earlier study led by Prof. Feldman, increased levels of oxytocin were found in both
mothers and fathers who played with their babies for 15 minutes. Hormone levels were
measured in 112 parents 71 mothers and 41 fathers from saliva samples taken before and
after play.
Findings showed that oxytocin levels rose during play among both mothers and fathers,
but that in mothers this happened only if they gave the babies a lot of loving physical
contact. In contrast, the hormone level rose in fathers only if they supplied a stimulating
touch that encouraged the infant to explore.

An additional study directed by Feldman and published recently examined the levels of
oxytocin in infants. It was conducted with 55 parents (36 mothers and 19 fathers) of infants
aged from four to six months. Its findings show that hormone levels after play increased in
parents and babies alike.
In this way, via coordinated interaction, parents shape childrens ability to establish
close relations, to feel empathy, to understand the feelings and intentions of others, and
to trust in the other, Feldman says.
So not only are scientists coming to understand the effects of hormones on sexuality and the
general hormonal state of the body, they are beginning to establish the reciprocal influence of
certain time-specific care-giving behaviors and their hormonal/learning effects in both the
children and parents. As far as I know, there hasnt been any research on these early dynamics
in terms of future sexual orientation, but at least one type of sexual imprinting has been found
in humans. Its called the Westermarck effect. During the imprint window for this effect (the
first six years of life), children living together in close proximity will not be sexually attracted
to each other when they start to develop sexual attractions later in life. But if even closely
related siblings, e.g. a brother and sister, live apart during this time, they may become
sexually attracted to each other as adults.
Sexual imprinting is also well established in animals, like the zebra finch, for example, which
learn to be attracted to mates that resemble their primary caregiver, even if that parent is a
foster parent and even if that foster parent is of a completely different species. If a young
animal is imprinted by a human, it will remain completely indifferent to its own species and
even try to mate with humans (Jablonka and Lamb, p. 168). Given the strong influence of
imprinting on animals sexuality, I dont think its unreasonable to look for similar
explanations of human sexuality. And given animals ability to imprint inanimate objects, it
could also explain some of our sexual peculiarities (e.g. fetishes) and perversions (e.g. sadism,
pedophilia). What remains to be studied are the exact biological mechanisms by which such
imprinting may take place.
And as for the other possible influence past lives Canadian biologist and psychiatrist Ian
Stevenson thought this was a good possibility based on his decades worth of research on the
subject. For those of you unfamiliar with Stevensons work, check out two of his books,
Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation and Where Reincarnation and Biology Intersect,
where he makes his case for the reality of past lives and their influence on present ones. The
books are kind of dry reading, but essential if you want the best science on the subject. Heres
a short description of his work relevant to sexuality:

Ian Stevenson pioneered the scientific study of reincarnation.


Many of these children with past-life memories show abilities or talents that they had in their
previous lives. Often children who were members of the opposite sex in their previous
life show difficulty in adjusting to the new sex. These problems relating to the sex change
can lead to homosexuality later on in their lives. Former girls who were reborn as boys may
wish to dress as girls or prefer to play with girls rather than boys.
Until now all these human oddities have been a mystery to conventional psychiatrists after
all, the parents could not be blamed for their childrens behavior in these cases. At long last,
research into reincarnation is shedding some light on the subject. In the past, doctors blamed
such peculiarities on a lack or a surplus of certain hormones, but now they will have to do
some rethinking. [HK: Of course, it could be either, depending on the individual.]
Scientists call the phenomenon childhood gender nonconformity. As Neil Swidey writes for
the Boston Globe, the research indicates that, of the boys who do exhibit CGN, about 75
percent of them perhaps more turn out to be gay or bisexual. And as the first case study
in Swideys article shows, even in identical twins one can be convinced hes a girl, while the
other shows the traits of a typical boy. The main thrust of the article is that homosexuality
may have a prenatal cause that hormones in uterodetermine sexual orientation, just as they
determine the development of physical sex features. As Swidey puts it:
Taken together, the research suggests that early on in the womb, as the fetuss brain develops
in either the male or female direction, something fundamental to sexual orientation is
happening. Nobodys sure whats causing it. But heres where genes may be involved,
perhaps by regulating hormone exposure or by dictating the size of that key clump of
neurons in the hypothalamus. Before researchers can sort that out, theyll need to return to the
question of whether, in fact, there is a gay gene.
Its also possible that these influences may determine how the child will later respond to
certain interactions with the parents, and the effects of the hormones released by those
interactions. But if it isnt taken as a possibility by scientists, chances are it wont be studied.
And, of course, politics surround the issue. Many would (incorrectly) see such research as
supporting the idea that homosexuality is learned and can therefore be unlearned, thus
giving ammo to the fundies and their anti-homosexual beliefs.

But the potential for human development in regards to imprinting is huge. Think about it.
What else in our early environment might affect the people we become later in life? Our
tendency to be attracted to certain types of individuals later in life was mentioned briefly
above. Perhaps some of us are predisposed in such a way to start relationships with
individuals who really arent good for us? That might explain the phenomenon of women
who love psychopaths, discussed by Sandra Brown MA. And of course, there is the imprint
window for language, which must be filled in at the appropriate time in order to learn
language skills. Who knows what other kinds of circuits might exist which pass by unfilled,
as a result of our ignorance? Might humans have potentials of which were totally ignorant, or
genes set in the off position, and as a result, we live our lives functioning as only a shadow
of who we could really be? We may be like that gadget sitting around the house gathering
dust for the simple fact that weve never figured out how to turn it on. Or worse yet, we may
think its just a decoration.
The Cs Hit List 05: Dr. Greenbaum and the Manchurian Candidates

Before reading this installment, we suggest you watch these horrifying clips from the 6 part
documentary, Evidence of Revision, detailing the MKULTRA program and some of its
applications.

On 25 June 1992,
Dr. D. Corydon Hammond of the University of Utah delivered a talk at the Fourth Annual
Eastern Regional Conference on Abuse and Multiple Personality at the Radisson Plaza Hotel
in Alexandria, Virginia. It was entitled Hypnosis in MPD: Ritual Abuse. In it, he described a
strange set of symptoms that he and other clinicians had discovered (often independently) in
patients, which indicated a massive, nationwide, well-coordinated program of systematic
abuse and mind control, which was often, although not always, indicated in family members
of NASA, CIA and military personnel. Using ideomotor responses elicited under hypnosis,
Dr. Hammond and his colleagues uncovered layers of programs that were installed in
victims (often starting in infancy) via repeated abuse (really amounting to torture), sensory
deprivation, disorientation, hypnosis, hallucinogens and other drugs.
Many different layers of programming were found, each with a different purpose, e.g. sexual,
suicidal (i.e., self-destruct), ritual and psychic killing programs, as well as built-in

shutdown codes, among others. Victims were also programmed with booby traps (called the
green bomb), so that if they ever began to recover they would go insane. Incidentally, the
number and frequency of individuals going off and killing for no reason seems to have been
increasing in recent years. Virginia Tech gunman Seung Hui Cho in 2007; Vince Li, the man
who decapitated another man on a Greyhound bus in Canada in 2008; and the Fort Hood
shooter(s) of 2009 are just a few examples who have made big headlines and show indications
of possible mind programming.
The story Hammond pieced together in his practice goes as follows. At the end of World War
II, Allen Dulles and others from the U.S. intelligence community recruited Nazi scientists and
doctors who were conducting mind control research in concentration camps and brought them
to the United States, where they began doing similar research for military intelligence in
military hospitals. A teenager raised according to Hasidic Jewish tradition and with a
background in Kabbalistic mysticism (themes from the Kabbalah turned up repeatedly in the
programming), saved himself by collaborating and assisting in the death-camp experiments,
and he was brought to the United States as well. The boy Americanized his name, obtained a
medical degree, became a physician and continued work that appears to be at the center of
cult programming today. Patients throughout the country know him by the name
Greenbaum. Of course, this is just a story. Hammond apparently had no means of verifying
what he was able to piece together from the victims.
According to Hammond, the purpose of this program is to create an army of Manchurian
Candidates who will engage in prostitution, child pornography, drug smuggling, international
arms smuggling, and other lucrative, illegal enterprises. Those at the top believe that they will
eventually create a Satanic Order that will rule the world. Again, if we remove the occult
gloss, this bears a striking resemblance to what has been occurring in the past decades. As I
wrote about recently, there is an undeniable confluence of these crimes (arms trafficking,
human trafficking, organized pedophile rings, drug running, etc.) among elite groups of
highly positioned men and women. And mind control turns up repeatedly (see the literature on
the Franklin scandal and the Dutroux affair, for example).
A Manchurian Candidate is an individual who has been brainwashed and hypnotically
programmed to kill. The term comes from Richard Condons 1958 novel of the same name,
which has been adapted twice for the big screen. As shown in the novel and films, such
individuals theoretically make the perfect spies, as they would not be consciously aware of
their mission, their superiors identities, or the acts they perform as one of their alter
personalities. They could act as foolproof assassins, couriers and informers, human tools used
by those who justify their whims in the name of national security. But, as is often the case,
truth is stranger than fiction. It wasnt the Chinese or the communists trying to implement this
very idea; it was the U.S.A.
The idea of brainwashing first made headlines in the 1950s as a propaganda term to describe
the effects of Maoist indoctrination and torture on American GIs. The problem is, that is all
that the Chinese and Russians ever did to the GIs in their custody: indoctrination and torture.
All the claims of narco-hypnosis and brainwashing were a lot of hot air. And given the CIA
connections of those pushing the propaganda (i.e., Edward Hunter, author of Brainwashing in
Red China), its telling that this is exactly what the U.S. itself was working on at the time.
(See Walter Bowarts Operation Mind Control, p. 45.) Nothing like accusing your enemy of
the very things you are engaged in.

So, in an attempt to keep pace in the mind control race, American military and intelligence
agencies began a series of projects, some of which were eventually made public when the
covert and illegal CIA Project MKULTRA was uncovered by the Church Committee in 1975.
The program included the development of methods to manipulate human behavior (including
electronic stimulation of the brain, or ESB), the attempt to create Multiple Personality
Disorder in subjects, the administering of various mind-altering drugs to non-consenting
victims, hypnosis, sexual abuse, and sensory deprivation (the very same practices uncovered
by Hammond in his victims)1. Using a wide network of front organizations and foundations,
the CIA funded this massive research project using unsuspecting subjects without their
consent. Even the researchers doing the studies were often unaware they were being funded
by the CIA, and their research was largely published in the open scientific literature and
journals. In this way, the CIA was able to make use of an extremely large base of research
(larger than they wouldve been able to procure had they only conducted top secret projects),
utilizing some of the biggest and most esteemed names in the fields of psychology and
psychiatry. The program was officially closed in the late 1960s, but many researchers believe
other similar programs existed, and continue to be pursued.
However, the practical application of such methods started before 1950, showing that the U.S.
wasnt merely interested in keeping pace, but was actually spearheading such efforts.
George Estabrooks, Rhodes scholar and psychologist, was an expert in hypnosis and worked
with military intelligence during World War II. He boasted that he could hypnotize a man
without his knowledge or consent into committing treason against the United States. He
also wrote that he had successfully induced multiple personality disorder in subjects and that
it has and is being done. In fact, the open literature records successful induction of MPD in
groups of children (see Jerry Leonards book, The Perfect Assassin, for references). Dave
McGowan writes that in his book, Hypnotism:

George Estabrooks
Estabrooks candidly acknowledges that his main interest has always been the military
application of hypnosis. What is needed is a subject suffering from what used to be
termed Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), and what is now termed Dissociative Identity
Disorder (DID). This condition can already exist within the subject or can be created by the
therapist. In all cases, however, the condition is created by severe trauma so severe in
fact that the traumatic episode cannot be integrated into the experiences of the core
personality.
Far and away the most common cause of MPD is early childhood abuse, often but not
always inflicted by a parent or other adult guardian. As Dr. Frank Putnam stated in 1989: I
am struck by the quality of extreme sadism that is reported by most MPD victims. Many
multiples have told me of being sexually abused by groups of people, of being forced into
prostitution by family members, or of being offered as sexual enticement to their mothers

boyfriends. After one has worked with a number of MPD patients, it becomes obvious that
severe, sustained, and repetitive child abuse is a major element in the creation of MPD.

Elsewhere, Estabrooks acknowledges that he himself had written previously that: everyone
could be thrown into the deepest state of hypnotism by the use of what [I] termed the Russian
method no holds barred, deliberate disintegration of the personality by psychic torture
The subject might easily be left a mental wreck but war is a grim business.
Estabrooks also notes that children make especially good subjects, given that they are
notoriously easy to hypnotize. This is a nice way of saying that children are particularly
vulnerable to abuse and have more of a tendency to dissociate traumatic experiences, thereby
creating alter identities that can then be exploited and controlled. (Mind Control 101)
A 7 January 1953 CIA document describes the creation of MPD in young women and states
these girls can act as unwilling couriers for information purposes. A document from a
year later describes a successful experiment in which a hypnotized woman was made to fire
an unloaded pistol at a colleague (which she believed to be loaded), and her complete amnesia
of the event. All of this is just to say, mind control isnt necessarily the loony idea its
generally made out to be. Personally, when I first encountered the ideas, I thought it sounded
like something out of a bad sci-fi movie: somewhat over-the-top and kind of ridiculous. But
after reading up on it, now Im not so sure of myself. As crazy as it may sound at first, this
type of research has been actively pursued by military-intelligence agencies for generations,
seemingly with much success. Just think of the advantages such procedures offer an up-andcoming cloak-and-dagger type: couriers of sensitive information can be hypnotically induced
to experience selective amnesia, so that even they would be unaware of the sensitive
information they carried; double agents could be programmed with multiple personalities to
truly believe they are defectors, gaining the trust of foreign governments or leadership
positions in subversive organizations, which could then be derailed, providing the excuse to
subsequently neutralize such groups; assassins and covert operatives could be programmed
to be unaware of previous or current missions, thus withstanding torture and interrogation and
not spilling the beans of precious information pertaining to national security. (Check out
some of the books listed below to get up to speed on the subject. For example, Walter Bowart
provides some interesting case studies of individuals who were conditioned to be hypnotic
couriers for the CIA.)
On 31 July 1999, Laura asked about the Greenbaum material specifically:
Q: The Greenbaum material says that there was a Jewish boy brought to America and trained
as a doctor who became this infamous Dr. Greenbaum. Is that true?
A: No. Green is an alias, or more accurately, a pseudonym for multiple persons engaged
in mind control efforts.
In Jim Marrs 2008 book, The Rise of the Fourth Reich, he writes:
According to former U.S. military intelligence agent Lyn Buchanan [in a 2007 interview with
Marrs], who at one time trained the U.S. Armys remote viewers, the Nazis formed a unit of
psychics and called it Doktor Gruenbaum. This name was for the psychic project, not a
person, although apparently a German psychic who assumed the name Gruenbaum may have
lived in the United States after the war. The name Gruenbaum, or green tree, apparently

was a reference to the green-tree symbol in the Cabala, which relates to the tree of
knowledge in the Garden of Eden. (pp. 180-181)
Neither Buchanan nor Marrs mentions Hammonds Greenbaum lecture or a possible
connection with mind control research, so its uncertain if they were aware of a possible
connection. What is interesting is the reference to Gruenbaum as a group engaged in
psychic/mystical pursuits, as well as the presence of a Gruenbaum in America, both of which
match the story provided by Hammond. With this in mind, consider the following from the Cs
session on 5 October 1996:
A: Now, some history as you know, the CIA and NSA and other agencies are the children
of Nazi Gestapo the SS, which was an experiment influenced by Antareans who were
practicing for the eventual reintroduction of the Nephalim on to 3rd and/or 4th density earth.
And the contact with the Antareans was initiated by the Thule Society, which groomed
its dupe subject, Adolph Hitler to be the all-time mind programmed figurehead. Now, in
modern times, you have seen, but so far on a lesser scale, Oswald, Ruby, Demorenschildt,
Sirhan Sirhan, James Earl Ray, Arthur Bremer, Farakhan, Menendez, Bundy, Ramirez,
Dahmer, etc
Jim Marrs confirms some of these details given by the Cs, with some suggestive details
pertaining to other comments as well. For example, the Thule Society was a German group of
intellectuals with interest in the occult, politics and race mysticism. The group served as a
front for the German Order, patterned after the old Teutonic Knights, and was instrumental in
the formation and funding of the German Workers Party. Hitler first made contact with
members of the Thule Society when he was twenty-nine. Marrs writes:
Author Joseph P. Farrell stated that the covert connections of [Dietrich] Eckart [publisher of
occult literature, Thule member, and Nazi] and future deputy fuehrer Martin Bormann support
the idea that Hitler was deliberately manipulated and placed into power, and secretly
manipulated behind the scenes by more powerful forces than even he wielded, and, when he
had served his purpose, was deliberately sabotaged and cast aside. (pp. 18-21)
Such groups were concerned with raising their consciousness by means of rituals to an
awareness of evil and non-human Intelligences in the Universe and with achieving a means
of communication with these Intelligences. And the Master-Adept of this circle was Dietrich
Eckart [the man Hitler called spiritual founder of National Socialism], noted [Trevor]
Ravenscroft. Hitler wrote of his own occult experiences as a solider in World War I: I often
go on bitter nights, to Wotans oak in the quiet glade, with dark powers to weave a union.
The more sophisticated versions of the legend of Thule only gradually developed in the
hands of Dietrich Eckart and General Karl Haushofer, and were later refined and extended
under the direction of Reichsfuehrer SS Heinrich Himmler, who terrorized a large section of
the German academic world into lending a professional hand at perpetuating the myth of
German racial superiority. Haushofer was a member of the mysterious Vril, an occult
society that practiced telepathy and telekinesis.
It is surmised that it was perhaps through such occult practices that psychic contact was
made with nonhuman intelligences Nazi occult researcher Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke
wrote that the power that motivated the occultists surrounding Hitler and Himmler is
characterized either as a discarnate entity (e.g., black forces, invisible hierarchies,
unknown superiors), or as a magical elite in a remote age or distant location, with which the
Nazis were in contact. (pp. 179-180)

In their book Morning of the Magicians, Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier write the
following:

Hitler was ultimately no more leader than Obama is of the US today.


Hitler was talking one day to Rauschning, the Governor of Danzig, about the problem of a
mutation of the human race. Rauschning, not possessing the key to such strange
preoccupations, interpreted Hitlers remarks in terms of a stock-breeder interested in the
amelioration of German blood.
But all you can do, he replied, is to assist Nature and shorten the road to be followed! It is
Nature herself who must create for you a new species. Up till now the breeder has only rarely
succeeded in developing mutations in animals that is to say, creating himself new
characteristics.
The new man is living amongst us now! He is here! exclaimed Hitler, triumphantly. Isnt
that enough for you? I will tell you a secret. I have seen the new man. He is intrepid and cruel.
I was afraid of him.
In uttering these words, added Rauschning, Hitler was trembling in a kind of ecstasy.
It was Rauschning, too, who related the following strange episode, about which Dr. Achille
Delmas, a specialist in applied psychology, questioned him in vain: It is true that in a case like
this psychology does not apply:
A person close to Hitler told me that he wakes up in the night screaming and in convulsions.
He calls for help, and appears to be half paralysed. He is seized with a panic that makes him
tremble until the bed shakes. He utters confused and unintelligible sounds, gasping, as if on
the point of suffocation. The same person described for me one of these fits, with details that I
would refuse to believe had I not complete confidence in my informant.
Hitler was standing up in his room, swaying and looking all round him as if he were lost.
Its he, its he, he groaned hes come for me! His lips were white; he was sweating
profusely. Suddenly he uttered a string of meaningless figures, then words and scraps of
sentences. It was terrifying. He used strange expressions strung together in bizarre disorder.
Then he relapsed again into silence, but his lips still continued to move. He was then given a
friction and something to drink. Then suddenly he screamed: There! there! Over in the
corner! He is there! all the time stamping with his feet and shouting. To quieten him he

was assured that nothing extraordinary had happened, and finally he gradually calmed down.
After that he slept for a long time and became normal again [Hermann Rauschning: Hitler
ma dit. Ed. Co-operation, Paris, 1939. Dr. Achille Delmas: Hitler, essai de biographie
psycho-pathologique. Lib. Marcel Rivimere, Paris, 1946.] (pp. 149-150)

Allen Dulles: he is also credited with 'exposing' the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as "an
anti-semitic tract". But considering this man's utterly duplicitous role in modern human
history, it is far more likely that the document, effectively a blueprint for global domination of
the few over the many, was falsely attributed to Jews by the psychopaths like Dulles who rule
from the shadows.
Marrs also describes the well-documented Project Paperclip, a Joint Chiefs of Staff operation
where Nazi scientists were swept up after the war and brought to the United States (e.g.,
Wernher von Braun, of NASA fame), the first of which arrived on U.S. soil just twelve days
after Germanys surrender. The project was still going full steam in 1973. (Marrs, pp. 149150) Then there are the well-documented ties between members of the American elite
(businessmen, industrialists and politicians) and the German Reich. For example, Prescott
Bush (Ws granddaddy) and George Herbert Walker both served on the directors board for
the Union Banking Corporation (UBC), which had its shares seized in 1942 under the Trading
with the Enemy Act for their collusion with the Nazis. Both men were also members of the
Council on Foreign Relations. And their lawyers? Allen and John Foster Dulles. Marrs
documents this and more in his book. (pp. 116-117)
Allen Dulles, of course, became the third Director of Central Intelligence of the CIA, which
itself was formed, along with the DOD, NSC, and Air Force as a result of Eisenhowers
National Security Act in 1947. (The DOD, in turn, led to the creation of the NSAs
predecessor, the AFSA, in 1949.) Dulles pops up again and again in these Nazi connections.
For example, he smuggled Nazi money and war criminals out of Germany and made Reinhard
Gehlen, who had an extensive Nazi spy network during the war, head of the CIAs

departments of Russian and East European affairs. (Marrs, pp. 138, 145) In fact, MKULTRA
was Dulles brainchild. Marrs writes:
It should come as no surprise that the men behind the documented CIA mind control projects
MKULTRA, ARTICHOKE, BLUEBIRD, MKDELTA, etc. had received Nazi medical
science passed along by Paperclip doctors and their protgs. The infusion of Nazi mind
control specialists within the fledgling CIA results in Project MKULTRA (p. 194)
Besides Dulles, three other names listed by the Cs as mind control victims Oswald, Ruby,
and De Mohrenschildt were also connected to the assassination of JFK. In his classic (and
hard-to-find) 1978 book, Operation Mind Control, investigative journalist Walter Bowart
deals with mind control and Manchurian candidates in depth. He has a lot to say about these
individuals, as well as Sirhan Sirhan (the lone assassin of Robert Kennedy) and James Earl
Ray (the lone assassin of Martin Luther King). Lets take a brief look at each of the
individuals mentioned by the Cs in turn. The material on each is pretty extensive, so Ill just
focus on what I consider to be some of the most interesting points and refer to other sources
for those who want to look into the subject in depth.
Lee, Jack, and George
This trio of characters had their fair share of CIA and FBI connections. Ruby, who claimed
shortly after killing Oswald that he was part of a much bigger conspiracy involving people in
high places, was an FBI informant in 1959 (revealed by the House Un-American Activities
Committee, and which Hoover managed to get kept out of the Warren Commission reports),
with close ties to the Mob and CIA-backed anti-Castro groups. De Mohrenschildt, one of
Oswalds only friends in Dallas (and a most unlikely one at that), was directly involved with
the CIA (as revealed by the House Select Committee on Assassinations) and just so happened
to have George Bush Sr.s (also CIA) name and phone number in his address book. De
Mohrenschildt conveniently shot himself the day before he was called to testify before the
Committee on Assassinations about his relationship with Oswald. He related to Edward Jay
Epstein that he had been instructed by a CIA man, J. Walter Moore, to keep in contact with
Oswald.

Staged event: Oswald being assassinated by Ruby while a Dallas police officer stands back.
Oswald himself was under constant CIA surveillance from the time of his defection to the
Soviet Union until the assassination, with his mail being read and phone calls monitored. But
he was never debriefed by the CIA upon his return to the States, despite the fact that he had

sensitive information regarding U-2 spy-plane operations and offered this information to the
Soviets. This fact, among others, led researcher John Newman to conclude that Oswald was
acting as a double agent, perhaps in an effort to assess how much information the Soviets
already had on the subject, and to identify the location of a suspected mole who was already
feeding U-2 secrets to the Soviets. The U-2 pilot shot down in the USSR while Oswald was
still there, Gary Powers, even blamed Oswald for giving the Soviets the information necessary
to shoot him down (which is very interesting in light of the case advanced in The Secret Team
by L. Fletcher Prouty that Powerss plane was brought down in a deliberate effort to sabotage
a peace conference between Eisenhower and Khrushchev). And a document concealed from
the Warren Commission, released in 1976 via FOIA, shows that Allen Dulles had secretly
coached the CIA on how the Agency should deny having any connection with Oswald.
According to one of the memos, Dulles strongly recommended that the CIA Director Helms
deny under oath that the CIA had any material in its files which suggested an Agency
relationship with Oswald (Bowart, p. 188).
Oswald defected in 1959 after serving Marine duty in Japan (the base at which he was
stationed being one of the CIAs main overseas stations and also a center for MKULTRA
LSD research), the same year the famous double agent code-named Wallflower (Dave
Cassidy) was chosen from a pool of retired military men previously stationed in Japan to
gather intelligence in, and feed disinformation to, the Soviet Union. Upon his return to the
States, Oswalds involvement in pro-communist and pro-Castro groups in New Orleans just
happened to justify the CIAs (illegal) domestic spying operations. Oswald (and others like
him), with his communist ties and known defector status, served to link together various
groups on the CIAs watch-list (e.g., the ACLU and FPCC) and provide a paper trail of ties
with the U.S. Communist Party. These groups and others would later be targeted during the
wave of protest and anti-war sentiment at the height of the Vietnam War, in the FBIs
COINTELPRO and CIAs MERRIMAC and CHAOS operations, which had the purpose of
spying on, infiltrating, discrediting, and neutralizing existing anti-war and civil-rights groups,
as well as creating them as controlled opposition for the same purposes. The FBI became
particularly notorious for this: infiltrating such groups with fake communists, then using
their presence as justification for further monitoring and infiltration.

Unthinkable? Nope, just S.O.P. in a world ruled by psychopaths.


Are we beginning to see an M.O. to the CIAs operations here? Want to illegally spy on
domestic groups critical of corrupt elites with entrenched power and thereby neutralize any
possible legitimate source of dissent and threat to your power base? Simply plant your own
communist agents, claim communist infiltration, and propose domestic spying in order to
root out the damned commies. Its classic problem-reaction-solution. Better yet, get your
agents provocateur to engage in illegal and violent actions, thus discrediting the groups in

question in the eyes of the public and justifying a well-deserved crackdown. Oswald likely
played this role in the lead-up to the assassination, infiltrating pro-Cuba groups for the
purpose of spying on and discrediting them. Leonards book contains all the details. Needless
to say, Oswald was in all likelihood CIA, plain and simple. The question is, was he even
aware of it?
The description of Oswalds post-defection actions bear a striking resemblance to the scenario
Estabrooks proposed for the creation of a super spy, as well as MKULTRA plans and
research. Leonard quotes Estabrooks:
We start with an excellent subject, and he must be just that, one of those rare individuals who
accepts and who carries through every suggestion without hesitation. Then we start to
develop a case of multiple personality through the use of hypnotism. In his normal waking
state, which we will call Personality A, or PA, this individual will become a rabid communist.
He will join the party, follow the party line and make himself as objectionable as possible to
the authorities. Note that he will be acting in good faith. He is a communist, or rather his PA
is a communist and will behave as such. Then we develop Personality B (PB), the secondary
personality, the unconscious personality, if you wish, although this is somewhat of a
contradiction in terms. This personality is rabidly American and anti-communist. It has all the
information possessed by PA, the normal personality, whereas PA does not have this
advantage. My super spy plays his role as a communist in his waking state, aggressively,
consistently, fearlessly. But his PB is a loyal American, and PB has all the memories of PA.
As a loyal American, he will not hesitate to divulge those memories, and needless to say we
will make sure he has the opportunity to do so when occasion demands. Once again these
people would have a great advantage over ordinary informers. Convinced of their
innocence, they would play the fifth column role with the utmost sincerity, and as mentioned
before this conviction of innocence would probably be their greatest protection. Again, if
suspected, no one could obtain from them any useful information. Only a very few key people
could throw them into the trance and, without this, any attempt to get information would be
useless. (pp. 13-14)
Leonard also quotes John Marks book on MKULTRA:
According to a CIA document, the subject was to be a 35-year-old, well-educated foreigner
who had once worked for a friendly secret service, probably the CIA itself. He had not shifted
his loyalty to another government, and the CIA was quite upset with him. The Agency plan
was to hypnotize him and program him into making an assassination attempt. He would then
be arrested at the least for attempted murder and thereby disposed of. (p. 45)
This scenario closely resembles the one mentioned in a 1954 CIA memo, with possible
implications for Oswalds role in the JFK assassination. The memo proposed: Can an
individual of [redacted] descent be made to perform an act of attempted assassination
involuntarily under the influence of ARTICHOKE? [Artichoke being the CIA code name for
a study program of interrogation techniques with reference to mind control.]
As a trigger mechanism for a bigger project, it was proposed that an individual of ******
descent, approximately 35 years old, well educated, proficient in English and well established
socially and politically in the ******* Government be induced under ARTICHOKE to
perform an act, involuntarily, of attempted assassination against a prominent ******
politician or if necessary, against an American official.* [handwritten footnote reads
simulation only] After the act of attempted assassination was performed, it was assumed

that the SUBJECT would be taken into custody by the *** Government and thereby
disposed of.
Estabrooks and MKULTRA researchers had even proposed using mind-controlled assassins
for anti-Castro operations. And Oswald just happened to be connected in New Orleans with a
CIA/assassin/anti-Castro exile, Carlos Bringuier, offering him his ex-Marine expertise, as
well as a Mob assassin hired by the CIA to kill Castro.
As a Marine, Oswald would have probably received his training/programming under the
auspices of the Navy, which had an intensive assassin-training program, revealed by U.S.
Navy psychologist, Lt. Commander Dr. Thomas Narut in the 70s. (Oswalds psych
evaluations labeled him as having schizoid tendencies; in other words, he was good assassin
material.) Estabrooks had Naval Intelligence connections (and also boasted of successfully
programming one Marine as a double agent), as did Guy Banister, the ex-FBI-turned-antiCastro-agent whose address Oswald listed on his infamous pro-Castro pamphlets. Then there
are Oswalds ties to ex-CIA-pilot and hypnosis aficionado David Ferrie. According to the
House Assassinations Committee, Ferrie frequently performed hypnosis on his young recruits
in the Civil Air Patrol, where Oswald was stationed in the 50s.

De Mohrenschildt
According to journalist Willem Oltmans (and confirmed by de Mohrenschildts lawyer, Pat
Russell), de Mohrenschildt had confessed to him that he knew of an assassination plot before
the fact, and planned to publish a book about what he knew. Oltmans later released portions
of an interview with de Mohrenschildt. Among the fragments: de Mohrenschildt had known
Oswald during the years when Oswalds brain was being programmed toward the murder of
the century. He also told Oltmans that I was drugged surreptitiously [after revealing
certain FBI and CIA-connected names in a book manuscript after the assassination]. As a
result I was committed to a mental hospital. I was there eight weeks and was given electric
shocks and as a consequence I sometimes forget certain details temporarily As a result of
this treatment, he tried to commit suicide five times One of these days I will put a
revolver to my head (Bowart, pp. 202-203). Well, he was wrong about that. It was a
shotgun.
When the House Committee on Assassinations went to follow up on information from
Oltmans, de Mohrenschildt was found dead. He had shot himself during a break while being
interviewed by Edward Jay Epstein for his book, The Legend of Lee Harvey Oswald. Bowart

writes, De Mohrenschildts daughter, Alexandra, told Epstein that she believes her father
took his own life after having had a post-hypnotic suggestion triggered by a voice over the
telephone in his room. (p. 204)
Speaking of post-hypnotic triggers, heres some more of what the Cs had to say on the
subject, from the same session as the list above:
A: you must know that Oswald was programmed to be the patsy. So that he would say
many contradictory things. Demorenschildt was both a programmer and programmed.
Ruby was hypnotically programmed to shoot Oswald, with an audio prompt, that being
the sound of a car horn. [The car horn is audible in the video recording of the shooting.]
As for Jack Ruby, there are witnesses who claim to have seen Oswald at Rubys nightclub.
Ruby, of course, disposed of Oswald while the latter was in custody, and before a proper
investigation could establish his guilt or innocence. In his rambling testimony to Earl Warren
he expressed his fear of his family being tortured and mutilated if he shared details relating to
his motivations for killing Oswald, and said I have been used for a purpose, and there will
be a certain tragic occurrence happening if you dont take my testimony. He also shared his
belief that a whole new form of government is going to take over our country (p. 199-200)
A trigger mechanism for a bigger project, perhaps? The one major journalist to interview
Ruby in prison was Dorothy Kilgallen, in 1965, after which she said she had evidence that
would blow the JFK case sky high. Days later, she was dead of an apparent suicide, her
apartment ransacked and the interview transcripts missing.
Sirhan Sirhan

"We shot him, we shot him!" rejoiced the psychopaths in glee.


Theres little doubt that a cover-up took place following the assassination of Robert Kennedy
(see Allen Bransons in-depth report, beginning here). LA police browbeat and coerced
witnesses, including Sandra Serrano, who was one of several to see Sirhan in the company of
another man and a lady in a polka-dot dress at the scene of the shooting. Her interrogator was
one Hank Hernandez, who returned from working from a CIA front company just in time for
the investigation. The polka-dot dress woman was also seen after the shooting and heard by at
least two witnesses (including Serrano) to exclaim gleefully, We shot him. We shot him.
Police also destroyed evidence of additional bullet holes in the Ambassador Hotel pantry
where Kennedy was shot, and the autopsy report showing the Kennedy had been shot from

behind and at point-blank range (Sirhan was several feet in front of Kennedy for the entire
shooting) was not allowed to be used in Sirhans trial. They even tried to get the coroner who
conducted the autopsy to change his report so that it meshed with their story. Needless to say,
more than one gun was fired that day, and those responsible for firing the extra shots were
never brought to justice.
Now, Sirhan never denied shooting Kennedy. He took others word that he had done it, but
remembered nothing of the shooting itself; just being at the hotel, then being wrestled down
after the shooting. Both the prosecution and defense established the reality of his inexplicable
amnesia of the actual shooting. In custody, he suffered from dizziness and stomach cramps (as
did Candy Jones and Luis Angel Castillo, also included in Bowarts book), and would stare
into the mirror for hours. He was soon found to be a perfect hypnotic subject and the defense
psychiatrist believed that Sirhan had self-programmed himself in deep trance states to commit
the murder. The only problem was, he had no motive. Sirhan was not political, and even
expressed sadness for Kennedys death and shame for his own actions, which ran counter to
his values.
Several notebooks were found in Sirhans residence. One entry was used as proof of
premeditation at his trial:
May 18 9:45 A.M. 68. My determination to eliminate RFK is becoming more the more of
an unshakable obsession RFK must die RFK must be killed Robert F. Kennedy must be
assassinated RFK must be assassinated RFK must be assassinated Robert F. Kennedy must
be assassinated before 5 June 1968 Robert F. Kennedy must be assassinated I have never
heard please pay to the order of of of of of of of of of of this or that please pay to the order of
(Bowart, p. 216)
Sirhan could not remember writing these notebooks, and the resemblance of this entry to
posthypnotic commands should be obvious. The strange circumstances of the case have led
several researchers, including Dr. Philip Melanson, author of The Robert Kennedy
Assassination; Dr. Herbert Spiegel (Columbia University Medical School), expert on
hypnotism; and Sirhans current lawyers, William F. Pepper and Laurie D. Dusek, among
others (some of whom are included in Bowarts book) to the conclusion that Sirhan was not
self-programmed; he was programmed as a Manchurian candidate by other forces for the
express purpose of assassinating Kennedy. From a recent article on the case:

According to the new pleadings,


[Sirhan] was an involuntary participant in the crimes being committed because he was
subjected to sophisticated hypno-programing and memory implantation techniques
which rendered him unable to consciously control his thoughts and actions at the time the
crimes were being committed.
Anticipating the skeptical firewall that the phrase hypno-programming raises in many
inquiring minds, the filings also maintain that, The public has been shielded from the
darker side of the practice. The average person is unaware that hypnosis can and is used
to induct antisocial conduct in humans.
According to Dr. Richard Kluft, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Temple University
and the past-president of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, the scenario
that Sirhans legal team advances is certainly within the realm of plausibility.
To put the seemingly far-fetched theory into context, Kluft notes that it is undisputed and
freely available information that U.S. government security agencies have extensively
researched the possibility of creating so-called hypnotic assassins and hypnotic couriers.
(A hypnotic courier would theoretically memorize a classified message while under hypnosis
and then only be able to retrieve that information if provided with the proper post-hypnotic
cue by the messages intended recipient, thus eliminating the possibility that the agent could
divulge the information if captured and tortured.) Information on whether and how covert
organizations have put the findings of their hypnosis research such as that conducted in the
CIAs allegedly discontinued human experimentation program MKULTRA to use,
however, is harder to obtain.
According to Kluft, it is not possible to hypnotize someone to do something that obviously
violates their beliefs or desires. In hypnosis, though, context is everything. Say, for example,
an unethical hypnotist wanted to hypnotize a suggestible vegetarian to eat a steak. If the
hypnotist simply put the vegetarian into a state of hypnosis and then presented him or her with
a steak, identified it as a steak, and told the person to eat it, the hypnotized vegetarian would
almost certainly refuse.
But if the hypnotist put a vegetarian into a state of hypnosis and then made repeated
misleading suggestions that in a short period of time a waiter would deliver a mouth-watering,
mock-meat, soy-based protein slab that would be both delicious and meat-free, and then

proceeded to order genuine filet mignon, the vegetarian would probably be more amenable to
taking a bite.
The very uncomfortable and very serious question, then, is whether an exceptionally
suggestible human brain, manipulated in just the right way, might be seduced by its delusions
into committing an act far beyond the violation of a dietary code namely, gunning down a
gifted politician in the early stages of an auspicious bid for the American presidency.
As this CNN article mentions, associate clinical professor in psychology at Harvard Medical
School, Daniel Brown, claims that after extensive interviews with Sirhan, he now remembers
that when he fired his shots in the pantry he believed he was at a gun range and shooting at
circular targets. It also details other new developments in the case, including evidence of
crossfire in the pantry and fraud in the original investigation.
James Earl Ray

MLK, the next peacemonger on the Pathocrats' hitlist.


Compared to the assassinations of JFK and RFK, I had little knowledge of the assassination of
Martin Luther King Jr. until recently. I can only recommend that readers in a similar situation
watch Evidence of Revision to get up to speed. Just as with the other assassinations, what
really happened on April 4, 1968 bears little resemblance to what has been handed down as
the official story. Again, witnesses whose accounts disagreed with the official narrative were
ignored or otherwise disposed of. There was no evidence linking the accuseds rifle to the
shooting itself, which was obviously planted to incriminate James Earl Ray. This and other
planted evidence were taken at face value, backed up by a single witness who was dead drunk
at the time, and Rays lawyer seemed intent on sabotaging the case, coercing Ray into a guilty
plea, which he later recanted. Rays connections to a mysterious Raoul were ignored, as
were Rays curious access to money, vehicles and forged IDs. (Incidentally, William Pepper,
Sirhans current lawyer, has researched the King Assassination since 1978, as well as being
Rays lawyer, and Martin Luther Kings family fully supports his conviction that James Earl
Ray was framed.)
One of those IDs identified him as one Eric S. Galt, the name under which Ray rented the
room in the Lorraine Motel from which officials said the fatal shot was fired. According to
Ray, he thought he was in town for a weapons deal arranged by Raoul. He had been instructed
by Raoul to buy the rifle, and was driving around the neighborhood when he heard over the
radio that police were searching for a man matching his description. He fled to Canada, then

the UK, and the rest is history. But what is interesting is the Galt connection. All four of
Rays recurring aliases were real people living close together in Toronto. And they all
resembled Ray. Galt (who happened to have been a sharpshooter in Rhodesia) not only bore a
striking physical resemblance to Ray, but they also shared visible scars: on the forehead, on
the right hand, and one, from plastic surgery, on the nose (Ray, using Galts name, had plastic
surgery performed on his nose one month before the assassination). And Ray shadowed Galt
on trips to various Canadian cities, including Ottawa and Montreal, always staying in close
proximity.
So how did Ray procure this intelligence on Galt for so close a match? Galt thinks Ray must
have had assistance, and it turns out that Galts information was held in a top-secret file for
his work on a defense contract. According to Fletcher Prouty, these files would have been
easily available to US intelligence, which keeps records on everyone involved in their defense
contracts. Needless to say, this all suggests there was more to Ray (and Raoul) than meets
the eye. Curiously, Ray had been hypnotized before, by psychologist Mark Freeman, who
found him to be a good hypnotic subject (as was the case with Sirhan) and, like Oswald,
displayed behavior that was contradictory. In general, he was shy, reserved, and passive, but
while in LA, he was outgoing, aggressive, vain about his appearance, and a fervent
campaigner for George Wallace.
Arthur Bremer

George Wallace
Arthur Bremer took four shots at the same Mr. Wallace on May 15, 1972. As with Sirhan and
Kennedy, the trajectory of bullets and number of wounds to Wallace and bystanders suggest
more than one shooter. And assassination researcher Lisa Pease doesnt rule out the
possibility of hypnotic programming, citing Bremers odd behavior before and during the
assassination. He also climbed around his jail cell like a monkey, just as Sirhan had done.
Now, hows this for a string of coincidences? Bremers brother worked at the horse stables in
Santa Ana, California, the same stables frequented by Sirhan before the assassination
(workers saw him there just a few days before). Witnesses also frequently saw Sirhan in the
presence of fundamentalist preacher Jerry Owen, who had a ranch close by the stables, and
who told the owner of the stables he knew a guy named Sirhan who was good with horses
(Sirhan had worked at the Santa Anita stables in Arcadia for a couple years). Now, William
Joseph Bryan Jr., expert hypnotist, self-proclaimed advisor on the film version of the
Manchurian Candidate, known sex offender, fundamentalist preacher, and sometimes
CIA/MKULTRA consultant, preached the same circuit as Jerry Owen. He was also famous
for procuring the confession of Albert DeSalvo (the Boston Strangler) via hypnosis. And in
Sirhans trance-induced journals, we find the following line: God help meplease help me.
Salvo Di Di Salvo Die S Salvo. Lisa Pease writes that Just hours after [Robert Kennedys]

assassination, famed hypnotist Dr. William Joseph Bryan was on the Ray Briem show for
KABC radio, and mentioned offhandedly that Sirhan was likely operating under some form of
posthypnotic suggestion. He also allegedly bragged to prostitutes that he programmed
Sirhan. Judging from Bryans history, he seems like the type

The police file report linking Arthur Bremer to Sirhan Sirhan via Thomas Bremer at the Santa
Ana Stables in California
Farrakhan

Malcolm X: "Education is our passport to the future, for tomorrow belongs to the people who
prepare for it today."
To be honest, I havent looked too deeply into Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam.
However, from what Ive read, a few things stand out. First of all, theres his alleged
involvement in the assassination of Malcolm X, for which he has apparently admitted being
involved to some extent or another, although he seems to vacillate on the topic. Then theres
the fact that he claims to be an alien abductee. That opens a whole other can of worms, but for
the meantime, let me just say that I wouldnt be surprised if many memories of alien
abductions are screen memories for mind control (and maybe even vice versa (yeah, I know,
its complicated!)).
If Farrakhan were a Manchurian candidate, it would make sense from another angle. As Jerry
Leonard shows in his book, the CIA has a long history of not only infiltrating groups that get
on their nerves; but also creating them out of whole cloth as a form of controlled opposition.
To counter the spread of communist leftist groups, they created a series of non-communist
leftist groups (both at home and abroad). In fact, they created an entire leftist culture, funding
and controlling leftist media outlets, intellectuals, politicians, and even shaping trends in
film and art (abstract expressionism made a nice contrast to Soviet realism). The foreign
groups also came in handy whenever the CIA wanted to stage a coup; their opposition was
ready to step in. As Leonard writes:
These activities allowed the CIA to manipulate groups and even national governments into
leftist behavior that it could control, thus blunting independent leftist behavior that was
outside of its control or allegedly under the Soviets control. In other words, to control the
real left, the CIA created leftist movements of its own design that would remain under its
own influence. (note #255)
Might the Nation of Islam fall under this category? And might the assassination of Malcolm X
been one of their coups? The very first African-American FBI special agent, James
Wormley Jones, was assigned to infiltrate the Universal Negro Improvement Association
under the leadership of Marcus Garvey in 1919! It looks to me as though the black pride
movement was co-opted long ago, especially given the current Islamic=terrorist propaganda

Another Kind of (Lone) Nut

Theres something about America. For a socalled first-world country, its curious that the States have the highest number of
assassinated political figures of any country: 39 (including 4 presidents), just ahead of Sri
Lanka (32), India (29), Russia (28) and Afghanistan (26). It also leads the chart for
documented serial killers, by far: 219, followed by the UK with 52. Hows that for the land of
the free and home of the brave? If it were strictly a natural phenomenon with a normal
distribution, you might expect India or China to have a lot more serial killers, but their figures
are paltry compared to the States: 9 and 6, respectively. So what is it about the US and lone
nuts going off killing people? And whereas lone nuts tend to get much publicity and highly
visible trials, why is it that organized pedophile/torture/murder groups, like the Finders and
the Franklin group tend to get off scot-free (not to mention CIA assassins and other players of
such intelligence-related fun and games)?
Well, if Dave McGowan (and the Cs, incidentally) are correct, it may have something to do
with the distinctly American tradition of mind control. McGowan, in his book Programmed to
Kill: The Politics of Serial Murder, argues that serial killers are probably Manchurian
candidates of a different sort: a psychological operation designed to instill a law-and-order
mentality in civilians via systematic terrorization, much like false-flag operations tend to
do. Its like the Phoenix Program writ large upon the American public. After all, the only
solution to social chaos is a strong government and police force, right? And what better way
to cover up possible assassinations than to add them to the list of victims of some lone nut
serial killer? Tagging on a slew of unsolved homicides isnt so hard in such circumstances.
And they tend to divert attention away from those pillars of the community who engage in
equally atrocious acts. Maybe thats the purpose?
What McGowan shows in his book is pretty damning: serial killers with high-level
intelligence, military, and political connections (including those involved in pedophile rings),
one case of documented MKULTRA research (on Gary Heidnik), mystifying leniency in
some cases, and fabricated evidence and sham trials in others. Far from the lone nuts that the
media presents them as, many of the killers weve heard about in all likelihood had
accomplices, and rather than having an obsessively rigid M.O., tended to use weapons of
opportunity or inflicted execution-style gunshots to the head. I wont go into the details for
each of the killers mentioned (this is getting long enough already), but instead suggest you
just read the book. Its really good, despite some flaws (McGowan tends to harp on the occult
angle, and is dismissive of psychopathy). Needless to say, you wont look at serial murder the
same way again.
A Final Thought

Osama Bin Laden a.k.a. Tim Osman


Most of this article has dealt with propaganda of a bygone era. The Cold War is over, replaced
by the Global War on Terror, complete with shadowy groups of Islamic terrorists, sleeper
cells, suicide bombers, and endless wars waged against an enemy without a nation. How
convenient. But I think this recent history provides some much-needed perspective for
understanding what is happening today. Just 50 years ago, the CIA and others were creating
fake opposition groups, infiltrating real ones, programming fake commie assassins,
controlling the media, stage-managing political events, and killing a whole lot of people in the
process. Do you really think anything has changed?
If we simply replace communist with terrorist in any of the scenarios mentioned above, I
think well come to a much closer picture of what is really going on in the world today. Think
about it. To paraphrase an earlier paragraph:
Are we beginning to see an M.O. to the CIAs operations here? Want to illegally spy on
domestic groups critical of corrupt elites with entrenched power and thereby neutralize any
possibly legitimate source of dissent and threat to your power base? Simply plant your own
[Islamic] agents, claim [terrorist] infiltration, and propose domestic spying in order to root
out the damned [homegrown terrorists]. Its classic problem-reaction-solution. Better yet, get
your agents provocateur to engage in illegal and violent actions, thus discrediting the groups
in question in the eyes of the public and justifying a well-deserved crackdown.
Assuming that the movers and shakers in the CIA havent suddenly grown a conscience and
decided of their own free will to cease any and all questionable and outright inhuman
activities, Id bet my money on the following: First of all, all those so-called terrorist groups
are either the creation of the very intelligence agencies citing them as threats to their nations
existence, or infiltrated to the point that they are, in effect, puppets of said agencies. Any
number of hypno-programmed patsies and lone nuts serve an agenda that spells more control
for said agencies, whether that be lighting their underwear on fire, or staging a suicide
bombing, resulting in more defense spending, more draconian legislation, and more public
hysteria. Just as the anti-communist spymasters knew that if they could stage a mindless
attack by commies, people would rally behind the security measures offered in response, the
same goes with terrorist attacks. And what to do about those pesky anti-war groups who
threaten to turn people against this agenda? Well, thanks to the recent NDAA, its as simple
as planting an Oswald in their group, tying them with known terrorist groups, and
detaining them indefinitely for their support of terrorists. As for the Oswalds, they are

easily disposed of, and possibly totally ignorant of the purpose they have served. Clever,
huh? The scary thing is, its working.

Sources
The 6-part documentary Evidence of Revision contains information on Oswald, Ruby,
DeMohrenschildt, Sirhan, Ray, mind control, among other topics. I highly recommend it as an
introduction to the topics in question and as a means of putting our current political situation
into the context it needs.
The information on Oswald comes primarily from The Perfect Assassin: Lee Harvey Oswald,
The CIA and Mind Control by Jerry Leonard. Other sources on mind control, including the
other lone nuts mentioned, include: John Marks The Search for the Manchurian Candidate,
Walter Bowarts Operation Mind Control, Colin Rosss The CIA Doctors, Dave McGowans
Programmed to Kill. See also this site, which contains a brief summary of the 18,000+ pages
of declassified documents relating to mind control.
The Cs Hit List 06: Lets Do the Planetary Twist to the Tune of the Brothers Heliopolis

OK, its time for more weirdness. As we covered in a recent SOTT Report, accounts and
recordings of strange noises heard all over the world went semi-viral on YouTube in January
this year, and some are even receiving mainstream media coverage. Some YouTube pundits
claim theyre all faked, a couple of scientists say theyre normal and nothing to worry about,
and many are freaking out as the phenomenon is feeding the 2012-apocalypse-oh-my-Godwere-all-gonna-die hysteria. So whats really going on?
The hype appears to have started with these videos from Kiev, Ukraine, posted on 3 August
and 11 August 2011, respectively. (Although, as well see later, these were not the first
accounts.)

Kiev Video 1
Kiev Video 2
(See here for a translation of the uploaders account of the sounds and analysis and here for a
summary of the associated thread, with additional analyses and accounts.)
Dozens of videos have been uploaded since then, some obviously faked, others perhaps not.
For example, at least 28 videos posted in the months since Kiev obviously use the sound from
the original video played over random video footage, sometimes with staged Oh-my-Godwhat-is-that? dialogue. And, no, as far as I can tell, none of them use samples from the films
Red State or War of the Worlds, as some have claimed. The similarity is striking (trumpet-like
blasts, metallic rumbles and such), but truth has been known to resemble fiction. And it
wouldnt be the first time that similar strange noises have been heard, both in recent times and
the murky depths of history recorded in myth and legend.
From the trumpets of Revelations, the Old Testaments Jericho, and Islams Israfel, to the
Norse god Heimdall, the Roman Triton, and the Arthur legend, all of these images of blasting
horns heralded mass destruction and End Times. And often associated with such sounds
were images of fire-breathing dragons and gods bringing death and destruction to earth with
their thunderbolts, rocks, fire and brimstone. As astrophysicists Victor Clube and Bill Napier
show in their books Cosmic Winter and Cosmic Serpent, these are all depictions and
memories of ancient encounters with comets, from a time when such heavenly occurrences
were much more frequent in our solar system. And for those who experienced them, it may as
well have been the End of Times, albeit without the religious/metaphysical overlay.

An eighteenth-century artist's depiction of the Ark of the Covenant and seven priests with
rams' horns at the siege of Jericho. Biblical overlay of naturally recurring catastrophic events
So what can we say about the sounds heard in these recent videos? Are any of them
legitimate, and if so, what could be causing them? Lets start with the second of the Kiev
videos. This Ukrainian news report seemingly debunks the video, albeit in the fashion typical
of mainstream media: condescendingly and not very rigorously. The few people they
interviewed from the area didnt hear anything and a simple explanation is offered: routine
construction work (which, incidentally, sounds nothing like the Kiev video). Needless to say,
the reports of a few witnesses who did not hear anything do not negate the claims of those

who did, and a couple of locals have responded to the video saying that they did, in fact, hear
the sounds. And given the tendency of folks to normalize strange occurrences, their claimed
impressions strike me as valid. One got bored, closed his window, and went to play video
games; and the other just thought they were building a bridge somewhere.
Other than that, there hasnt been a lot of detailed analysis, so its hard to say one way or the
other. But theres one thing you can take to the bank: reports of these noises were just getting
started. Not counting the obvious fakes, August saw around 14 such videos, including a
strange hum in France on the 14th and a whistling, wind-like sound heard at a Tropicana Field
baseball game in Tampa, Florida on the 23rd. The phenomenon dropped in the following
months: September saw 13 videos, October 9, November 4, and December only 2. Then
things really kicked off in January with at least 75 videos. The recorded sounds include a
variety of hums, industrial-sounding scrapes, squeaks, and rumbles, as well as the familiar
Kiev trumpet blasts. But there were also several videos from before Kiev, including a 20minute event filmed in Florida in March. And the phenomenon continues, with the most
recent report coming from Ireland this February.
Some debunkers cite the inspiration for the hoax as being the release of Kevin Smiths film,
Red State, which premiered in September 2011, just weeks after the Kiev video, and features
similar apocalypse-inspired trumpet sounds. But even if we were to assume that this entire
recent spate of videos is a collective hoax (or viral ad campaign), it doesnt change the fact
other strange sounds have been occurring in the past year or so, heard by multiple credible
witnesses, recorded, and reported by major media outlets. In fact, if I were to get
conspiratorial, I might even take a page out of my last installment and suggest that the sheer
number of fakes are akin to the fake CIA commies planted in leftist groups in the sixties: a
diversion with the intent of trivializing the real phenomena, priming the public to view it with
an attitude of ridicule (or mindless hysteria), and effectively blocking any actual analysis or
research into the possible causes and implications.
Strange low-frequency humming sounds have been reported all over the world since the early
nineties, from New Zealand and the UK, to Canada and the US. Perhaps the most famous is
the Taos hum in New Mexico. Strangely, while thousands have reported experiencing the
irritating, grating groan, not everyone can hear it. For those who can, some report feeling it
resonate in their bodies. For the man in the video linked to above, the sound even got stronger
when he experimented by entering the copper mines of the region. Interestingly, hearers of the
hum claim that it is more intense at times of US wars, and military ELF communication
coincidentally started up in the late eighties. Also, the earths crust is allegedly thin under
Taos, causing one hearer to speculate that they were hearing mantle movements. Two
scientists studying the problem speculated that the sound could be an acoustic transduction of
radio frequencies, which as well see, may be pretty close to the truth. But as far as I can tell,
there are no recordings of these hums, just reports of subjects hearing them. That seems to
have changed.
Since February 2011, residents of Windsor, Ontario, (including their city Councilor, Al
Maghnieh) have experienced a similar rumbling hum, and no one can figure out what it is. By
September after the first spate of YouTube uploads it had just gotten louder, rumbling
both eardrums and walls, frustrating and demoralizing the local population, for whom answers
have not been forthcoming. It intensified again this January, again matching the frequency of
videos uploaded worldwide. So far, the finger has been pointed across the border, to Zug
Island, Michigan, a heavy industrial area. If Zug is the source of the hum, Maghnieh asks
some interesting questions here:

Having learned this information now, it really warrants several questions. Did something
change on Zug Island in the last year? Did U.S. Steel Company change their manufacturing
process after consolidation? Did industry bring in some new machines? These are all
questions Im hoping we can get some answers to soon.
Or perhaps, if all the recent worldwide accounts are to be believed, something of a different
nature has changed, causing certain sounds to be more audible? I find it interesting that the
hum began in early 2011, around the time of the Florida videos, and intensified in September
and January, which have the most YouTube uploads by my count. Coincidence?
Take North Battleford, Saskatchewan, where dozens of residents (including Mayor Ian
Hamilton) heard strange scraping, trumpet- and foghorn-like sounds in the atmosphere in midJanuary this year. A local news investigation prompted University of Saskatchewan professor
Jean-Pierre St. Maurice to comment that Somehow they are picking up noise from an
environmental antenna that happens to be there. That is electromagnetic noise. Nice, natural
noise. St. Maurice points to the aurora, which some witnesses have described hearing as a
hissing noise. (See Mike Baillies Exodus to Arthur, p. 179, for more on the phenomenon).
That such trumpet sounds are a real phenomenon and not just a hoax was further supported by
this La Paz, Mexico, news report. The sounds were even recorded by a weather station.
Meteorologists put it down to a cold front.
The SOTT team asked the Cs about the phenomena back on 20 August 2011. Heres what
they had to say:
Q: (Psyche) I wanted to ask about the strange sounds around the world, especially in Kiev?
(L) Oh yeah, the strange sounds like a trumpet in the sky.
A: Mostly radio type waves due to increase of solar system energy input.
Q: (L) How can you hear radio waves? Why are people hearing these things?
A: Interaction with other EM factors on planet similar to amplification and wave
conversion.
Q: (Ark) Something in the Earth changes the frequency and starts vibrating. (Scottie) Or
maybe like some kind of modulation where the frequencies add and subtract, and you end up
with audible frequencies. (Ark) No, I think its a secondary vibration. But then these radio
waves should be detected by radio devices. And the question is, why there is nothing special?
We have a lot of radio devices, and they do not detect these waves. (L) I wonder if those
circles that people are always seeing on radar devices have anything to do with it? (L) Well,
the question is, if they were detecting something, would they even tell us? But then there are
radar devices at every airport. Surely people would say something. (Ark) Are these low
frequency radio waves?
A: Yes. ELF.
Now, ELF radio frequencies can be given off by lightning and astronomical bodies. It turns
out they can even be heard by the human ear via the process described by the Cs and Dr. St.
Maurice. When witnesses of comets and fireballs reported sounds accompanying the stunning
visual displays (sometimes before they even saw the fireball), scientists dismissed them as

impossible, the speed of sound being much too slow for such sounds to reach the witnesses
before visual identification. But as Baillie points out:
The plasma trail from a large fireball may generate Extra Low or Very Low Frequency
radio emissions; if an observer happens to be standing beside a suitable object (or perhaps if
he or she is wearing a suitable object like glasses or headgear) [HK: Keays and Baillie note
that almost any object can serve the purpose], that object can act as a transducer for the
electromagnetic signal thus the observer actually hears the incoming fireball as it enters
the atmosphere, before seeing it. The technical name for this phenomenon is geophysical
electrophonics. What do observers claim that they have heard? It appears that the sound is
most like hissing, shooshing, popping, wooshing or clicking In a recent article [Colin]
Keays provides a real gem: two Chinese researchers, Zhuang and He, have found in old
reports the statement that the very bright Comet De Cheseaux in 1743 produced sounds when
it appeared. Obviously we cannot hear across the vacuum of space, so the likely explanation,
according to Keay, is that particles from the comets tail must have been interacting with the
magnetosphere. Apparently sometimes we can hear comets! (Exodus to Arthur, pp. 179-180)

The plasma discharge of comets and meteors can be heard before they are seen
Keays and Baillie should read some of James McCanneys work. The plasma discharge of an
active comet, according to the Electric Universe theory, can form an electrical-current
connection with earths atmosphere. Perhaps it is this discharge phenomenon (remember,
lightning is also such a discharge) that is responsible for hearing comets? (In his list of
phenomena associated with approaching comets, McCanney lists colorful auroras, trumpetand whistle-like sounds.) Incidentally, the sounds resemble those heard before the perhaps
related explosions of transformers that weve covered on SOTT. And some of the videos
above include similar flashes of light, suggesting electrical phenomena, and the strange sound
heard at the baseball game in Florida was apparently preceded by a lightning storm, causing
some to speculate that the stadiums PA system went haywire as a result. Maybe it was
amplifying similar ELF waves?
But if the majority of these sounds arent caused by obvious lightning or fireballs, what else
could it be? Obviously something has changed, so what has made these once rare sounds
seemingly so common? Either something else is coming in from up there or something has
changed down here. Maybe both. Perhaps coincidentally, earth-directed CMEs occurred
multiple times in early August, as well as on 17 January and 23 January (prompting the

strongest radiation storm since 2005), the times of peak uploads on YouTube. But overall,
this latest solar cycle apparently hasnt been that spectacular. So whats up? Lets take a look
at some more comments from the Cs and see if we can come up with possible explanations for
what exactly is changing in our planetary and solar system environment. Its a bit tangled, so
Im going to take it one thread at a time and then try to tie it all together at the end.
Sols Little Brother
On 17 January 1997, the Cs offered up this for discussion:
A: What do you suppose happens when the mantle stops, or slows, and the crust does not?
Q: (Laura) Frank had a dream about this the other night, too. (Terry) About the mantle
slowing? Okay, if the mantle slows and the crust doesnt (Laura) Its like walking around
the room, carrying a bowl of soup, and then stopping (Terry) It sloshes over because the
crust keeps moving water in all of the oceans is going to slosh
A: No sloshing.
Q: (Laura) Okay, what happens when the is it that there will be lots of earthquakes?
A: Maybe, but what is the bigger picture?
Q: (Laura) The bigger picture is that the earth changes its orbital position, velocity (Terry)
No. The bigger picture is that life on earth gets pretty well wiped out.
A: No.
Q: (Laura) It exchanges energy potentials with other bodies?
A: No.
Q: (Jan) Gravity changes
A: Warmer
Q: [] (Laura) So, if gravity is lessened, and it is the binder, then, everything ohhh, I see
what youre getting at! (Jan) Yes, gravity is the binder. Without gravity, it just all falls apart

A: Not Falls apart, my dear, it all opens up!


This was followed up on 15 April 2000 with:
Q: (L) You mentioned that if the earths rotation were to slow, even a minute bit, that
everything opens up gravitationally speaking. But, this seems to be connected to solar
activity, and not so much the speed of the earth.
A: The solar and earth activities are interconnected.

Lets start with gravity. As far as most scientists are concerned, it is a constant. It never
changes. Lets assume thats the case for now. How might gravity change on earth? Well,
gravity is actually stronger in some places than others. Theyre called gravity anomalies and
they depend on the total mass underneath your feet, and that is affected by the thickness
(elevation) and mass density of the material.

Constant, gravity? A gravity anomaly map from NGU, the Norwegian Society for Geology
One factor that can cause such a change in gravity actually has to do with the mantle the
viscous, rocky layer between earths core and crust. Hotter mantle is less dense, so elevated
heat flow results in lower gravity. (Incidentally, this could explain the lower gravity detected
in Canada.) Its commonly believed that heat from the core causes the mantle to convect in
plumes, like a pot of water on the stove. The heated mantle rises from the core to the crust,
which it interacts with, resulting in such dramatic changes as tectonic plate movement, midplate volcanism, and crustal reorganization as rising magma cools to become new crust. Its
also commonly believed that mantle plumes called hotspots are responsible for regions of
volcanically active oceanic ridges. But strong plumes arent always located where they
should be, leading the authors of one relatively recent paper on the subject to write: Such
observations tend to preclude the use of a single hotspot/ridge interaction model and stress
the need for additional observations in various plume/ridge configurations.
Caltech scientist Don L. Anderson suggests that this bottom-up picture, where the mantle is
active and the plates passive, may not be the right way to look at it. It ignores the influence of
the pressure from the plates above and the extreme viscosity of mantle near the core-mantle
boundary (CMB), making such dramatic plumes unlikely to occur. Anderson presents a model
where the upper thermal boundary layer near the crust takes on the active role. The cold
surface drives the passive convection of the mantle. Even then, Anderson writes:
Hot regions of the lower mantle will heat the upper mantle and may control, to some extent,
the locations of supercontinents and long-lived subduction zones. Even if the mantle is
irreversibly chemically stratified into two or more layers, the deep layers will have an effect
on geophysical observables. Regions of high elevation, tensile stress and volcanism will tend
to be above low-density regions of the deep mantle unless counteracted by gravitational
forces in the plates themselves and at plate boundaries.

So, as is usually the case when you start digging into any accepted science dogma, Im
finding that things arent as cut and dried as theyre presented in the textbooks. Core-mantle
effects seem to have some influence on activities and structure of the crust, but the opposite is
just as likely. It goes both ways. But even if we dont know for sure if the tail wags the dog or
vice versa, some possibilities still start to take shape. The processes of mantle convection,
plate tectonics, volcanism (as weve seen in part one of this series, undersea volcanoes may
have something to do with global warming and climate change in general), and crust
formation, among others, are all tied together. Depending on the direction of causation, some
change in the core (or crust) would spark a chain reaction of feedbacks, and gravity effects
will be a part of it. Slower, cooler mantle will have more gravity, while hotter, less dense
regions will have less. As to the possible effects of any such disturbance in the force, well
see some possibilities further on.

The corona produced by a total solar eclipse. Maybe the ancients were wary of such events for
good reason?
However, things might not be that simple (ha!) when it comes to gravity changes. In their
book, Who Built the Moon?, Christopher Knight and Alan Butler share some remarkable
findings relating to gravity. For example, in the 1950s, French engineer Maurice Allais
discovered something amazing, completely by chance. He was investigating a possible link
between gravity and magnetism, using a Foucault pendulum. One day there happened to be a
solar eclipse, and the pendulum started rotating backwards (!). The results were verified by
Allais, as well as other scientists with no connection to him, in the years after. By current
science dogma, this is impossible, therefore it mustnt have happened. But perhaps connected,
in 1995, Indian scientists D. C. Mishra and M. B. S. Rao observed a small and sudden drop in
the strength of gravity during a solar eclipse using a gravimeter. Again, other scientists have
apparently detected similar effects (Knight & Butler 2007, 37 39). So, perhaps the Cs were
being quite literal. But what could the cause of these changes be?
I find it fascinating that the gravity changes observed by Allais, Mishra, Rao, et al., occurred
during solar eclipses. As we know from James McCanneys work, during a new moon, the
moon temporarily forms an electrical alignment between the earth, moon, and sun. The moon

blocks the electrical connection between the sun and earth, causing us to get hit by a strong
burst of solar energy when it passes out of alignment and triggering extreme weather effects.
A total solar eclipse will most likely have the most extreme effects. Its also interesting that
Allais was studying a link between gravity and magnetism. Heres what the Cs said on 18 July
1998:
Q: (L) Now, one question that we were discussing earlier is: how can the close approach of
the companion star cause an increase in the Suns gravity when there is no reason why it
should change anything, since gravity is a function of mass?
A: But do you really know all there is to know about gravity?
Q: (A) No, we dont know. But, does this mean that this will be an effect that does not follow
from the theory of gravity that we know already?
A: Gravity is the life force that binds all realities as one.
Q: (L) What are the mechanics of the increase in the Suns gravity? What is going to cause
this?
A: In order to understand this, you would need a reworking of the theorem.
Q: (L) Can you help us in this reworking of the theorem?
A: Waves. []
Q: (A) What wave, a gravitational wave, or an electromagnetic wave, or some other wave?
What wave?
A: Arkadiusz, how do these intersect?
Q: (A) Gravity and electromagnetic?
A: Yes. And others.
Q: (A) How they are described within a theory, or how they intersect in space when they
come together?
A: Both.
Q: (A) Okay, why does this increase in the Suns gravity have anything to do with
electromagnetism? We were told that the Brown star will not radiate any radiation, so, in
particular, no electromagnetic radiation. So, where does electromagnetics come in? I do not
understand
A: Gravitational pull incites electromagnetic impulse.
While it may or may not be related to the Cs linking of electromagnetics and gravity, in
McCanneys model, the gravitational pull of the sun on objects entering the solar system
(comets) results in them cutting through regions of electric charge, in turn causing them to
ignite and discharge the solar capacitor. This relates to the remark from the Cs above that

the sun and earth activities are interconnected: changes in the suns output affects the earth
(and the whole solar system), and some specific changes in celestial bodies of the solar
system affect the capacitor and thus the sun (which is why discharging comets often prompt
CMEs, to give just one example).
But this excerpt brings us to another point: the possibility that our sun has a companion.

In fact, binary star systems are quite


common, if not the rule in our galaxy. Physicist Peter Eggleton quotes Petries research from
1960 that 52% of star systems showed evidence of multiplicity (the real number theoretically
being much larger, due to limits to measurement accuracy). He also writes, After considering
unseen companions [e.g. brown dwarfs], Poveda et al. (1982) concluded that nearly 100% of
stars are in binaries, including long as well as short periods (Eggleton 2006, p. 14). In his
2007 paper, The Incidence of Multiplicity Among Bright Stellar Systems, Eggleton et al.
rate the multiplicity rate of 4649 visible stars (magnitude 6 or less) at 40%. This observed
incidence suggests a true rate of at least 65%. But as Eggleton points out, even the 30-35%
that he classifies as single systems could well contain undetected companions.
Also, King et al. analyzed a group of 5 star clusters (totalling about 2675 stars), to determine
how many binary systems they contained (the clusters ranged from 7.5-50% binaries), and
what the initial binary rate would have been after the stars formed and before some systems
lost their companions. In their model, an initial rate of 73% binaries best explains current
conditions in these star clusters, but only for the range of orbits they were able to study in all
five clusters (62-620 AU), and they acknowledge that they cant discount an even higher
initial number, if more binaries exist below the observed range.
So, if McCanney, Poveda, and Eggleton are right about the incidence of binary systems, Sol
should probably have one (if it wasnt lost at some point in the past). If its still there, since
its not visible, chances are it would be a brown dwarf. This is what the Cs suggested on 3
August 1996 and 4 July 1998. (See here for the full sessions.)
But keep in mind that there are dissenting views. For example, Deepak Raghavan et al.
analyzed a sample of 454 solar-type stars within 25 parsecs of the Sun and found that the
majority (about 54%) were single-star systems. They found that the bigger the mass of the

star, the more likely it is to have a companion. Clark et al. summed up the findings by writing
that stars up to 40 times the mass of the Sun exist in binaries about 75% of the time, down to
20% for stars less than 0.1 the mass of the sun (that includes brown dwarfs).
In the region closest to our sun, the only systematic, observational research on the subject
seems to have been done by RECONS (Research Consortium on Nearby Stars). Of the star
systems within 10 parsecs of our own, 29% have 2 or more observed stars. As the RECONS
people point out, this number may seem low, because 73% of the stars identified are red
dwarfs (less than half the mass of the sun and listed as M types in their chart). Red dwarfs
are less likely to have companions than larger stars, so the 29% figure probably isnt
representative for all star types in our cosmic neighbourhood, especially if we take into
account the difficult-to-detect brown dwarfs.
Moving on, I already included this next excerpt from 22 February 1997 in part two of this
series, where I mentioned the idea that changes in cloud formation can cause a change in
angular momentum of the earth, thus a change in its rate of rotation. (See here for a short
discussion of angular momentum.) On this point, we recently carried an article reporting that
average cloud height, which is positively correlated with global temperature, has been
dropping for approximately the last decade, something SOTT has been pointing out for a
while now high-altitude phenomena like jet contrails are appearing lower and lower, giving
way to widespread belief in chemtrails. In other words, the atmosphere (upper and now
lower) appears to be cooling. (See this as well, which brings more confirmation to something
else I wrote in part two: global warming stopped in 1997.)
A: Climate is being influenced by three factors, and soon a fourth. [] 1) Wave approach. 2)
Chloroflorocarbon increase in atmosphere, thus affecting ozone layer. 3) Change in the
planets axis rotation orientation. 4) Artificial tampering by 3rd and 4th density STS forces
in a number of different ways. []
Q: (Jan) What causes the change in the axis?
A: By slow down of rotation. Earth alternately heats up and cools down in interior.
Several factors affect earths angular momentum, and thus its length of day (or rotation):
atmospheric angular momentum (movement of the atmosphere around the globe, including
differing wind speeds and directions), oceanic angular momentum (mass distribution of
earths oceans), hydrological angular momentum (estimated based on the distribution of all
the other water on the continents, including snow, ice, ground moisture, etc.), and core
angular momentum (the electromagnetic coupling of the core and mantle). Changes in any of
these factors lead to observed changes in length of day and polar wandering. (LOD and
polar wander are both governed by the mass distribution inside earth.) So a slow down of
rotation is definitely tied to a change in the planets axis orientation (polar wander), and coremantle dynamics seem to play a role. The topography, viscosity, gravity, and
electromagnetism of the core and core-mantle boundary (including the factors mentioned
above, like atmosphere) can all act as torques, and are responsible, to varying degrees, for
transfers of earths angular momentum, and thus changes in rotation and polar wander.

Europe experienced first-hand this month how quickly temperatures can plummet to 40
degrees Celsius below zero.
And according to Harvard earth sciences Professor Peter Huybers, at least now we know
with greater than 99 percent confidence that shifts in earths axis are among the factors that
contribute to deglaciation. As the article puts it: The idea that slight shifts in Earths axis
might have been enough to trigger the ice ages is a century old. But a Harvard earth sciences
Professor Peter Huybers has finally proved it, using computer models to test competing ideas
and finding that earths tilting axis is the only one that works. In another article, Huybers
says, Another important aspect to consider is that the orbital configuration we now have is
almost exactly where it was 20,000 years ago, during the Last Glacial Maximum, but this time
were near a glacial minimum. Maybe not? The next ice age is coming sooner rather than
later, according to Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the space research laboratory at Saint
Petersburg-based Pulkovo Observatory.
There may be a sun-earth core connection, too. As NASA reported last year, an external
(e.g. solar) process may somehow affect the core and outer core, explaining a correlation
between long-term surface temperatures and length of day fluctuations. This may mesh with
McCanneys theory of earths magnetic field: that it is not the result of an internal dynamo
process, but external electrical interactions with the solar capacitor. According to McCanney,
the magnetic field is both permanent (in the solid core, as well as pockets of mantle and crust)
and variable (above the surface and including electric currents that flow between earths inner
layers). As I already mentioned above, some mainstream scientists have associated the length
of day variations noticed by NASA with torques produced by electrical currents which flow
between and connect the core to the mantle, but as the authors of one paper write, less is
known about [these] torques. Perhaps the sun, and the earths electrical connection with the
solar capacitor, is at least partially responsible for these dynamics in the core (perhaps causing
its periodic heating and cooling). So if there is a connection with the sun, maybe more would
be known if these scientists got up to speed on electric universe theory? And maybe we can
add the magnetic field to our list of interrelated factors, along with rotation, axis, gravity,
atmosphere, climate, etc.?
So, keeping all that in mind, read the following from 31 October 2001:
Q: (L) Why cant pole shifts be predicted? Cant we know where the new pole will end up?
A: Chaotic function here.

Q: (L) Okay, in a pole shift does the lithosphere of the planet slide on the core? (A) No. We
have to be very precise. There are three possible things that would come under the name pole
shift. Only one of them may come, or two, or three, okay? And these are the following the
axis of rotation [HK: polar wander] with respect to stars is changing, straightening out for
instance; this is one thing; while all the rest goes with the axis, the lithosphere and the
magnetic field. Second, the axis stays where it is, maybe it shifts a little bit; the lithosphere
stays where it is maybe it wobbles but the magnetic field changes: for instance reverses.
Third, axis stays, magnetic field stays, but the lithosphere is moving. So thats three ways a
pole shift can happen. And of course there are things that come together. The most dramatic
one which is seen from outside is when the axis of rotation changes. The next dramatic one is
probably when the lithosphere changes. And the third of unknown consequences is when the
magnetic pole changes, okay? So, we want to have an understanding what will be the main
change. (L) Well I guess we ought to ask an even more basic question: are we looking at a
pole shift happening? Thats starting at the beginning. (A) Alright. (L) In the next ten years. Is
a pole shift possible in the next ten years?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Is a pole shift of the axis (A) Honey, you ask if the pole shift is possible, of course
its possible. But suppose its almost zero probability? Is it possible is not the right question.
Is it going to happen? Thats a question. (L) Okay, you ask, carry on. (A) Are we looking at
a pole shift during the next ten or so years with a high degree of probability?
A: Yes. [HK: Note, this session was from just over 10 years ago.]
Q: (A) In this concept of pole shift, what would be the main feature of this pole shift, of all
those which we were discussing?
A: New axial orientation, and magnetic reversal.
Q: (L) Thats fairly dramatic. (A) Alright, now, change of axis or orientation of axis of
rotation: can we say we would straighten up, getting almost perpendicular to the ecliptic? Or
the other possibility is that it will fall down being almost parallel to the ecliptic. The third is
that well flip completely by 180 degrees. We know its highly unpredictable, but can we have
a clue from which one is, so to say, dominate?
A: Perpendicularity will be restored.
Q: (A) We know the axis will change dramatically and magnetic reversal will happen. You
didnt mention a change or shift of the lithosphere alone. Can we
A: Lithospheric shift will feature to some extent.
Q: (A) But, that means eventually that the equator will almost not change because
A: Correct.
Q: (A) So it will just shift a little bit, but its not going to go to Hawaii? (L) Oh rats! That was
my theory! Well, it was a good idea. (A) What about changes in the lithosphere: can we
predict a little bit of change in geography, coming from motions in lithosphere and changes in
water level?

A: Chaotic features predominate but in general it will be safer inland and in mountainous
areas since less folding occurs in such locations.
Q: (A) Now, the major, the change of the orientation of the axis, what would be the main
trigger, force, or activity, or what kind of event will trigger this change of the axis?

Comet Lovejoy photographed from space


A: Cometary bodies. [HK: See my review of McCanneys book for the possible mechanics
of this process; basically, the gravity of a passing comet pulls upon the lithosphere, and may
cause precession of the cores rotation, thus changing the axis of rotation.]
Q: (L) Are the planets of the solar system going to kind of shift out of their orbits and run
amok? Is that a possibility?
A: Yes.
Q: (A) Due to cometary orbits alone?
A: Yes. Twin sun also.
Q: (A) When we speak about these cometary bodies, are we speaking about impacts?
A: Some will hit.
Q: (A) What would be if any the role played by electric phenomena?
A: Twin sun grounds current flow through entire system setting the motor running.
Q: (L) Does this mean that all of the different bodies of the solar system are like parts of some
kind of giant machine, and once this electric current flows through them, depending on their

positions relative to one another at the time this current flows, that it has some influence on
the way the machine runs?
A: Yes, more or less.
And most recently, there was this follow-up on the opening up on 6 July 2010:
Q: (L) Is there going to be a gigantic methane eruption in the Gulf of Mexico resulting in a
tsunami that wipes out everybody in Florida?
A: No. The methane is a serious contributor to global warming, however.
Q: (L) Is oil leaking out of the ocean bed floor in the Gulf of Mexico in any other places
besides through the well?
A: Yes but that is happening elsewhere as well. All part of the opening up phenomenon.
Q: (L) So, you mean that what weve speculated about sinkholes and cracks in the earth
What is causing this opening up?
A: Misalignment, or rather sliding of layers of crust of earth due to slowing of rotation.
Q: (L) Okay, what is causing this slowing of rotation?
A: We have mentioned the approach of companion star and its tendency to ground the
system.
Followed up on 12 Dec 2010:

Q: (L) Ok, now Ive got this other


book here, Lost Star of Myth and Time and his theory is about a companion star and the fact
that the earth or the solar system is rotating around a common center of gravity, in tandem
with this companion star. It is said that it is this orbit that creates the precession of the zodiac.
He says that the precession is not a big wobble that the earth goes through, as it proceeds in a
fairly direct course through the galaxy, but rather that it is this rotation around this common
center of gravity with the companion star that produces the effect of precession. Now, is he on
to something with his theory also about the precession of the zodiac?

A: Absolutely!
Q: (L) OK, he points out some interesting effects in here. First of all, he mentioned recording
the speed of the earths rotation. They had a fixed telescope with crosshairs and they had a
clock that was connected to some kind of super time clock that was extremely accurate, and
they were recording exactly how long it took the earth to rotate in respect of Sirius, Sirius
being a fixed point. These researchers discovered that during the period of time, when Sirius
B (Siriuss companion, which is a dwarf), eclipsed Sirius A; it actually slowed the rotation
of the earth. Now, this is what their measurements showed. Something like 50 arc seconds.
The slowing began a week before the eclipse, then after the eclipse the earth actually sped up.
By 50 arc seconds. So, there are two weeks of effects on the rotation of the earth, caused by
the eclipsing of Sirius A caused by its companion Sirius B as I remember, though I may have
missed the exact time period. Now, the conclusion that he drew from this is that we are
affected by being gravitationally connected to Sirius somehow. Anyhow, the conclusion that
he draws is and he also points out that it seems that Sirius is heading in our direction; we
are getting closer to Sirius so, he theorizes that Sirius is our companion star. Is he correct
about that?
A: Not Sols companion; but look in that direction for clues to your own little brother.
Q: (L) Is it true as he speculates that when the solar system approaches this companion of
ours, that it will have a psychic effect?
A: Yes. You are already feeling its approach.
Q: (L) Well, thats one thing that this guy James McCanney said. He said that this last solar
cycle the maximum was so long, so intense that it was evidence that something really big,
had entered the solar capacitor. It was discharging the sun. And, if thats the case, theres
probably a current flow and that means that its possible that at some point the earth and
maybe the moon and several other astronomical bodies, will line up along the line of this flow
thats going on between the sun and its companion. And if thats the case, could that be a little
problematical?
A: Oh indeed! Yes, it is happening already. Do you not see the evidence all around the globe?

A sign of comet dust loading and a shrinking, cooling atmosphere, not government plots to
spray chemical or biological agents in order to reduce the population. The result may be the

same however, due to the increased possibility of dangerous pathogens riding in on comet
debris.
Q: (L) Well, on that point, McCanney says that when the earth gets into this kind of situation
where theres a discharge thing going on, between the sun and another body and the earth gets
involved in it, that the earth itself becomes comet-like during that time and it begins also to
attract what he calls pollution events. It starts picking up all kinds of dust and stuff from outer
space and even the water volume on the planet gets increased because of this precipitating,
because the planets picking stuff up from space. Its growing from accumulating stuff, from
acquiring stuff. And if thats the case, we could be attracting dust loading in the upper
atmosphere-regardless of whether or not we pass through cometary dust clouds. All
these things that weve been noticing going on in the upper atmosphere strange clouds,
long-lasting contrails, extreme cooling could be exactly as he described. There could also be
atmospheric effects of these electric sheets, because he says that there are different kinds of
ways of currents and layers of currents. Hes got like a five-layer model of how the
electromagnetic field of the planet goes, and he says that its the cause of El Nio, its the
cause of earthquakes, volcanoes , storms, changing of the Jet Stream, and just a whole host of
things: its all electrical phenomena. He says that the electricity from the sun creates and
drives hurricanes and that it is not the temperature of the water. Because he said that if it had
to do with the temperatures of the water, one hurricane comes along, sucks all the heat out
then it would be impossible for another hurricane to form for a period of time. And yet you
see very often, hurricane after hurricane. So, is he on to something with this theory?
A: Oh you bet!
So if the companion sun, and any wayward comets it has catapulted into the solar system, are
entering and discharging the solar capacitor, this could have a number of effects on earth,
including:

atmospheric: dust loading of the atmosphere, perhaps affecting cloud formation;


hydrological: hydrological: positive and negative feedbacks for warming and cooling
temperatures, leading to changes in evaporation and precipitation;
electromagnetic: electrically influenced extreme weather and other effects (ELF radiation,
strange sounds, transformer explosions, heating of the core, etc.);
gravity: gravity anomalies caused by resulting changes in the core and mantle;
crustal anomalies (like volcanism and perhaps outgassings and sinkholes);
changes in the magnetic field;
pretty much all of which may have an effect on rotation and axis orientation.

Perhaps related, a few recent news stories stick out: the sun displayed some interesting
cyclonic magnetic activity on February 7-8, a new comet was discovered on February 11, an
unexplained ripple in earths magnetic field occurred on February 14, leading to strange
whirlpool auroras in the Arctic Circle, and it was recently discovered that Venus rotation has
slowed by approximately 6.5 minutes in the last 16 years. Perhaps whatever is influencing
Venus rotation is having a similar effect on earth?
Interestingly, GNFE (Global Network for the Forecasting of Earthquakes) President Professor
Elchin Khalilov reported that on November 15, 2011, multiple ATROPATENA earthquake
forecasting stations simultaneously recorded a very powerful gravitational impulse of the
type which usually signal impending earthquakes.

A detailed analysis of all records of the stations led to the conclusion that this might be
possible only if the source of the stress waves was in the Earths core. According to the
scientist, such an impulse could be caused by a powerful energy burst in the Earths interior,
at its core. This process may result in the accelerated movement of lithospheric plates and,
consequently, strong earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis and other geological
cataclysms.
Professor Khalilov was later interviewed about the strange sounds heard over the world. Ill
close this article with some food for thought from Dr. Khalilov:
We have analyzed records of these sounds and found that most of their spectrum lies within
the infrasound range, i.e. is not audible to humans. What people hear is only a small fraction
of the actual power of these sounds. They are low-frequency acoustic emissions in the
range between 20 and 100 Hz modulated by ultra-low infrasonic waves from 0.1 to 15
Hz. In geophysics, they are called acoustic-gravity waves; they are formed in the upper
atmosphere, at the atmosphere-ionosphere boundary in particular. There can be quite a lot of
causes why those waves are generated: earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, storms,
tsunamis, etc. However, the scale of the observed humming sound in terms of both the
area covered and its power far exceeds those that can be generated by the abovementioned phenomena.
In that case, what could be causing this humming in the sky?

Comet NEAT causing the sun to discharge during its flyby in 2003.
In our opinion, the source of such powerful and immense manifestation of acoustic-gravity
waves must be very large-scale energy processes. These processes include powerful solar
flares and huge energy flows generated by them, rushing towards Earths surface and
destabilizing the magnetosphere, ionosphere and upper atmosphere. Thus, the effects of
powerful solar flares: the impact of shock waves in the solar wind, streams of corpuscles
and bursts of electromagnetic radiation are the main causes of generation of acousticgravitation waves following increased solar activity. []

But you said that the cause of the sky hum can lie within Earths core as well, what does it
mean?
There is one more possible cause of these sounds and it may lie at the Earths core. The fact is
that the acceleration of the drift of the Earths north magnetic pole which increased more
than fivefold between 1998 and 2003 and is at the same level today points to intensification of
energy processes in the Earths core, since it is processes in the inner and outer core that form
the Earths geomagnetic field. Meanwhile, as we have already reported, on November 15,
2011 all ATROPATENA geophysical stations which record three-dimensional variations of
the Earths gravitational field almost simultaneously registered a powerful gravitational
impulse. The stations are deployed in Istanbul, Kiev, Baku, Islamabad and Yogyakarta, with
the first and last one being separated by a distance of about 10,000 km. Such a phenomenon is
only possible if the source of this emanation is at the Earths core level. That huge energy
release from the Earths core at the end of the last year was some kind of a start signal
indicating the transition of the Earths internal energy into a new active phase.
Intensification of the energy processes in the Earths core can modulate the geomagnetic
field which, through a chain of physical processes at the ionosphere atmosphere boundary
level, generates acoustic-gravity waves the audible range of which has been heard by people
in the form of a frightening low-frequency sound in different parts of our planet.
In both cases, even though the causes of acoustic-gravity waves are of a quite understandable
geophysical nature, they are indicative of the expected significant increase in solar activity
and the geodynamic activity of our planet. There is no doubt that processes in the core rule
the internal energy of our planet, therefore, we should expect by the end of 2012 a sharp rise
in strong earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis and extreme weather events with peak
levels in 2013 2014.
The Cs Hit List 07: Sun Star Companion, Singing Stones and Smoking Visions

Im going to begin this installment of the Cs Hit List by


picking up where we left off in the last one: the idea that our sun has a companion star. After
publishing Cs Hit List 06 and reflecting on it some more, I realised that my argument for why
our sun might have a companion star simply that its statistically probable was kind of

weak. Theres actually more to it than that, even if such a companion has yet to be discovered.
(Assuming its there, of course, and that we would be told if it was actually discovered!).
In fact, its not a new idea. Check out the Wikipedia page on the so-called Nemesis
hypothesis. (And see here for additional resources.) It was introduced in 1984 by two teams of
astronomers (Whitmire & Jackson, and Davis, Hut & Muller) to explain the periodically
spaced extinction events observed in the earths fossil record. The idea was that a companion
sun passing through or close to the spherical Oort cloud would send a death-dealing swarm of
comets in earths direction every 26 million years or so. Its presence may also help explain
the non-random trajectories of certain long-period comets, as well as the strange and
unexpected elliptical orbit of the recently discoveredtransneptunian object Sedna.
Recently, astrophysicists Daniel Whitmire and John Matese have been arguing for a Planet
X model to explain these phenomena, i.e. an undiscovered tenth planet existing beyond
Pluto, possibly up to 4 times the mass of Jupiter. Perhaps prematurely, given that its purely
theoretical at this point, theyve even given it a name Tyche. Using the same Oortdisturbing mechanism as Nemesis, the hypothetical gas giant might explain the angle at which
comets enter the solar system, witha fifth of the expected number since 1898 entering higher
than expected. Matese and Whitmire are hopeful that NASAs Wide-field Infrared Survey
Explorer (WISE) telescope, which has the ability to detect such objects, will show evidence
for Tyche, once the already-recorded data is analyzed. (Incidentally, WISE also has the ability
to spot a brown dwarf.)
Nemesis is thought to have its furthest point in orbit anywhere
from 25,000 to 88,000 astronomical units (AU) from the Sun. Tyche, however, is thought to
orbit well within (as Wikipedia puts it) the Oort cloud, at 15,000 AU, with its gravity
tugging stray comets into the solar system. (The outer, spherical Oort cloud is thought to
begin anywhere from 20,000 to 50,000 AU from the Sun.) However, the discshaped inner Oort cloud, or Hills cloud, which extends outward along the plane of the
ecliptic to join up with the outer cloud, is hypothesized to be as close as 3000 AU. (On 4 July
1998, the Cs said that the Oort clouds closest boundary averaged approximately 510 billion
miles, or around 5500 AU.) So if the orbit of any Planet X or companion star brings it
through this disc of comets, the Hills cloud could be another source of cometary ammo, not
just the outer cloud, as some articles Ive read on the subject seem to imply. Keep these
figures in mind as you read the following abstract froma recent paper by Italian astrophysicist
Lorenzo Iorio:

A recent analysis of a Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) data record spanning 38.7 yr revealed an
anomalous increase of the eccentricity [e] of the lunar orbit The present-day models of
the dissipative phenomena occurring in the interiors of both the Earth and the Moon are not
able to explain it. We examine several dynamical effects, not modeled in the data analysis, in
the framework of long-range modified models of gravity and of the standard
Newtonian/Einsteinian paradigm. It turns out that none of them can accommodate
de/dt_meas. Many of them do not even induce long-term changes in e; other models do,
instead, yield such an effect, but the resulting magnitudes are in disagreement with
de/dt_meas [this is the time variation in eccentricity (the ovalness of the Moons orbit)].
In particular, the general relativistic gravitomagnetic acceleration of the Moon due to the
Earths angular momentum has the right order of magnitude, but the resulting Lense-Thirring
secular effect for the eccentricity vanishes. A potentially viable Newtonian candidate
would be a trans-Plutonian massive object (Planet X/Nemesis/Tyche) since it, actually,
would affect e with a non-vanishing long-term variation. On the other hand, the values for
the physical and orbital parameters of such a hypothetical body required to obtain the right
order of magnitude for de/dt are completely unrealistic. Moreover, they are in neat
disagreement with both the most recent theoretical scenarios envisaging the existence of a
distant, planetary-sized body and with the model-independent constraints on
them dynamically inferred from planetary motions. Thus, the issue of finding a
satisfactorily explanation for the anomalous behavior of the Moons eccentricity remains
open.
So, a companion object can explain the anomaly, but not using the accepted sizes and orbits
for hypothetical Planet X-type objects. As Iorio writes in the paper: For example, a
terrestrial-sized body should be located at just 30 au, while an object with the mass of Jupiter
should be at 200 au. (A sun-sized object would be at around 9000 AU.) In other words, not
where Matese and Whitmire say it is (or rather, should be). But what about a much larger
object, perhaps with a much more distant orbit? While subject to some degree of noise,
apparently such highly eccentric and long orbits are possible, and stable enough to
persist over long periods of time. Taking all of that into account, the sun companion model
may be more likely than a gas giant. (But even then, theyre not mutually exclusive; I suppose
extra planets could exist, but they may not account for certain phenomena associated with
Nemesis.) It would be interesting to know exactly what other figures do fit into Iorios
calculations, and whether they match those compatible with a brown dwarf, or not.
(Mathematicians, plug away!)

So, somethings going on. When we consider the steady slowing of earths rotation, the
progressive snaking of its magnetic poles, climate change, the accelerating rate of axial
precession, the increasing number of fireball and meteorite sightings, strange electromagnetic
phenomena, and similar effects and anomalies on planets throughout the solar system,
including the baffling asymmetric reversal of the Suns magnetic field, I wonder whether we
arent seeing the multiple, gradually escalating effects of a common cause?
Revelatory confirmation of the brown dwarf hypothesis has already been announced, but
despite its inclusion of many elements of the Cs model (e.g., brown dwarf, closest approach
just beyond Pluto, etc.), and in spite of NASAs somewhat heavy-handed dismissal of it as a
hoax, it does look to me to be too good to be true. As far as I can tell, the StarViewer Team
of Spanish astronomers who made the announcement have so far failed to publish their final
report containing their alleged proof on the subject, which was originally scheduled for
publication in February 2010. (You can read translations of some of StarViewers
writings here and here.) Ill leave it up to the reader to form his or her own conclusions on the
matter.
Comet Clusters and Dinosaurs
Even though the idea of an Oort-disturbing body has been around for almost 30 years,
suggesting at least the possibility of dense swarms of comets (another model being Clube &
Napiers break-up of a giant comet), and even though 1994 saw the break-up and
fragmentation of Shoemaker Levy-9 before it slammed into Jupiter, most discussions of
comet or asteroid bombardment in the media still stress the danger of asingle impact, i.e. a
giant cosmic body crashes into earth with a giant explosion resulting in cold-inducing,
extinction-causing dust cover. And even then, the American school has tended to dismiss the
danger posed by comets, placing its focus on asteroids instead. But as early as 30 September
1994, the Cs brought up the idea of comet clusters being at least partly responsible for the
periodic catastrophes on earth, echoing the works cited above:
Q: (L) The sun is not the source of the periodicity of dyings, is that correct?
A: Sometimes. Many causes.
Q: (L) Well what is the cause that recurs like clockwork? Is there some cause that is a regular
pulsation?
A: Cometary showers.
Q: (L) Where are these cometary showers from?

A: Clusters in own orbit. [HK: Note that this is clusters, in plural. A long-period companion
sun can trigger any number of shorter period clusters. According to the Cs, one of these
clusters has a 3,600-year period, as I discussed in Cs Hit List 03.]
On 7 October 1994, Laura specifically asked about the dinosaur extinction (placed at 65.5mya
by conventional chronology):
Q: (L) What killed off the major dinosaurs?
A: Comet impact.
Q: (L) What was the source of this comet?
A: Cluster.
Q: (L) How long has this comet cluster been with us in our solar system?
A: 890 million years.
On 27 August 2010, BBC ran this article on their website:
The dinosaurs were wiped out 65 million years ago by at least two meteorite impacts, rather
than a single strike, a new study suggests.

Previously, scientists had identified a huge impact crater in the Gulf of Mexico as the event
that spelled doom for the dinosaurs.
Now evidence for a second impact in the Ukraine has been uncovered.
The new findings are published in the journal Geology by a team lead by Professor David
Jolley of Aberdeen University.
When first proposed in 1980, the idea that a meteorite impact had killed the dinosaurs
proved hugely controversial. Later, the discovery of the Chicxulub Crater in the Gulf of
Mexico, US, was hailed as the smoking gun that confirmed the theory.

Professor Kelley continued: It is quite possible that in the future we will find evidence for
more impact events.
Rather than being wiped out by a single hit, the researchers think that dinosaurs may
have fallen victim to a meteorite shower raining down over thousands of years.

What might have caused this bombardment is highly uncertain.


So some scientists are at least starting to look in this direction, and the idea of comet-fragment
showers recently got another boost with the publication of Isabel Israde-Alcntara et als
new PNAS paper Evidence from central Mexico supporting the Younger Dryas
extraterrestrial impact hypothesis. It looks like such events are a lot more common than
scientists have believed in the past, and that the Cs were right on the money about one of the
mechanisms involved in these catastrophic encounters.
Food for the Moon
Comet clusters came up in another context on 22 October 1994, this time in relation to the
moon:
Q: (L) When and how did planet earth acquire its moon?
A: Was caused by the regular passage of a large comet cluster which caused a gravitational
disruption allowing a large chunk of the original earths surface, which was somewhat
less solid at that point in space/time, to break away from the main body and assume a
locked in orbit around the main body.
Q: (L) When did this happen?
A: This occurred approximately 3 billion years ago.
Just this March, Science Now reported:
Most scientists believe Earth collided with a hypothetical, Mars-sized planet called Theia
early in its existence, and the resulting smash-up produced a disc of magma orbiting our
planet that later coalesced to form the moon.
One way to test the hypothesis is to look at the isotopes of particular elements in rocks
returned from the moon. The proportions found in samples from meteorites and other
planets like Mars, however, are usually different. So if you find that a sample has the same
oxygen isotope composition as one from Earth, then its very likely the sample came from our
world.

Previous research has established that the oxygen isotope composition of lunar samples
is indistinguishable from that of Earth. Since 40% of the moon is supposed to have come
from Theia (which presumably would have had a different isotope composition), this might
spell trouble for the giant impact hypothesis.
In the new research, published online today in Nature Geoscience, geochemists led by Junjun
Zhang at the University of Chicago in Illinois, together with a colleague at the University of
Bern in Switzerland, looked at titanium isotopes in 24 separate samples of lunar rock and soil.
The proportion of 50Ti to 47Ti is another good indicator of whether a sample came from
Earth, and, just as with oxygen, the researchers found the moons proportion was effectively
the same as Earths and different from elsewhere in the solar system. Zhang explains that
its unlikely Earth could have exchanged titanium gas with the magma disk because titanium
has a very high boiling point. The oxygen isotopic composition would be very easily
homogenized because oxygen is much more volatile, but we would expect homogenizing
titanium to be very difficult.
So, if the giant impact hypothesis doesnt explain the moon, how did it get there? One
possibility is that a glancing blow from a passing body left Earth spinning so rapidly that it
threw some of itself off into space like a shot put, forming the disk that coalesced into the
moon. This would explain why the moon seems to be made entirely of Earth material. But
there are problems with this model, too, such as the difficulty of explaining where all the
extra angular momentum went after the moon formed, and the researchers arent claiming to
have refuted the giant impact hypothesis.
Singing Stones and Visions of the Past

And that leads us, in a roundabout way, to Stonehenge. Theories abound as to its original
purpose: ritual temple, healing chamber, astronomical observatory, burial site, UFO landing
pad. While the available options are certainly not mutually exclusive, theres isnt much
academic consensus on the topic, although the burial site hypothesis seems to be in vogue.
(Thats one helluva tombstone!) Personally, I think Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas
present the most likely scenario in their book Uriels Machine. Youll really have to read it to
follow their argument, but in a nutshell, it goes something like this: Stonehenge is similar in
function and design to Uriels Machine, a device whose simple yet ingenious construction is
described in the apocryphal Book of Enoch. Such machines are perfect observatories of
celestial phenomena, and are thus perfect for calibrating a calendar. Not only can they be used
to mark the seasons and track the passage of stars and planets; they can be used to observe
and track approaching comets, which as weve seen in previous articles, wouldve come in
handy during that period of history. Knight and Lomas argue that Stonehenge was built for
this purpose a kind of comet warning station after a cometary cataclysm some 10,000
years ago necessitated the development of precise astronomical knowledge in order to predict
when it would happen again (i.e. approximately 3,150 years ago, according to K&L).
Now, as I mentioned, theres no reason Stonehenge couldnt have served dual or even
multiple purposes, which is where the following transcripts from the Cs come in. But first, a
small warning. If you are a hardcore atheist/materialist, prepare to have your sensationist
sensibilities assaulted by terms such as spirits, thought waves, telepathy, and (gasp!)
chakras, in the following transcripts:
23 October 1994:
Q: (L) How did [the builders of Stonehenge] move the stones and set them up?
A: Sound wave focusing; try it yourself; Coral Castle. []
Q: (L) What was Stonehenge built to do or be used for?
A: Energy director.
8 December 1996:

A: Location [of Stonehenge] attracted those spirit types on the proper frequency, who in turn,
placed stones in proper location to receive the coded communications in code telepathically,
in order not to have to chase around the countryside reading encoded pictographs.

Q: (L) What was the technique used within the circle to receive the information
telepathically? [Planchette spiraled in, and spiraled out.]
A: Transcendent focused thought wave separation.
Q: (L) OK, so that youre saying that moving in a spiral
A: The spiral serves to translate message by slowing down the wave and focusing thought
wave transference energy.Utilizes/transduces electromagnetic waves, the conduit, by
breaking down signal from universal language of intent into language of phonetic profile.
This is for multiple user necessity.
Q: (L) Multiple user necessity implies that a number of people must do the spiral. Is that
correct?
A: No. Must hear and feel and understand precisely the same thing. The molecular structure
of the rock, when properly sculpted, sings to you.
22 August 1998:
A: Stonehenge is a vector of energy derived from solar and cosmic rays.
19 February 2000:
Q: Is it the case that some of them communicated with higher density beings via Stonehenge,
and that these communications they received
A: Stonehenge used to resonate with tonal rill, teaching the otherwise un-teachable with
wisdoms entered psychically through crown chakra transceiving system. [rill: a small stream,
a shallow channel cut in the ground by running water; to flow in or like a rill.]

If we leave aside the speculative idea of telepathic thought wave transference for the
moment, we have ideas relating to sound (sound wave focusing, tonal rill, singing stones),
resonance, energy storage, and electromagnetism all associated with Stonehenges
construction and purpose. When I first encountered the idea of sound levitation, I thought it
was nuts, to be honest. Then I saw this video, among others. It turns out that acoustic
levitation is pretty common, and Wikipedia tells us: There is no known theoretical limit to
what acoustic levitation can lift given enough vibratory sound, but in practice current

technology limits the amount that can be lifted by this force to at most a few kilograms. So
maybe its not so crazy, especially considering that Edward Leedskalnin was somehow able to
create Coral Castle using fairly crude tools and a technique still unknown to modern science.
Leedskalnin wasreportedly heard singing to his massive, levitating blocks of coral
As for acoustic resonance, in 1999 Aaron Watson and David Keating published a paper on
their work in archaeoacoustics called Architecture and Sound: an acoustic analysis of
megalithic monuments in prehistoric Britain. An article in the Sunday Times reported on their
work:
Newgrange, [north of Dublin] Irelands world-renowned neolithic burial chamber, may have
been used as a prehistoric echo chamber in religious ceremonies, according to two
scientists who have discovered that the 5,000-year-old grave has the ability to alter sound.
Aaron Watson, an archeologist, and David Keating, an acoustic expert, carried out up to 10
hours of sound tests at Newgrange last month in conjunction with the BBC. The tests included
humming, bursting balloons, banging drums and playing standing waves to the stones. The
University of Reading scientists have conducted similar tests at Stonehenge and other
neolithic sites. We had a loudspeaker making a humming tone and as you moved towards the
sound, it got quieter. It was very unusual, said Keating.
However, if you moved away towards the side chambers, the sound got louder. Even with
modern knowledge of acoustics, it is quite an eerie and odd effect.
After Watson and Keating, Rupert Till and Bruno Fazenda then picked up the trail,
conducting more work on the acoustics of Stonehenge. (Incidentally, I was quite amused
when a forum member noted the researchers name: R(upert) TILL. T(onal) RILL?)
The Telegraph reported on Tills research in 2009:
Mr Till, an expert in acoustics and music technology at Huddersfield University, West
Yorkshire, believes the standing stoneshad the ideal acoustics to amplify a repetitive
trance rhythm.
The original Stonehenge probably had a very pleasant, almost concert-like acoustic that our
ancestors slowly perfected over many generations.

New Stonehenge, aka Maryhill Stonehenge

The most exciting discoveries came when he and colleague Dr Bruno Fazenda visited a fullsize concrete replica of Stonehenge, with all the original stones intact, which was built as a
war memorial by American road builder Sam Hill at Maryhill in Washington state.
[Till] said: We were able to get some interesting results when we visited the replica by using
computer-based acoustic analysis software, a 3D soundfield microphone, a dodecahedronic
speaker, and a huge bass speaker from a PA company.
By comparing results from paper calculations, computer simulations based on digital models,
and results from the concrete Stonehenge copy, we were able to come up with some of these
theories about the uses of Stonehenge.
The most interesting thing is we managed to get the whole space (at Maryhill) to
resonate, almost like a wine glass will ring if you run a finger round it.
While that was happening a simple drum beat sounded incredibly dramatic. The space had
real character; it felt like we had gone somewhere special.

You can hear a very nice recording they did at Maryhill, featuring singing and drumming,
at the end of this article, recently published in the Daily Mail, as well as some of the
simulated sounds on Tills website here, which include drumming, clapping and a flute.
Watch the candle flames, too. Talk about trance-inducing! If these acoustic properties were
utilized by Stonehenges Neolithic visitors, it would match up nicely with the theories of
cognitive archaeologist David Lewis-Williams. In his book (written with David Pearce) Inside
the Neolithic Mind: Consciousness, Cosmos, and the Realm of the Gods, he argues that the
Neolithic stone sites were used to elicit altered states of consciousness and hallucinatory
visions, products of and inspiration for a shamanistic religion and worldview. But maybe
theres even more to it than that? Take the following excerpts from Lyall Watsons book The
Nature of Things: The Secret Life of Inanimate Objects:
Some stone seems to have a capacity for storing and releasing energy. It demands attention,
carries echoes and triggers memories, in ways that make individual pieces sacred and give
larger and more formal arrangements such a strong spirit of place. This awareness has
always been widespread, but it remained covert, something not quite suitable for scientific
discussion. (p. 30)

He then relates the story that inspired solid state chemist Don Robins to start researching this
ability of inorganic materials to store and transform energy. In the 1970s a zoologist was
tracking bats with an ultrasonic detector near dawn, when he heard a strong signal coming
from a group of standing stones. As far as he could tell, the stones themselves were the source
of the sound:
He searched the area for signs of life, found nothing and left with the strange feeling that the
megaliths themselves were the source of the pulsing sound, singing out at sunrise like the
colossal statue of Memnon seems to do at ancient Thebes. I have heard it. Shortly before
dawn there is an insistent hum. A chest, rather than a throat, sound which emanates from the
stone and rises in tone as the statue is struck by the first rays of the sun. It could be the
result of energy, possibly piezo-electric, which surges as the substance warms up. Some rocks
are known to do this naturally. Perhaps others can be induced to do so, and shaped in ways
that amplify the sound? Such possibilities were explored between 1978 and 1982 by the
Dragon Project, an informal group of scientists interested in anomalous energies. They took
sensitive wide-band detectors and Geiger counters to a number of megalithic sites and found
that many produced readings that could not be explained in terms of stray radiation or random
noise. Some proved to be the source of seasonal signals that reached a powerful peak
most mornings at dawn

Since then Don Robins has gone on to look more closely at the whole question of energy
storing and transformation by inorganic materials. He starts with the discovery that Xrays can be used to reveal the symmetry and pattern within the atomic structure of crystals.
Viewed in this way every inorganic element consists, it seems, of a characteristic threedimensional framework or lattice of atoms, whose precise architecture depends on the
elements purity. this condition provides a way of trapping and storing incoming
information. There is, in Robins words, rogue energy in the heart of the crystal and a
suspicion that this could function as a rudimentary form of inorganic memory.

All matter is subject to disturbance by natural radiation from a variety of sources. This turns
some molecules into a sort of atomic rubble, releasing a frenzy of free electrons which suffer
a variety of fates. Some are lost altogether, but a few at least are caught up in the energetic
eddies [HK: rills?] which surround crystal architecture, in much the same way as stray wind
currents seem to be generated by some tall buildings. Impure crystals, like badly-designed
tower blocks, soon come to throb with the strange music of these wild spirits which can be
trapped and held captive for thousands of years. But they can also be persuaded, in certain
circumstances, to release their energies and the information these contain, on demand.
what Robins is suggesting is that all stone, which is after all largely crystalline, should be
seen as a sort of macrochip. A natural, if somewhat haphazard, electronic system capable of
storing energies and, given the right circumstances, playing these back later. (pp. 31-32)
The discoveries of the Dragon Project make it quite clear that electromagnetic and mechanical
forces do behave strangely at some prehistoric sites, and that such anomalies are directly
connected to the stones themselves.
It is interesting that our first instrumental awareness of such oddity should have come
from a machine designed to detect sound. And it is fascinating to learn from recent
discoveries in microelectronics that patterns at the heart of the crystal lattice are disturbed by
sound waves almost as easily as they are by electrical energy. As Don Robins points out,
some crystals including quartz just happen to be natural acousto-electric amplifiers. [HK:
quartz is present in the bluestones of Stonehenge.] All of a sudden it seems wonderfully
appropriate that our relationship with special stones should always have been so sonorous, so
generously accompanied by rhythmic ceremony and song, so laced with repetitive chant and
prayer. (p. 35)

We are, [Robins] suggests, tied to our environment, to our buildings, stones and artifacts, by a
feedback loop that links the energies of both. We have the ability not only to imprint an
electronic trace on crystal and stone, but the capacity to trigger release of this lithic memory
in certain circumstances. Robins believes thatthe coupling is most often acoustic, and that
recording takes place as a direct result of structured sound signals such as those produced
by ritual music, chant, prayer, dance, applause and song.
Robins is careful not to imply that the entrapped energy is organized in any way analogous to
mind. It is not creative or conscious, but nevertheless carries a pattern that can model or
induce a certain frame of mind. In other words, in the presence of such stone we can become
aware of echoes of the past which may lead to particular mental imagery, perhaps even
to hallucination in an individual or even to collective illusion. (pp. 40-41)

Quartz came up in another source while researching the topics for this article. In his book The
Cosmic Serpent, anthropologist Jeremy Narby writes:
Quartz is a crystal, which means it has an extremely regular arrangement of atoms that vibrate
at a very stable frequency. These characteristics make it an excellent receptor and emitter of
electromagnetic waves Quartz crystals are also used in shamanism around the world.
Amazonian shamans consider that spirits can materialize and become visible in
quartz crystals. (p. 129)
Well read a bit more about Narby below, but the reason he brings up quartz is that it is used
in almost all experiments involving biophotons, photons emitted by living organisms. While
the mechanism by which biophotons are emitted isnt known, it has been observed
experimentally, suggesting both emission and reception abilities. In fact, it has been called a
cellular language or nonsubstantial biocommunication. Cells separated by a quartz screen
are mutually influenced by each others multiplication processes. A metal screen results in no
mutual influence.

In fact, DNA constantly emits biophotons in the visible spectrum. Their light, while very
weak, is very coherent, like an ultra-weak laser. One of Narbys colleagues described such
sources: A coherent source of light, like a laser, gives the sensation of bright colors, a
luminescence, and an impression of holographic depth. (p. 126) Narby speculates that there
may be a link between biophotons and the phenomenon of consciousness, and that this light
may be the source of visionary hallucinations, which are both 3D and highly colourful. The
stimulation of DNA may prompt the emission of visible waves of light. One of the prime
researchers of the phenomenon, Fritz-Albert Popp, wrote to Narby: Yes, consciousness could
be the electromagnetic field constituted by the sum of these emissions. (p. 128) Narby
wonders if these biophotons are in fact the spirits seen by the Amazonian shamans, beings
of pure light. Narby also points out that DNA is actually a one-dimensional crystal, and that
the repetitive sequences of non-coding DNA form a periodic crystal, which may act as a

receptor of biophotons. If Narby is correct in his idea that DNA may have the capacity to
pick up the photons emitted by the global network of DNA-based life (p. 131), maybe
Stonehenge really was an energy director?
Moving on, I recently read another article about acoustic research conducted on sites in
Ireland, Malta, Turkey and Peru that may connect another dot. Research at the Hal Saflieni
Hypogeum in Malta has led the scientists involved to suggest that certain sound vibration
frequencies created when sound is emitted within its walls are actuallyaltering human brain
functions of those within earshot. In her article in the journal Popular Archaeology, Linda
Eneix writes:
Regional brain activity in a number of healthy volunteers was monitored by EEG through
exposure to different sound vibration frequencies. The findings indicated that at 110 Hz the
patterns of activity over the prefrontal cortex abruptly shifted, resulting in a relative
deactivation of the language center and a temporary shifting from left to right-sided
dominance related to emotional processing and creativity. This shifting did not occur at 90
Hz or 130 HzIn addition to stimulating their more creative sides, it appears that an
atmosphere of resonant sound in the frequency of 110 or 111 Hz would have been switching
on an area of the brain that bio-behavioral scientists believe relates to mood, empathy and
social behavior. Deliberately or not, the people who spent time in such an environment under
conditions that may have included a low male voice in ritual chanting or even simple
communication were exposing themselves to vibrations that may have actually impacted
their thinking.

Here we have some totally different approaches coming to pretty much the same conclusion.
Above, Don Robins speculates that the electrical properties of the stones of megaliths like
Stonehenge may inspire visionary experiences. Jeremy Narby suggests a link between
crystals, biophotons and visionary states. David Lewis-Williams wrote an entire book on the
trance-induced imagery, layout and symbolism of the Neolithic sites, rooted in cognitive
psychology. Rupert Till has shown that the structure of Stonehenge is perfect for inducing a
trance state because of its acoustic properties (which Robins directly ties to lithic memory),
and Linda Eneix et al have measured actual shifts in brain functioning in response to certain
sounds within Neolithic sites. Note that the brain areas activated are related to creativity,
empathy and social behavior. In Stephen Porges polyvagal theory, these functions and
behaviors are intimately tied to stimulation of the vagus nerve, which is one of the main
effects of the breathing techniques in iri Eolas. As practitioners have related on our forum,

visionary experiences are a common feature of the relaxed, alert, and empathic state of
consciousness that results from practicing the program regularly.
David Lewis-Williams, however, is quick to write off the Neolithic visions (and all others) as
mere hallucinations, with no basis in reality, and no significance for our superior, scientific
culture. (Hint: hes an unabashed materialist.) I get a similar vibe from Robins above,
especially the last sentence quoted from Watsons book. But if youve read my article in issue
#14 of the Dot Connector, youll know my thoughts on ol Uncle S.A.M. (sensationistatheist-materialist naturalism). I think its a greatly flawed, incoherent worldview. So Im
open to the idea that there may besome objectivity to the material of shamanic trance states.
(Narby would agree on that point, pointing out the biomolecular information embedded in
their visions.) And if there are other forms of intelligence in the universe, like the Cs perhaps,
maybe the megaliths like Stonehenge could have been used in the manner the Cs suggested?
Echoes of the past Echoes of the future?
Smokin Visions!
While were on the subject of shamanism, we might as well end this installment with a few
words about smoking. (After all, smoking tobacco is a lot more fun than smoking cometary
debris!) Tobacco has traditionally been used by many technicians of ecstasy in the Americas
to aid their visions quests. In The Cosmic Serpent, Narby quotes the work of Johannes
Wilbert, a pioneering expert on the subject, who wrote: tobacco has long been known to play
a central role in North and South American shamanism, both in the achievement of
shamanistic trance statesand in purification and supernatural curing (p. 200). Narby also
relates a conversation he had with one such healer in Quirishari, Peru, asking him how the
tobacco he smokes works:

I always say, the property of tobacco is that it shows me the reality of things. I can see
things as they are. And it gets rid of all the pains. [Souls like tobacco b]ecause tobacco has
its method, its strength. It attracts the maninkari [invisible beings]. It is the best contact for the
life of a human being. [Souls exist i]n the air. That means that you do not see them, but
they are there, like radio waves. Once you turn on the radio, you can pick them up. Its like
that with souls; with ayahuasca and tobacco, you can see them and hear them. (pp. 30-31)
Narby has some very interesting ideas relating to shamanism and DNA, so I suggest you
check out his book. Now, here are a few things the Cs had to say about smoking on 27 June
1998 [with commentary embedded]:

Q: How can smoking be a balancing mechanism?


A: Speeds up metabolism, thus allowing greater food intake. []

[HK: Smoking not only lowers blood insulin, thus reducing smokers craving for sweets;
smokers also have heightened metabolism.]
Q: So, you are saying that nicotine is actually good for me?
A: Yes. Without it, you will remain with weight problems, because you will not be able
to lower food intake enough to compensate. Why do you think you had the inkling to start
smoking in the first place?
[HK: Tobacco is a known appetite suppressant and acts on a region of mices hypothalamus
to do so, according to research published inScience in June 2011.]
Q: Well, I just was going along with my friends, I thought.
A: No.
Q: What other things does nicotine do?
A: Raises defenses.
Q: What kind?
A: Immunological.
[HK: Actually, nicotine seems to suppress immune function, but might have therapeutic
potential as a neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory agent according to Mohan Sopori,
writing in Nature.]
Q: Anything else?

A: Excites neurotransmitters. You require less sleep.


[HK: Besides simply stimulating the release of several neurotransmitters, Narby writes in The
Cosmic Serpent (p. 119): The more you give nicotine to your neurons, the more the DNA
they contain activates the construction of nicotinic receptors, within certain limits.
Acetylcholine binds to nicotinic receptors, and coincidentally, is also increased by practicing
iri Eolas. Narby sees a connection between the shamans belief that the invisible beings
crave tobacco, and DNAs response: The more you give them, the more they want.]
Q: Is this true for everyone?
A: No.

Q: (A) How much nicotine is necessary?


A: 100 mg per day.
Q: (A) Can it be in pill form?
A: Cigarettes infuse it to brain tissues most effectively.
[HK: From this article we read that David Warburtons results were later repeated in many
controlled trials of nicotine, including Parrott & Winder in 1989: Nicotine chewing gum and
cigarette smoking: Comparative effects upon vigilance and heart rate. As the graph
shows, smoking is the most effective nicotine delivery method]
Q: Well, I am certainly relieved! Now I know that I do not have a smoking demon
possessing me! I was really getting worried!
A: Those who fit this profile find it nearly impossible to quit completely.
Q: So, there are people who are actually benefited by smoking?
A: Genetics will offer proof of this.

Q: You mean that one can see changes in DNA before and after smoking?
A: Close.
Lo and behold:
New studies suggest that genetic backgrounds may be to blame for smokers that have a
hard time quitting or cutting down on their habit.
Several genes can dictate how prone you are to take up smoking or how easily you can quit,
based on the studies.
In a study funded by the American Lung Association researchers studied several hundred
metabolites of 19 patients divided into groups of smokers and non-smokers. They found a
significant difference in the metabolites in smokers and non-smokers.
This gives us an idea of how people produce metabolites differently when smoking
cigarettes, which is based on their particular genetic profile and other biological and
environmental factors, says researcher Ping-Ching Hsu, who is a doctorial student and lead
investigator in the study.
Using a genome-wide scan, scientists analyzed blood samples from smokers versus
nonsmokers and found similar genetic patterns among smokers
In this latest study, published in the American Journal of Medical Genetics, Philibert and his
colleagues analyzed the DNA samples of 94 people, some smokers and some nonsmokers.
Using a technique called transcriptional profiling, they looked at all 30,000 genes of the
human genome, fluorescently labeling those that were turned on versus those that were turned
off in both groups. What they found was both promising and daunting: 579 genes were more
activated and 584 other genes were less activated in smokers versus nonsmokers.
Theres also a question of whether, once a person starts smoking, increased nicotine
consumption causes certain genes to turn on or off.
The Cs Hit List 08: Of Oracles and Conspiracies: TWA 800, 9/11, H1N1, and VISA

Evelyn de Morgan Ariadne on Naxos (1877)


So far in this series, Ive focused a lot on history and science, albeit some of it of a
particularly paranormal persuasion. To jog the readers memory, the first installment began
with a discussion of prophecy and prediction and asked some questions such as: Can
prophecies be true? If so, are they all true? All fake? How can we weed out the cons from the
clairvoyants, and can a good source give a bad prediction? How come? Well, today I want to
veer in a slightly different direction no climate science, companion stars, catastrophic
comets, or non-coding DNA. No, I want to ground this one in something a little more SOTTish: politics and conspiracies.
Over the course of the Hit List series, some readers may have wondered what place so-called
paranormal research has on an alternative news website. And others may, as I did just under
a decade ago, wonder what on earth political conspiracies have to do with so-called
spirituality. I hope the answer to the former question is at least partially clearer by now, after
seven installments. In a world as controlled as our own, where lies can be glibly passed off as
indisputable fact, with media, corporations, academia, and government acting as shapers of
public opinion on every subject, an individual finds him or herself in a situation not dissimilar
to that of Theseus in the Minotaurs labyrinth. At every turn we are confronted by lies, even
(and perhaps especially) when it comes to our most basic views about the nature of reality.
And we would be lost if not for the thread of Ariadne.
While Im on a Greek bent, let me share something a forum member recently pointed out
from Manly P. Halls The Secret Teachings of All Ages:
It is generally admitted that the effect of the Delphian oracle upon Greek culture was
profoundly constructive. James Gardner sums up its influence in the following words: Its
responses revealed many a tyrant and foretold his fate. Through its means many an
unhappy being was saved from destruction and many a perplexed mortal guided in the right
way. It encouraged useful institutions, and promoted the progress of useful discoveries. Its
moral influence was on the side of virtue, and its political influence in favor of the
advancement of civil liberty.

In other words, theres our answer to the second question: a good oracle (or spiritual source)
doesnt shy away from politics. Like a Greek cynic, or the proverbial Cassandra, the prime
role of an oracle is to present a vision of the world as it is, no matter how painful or unpopular
the view, and provide the only alternative fit for a lie: the truth. So, yes, we track high
strangeness, and our worldview is quite at odds with the materialistic dictum peddled and
enforced by PhDs and media pundits the world over. Everything you know is a lie, and that
includes all your metaphysical assumptions about the way the reality really works. Luckily
theres a way out of the labyrinth, and (please excuse me for going Biblical here!) the
truth will set you free.
With politics, its no different. Any spiritual source that suggests otherwise perhaps
holding the view that such things are unspiritual is no better than those COINTELPRO
agents I discussed in installment five.
Think about it. Can you imagine a great spiritual leader living under a corrupt government
who is so stupid as to believe the lies the Party tells him? Or one who would give her support
to a leader who spouts high-sounding words while killing innocent people? Well, maybe those
are dumb questions, because I can picture any number of such spiritual leaders. But I hope
the point is clear. A spiritual source that ignores politics is like a doctor who ignores disease.
On 3 January 2009, this topic came up:
Q: (L) I have a question I want to ask. A lot of people say that esotericism and politics
shouldnt be mixed together, that somebody who has esoteric pursuits or spiritual pursuits,
let me put it that way shouldnt be interested in worldly things. I would like to have your
view on this. Have we gone completely astray by mixing in politics?
A: Absolutely and vehemently not!!! There is no possibility of true spiritual work
progressing without full awareness of the world that surrounds you. What have we said
about true religion? Let your curiosity guide you. In its pure state curiosity is a spiritual
function. [HK: The reference to true religion is from 28 September 2002: Life is religion.
Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of little
faith in terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people think that the world exists for
them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the world will cease. They will
become exactly what they give to life. They will become merely a dream in the past. People
who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the future.
]

The Oracle of Delphi


TWA 800 Secrets

So with that in mind, lets check the Cs track record on a few issues. While doing some
research on fireballs and meteors recently I came across a letter to the New York Times in an
old installment of SOTTs Connecting the Dots series. The writers, Charles Hailey and
David Helfand, professors of physics and astronomy, respectively, at Columbia
Columbi University,
wrote the letter on 17 September 1996 in response to the breakup of TWA Flight 800 two
months earlier, which killed 230 people. Hailey and Helfand calculated the probability that
one commercial airliner over the last 30 years of high-volume
high
air travel would be struck by
an incoming meteor with sufficient energy to cripple the plane or cause an explosion as
being 1 in 10. They concluded: We believe the meteor or cometary fragment impact theory
deserves more considered attention.

They have a point, especially given the increasing number of fireballs in recent
recent years and the
fact that practically no one in the mainstream considers such possibilities. But their hypothesis
probably has more relevance to the recent destruction of Air France 447 in 2009 than it did to
TWA 800, as well see. Heres what the Cs had to say on 23 November
November 1996:
Q: (T) About Flight 800. Pierre Salinger claims that the info floating around on the internet is
accurate. He says that the Navy downed the flight. [HK: Before his journalism career,
Salinger was White House Press Secretary for both JFK and LBJ.]
A: Close. Pierre Salinger is an impeccable journalist and not one to fly off the handle. [HK:
Salinger had received informationfrom
information
a long-time
time French Intelligence contact that it had
indeed been friendly fire that downed the flight. The information came from Capt. Richard
Russell, who claimed to get the information from a friend who had attended a high-level
high
briefing on the incident.
t. Russell has stood by his claims, filing an affidavit asserting so in a
lawsuit against the government.]

Q: (T) Very true. And that is why I am amazed that the rest of the journalism community is
attacking him.
A: Why should you be amazed? They are bought and paid for. [HK: Operation
Mockingbird was a CIA program to infiltrate and influence the media, beginning in the
1950s. Needless to say, they never stopped.]
Q: (T) What did happen to flight 800?
A: This was the result of an experiment gone awry. So was KAL 007 in 1983.
Q: (L) What was the nature of the experiment?
A: Testing of secret impulse guidance system using civilian airliner as an arbitrary bounce
guidance target. Instead, it became the homing target, and a different aircraft became the
bouncer. This was because the programmers did not anticipate the lower than expected
altitude of the 747. [HK: The flight exploded and crashed just 12 minutes after takeoff from
the John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. Eleven minutes after takeoff, the
Boeing 747 was flying at 13,700 feet, lower than usual because it had delayed its climb in
order to make way for another flight approaching Rhode Island. Seconds before the
explosion, the flight crew had responded to Air Traffic Control instructions to climb to a
cruising altitude of 15,000 feet.] Warning: this must stay in this room for the
present!!!!!!!!!! The facts will eventually be discussed by others. [HK: This was the case,
as well see below.] At that time, the danger is lifted. Now, about KAL 007 that one is not
dangerous to know. The plane was deliberately instructed to fly off course in order to trigger
the Soviets Pacific air defense system, to see what they were made of in that area. The
plane was lost, but the experiment worked. They did not expect them to shoot down a civilian
airliner.
Now, all moving targets create electronic impulses. These can be read by the proper
extremely high tech equipment. Older radar guided systems are subject to malfunctions in
weather conditions that are severe, as one example. Also, the impulse system is an offshoot of
the electromagnetic pulse experiments being carried out at Montauk, Brookings and
elsewhere as part of the HAARP project! In connection with Pentagon missile tests, HAARP
has many interesting tie-ins, not the least of which is your cell phone towers.
Now, the homing target can be any moving object. It can be whatever is entered on the
computer. It can be a squirrel in a tree, a jogger on the beach, a building, whatever you want.
The system looks for any moving target in order to establish recognition to the computer, in
order to establish recognition of match pattern of pulse. TWA 800 was flying at the exact
same altitude that was supposed to be designated for the drone craft. The drone plane was
farther out at sea. The bounce target was to be any moving object in the air within 400
square miles.
Q: (L) So, TWA 800, through a series of problems, happened to find itself at the right altitude,
a restricted altitude, within the parameters of the experiment. Anything further on this?
A: Not for now.
Up to 154 witnesses from several vantage points (including scientists, schoolteachers, Army
personnel and business executives, according to the New York Post) reported seeing a bright

flare-like
like object streaking up vertically towards the plane and changing direction mid-air
mid
(ruling out a meteorite). Radar had indeed picked up another object. Rick Hampson reported
repo
for AP on 19 July 1996 that Radar detected a blip merging with the jet shortly before the
explosion. This was probably in reference to the Long Island FAA radar technician who filed
a report regardingconflicting
conflicting radar tracks that indicated a missile.
missil
According to James
Sanders (see below), the radar tape was then analyzed by the FAA Technical Center, who
found an unexplained blip, and U.S. military experts told the FBI that a missile with a radar
homing system would show up on an FAA radar set in transponder mode. The Times of
London also reported that spy satellite images showed an object racing up to the TWA jet
and smashing into it.

The aftermath of the crash was an absolute farce. As the friendly fire theory gained more
ground, alternative theories popped up: the predictable terrorist attack nonsense (propagated
by Internet spooks), followed by a sparking fuel pump as the cause (for which there was no
good evidence). Officials initially denied evidence of explosive residue. It was later found,
but explained away as residue from
f
a bomb-sniffing
sniffing dog exercise (another impossibility).
James Sanders was provided two samples of fabric from the flight by a TWA employee. He
had them tested by an independent lab, which found residue consistent with a solid fuel rocket
motor. When he handed
anded the samples over to CBS to have them tested again, CBS handed
them on to the government, and Sanders was found guilty of theft of government property.
Sanders went on to author a book, The Downing of TWA Flight 800,, where we find the
following (first published in 1997, five months after the above excerpt):
As the evening of July 17, 1996 began, a joint naval task force was assembling for a
critical test of a top secret weapons system.
system. At 2000 hours military zone W-105,
W
thousands of square miles of ocean located south and southeast of Long Island, was activated
by the United States Navy. Within minutes, from different locations around the sector,
military activity increased as the various units participating in the operation deployed their
aircraftt and surface vessels.
Over the horizon, to the East, in zone W-105,
W 105, U.S. Navy AEGIS guided missile warships
prepared for the final evaluation of a multibillion-dollar
dollar upgrade to their software, radar,
and Standard IIIA and IV antiaircraft/antimissile missile.
mi
. Tonight, the system itself

had to be tested as the surface vessels sailed into position. At the same time, a Navy plane,
with newly upgraded electronic equipment designed to work with AEGIS, slowly cruised.
The plane was the key to the new top secret and highly complex radar tracking system that
was in its third year of testing.
Zone W-105 was selected for this final pre-certification test because of the complexity of the
area. Long Island offered dense ground-clutter, and the constant flow of commercial air
traffic out of JFK gave the navy the neutral radar blip it needed to test the
discrimination skills of the targeting software. Meanwhile, navy planes were approaching
the exercise area to present friendly electronic signatures for AEGIS to track and compute
into the task force battle array. A hostile presence would soon appear in the form of a
BQM-74E Navy drone missile launched in the vicinity of Shinnecock Bay, east of
Riverhead, Long Island.
Shortly before 2030 hours on July 17, an all-clear signal was given to the drones launch
platform. No general aviation or commercial aviation traffic was in the area. It was safe.
Within minutes of the all-clear, the drone was airborne.
CEC could identify and track all commercial traffic, and friendly military surface and air
traffic in and out of the countries bordering the Sea, while remaining on the lookout for a
hostile cruise missile launch from any direction. The Navy believed this system would allow
them to discriminate electronically among friend, foe, and background clutter and still
fight a battle. At least thats what the Navy thought
almost instantly, the interlocking software of each AEGOS-CEC platform acquired the
target drone, [one radar] computed a shot through the thickening fog of multiple hostile
electronic jammers, plotted its trajectory, and commanded the software to automatically select
the platform best positioned to make the shot.
The computer software then launched a Navy Standard IIIA or IV antimissile missile,
specifically altered to function with this new equipment, toward the oncoming drone. The
antimissile missile climbed high into the evening sky and rocketed west in the general
direction of the low-flying cruise-missile drone, toward a position where its onboard computer
was expecting to receive a midcourse correction. This signal was supposed to fine-tune the
Standard missiles trajectory in order for the inboard semi active radar homing device to lock
onto the target as the Standard missile began its plunge toward the drone a few thousand feet
below. At least that was the plan.
Commercial planes rising into the sky from JFK were unwitting participants in this final test
of 21st century technology. TWA Flight 800 crossed into the warning zone and
technically became a neutral. At the same time, the electronic receiver onboard the Navy
Standard missile began sweeping its secure radio frequency, waiting for the course correction
commands from the AEGIS computers to direct the weapon, now at its predesignated point, to
where it was supposed to attack its prey.
But prior to the mandatory midcourse correction the last AEGIS-CEG radar still tracking the
missile and the drone through the heavy electronic jamming suddenly went completely blind.
The drone and Standard missile could not be tracked. the Standard missile was no longer
under the control of the AEGIS-CEC system. In an instant, the Standards internal radar
acquired TWA Flight 800 at well above and to the west of the target drone. The antimissile
missiles radar turned sharply to the right, aimed its inert war head at the 747, and painted an

electronic bulls-eye on an area just in front of the right wing. The missile leveled off in a
direct line to its impact point, and then at full speed slammed into the fuselage several feet
below the passenger cabin.
You can read the full excerpt here, which includes a good summary of the events of the crash
and the subsequent cover-up. While his account makes no mention of secret electronic
impulse technology, the similarity is still striking, and suggests to me that, however he got
his information, it was probably a limited hangout. In other words, present the facts as
accurately as possible, but leave out anything too sensitive.
9/11 and the Dancing Israelis
Reading about the way in which the official bodies involved in the investigation went about
doing damage control, sowing disinformation, and in general covering up the truth about
TWA 800 should bring to mind any number of recent tragedies and attacks that have been
given the Gaslight treatment. 9/11 was the biggest, by far. Just three days after the attacks,
on 14 September 2001, the Cs had this to say:
Q: We have a series of questions about this recent event. Was the attack on the World Trade
Center undertaken by Muslim Terrorists?
A: No.
Q: Who was behind this attack?
A: Israel.
Q: Is it going to become known that it was Israel? Will they be exposed?
A: Yes. [HK: This turned out to be true, to an extent. See below.]
Q: Is this the event that is going to lead to the destruction of Israel?
A: Yes. [HK: Open, at this point.] []
Q: Are there going to be further terrorist attacks in the U.S. next week as others have been
predicting?
A: No. [HK: True.]
Q: Are there going to be further terrorist attacks of this kind at any time in the near future in
the U.S.?
A: No. [HK: True.]
Q: Is this the beginning of WWIII?
A: No. [HK: True. Despite being an aggressor, all the U.S.-led wars of recent years have
been decidedly one-sided and local in nature.]
Q: Is the U.S. going to bomb Afghanistan?

A: Possible in future. [HK: True. The U.S. invaded Afghanistan just over three weeks later, on
7 October 2001, which included widespread air campaigns.]
Q: Well, you say there arent going to be any further attacks; can we believe you?
A: Up to you.
Q: (A) You say that Israel will be exposed; in what time perspective?
A: Month [before first hints emerge.]
Q: Expose Israel? How?
A: Yes, open. Perhaps sooner.
Indeed, the first hints had already been published in a few local newspaper reports from the
previous days, but the details were still too obscure to form any sort of clear picture. For
example, on the 12th the Bergen Record reported that five men had been detained after they
were found carrying maps linking them to the blasts. Their Urban Moving Systems van
had also tested positive for bomb residue. Three of the men, described as middle-eastern in
appearance, had been seen celebrating at Liberty State Park after the initial impact, which
prompted an FBI be on lookout alert. East Rutherford Police identified the van and made the
arrests.
On the 14th, General Hamid Gul, the former head of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence
agency (ISI), was interviewed by Newsweek,sharing his opinion that it was a coup [attempt],
and I cant say for sure who was behind it, but its the Israelis who are creating so much
misery in the world. The Israelis dont want to see any power in Washington unless its
subservient to their interests, and President Bush has not been subservient.
On the 16th it was reported that Israel had issued urgent warnings about an imminent attack,
but provided no specific details. U.S. intelligence denied the warning. And on the same
day, Haaretz reported that the five detained men were Israelis. The next relevant news
reporting didnt come until 8 October (three weeks after the session above). The five men
were identified as Sivan & Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Schmuel, Oded Ellner & Omer Marmari.
The men had a box cutter, $4,700 in cash, fresh photos of the burning WTC on a camera, and
one carried two passports. At least 4 of the 5 worked for Urban Moving Systems (explaining
the box cutter), and all faced deportation for overstaying their visas and other immigration
offenses.
In the years after, several more details would emerge. After resisting police orders to leave the
vehicle, and before any reason had been given for their arrest, Sivan Kurzberg said, We are
Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the
problem. Another lied about their whereabouts, saying they were on the West Side Highway
during the attacks. Two of the men (the Kurzbergs) would be revealed by the FBI as agents of
Mossad, and that all were on a Mossad surveillance mission. (There are very few official
Mossad agents most act on a volunteer basis, i.e., off the books.) All five were released
and deported to Israel on 20 November 2001, after 71 days in custody. They claimed to have
been tortured. Two other employees of Urban Moving Systems had been arrested on 12
September: Roy Barak and Motti Butbul.

The owner of Urban Moving Systems, Dominick Suter, had been questioned on 12
September, but when the FBI returned a few days later, he was nowhere to be found, having
fled to Israel with his wife on the 14th. Christopher Ketcham later reported: Suters
departure was abrupt, leaving behind coffee cups, sandwiches, cell phones and computers
strewn on office tables and thousands of dollars of goods in storage.Suters name later
appeared on the May 2002 FBI Suspect List, along with Mohammed Atta and the other
alleged hijackers. The FBI would latertell ABC News, Urban Moving may have been
providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation. The Jewish Daily Forward came to the
same conclusion: that Urban Moving Systems was a front operation for Israeli intelligence.
Two former CIA officers confirmed this to Chris Ketcham, noting that movers vans are a
common intelligence cover. Ketcham also wrote:
A former high-ranking American intelligence official, who said he was regularly briefed
on the investigation by two separate law enforcement officials, told reporter Marc Perelman
that after American authorities confronted Jerusalem at the end of 2001, the Israeli
government acknowledged the operation and apologized for not coordinating it with
Washington. From the beginning, the FBI investigation operated on the premise that the
Israelis had foreknowledge, according to [former chief of operations for counterterrorism
with the CIA Vincent] Cannistraro. Before such issues had been fully explored, however,
the investigation was shut down. Following what ABC News reported were high-level
negotiations between Israeli and U.S. government officials, a settlement was reached in the
case of the five Urban Moving Systems suspects. Intense political pressure apparently had
been brought to bear. The reputable Israeli daily Haaretz reported that by the last week of
October 2001, some six weeks after the men had been detained, Deputy Secretary of State
Richard Armitage and two unidentified prominent New York congressmen were lobbying
heavily for their release. According to a source at ABC News close to the 20/20 report, highprofile criminal lawyer Alan Dershowitz also stepped in as a negotiator on behalf of the men
to smooth out differences with the U.S. government.
A most revealing clue had come the day before 9/11. In a report written for the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, a group of second-year students at the Army School of Advanced Military Studies
(SAMS) had referred to Israels military as a 500-pound gorilla in Israel that is well
armed and trained and is known to disregard international law to accomplish mission. Of
the Mossad, the report said: Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US
forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.
Since revelations of the 5 Dancing Israelis, researchers have gone much further in
investigating Israeli/Mossad complicity in the attacks. For example, see this collection of
resources for a lot of it (summarized here). And in addition to Pakistans General Gul, a
couple of other prominent people have laid the blame on Mossad, including former president
of Italy, Francesco Cossiga (All of the democratic circles of America and of Europe now
know well that the disastrous [9/11] attack was planned and realized by the American CIA
and Mossad with the help of the Zionist world to put under accusation the Arabic Countries
and to persuade the Western powers to intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan.) and former
German government minister, Andreas von Bulow.
Pandemic and Palestine
On 24 September 2001, ten days after the session quoted about 9/11, this exchange took
place:

Q: (L) Are there going to be any other kinds of violence, such as bombs or airplanes being
flown into buildings, or release of anthrax, or small pox, or any other kind of chemical or
germ warfare activities? Any of those?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Which ones?
A: Fair chance of germ disbursement.
Q: (L) What kind of germ?
A: Influenza.
Q: (L) Do you mean a deadly form of flu?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) But nothing like anthrax or small pox or any of those really sick ones? Is that it?
A: No. Keep looking and listening. [HK: The 2001 Anthrax attacks had occurred a week
before, infecting 22 and killing five.]
Q: (L) Well we plan to. What is going to happen with the Middle Eastern situation; this
Afghanistan or whatever?
A: Herding of population to much finer order of control.
Q: (L) What is the purpose of this control; this increasing control.
A: Preparation for war in Palestine.
Q: (L) But nobody has said anything about having a war in Palestine. Theyre all talking
about having a war in Afghanistan. How does Palestine fit in here?
A: It is the ultimate objective of Israel.
Q: (L) Why would they want to have war in their own country? Well, aside from the fact that
theyve been having a war in their own country for a long time. I guess they want to bring it to
a final conclusion. What is going to be the result of this plan?
A: Destruction of Jews.
Interestingly, the two events hinted at above a flu outbreak and war in Palestine both
occurred in early 2009. The Gaza Massacre (Operation Cast Lead) began on 27 December
2008, coming to a halt on 18 January. In those three weeks, 1,417 Palestinians were
murdered, as well as 13 Israelis (4 from friendly fire). South African Justice Richard
Goldstones subsequent report rightly accused the Israelis of war crimes and crimes against
humanity. Unsurprisingly, it was met with a barrage of controversy and propaganda.

Four months later, in April, the first reports of


a possible flu outbreak in Mexico and the southwest U.S. hit the airwaves. In what was to
become the 2009 swine flu pandemic, several people were stricken with novel H1N1
influenza (a prior version of which was responsible for the 1918 flu pandemic). Apparently
the human outbreak had begun in February. After spreading rapidly, the WHO declared a
global pandemic on 11 June, the first since the 1968 Hong Kong flu. By May 2010, it had
reportedly caused anywhere from 9,000 to 18,000 deaths. (By comparison, estimates for the
mortality of the 1918 pandemic run as high as 130 million deaths.)
The virus was a veritable disease cocktail, including bits of human, avian and swine influenza
viruses from North America and Eurasia. The pandemic sparked a ludicrous scramble and
push for vaccines (e.g., Norway, with only 23 cases, ordered 9.4 million vaccines) and in
general created a climate of hysteria totally out of proportion to the actual threat. As SOTT
wrote at the time, Consider also, the fact that the CDC was working on combining flu
viruses back in 2004. A new strain would necessitate another hugely expensive (and
profitable) round of vaccine development and marketing.
Not Cash, VISA
Given the current global financial crisis, especially the situation currently embroiling Greece,
I thought it might be fitting to look at something the Cs said back on 16 October 1994:
Q: (L) What is the meaning of the number 666 in the Book of Revelation?
A: Visa. [HK: From later in the session: VI is 6 in Roman Numerals. S was 6 in ancient
Egypt. A was 6 in Sanskrit. VISA, see, is 666. As far as I can tell, the symbol for 6 in hieratic
Egyptian more resembled our letter z, the Greek lowercase form of which does, however,
resemble a more curved s (). Our numeral 6 actually comes from India, but the earliest
representations more resemble a cursive e. So, not quite a hit, based on what I could find,

unless you consider Visas phonetic pronunciation: viz.]

Q: (L) You mean as in credit card?


A: Yes.
Q: (L) Are credit cards the work of what 666 represents?
A: Yes?
Q: (L) Should we get rid of all credit cards?
A: Up to you.
Q: (L) Would it be more to our advantage than not to disconnect ourselves from the credit
system?
A: Isnt just credit also debit.
Q: (L) Is that an affirmative.
A: How are you going to do this?
Q: (L) Well, do you have any suggestions?
A: World will soon have nothing but credit and debit. Have you not heard of this new visa
debit cards? This is the future of money as controlled by the world banking system i.e. the
brotherhood i.e. Lizards i.e. antichrist.
Q: (L) If I dont have a credit card then I dont have to belong to this system?
A: No. You will have no choices: belong or starve.
Well, were not quite there yet, but apparently only 7% of financial transactions in the States
are now done with cash, and at least some movers and shakers in the financial industry are
pushing for a cashless society. Apparently cash is expensive, according to executive vice
president of Visa Europe Steve Perry. That was reported in September 2011. Check out these
headlines since then:

theology21.com
18 March 2012: Sweden moving towards cashless economy
19 March 2012: Nickeled and Dimed: Would the United States save money by switching to
a cashless economy? (Slate.com even has an archive devoted to the topic: 10 articles over a
one-month period.)
29 March 2012: Visions of a Cashless Society: Echoes
15 April 2012: Is a cashless society inevitable?
13 June 2012: Cashless society: Do we even need cash?
With all the media coverage coming at this time, I hope readers will forgive my cynicism for
thinking that something decidedly manufactured is indeed in the works. As this article from
the Economic Collapse blog put it: Yes, a cashless society is coming. Are you ready for it?
Summing Up
Trying to make sense of chaos is human nature. Look at a blurry picture and your mind will
try to piece it together into something intelligible. And its rewarding when it comes
together. Aha! However, say that picture is evidence of a crime. The criminal has a vested
interest in keepingit obscure, whether that means burning the evidence or influencing your
perception of the blur in question. When truth is an obstacle to ones ambition, lies are the
only option, and that puts one at odds with anything truly human or spiritual in nature. It puts
one in a position that goesagainst reality, forcing it into something it is not. Silencing those
who question your manufactured reality and thus risk waking others up to the truth and your
own downfall naturally follows.
This places those on the receiving end of the propaganda at a crossroads. It forces the
questions: What do you truly value? Will you settle for being conned, if it means a relatively
comfortable life? Or will you walk the thorny road of truth? That is spirituality.
The Cs Hit List 09: DNA, Rational Design and the Origins of Life

A controversial paper questioning the Out of


Africa theory of human origins was recently published in the journal Advances in
Anthropology. There are quite a lot of references to the origins of humanity in the Cs
transcripts, so thats what I want to discuss in this installment of the Hit List series. Ill get to
the paper in question a bit further on, but before I do, theres a bunch of background material
to cover. The references from the Cs are given in a certain context and concern ideas and
possibilities that probably wont make much sense without covering certain ground first. That
said, theres way too much material to cover in one article, so I suggest checking out the
books Ill be referencing and reading them in full if anything here strikes the readers interest.
Pop culture has conveniently provided a starting point from which to take off on these topics.
In June, Ridley Scott released the much-anticipated prequel of sorts to his blockbuster
film, Alien, titled Prometheus. Leaving aside any discussion of the artistic merits of the film,
it does cover some themes relevant to the subject at hand. The plot revolves around the idea
that life on planet earth, and presumably other planets in the galaxy, was not a chance
happening. In the film, a race of pale-skinned, muscular and hairless humanoids seeds life
on planets through acts of sacrifice. An engineer, as theyre called in the film, gives his body
to be broken down into its constituent parts, providing the source DNA from which life will
take root. The human characters in the film fund a space mission to meet their makers at a
location indicated in ancient artwork found all over the world.
The film leaves the question of the ultimate origins of life open, allowing conventional
evolutionary theories (i.e., neo-Darwinism) and so-called intelligent design (or biogenetic
engineering) to coexist as compatible options. In other words, the engineers intelligently
seeded life on earth, after which evolution took its natural course (with a possible tweak
here and there over the course of history), resulting in the wealth of DNA-based life forms
that characterize our planet. The origin of the engineers is left untouched a further mystery
to be pondered.
Back in the real world, the fact of the matter is that no one knows how life actually started on
planet earth. Let me repeat that: no one knows. All we have are various theories, none of
which has been scientifically demonstrated to have actually occurred. At best, most scientists
will say itmust have occurred a certain way, simply because they have excluded other options
as not worth considering. In fact, we may have a pretty good idea of some of the evolutionary
mechanisms that have been in effect since the hypothetical first single-celled organism, but
how that organism got there in the first place is a mystery, and open to speculation.

Historically, there have been five or so categories under which various theories have been
proposed. First, of course, theres creationism: the idea that God created all the forms of life
in one way or another. Then there are the various theories of spontaneous abiogenesis. This
is the idea that somehow ordinary chemistry spontaneously resulted in the formation of
primitive biological materials, which somehow acquired the ability to self-replicate and
evolve all on their own, whether on crystals, or by some other mathematically improbable and
as-yet-unobserved natural process. Panspermia, popularized by scientists Sir Fred Hoyle and
Chandra Wickramasinghe, is another option whereby organic materials are said to exist
throughout the universe and are carried by cosmic wanderers like asteroids and meteoroids, to
then be deposited on some lucky planet, et voila! The fourth option, directed panspermia,
promoted by Francis Crick (co-discoverer of the DNA molecule), posits that life was
deliberately seeded by an already existing intelligent race somewhere in the galaxy. As
in Prometheus, that leaves open the question as to their own origin.
Engineer Bryant M. Shiller proposes a fifth option in his book Origin of Life: The 5th Option.
Shiller calls it rational design, probably to distinguish it from intelligent design, many
proponents of which are Christian. While they dont often mix their theology with their
science, based on what Ive read of the intelligent design camps work, the connection is a
contentious one, prompting suggestions from critics that their science is just a cover for
pushing a religious agenda. That may be true in some cases, but I dont think its a valid
argument in most. Shillers take on the subject, for example, is anything but religious. That
said, there are some metaphysical implications to the theory.
Shillers Rational Design Hypothesis (RDH) argues that the origin of life cannot be explained
by abiogenesis. Some of the ideas that Shiller introduces to support his hypothesis include:

there is a clear divide between chemistry and biochemistry one is random, while the other
is directed;
the primary design platform of life (i.e., the cell) is itself extraordinarily complex and not
subject to evolutionary changes;
mutations only affect evolutionary add-ons to the basic cell; incremental mutations lead
only to quantized changes in phenotype (i.e., quantum jumps);
biology controls evolution by anticipating biosphere conditions, distributing species
attributes along a normal distribution curve so that some individuals will survive almost any
change in their environment;
species attributes then re-distribute among the population in response to changes in the
biosphere, ensuring the expansion and continuity of life;
the degeneracy of the genetic code, which acts as an evolution filter, tends towards useful
mutations; among others. (p. 425)

It follows from all of the above that life had an intelligent designer or engineer. Not
necessarily DNA-based, mind you, but intelligent nonetheless. But what is intelligence?
Shiller defines intelligence as a system capacity to counteract entropy,
differentiate information from randomness, and effect choice over chance. (p. 308) We
do this each time we form a sentence, solve a puzzle, or build a machine. With machines, as
long as they have intelligent operators, they can be kept running (against entropy) by ensuring
they are properly fueled and faulty parts are replaced as required. Without intelligent input,
the system or machine would run down due to entropy. Shiller notes: Similarly, the LS [Life
System] comprises biological machines that are able to fuel themselves and repair
themselves. The only discernable difference is that instead of humans controlling these
functions as occurs in all human designed machines, these functions are intelligently

controlled automatically from within the biological machines that comprise the LS (no
system-external intelligent operators required). (p. 310)
Simply put, life itself is intelligent, and it goes against entropy, like any designed system. It
actually becomes more complex over time, not less so (unlike normal chemistry); it isnt
random (take DNA, literally a multi-volume work of organized information, including
instructions for the design, construction, repair, maintenance, and adaptive evolution in every
cell and structure of an organism processes which are directedchemistry carried out by
highly efficient molecular machines); and it shows evidence of choice over chance, both in its
blueprint and in its function. The chances for even the simplest and smallest number of
proteins in a working cell coming into existence by chance are somewhat unlikely, to
understate the matter, rather like the chances of winning the lottery 4 million times in a row.
Also, as Shiller shows, the random mutations to which DNA is subject seem to be constrained
by design to favor functional mutations, filtering out dead-end possibilities by virtue of the
inherent degeneracy of DNA coding. (See Chapter 13 of his book and his amino acid
diagrams in the appendices. In a nutshell, mutations confine themselves to two distinct
groupings of options amino acids from one group never substitute directly for any in the
other group, limiting the number of possible mutations.)
To borrow and adapt an analogy from Shillers book, lets say someone takes ten thousand
pennies and throws them up in the air. (And for the sake of levity, lets also assume their
hands are large enough to perform such an action.) Sure, the chances of them all landing with
heads up is as likely as any other specific combination, but what would you think if you came
across ten thousand pennies on the floor, all showing heads? Personally, Id think someone
had intentionally placed them like that, or suspect some other form of intelligent trickery, like
double-sided or specially weighted coins, for example.
Thinking about this action in terms of the laws of thermodynamics, nothing is amiss. The
energy invested in placing each coin is the same whether it is done randomly or in a pattern,
and energy is lost as entropy when work is done. But when looked at in terms of information,
not so. Intelligence has come into play, made clear by the meaningful form taken by the
placement increased order as opposed to disorder. (Life and evolution does the same thing.)
As Shiller puts it, intelligently applied energy introduced to any system is able to overcome
randomness and to control the outcome of events. (p. 274) And as I mentioned above, as
human beings, we recognize that. We see words on the page and recognize them for
meaningful language, not random letters that have coincidentally formed themselves into
sentences that we then project meaning into. And even when controlling events which are
incredibly unlikely if left to chance, we can perfectly control their outcome every single time.
We have intelligence, and to a greater or lesser degree can recognize signs of intelligence. Its
here that Shiller sees a way to test his theory.
If some form of intelligence actually engineered DNA, and thus life itself, it is possible it left
a signature of sorts. Shiller believes the most likely place for this would be in so-called junk
DNA, portions of which have been highly conserved between species over billions of years,
seemingly for no purpose. (Note: Each year, scientists are discovering more purposes for junk
DNA, meaning its definitely not junk. However, some parts still seem to serve no discernible
function: In 2004, Edward Rubin and his team removed sections of this highly conserved
DNA, measuring over 1.6 million base pairs long, from mice, with no discernible effect on the
animals. They repeated a similar experiment in 2007, with certain modifications, and the same
result.) Perhaps these conserved sections are the ultimate message in a bottle? If some
pattern or message is discovered, it would be undeniable proof of intelligent bio-engineering.

Coincidentally, in the same year that Shillers book was published (2005), Christopher Knight
and Alan Butler made the same speculation in their book, Who Built the Moon? They traced
the idea to physicist Paul Davies (1994). The idea makes me wonder if the Cs tribal unit
remark (quoted in part four) might be such a signature? And just recently, on 17 August 2012,
this article was published on Extreme Tech: Harvard cracks DNA storage, crams 700
terabytes of data into a single gram.
Scientists have been eyeing up DNA as a potential storage medium for a long time, for three
very good reasons: Its incredibly dense (you can store one bit per base, and a base is only a
few atoms large); its volumetric (beaker) rather than planar (hard disk); and its incredibly
stable where other bleeding-edge storage mediums need to be kept in sub-zero
vacuums, DNA can survive for hundreds of thousands of years in a box in your garage.
It is only with recent advances in microfluidics and labs-on-a-chip that synthesizing and
sequencing DNA has become an everyday task, though. While it took years for the original
Human Genome Project to analyze a single human genome (some 3 billion DNA base pairs),
modern lab equipment with microfluidic chips can do it in hours. Now this isnt to say that
Church and Kosuris DNA storage is fast but its fast enough for very-long-term archival.
Just think about it for a moment: One gram of DNA can store 700 terabytes of data. Thats
14,000 50-gigabyte Blu-ray discs in a droplet of DNA that would fit on the tip of your
pinky. To store the same kind of data on hard drives the densest storage medium in use
today youd need 233 3TB drives, weighing a total of 151 kilos. In Church and Kosuris
case, they have successfully stored around 700 kilobytes of data in DNA Churchs latest
book, in fact and proceeded to make 70 billion copies (which they claim, jokingly, makes
it the best-selling book of all time!) totaling 44 petabytes of data stored.
If the entirety of human knowledge every book, uttered word, and funny cat video can
be stored in a few hundred kilos of DNA, though well, it might just be possible to record
everything (hello, police state!)
Its also worth noting that its possible to store data in the DNA of living cells though only
for a short time. Storing data in your skin would be a fantastic way of transferring data
securely
Perhaps that is already being done, and we just havent looked for it?
At the age of eighty-one, after considering all the information that has come to light on the
nature of DNA, Professor Anthony Flew, a prominent atheist and philosopher, revised his
thoughts on the origins of life, writing: A super-intelligence is the only good explanation for
the origin of life and the complexity of nature. In a certain sense, this idea may echo that of
physicist John Archibald Wheeler:
[I]t is not unreasonable to imagine that information sits at the core of physics, just as it sits
at the core of a computer. It from bit. Otherwise put, every it every particle, every
field of force, even the space-time continuum itself derives its function, its meaning, its very
existence entirely even if in some contexts indirectly from the apparatus-elicited answers
to yes-or-no questions, binary choices, bits. It from bit symbolizes the idea that every item
of the physical world has at bottom a very deep bottom, in most instances an immaterial
source and explanation; that which we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of

yes no questions and the registering of equipment-evoked responses; in short, that all things
physical are information-theoretic in origin and that this is a participatory universe.
And information is inextricably linked to intelligence. As to the nature of the intelligence(s)
behind life and the universe, the Cs have suggested various levels of super-intelligence,
from hyperdimensional beings to the mind of the universe as a whole. As Shiller puts it,
information can only come from intelligence, and intelligence itself can only come from
intelligence. Intelligence must somehow be rooted in the fundamental structure of the
universe, perhaps as an additional dimension.
In summary so far, Shiller makes a case for the biogenetic engineering of life. While he
doesnt discuss the possibility that this has been an ongoing process, with design
modifications along the way, there is nothing in the theory to exclude such a possibility. With
that in mind, I already included a short bit from the Cs on epigenetics in part four. Heres the
continuation of that excerpt from 23 September 2000:
Q: What does the rest of the DNA code for that is not coding for structural genes. What else
can it be doing?
A: Truncated flow [of] liquids.
Q: [] (L) Does truncated flow mean a flow of liquid that has been stopped?
A: Yes. Because of design alteration!
Q: Is this liquid that has been truncated a chemical transmitter?
A: Yes.
Q: And would this chemical transmitter, if it were allowed to flow, cause significant
alterations in other segments of the DNA?
A: Yes.
Q: So, there is a segment of code that is in there, that is deliberately inserted, to truncate this
flow of liquid, which is a chemical transmitter, or neuropeptide, which would unlock
significant portions of our DNA?
A: Close. Biogenetic engineering.
Q: I assume that this was truncated by the Lizzies and cohorts?
A: Close, but more likely Orion STS designers. [HK: That is, higher-density intelligences.
See also sessions: 23 October 1994,5 December 1994.]
Q: Okay, can you tell us what this specific liquid or transmitter [is that] was truncated?
A: Think of the most efficient conductor of chemical compounds for low wave frequency
charge.
Q: Acetylcholine?

A: No.
Q: Water?
A: No.
Q: Saline?
A: Closer. It is a naturally bonding combination.
Q: (L) Well, Ill have to research it. The fact is, weve got 3 billion base pairs do some of
these so-called segments of junk DNA, if they were activated, would they instruct
chromosomal replication to take place with more than 23 pairs as a result?
A: In part. []
Q: Was my insight that I had one night that, at some point in time something may happen that
will turn genes on in our bodies that will cause us to physically transform, an accurate
perception of what could happen at the time of transition to 4th density?
A: For the most part, yes.
Q: Are there any limitations to what our physical bodies can transform to if instructed by the
DNA? Could we literally grow taller, rejuvenate, change our physical appearance,
capabilities, or whatever, if instructed by the DNA?
A: Receivership capability. [] Change to broader receivership capability. []
Q: (A) It means how good is your receiver.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) What is your receiver? The physical body?
A: Mind through central nervous system connection to higher levels. [HK: If intelligence
and information is really at the root of life, the universe, and everything, this comment brings
to mind Rupert Sheldrakes idea of the brain as transmitter. That is, similar to how a
television picks up a broadcast signal but isnt the source of the signal, so too is the brain a
transmitter/receiver or window for consciousness.]
Q: So, that is the whole issue of gaining knowledge and developing control over your body. If
your mind and CNS are tuned to higher levels of consciousness, that has significance in terms
of your receivership capability?
A: Close. [HK: As our research on the Cassiopaea forum has shown recently, the ketogenic
diet appears to have some remarkable effects on gene regulation, energy metabolism,
resistance to oxidative stress, mental functioning, and more. It is literally transformative.
Regarding DNA changes, on 9 April 2011, the Cs said: This is how work on the self works!
It prepares you for even more dramatic and rapid changes! And this is receivership
capacity.]

Some further remarks on DNA were made on 4 March 2012:


Q: (L) Okay, we have a question that Psyche and I have been thinking about. After reading
this book about viruses, we have the idea that viruses may be the means by which genetic
manipulation [as in intentional, coming from other densities] has taken place on this planet for
millions, if not billions, of years.
A: Yes
Q: (L) Does that mean that a virus is a transdimensional manifestation?
A: Yes. Thoughts made manifest! Compare to some crop circles!
Q: (Psyche) Some viruses in the atlas DO look like crop circles. [wind noise muffles Arks
question] (Ark) of course virus is just pure DNA, or what? (Psyche) It can be both DNA or
RNA depending on the type of virus, and usually coated to protect itself. There are so many
types of viruses; it can be just a piece of genetic code. (Ark) Okay, so my question is whether
there is a particular part of the virus that has the property that is not just described by normal
quantum physics or quantum chemistry and so on, or its the whole organization of virus that
has this property?
A: Yes. Information field aggregates matter.
Q: (talk of thought vs. information) (Belibaste) Does information command or direct the
aggregation of different proteins or amino acids to form a virus? Materialization?
A: Yes.
Q: (Psyche) Its very interesting because they have found in our junk DNA, properties of
viruses that are close in location to those of stem cells, and also cells that end up producing
cancer. It is quite interesting. (Perceval) That means our DNA is thought made manifest?
A: More or less!
This may clarify a statement made on 23 October 1994:
Q: (L) Did the souls presence in the ape body [HK: i.e., the bodies on earth before modern
humans] cause its genetics and DNA to change?
A: Yes.
According to the Cs, humanoids are based on a sort of universal template, for which there
are literally millions of colonies, of which planet earth is one. Different races represent
various human types engineered for specific environments and planted in those locations.
(See session: 24 September 1995, for references.) On 24 June 2000, they summed it up as
follows:
A: Your current physical form has been fine tuned on your present locator through advanced
biogenetic engineering. It is an ongoing process. [HK: This might suggest that not only
conserved regions of non-coding DNA, but species-specific sections as well, may potentially
hold meaningful information.]

With that in mind, lets move on to the paper I mentioned in the first paragraph. Its
titled Re-Examining the Out of Africa Theory and the Origin of Europeoids (Caucasoids)
in Light of DNA Genealogy, and was written by Anatole A. Klyosov and Igor L. Rozhanskii.
As the title makes clear, it brings into question the alleged scientific consensus on the topic of
human origins, which states that all modern humans can be traced back to a group that
originated in Africa and then spread out to populate the globe. In other words, the theory says
that all modern humans can trace their ancestry via mtDNA (passed on solely through the
female line) back to a single African woman (Eve) who lived in Africa 160,000 years ago,
and via the Y-chromosome to a single man (Adam) some 140,000 years ago humanitys
most recent common ancestors.
The authors of the new paper also used a technique to calculate common ancestors between
groups. Using a sample of 7556 haplotypes from 17 major haplogroups, they compared
specific genetic sequences and their differences, calculating the number of mutations and the
time necessary for those mutations to occur from the original pure sequence the common
ancestor. (Their methodology for this technique is described in the Materials and Methods
section of their paper, as well as here. Needless to say, the accuracy of their dating is only as
good as the mutation rate in their formula, which I am not qualified to evaluate.) They did this
for all the groups tested, comparing each to the other, and thus ended up with a tree of life
diagram showing the relationship between all the groups, each branch representing a splitting
off from the common ancestor. However, the resulting chart shows a completely different
picture of human origins, which Ill reproduce below. But first, here are the relevant
transcripts from the Cs.
31 May 1997
Q: Lets back up here. You said that the Celts came from Kantek. They were transported by
the Lizzies brought here, correct? [By Celts I mean the broader, more inclusive group of
Indo-Europeans, or Caucasoids, from which the Celts proper trace their descent. Kantek is
the name given to the planet that the Cs suggest used to occupy the orbital position of the
asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, sometimes called Phaeton, before it was destroyed.
Lizzies is a shorthand term for another group of alleged hyperdimensional
beings/intelligences.]
A: Yes.
Q: When the Lizzies did this, how many Celts were physically brought here?
A: Hundreds of millions.
Q: How long, in our terms, did it take to bring these Celts to this planet? Or, is this ongoing?
A: Well, in the sense that you measure it, let us say about a week.
Q: Did they transport them in ships, that is some sort of structure. That is, did they load them
up, move them into 4th density, reemerge here in 3rd density, or something like that?
A: Close.
Q: And they unloaded them in the area of the Caucasus, is that correct?

A: And regions surrounding.


Q: And, that was what, 79 to 80 thousand years ago?
A: Over 80,000. []
Q: Were the Jews that were genetically engineered and then planted in the Middle East
what year was this?
A: 130,000 years ago.
Clarifying this last remark, this exchange occurred on 23 August 2001:
Q: (L) Okay, moving on to the next question: Are Semites a mixture of Aryan genetics and
Black genetics as I*** and I have theorized?
A: Partly.
Q: (L) Once before you talked about the mission destiny profile prior encoding of the
Semitic genetic code structure. Of course, you talked about this being done 130,000 years
ago, so thats a long time. But, was that original code structure put into the genetic code of
the Black peoples
A: Yes.
Q: to then be spread via their mixture with Aryans as Semites into other races?
A: Partly.
Q: (L) What is the other part?
A: Genetic tweaking of Semites.
Q: (H) In reading through the transcripts in the 9/11 book [Lauras and Joe Quinns 9/11: The
Ultimate Truth], I was confused about the genetic tweak that was made 130,000 years ago.
Was that a tweak that was done to all the Semites, so it wasnt only the Jews?
A: Question is what is a Semite? []
Q: (H) So the real Semites are the Aryans?
A: You got it! []
Q: (H) Then the genetic tweak, was it made in the Aryan Semites or was it made in the Jews
that we know as Jews today?
A: Aryan. Reason for destruction of Jews of the Abrahamic line.
This was all further clarified on 5 August 2009:

Q: (L) Okay. So the next question is: The putative Nostratic speakers in East Asia include the
Asians that I think were the original shamans which Ive discussed in Secret History and
elsewhere, Altaic speakers in particular. So if this is the case, and if Nostratic as a linguistic
group can be correlated with an original population from Kantek, does that mean that both the
early shamans of East Asia and the circle-people of Europe (with the pyramid people further
south) have their origins on Kantek?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) And does the difference in phenotype between the two groups indicate admixture of
the East Asian Kantekkians with a more native group that was already on Earth?
A: Yes. And notice the ongoing dispute over the out of Africa versus the out of Asia
groups. It is an improper assumption.Out of Kantek vs out of Earth is a better formulation.
So here the Cs suggest that there are at least two distinct, or major, branches of human types,
which have mixed over the years to give rise to the variety of human types alive today. We
have a group of pale-skinned, pale-eyed humanoids planted in the Caucasus some 80,000
years ago; and the previous inhabitants. Included in this latter groups are: a group of
Africans (Negroids?) with a certain DNA profile, who then mixed with Caucasoids,
producing a group of Semites/Aryans who were genetically tweaked; and perhaps the
Mongoloids, a product of the Kantekkians and a native group populating Asia. (I just want
to note here that genetic tweaking may be as simple as being exposed to a virus that inserts a
certain genetic sequence into ones DNA, as was discussed in one of the excerpts above.)
The first map below shows the hypothesized human migration path out of Africa. The
second adds the various mtDNA haplogroups. Note the relatively well-defined geographical
groups (Asian, African, and European). According to Masatoshi Nei, Professor of Biology at
Pennsylvania State University, the analysis of clusters of genetic distances between
groups confirms the traditional grouping of humanity into three main races: Negroid,
Caucasoid, and Mongoloid (including Australoid and Amerindoid).

The Klyosov and Rozhanskii paper doesnt use mtDNA haplogroups, however, but rather YDNA. They have this to say on the Out of Africa hypothesis:
The concept was based primarily on the premise that Africa possesses the highest variability,
or variance, of the human DNA and its segments. Set apart, it is not a strong argument
because a mix of different DNA lineages also results in a high variability and is largely
what occurs in Africa. [HK: In other words, African groups have been evolving longer
(mutation-wise) than more recent groups, giving rise to the higher variability.] Moreover, a
genomic gap exists between some Africans and non-Africans, which has also been interpreted
as an argument that the latter descended from Africans. A more plausible interpretation might
have been that both current Africans and non-Africans descended separately from a more
ancient common ancestor, thus forming a proverbial fork. A region where this downstream
common ancestor arose would not necessarily be in Africa. In fact, it was never proven that
he lived in Africa.
Their analysis shows this to be the case. African haplogroups (A and its subclades) are
very remote from all other haplogroups. Haplogroup A (primarily Negroid) is
approximately 132,000 years old, but shared a common ancestor with all other haplogroups
approximately 150,000-170,000 years ago, indicating a branching off of groups at that time.
(Note the Cs remark about an African gene sequence introduced 130,000 years ago.) The
authors ascribe the creation of all other haplogroups 60,000-70,000 years ago (which they
place within an overarching beta-Haplogroup) to a population bottleneck, perhaps the Toba
event', which occurred 69,000-77,000 years ago. (Again, note the Cs figure of 80,000 years
for the arrival of the Kantekkians.) The authors summarize the history of the other groups:
Apparently, haplogroup B was initially not of an African origin. It could have migrated to
Africa and mixed there with a local Negroid population. A common ancestor of the
present-day bearers of haplogroup B lived 46,000 ypb [years before present]. The
Mongoloid and Austronesian haplogroup C split ~36,000 ypb and gradually populated regions
of Central Asia, Australia and Oceania. Haplogroup DE split to D and E around 42,000 ybp,
and currently populates vast territory from North Africa to the west to Korea and Japan to the
east.
The family of haplogroup[s] from F through T is largely the Europeoid (Caucasoid) family.
Most of the bearers of these haplogroups remained Europeoids; however, some populations

have acquired racial features of the prevailing races in a given region, recently or in the
long past.
It cannot be excluded, of course, that haplogroup A might have appeared elsewhere and
then migrated to Africa. However, there
there is no reason to believe (and fewer reasons to insist)
that the Europeoid family originated in Africa.
Heres the diagram, which accompanies the paper. You all know what they say about
pictures!

On the left are the African haplogroups, and on the right are the European and Asian ones. In
the caption, the authors write: The Europeoid family of haplogroups arose apparently in the
triangle
riangle between Central Europe on the west, the Russian Plain (Eastern European Plain) on
the east and Levant on the south.
So far, the picture is looking much as the Cs describe it, at least in broad outline. (I wont hold
my breath to see any respected
respected academics consider the idea of an extraterrestrial infusion
into the human gene pool!) Earth-based
Earth based humans had split into at least two groups
approximately 160,000 years ago: one that gave rise to Negroid haplogroups, and the second
to all others. Afterr a population bottleneck (it has beensuggested
been
by some that only 3,0003,000
10,000 humans survived), humanity suddenly expanded its numbers about 70,000 years ago in
the Caucasus and the surrounding regions. However, another interpretation suggests that such
low population numbers were more the norm, having persisted for much of human history, so
it wasnt so much a bottleneck as a long period of constrained size followed by an
expansion.

The question is, what caused the expansion? While the Cs explanation may be a literal
description of what happened (i.e., hundreds of millions of Kantekkians somehow
transported to earth), it may not be. Keep in mind what I wrote about the slippery nature of
prophecy in part one. In Chapter 10 of her new book, The Apocalypse: Comets, Asteroids
and Cyclical Catastrophes, Laura gives a number of hypotheses, ranging from comet-borne
DNA to atomized body parts entering earths atmosphere as a result of the destruction of the
Fifth Planet. Whatever the case, the idea of extraterrestrial genes isnt that incredible when
looked at in light of modern science, especially in light of the news that NASAmay have
found microbes on Mars 37 years ago.
In part three, I wrote a section about Neanderthals, pointing out that new dating suggests they
died out around the same time that Cro-Magnon dropped onto the scene, 35,000-40,000 ybp.
In the same chapter of Lauras Apocalypse, she brings up another interesting connection.
Could the population explosion 70,000-80,000 years ago, which gave rise to the betahaplogroup (spawning all others except A), be the same that saw the emergence of CroMagnon humans? As Laura points out, the figure of 35,000-40,000 ypb is based on
radiometric dating, which is only as good as its calibration. You need to know the exact ratio
of the decaying element in question at the time in question, which can vary based on a number
of factors (including cometary events). This article spells out some of the issues:
[Carbon dating] is based on several assumptions, one of which is false. For this method to
work, the rate of production of carbon-14 in the atmosphere has to remain constant through
time. In truth, however, the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere varies with fluctuations
in solar activity and Earths magnetic field, changes in atmospheric conditions and even
the exploding of atomic bombs!
As a result, radiocarbon dating isnt so accurate: Provided they are adjusted, radiocarbon
dates are now considered reliableas far back as 5000 B.C., writes archeologist and professor
Martha Joukowsky in A Complete Manual of Field Archeology.Since the
dendrochronological sequence extends back only as far as about 5500 B.C., no way exists at
present to check radiocarbon dates from 5500 to 10,000 B.C.
When comparing radiocarbon dates with dates derived from tree rings, known as
dendrochronological dating, the dates only agree accurately as far back as A.D. 640 [HK:
Note that Mike Baillie argues for a period of cometary bombardment 100 years before this
date, as I discussed in part three], and only generally well back to the time of Christ.
Anything further back and the dates are as much as 800 years off. So scientists made
calibration charts to make up for the variation. But they still have to verify their calibrations
with samples of known dates. There is still a problem!
Radiocarbon dates can only be trusted up until the record left by trees can back them up.
There is no other way to verify the calibration charts accurately! Scientists, however, will
push the envelope to 10,000 B.C. without any way to verify it.
Heres what the Cs had to say about carbon dating on 3 June 1995:
Q: (L) Now, the general scientific opinion is that the major dying of dinosaurs occurred 65
million years ago. You have given us the figure 27 million years ago. Can you explain the
discrepancy?
A: Radio carbon dating is not exact science.

and expanded on, 3 July 1999:


Q: (A) Carbon dating. Is it incorrect by a factor of two prior to 10,000 years as Laura has
suggested? We observe a factor of 2 variation in the scientific dating versus your dating. This
is a repeating phenomenon on nearly all dates you have given.
A: They fail to take into effect the influence of magnetic aberrations caused by ancient
cataclysms.
Q: (L) How can these magnetic aberrations affect radiocarbon dating?
A: By altering the isotopal imprints of matter.
Q: So, the cataclysm of about 1500 B.C.
A: All of them scramble the radiological data because of magnetic surges.
Another article from 2010 goes into more detail:
Its a mystery that presented itself unexpectedly: The radioactive decay of some elements
sitting quietly in laboratories on Earth seemed to be influenced by activities inside the sun, 93
million miles away.
Ephraim Fischbach, a physics professor at Purdue, was looking into the rate of radioactive
decay of several isotopes as a possible source of random numbers generated without any
human input. As the researchers pored through published data on specific isotopes, they
found disagreement in the measured decay rates odd for supposed physical constants.
Checking data collected at Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island and the Federal
Physical and Technical Institute in Germany, they came across something even more
surprising: long-term observation of the decay rate of silicon-32 and radium-226 seemed to
show a small seasonal variation. The decay rate was ever so slightly faster in winter than in
summer. Everyone thought it must be due to experimental mistakes, because were all
brought up to believe that decay rates are constant, Sturrock said.
On Dec 13, 2006, the sun itself provided a crucial clue, when a solar flare sent a stream of
particles and radiation toward Earth. Purdue nuclear engineer Jere Jenkins, while measuring
the decay rate of manganese-54, a short-lived isotope used in medical diagnostics, noticed
that the rate dropped slightly during the flare, a decrease that started about a day and a
half before the flare.
What could the flare send forth that could have such an effect?
Jenkins and Fischbach guessed that the culprits in this bit of decay-rate mischief were
probably solar neutrinos, the almost weightless particles famous for flying at almost the speed
of light through the physical world humans, rocks, oceans or planets with virtually no
interaction with anything.
All of the evidence points toward a conclusion that the sun is communicating with
radioactive isotopes on Earth, said Fischbach. But theres one rather large question left

unanswered. No one knows how neutrinos could interact with radioactive materials to change
their rate of decay.
It doesnt make sense according to conventional ideas, Fischbach said. Jenkins
whimsically added, What were suggesting is that something that doesnt really interact
with anything is changing something that cant be changed.
So a factor of 2 might resolve some of the discrepancies and make sense of the sudden and
mysterious appearance of Cro-Magnon on planet earth and all they apparently brought with
them: art, culture, shamanism.
To close off this article, I want to share some statements made be the Cs on 23 August 2001,
regarding the genetics of the Scythians, and what modern science has to say on the subject:
Q: (L) How did the Scythians get to Egypt? And by Scythians I mean the group living in
Scythia parts of modern-day Central Asia, Eastern Europe and the northern Caucasus from
around 900 BCE to 200 CE.
A: Via Akkad.
[Akkad was the region occupied by the Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia, which corresponds
to parts of modern-day Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey.]
Q: (L) Was Sargon a Scythian?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Were the Hittites a genetically altered group of Scythians? [The Hittites were a group
living in Anatolia from around 1900 BCE to 900 BCE.]
A: Close.
First of all, note that the names of these two groups refer primarily to the kingdoms or
empires they established in certain parts of history. While the Hittites technically existed
before the Scythians, this does not exclude the possibility of some group of ancestors living
in the same region migrating south to Anatolia. What genetic analysis that has been done on
ancient Scythian bones has only found haplogroup R1a. This haplogroup is frequent in many
Europeans and South Asians and probably originated in Central Eurasia, the region occupied
by the Scythians. R1a has also been found in low frequencies in Armenia and northern
Anatolia, possibly suggesting that a hybrid group of R1a-R1b from the Volga-Ural region
migrated to this region sometime between 2000 BCE and 1650 BCE. Sargon, the Great
King of Akkad, is suggested to have lived 2334-2279 BCE, or close enough for horseshoes.
So there is some evidence suggesting a possible incursion of Scythian types into Hittite
territory close to the time mentioned by the Cs.
While some northern Anatolians are R1a, apparently the Hittites were primarily R1b, another
Indo-European haplogroup. It was common among the Ossetians, a group descended from the
Sarmatians, who were related to the Scythians. This was also the haplogroup of Tutankamun,
although it is present in less than 1% of Egyptians, most of which is explained by migrations
occurring to the region in the last 2000 years. As the linked article says, Therefore it is not

clear at this point of time, how this lineage came from its region of origin to Egypt. Via
Akkad? Continuing with the excerpt:

Q: (L) Where do the Scythians come from?


A: China.
Q: (L) How did they get to China?
A: From the Caucasus. [HK: See the image to the right for the hypothesized migration of
haplogroup R1a, which is common in Western China.]
Q: (L) So, they started off from the Caucasus, went to China, and were later driven back West
by the Chinese? Is that it?
A: Yes. [HK: From Wikipedia: R1a1a frequencies are patchy in Central Asia. This
variation is possibly a consequence of population bottlenecks in isolated areas and the
movements of Scythians in ancient times and later the Turco-Mongols.]

You might also like