- The Facts:
Recently, a popular rapper named Lil Buu claimed he is a clone who was cloned by a company called Clonaid. He ignited a debate, but the fact remains, human cloning has been a controversial topic for years, and it might have already been done.
- Reflect On:
Different types of cloning may exist, including the transferral of consciousness into another body. It could also have health benefits, but is it 'right?'
Before you begin...
If there’s one thing I’ve learned about the planet from working at CE for nearly a decade, it’s not to instantaneously dismiss a claim simply because it conflicts with what I currently believe. This has been a problem throughout history, in all fields, and it’s not a secret that intellectual authorities have pronounced their supremacy by simply ridiculing aspects of our reality that simply don’t fit within the framework of accepted knowledge.
We’ve come a long way, and we now live in a world where labelling something as a ‘conspiracy theory’ is actually harmful and detrimental to moving forward. 9/11 is perhaps the best example we know, despite the fact that the US government still sticks to their official story while practically all of America has now seen through the cracks and lies. Another great example would be Edward Snowden. Prior to his leaks, mass surveillance was considered a conspiracy theory. UFOs are another one that is no longer a debatable topic–UFOs exist, the extraterrestrial conversation is the one we are having now, along with other metaphysical realities.
--> Our Journalism Is Moving - Our investigative journalism and reporting is moving to our new brand called The Pulse. Click here to stay informed.
Revelations continue to make their way into the mainstream, and when the ‘global elite’ ridicule them, or label them as false without explaining why or presenting any evidence, it just hurts their agenda even more. So while we as a collective have been ‘had’ on so many different topics in the past, it’s exciting that many more of us are becoming aware of this, and we are now reacting. We are in the midst of great change. In today’s day and age, it’s vital to keep an open mind, allow your belief systems to be challenged, as new information that is backed by evidence is hard to ignore. We have to come to terms with aspects of our reality and the human experience that don’t resonate with us, so we can begin to change the story.
Ready To Read About Cloning?
This is why it might be a good time for an article on cloning, to simply challenge you to observe your reaction to something you may not believe. What was once considered ‘crazy’ is no longer so in so many areas, and perhaps this is the trend we are seeing with regards to the idea of cloning. For those of you who don’t know, cloning on animals has been done and repeated in labs. Experts are also looking at cloning to re-generate new organs that could replace faulty ones. Multiple universities intend to produce cloned human embryos in order to derive stem cells for medical research on diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, and other diseases.
‘Dolly the sheep’ made headlines when she became the first (that we heard about) mammal to be cloned from an adult cell. Prior to Dolly, several clones had been produced in the lab, including frogs, mice, and even cows. All of them had been cloned from the DNA from embryos. Scientists also recently cloned monkeys for the first time. So is it really hard to believe that it’s been done on humans?
UN Prohibits Human Cloning
Shortly after Dolly was cloned, the United Nations General Assembly gathered to create a declaration on human cloning, where Member states were called on to adopt all measures necessary to prohibit all forms of human cloning. 84 countries were in favour of the ban, 34 were against it, and 37 Member States chose not to vote at all. (source) It raises a number of philosophical questions, for sure, but how fitting was it for the UN to pose these sanctions during this time?
Below is an excerpt from a Wikileaks document describing a meeting at the UN in 2008 with regards to human cloning, expressing that many countries believe “that any human cloning is unethical and an assault on human dignity, and transforms humans into commodities, devaluing human life and the relationship of human beings to each other.”
The document goes on to state,
An effort to ban reproductive human cloning, while being silent on “research” cloning, would suggest something less than total condemnation of all cloning and thus be inconsistent with the UNGA declaration. There can be no exception for “research” cloning, which would require the destruction of all cloned embryos: to attempt to justify it on the basis of potential benefits would take the ethically untenable position that human life can be created and destroyed for the convenience of others. And any effort to regulate “research” cloning would similarly be unacceptable since it would facilitate what the UNGA has already said should be banned.
So, as you can see, human cloning is a serious issue, and has been a serious issue for a while. For someone who has never heard of this type of thing, it might come as a shock that such discussions have taken place.
This is why it caught my attention when celebrity/hip-hop artist “Lil Buu” gave an interview on Vlad TV stating that he is a second generation human clone who escaped from a cloning facility and that he was cloned by a company called Clonaid. According to him,
I was cloned by clonaid in Canada, my model number is 0112568…A lot of the memories from Clonaid were erased so that way the new gen can move forward with whatever new programming was made….They can remove a fragment of bone that’s located here (points to forehead, in between the eyes), and in this fragment of bone it stores all of your memories and consciousness, and with that, they can make a sufficient replica of yourself, a reproductive version of you including your memories, and you can be selective as to which ones you keep and don’t keep. This process has been around for quite some time.
This begs the question, is the same body required for the transferal of consciousness?
It’s interesting he mentions Canada because Wikileaks’ Julian Assange also confirmed this a few years ago. (source)
Clonaid actually made headline news all over the world when they announced they’d received a large donation to fun the cloning of a human child. Dr. Brigitte Boisselier, Ph.D. (scientific director of Clonaid) and a former chemist from Air Liquide were in charge of the operation, and for years the company was under regulatory suspicion and bombarded by media coverage. In 2001, she announced that a baby had been born, but following multiple lawsuits and controversy, no evidence of the human clone was provided, and mainstream media insinuated that the entire debacle had been a hoax. You can watch the press conference below when she decided to make the announcement.
Why would the Federal government, along with big governing bodies like the United Nations openly and publicly stress that human cloning is not allowed if it was not possible?
Here’s a statement from Bill Clinton during his presidency, regarding the establishments view on human cloning,
Our administration believes that there are loopholes that could allow the cloning of human beings….Therefore today I am issuing a directive that bans the use of any federal funds for any cloning of human beings. Effective immedietley, no federal agency may support fund or undertake such activity. Of course a great deal of support and research in this area is supported by private funds, that is why I am urging the entire scientific and medical community, every foundation, every university, every industry that supports work in this area, to heed the federal governments example. I am asking for a volutary moratorum on the cloning of human beings…As we gain a fuller understanding of this technology…we must proceed with a conscious….(source)
One thing used to ridicule Clonaid, who Kid Buu referred to as just one company, is the fact that they are headed up by what’s become known as a ‘cult.’ They’re called the Raëliens, and they believe that we are descendants of extraterrestrials, that we were created, in a sense, by intelligent extraterrestrials. They believe that Buddha, Jesus and many other similar figures are all messengers of this movement. Their purpose is to create awareness about the idea that if humans become peaceful enough, they will meet and be welcomed by these extraterrestrials. The Raëliens have had a long interest in human cloning for the purposes of extending human life.
This is no doubt interesting, especially if you are familiar with Collective Evolution. We’ve been creating awareness about UFOs and the extraterrestrial hypothesis since our inception. If you’d like to read our ET/UFO related articles, you can do so in the disclosure section of our website, here.
That being said, I’ven ever done any research on the Raëliens, and I don’t know much at all about them.
Obviously, there are moral issues and a number of questions to ask with regards to human cloning. The first thing on most people’s mind would be the question of, is it natural? Is it playing God? I don’t know, but what is natural? Perhaps it is in our nature to figure out how to extend and expand our material life. At the same time, I believe it’s important to have the recognition that we are talking about life and death at the material level, I do believe that the non-material aspect of ourselves (our soul) is something eternal.
The fact remains, this technology is out there and has been out there for a long time. It’s not uncommon to hear about new technology and developments fifty to a hundred years past their inception. New technologies are also subject to secrecy orders if the global elite decides to use them in any sort of way. All they have to do is justify it being a ‘national’ security issue and then they don’t have to tell anybody.
We don’t know much about cloning, the details, the possibilities, or how human consciousness and the human soul play a role. There are still many unanswered questions, but at the end of the day, it’s all about changing the human experience and exploring what we are capable of. Perhaps we live in a world full of technologies that are far beyond what we can even comprehend? If these technologies can be brought out in order to benefit humanity, I’m all for them, but it’s really the intention and the consciousness behind that technology that determines if it’s at all necessary in any kind of way.
Clearly, there are still a lot of unanswered questions with regards to this, and that comes as a result of a lack of transparency. What also attracts me to this is the fact that the ‘powers that be’ seem to be sharply against it, and I doubt this is due to moral/ethical reasons. Does the release of cloning technology threaten the global control structure similar to the way free energy would? Are there powerful interests being threatened here? What are the implications of cloning?
Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!
Abductions & Car Vandalism – Startling Australian UFO Report Unclassified
Before you begin...
An uncovered Australian report performed by their Department of Defence. “Scientific Intelligence — General — Unidentified Flying Objects” is trending again. Those who have done extensive research on UFOs will find the Australian version of disclosure to be far more intellectually honest than the American version. Albeit it was conducted decades ago.
According to ex-US intelligence official Luis Elizondo, the Defense Department’s Inspector General is presently conducting three reviews. The inquiries vary from the Department of Defense’s handling of UFO claims to Elizondo’s alleged whistleblower retribution. The open IG cases are crucial to Australia’s report because they establish beyond a shadow of a doubt that the US Department of Defense is being dishonest and shady when it comes to the UFO subject. For decades, Australia has been a loyal friend of the United States. Within Australia’s boundaries, they share a military installation (Pine Gap). When a close defense ally’s intelligence agencies determined that the US was not being intellectually honest in its approach, perhaps it is reasonable to conclude that there is more to the tale than the 144 incidents studied since 2004 by the UAPTF.
The CIA became alarmed at the overloading of military communications during the mass sightings of 1952 and considered the possibility that the USSR may take advantage of such a situation.
Australian UFO study.
According to the summary, OSI, acting through the Robertson-Panel, encouraged the USAF to use Project Blue Book to publicly “debunk” UFOs. In a tragic twist of fate, when Australian authorities sought explanations from the US Air Force, the allegation was debunked. The authors of the study were depicted as conspiratorial and even crazy by the US Air Force. Ross Coulthart reported this, and it may be heard in a recent Project Unity interview. Courthart is an award-winning investigative journalist who is drawn to forbidden subjects. He also stated on the same podcast that a senior US Navy official identified as Nat Kobitz told him that the US had been in the midst of reverse-engineering numerous non-human craft. According to his obituary, Mr. Kobitz was a former Director of Research and Development at Naval Sea Systems Command.
Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!
PGA Tour To End COVID Testing For Both Vaccinated & Non-Vaccinated Players
- The Facts:
The PGA Tour has announced that it will stop testing players every week, regardless of whether they have been vaccinated or not.
- Reflect On:
Are PCR tests appropriate to identify infectious people? Should people who are healthy and not sick be tested at all, anywhere?
Before you begin...
The picture you see above is of John Rahm, a professional golfer on the PGA tour being carted off the golf course after tournament officials told him he had COVID. He was healthy and had no symptoms, yet was forced to withdraw from the tournament. He was told in front of the camera’s, and a big scene was made out of the event. You would think something like that, especially when you are a big time sports figure, would be done behind closed doors with some privacy.
Earlier on in June a spokesperson for the PGA Tour said that more than 50 percent of players on the PGA tour have been vaccinated. Although it seems that the majority of players on the tour will be fully vaccinated judging by this statement, it does leave a fairly large minority who won’t be, and that’s something we’re seeing across the globe as COVID vaccine hesitancy remains high for multiple reasons.
We are pleased to announce, after consultation with PGA Tour medical advisors, that due to the high rate of vaccination among all constituents on the PGA Tour, as well as other positively trending factors across the country, testing for COVID-19 will no longer be required as a condition of competition beginning with the 3M Open. – PGA tour Senior VP Tyler Dennis
The tour recently announced that the testing of players every week will stop starting in July for both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. This was an unexpected announcement given the fact that, at least it seems in some countries, vaccinated individuals will enjoy previous rights and freedoms that everyone did before the pandemic. Travelling without need to quarantine and possibly in the future not having to be tested could be a few of those privileges. Others may include attending concerts, sporting events, or perhaps even keeping their job depending on whether or not their employer deems it to be mandatory, if that’s even legally possible. We will see what happens.
Luckily for professional golfers, regardless of their vaccination status they won’t have to worry about testing positive for COVID, especially if they’re not sick. This is the appropriate move by the PGA tour, who is represented by their players and it’s a move that the players themselves may have had a say in. It’s important because PCR tests are not designed nor are they appropriate for identifying infectious people. A number of scientists have been emphasizing this since the beginning of the pandemic. More recently, a letter to the editor published in the Journal of infection explain why more than half of al “positive” PCR tests are likely to have been people who are not infectious, otherwise known as “false positives.”
This is why the Swedish Public Health agency has a notice on their website explaining how and why polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests are not useful for determining if someone is infected with COVID or if someone can transmit it to others, and it’s better to use someone who is actually showing symptoms as a judgement call of whether or not they could be infected or free from infection.
PCR tests using a high cycle threshold are extremely sensitive. An article published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases found that among positive PCR samples with a cycle count over 35, only 3 percent of the samples showed viral replication. This can be interpreted as, if someone tests positive via PCR when a Ct of 35 or higher is used, the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97 percent. This begs the question, why has Manitoba, Canada, for example, using cycle thresholds of up to 45 to identify “positive” people?
When it comes to golf, the fact that spread occurring in an outdoor setting is highly unlikely could have been a factor, but it’s also important to mention that asymptomatic spread within one’s own household is also considerably rare. It really makes you wonder what’s going on here, doesn’t it?
Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!
New Study Questions The Safety of COVID Vaccinations & Urges Governments To Take Notice
- The Facts:
A new study published in the journal Vaccines has called into question the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.
- Reflect On:
Why are people hesitant to take the vaccine? Why are scientists and journalists who explain why hesitancy may exist censored?
Before you begin...
A new study published in the journal Vaccines by three scientists and medical professionals from Europe has raised concerns about the safety of COVID vaccines, and it’s not the first to do so. The study found that there is a “lack of clear benefit” of the vaccines and this study should be a catalyst for “governments to rethink their vaccination policy.”
The study calculated the number needed to vaccinate (NNTV) in order to prevent one death, and to do so they used a large Israeli Field study. Using the Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR) database of the European Medicines Agency and of the Dutch National Register (lareb.nl), the researchers were able to assess the number of cases reporting severe side effects as well as the cases with fatal side effects as a result of a COVID vaccine.
They point out the following:
The NNTV is between 200-700 to prevent on case of COVID-19 for the mRNA vaccine marketed by Pfizer, while the NNTV to prevent one death is between 9000 and 50,000 (95 % confidence interval), with 16,000 as a point estimate. The number of cases experiencing adverse reactions has been reported to be 700 per 100,000 vaccinations. Currently, we see 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations, and the number of fatal side effects is at 4.11/100,000 vaccinations. For three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination. This lack of clear benefit should cause governments to rethink their vaccination policy.
The researchers estimates suggest that we have to exchange 4 fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2-11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations. This puts the risk vs. benefit of COVID vaccination on the same order of magnitude.
We need to accept that around 16 cases will develop severe adverse reactions from COVID-19 vaccines per 100,000 vaccinations delivered, and approximately four people will die from the consequences of being vaccinated per 100,000 vaccinations delivered. Adopting the point estimate of NNTV = 16,000 (95% CI, 9000–50,000) to prevent one COVID-19-related death, for every six (95% CI, 2–11) deaths prevented by vaccination, we may incur four deaths as a consequence of or associated with the vaccination. Simply put: As we prevent three deaths by vaccinating, we incur two deaths.
The study does point out that COVID-19 vaccines are effective and can, according to the publication, prevent infections, morbidity and mortality associated with COVID, but the costs must be weighted. For example, many people have been asking themselves, what are the chances I will get severely ill and die from a COVID infection?
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD, from the Stanford University School of Medicine recently shared that the survival rate for people under 70 years of age is about 99.95 percent. He also said that COVID is less dangerous than the flu for children. This comes based on approximately 50 studies that have been published, and information showing that more children in the U.S. have died from the flu than COVID. Here’s a meta analysis published by the WHO that gives this number. The number comes based on the idea that many more people than we have the capacity to test have most likely been infected.
How dangerous COVID is for healthy individuals has been a controversial discussion throughout this pandemic, with viewpoints differing.
Furthermore, as the study points out, one has to be mindful of a “positive” case determined by a PCR test. A PCR test cannot determine whether someone is infectious or not, and a recent study found that it’s highly likely that at least 50 percent of “positive” cases have been “false positives.”
This is the issue with testing asymptomatic healthy people, especially at a high cycle threshold. It’s the reason why many scientists and doctors have been urging government health authorities to determine cases and freedom from infections based on symptoms rather than a PCR test. You can read more in-depth about PCR testing and the issues with it here if you’re interested.
When it comes to the documented 4 deaths per 100,000 vaccinations and whether or not it’s a significant number, the researchers state,
This is difficult to say, and the answer is dependant on one’s view of how severe the pandemic is and whether the common assumption that there is hardly any innate immunological defense or cross-reactional immunity is true. Some argue that we can assume cross-reactivity of antibodies to conventional coronaviruses in 30–50% of the population [13,14,15,16]. This might explain why children and younger people are rarely afflicted by SARS-CoV2 [17,18,19].
Natural immunity is another interesting topic I’ve written in-depth about. There’s a possibility that more than a billion people have been infected, does this mean they have protection? What happens if previously infected individuals take the vaccine? What does this do to their natural immunity? The research suggesting natural immunity may last decades, or even a lifetime, is quite strong in my opinion.
There are also other health concerns that have been raised that go beyond deaths and adverse reactions as a result of the vaccine.
As the study points out,
A recent experimental study has shown that SARS-CoV2 spike protein is sufficient to produce endothelial damage. . This provides a potential causal rationale for the most serious and most frequent side effects, namely, vascular problems such as thrombotic events. The vector-based COVID-19 vaccines can produce soluble spike proteins, which multiply the potential damage sites . The spike protein also contains domains that may bind to cholinergic receptors, thereby compromising the cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathways, enhancing inflammatory processes . A recent review listed several other potential side effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines that may also emerge later than in the observation periods covered here …Given this fact and the higher number of serious side effects already reported, the current political trend to vaccinate children who are at very low risk of suffering from COVID-19 in the first place must be reconsidered.
Concerns regarding the distribution of the spike protein our cells manufacture after injection have been recently raised by Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist from the University of Guelph who recently released a detailed in depth report regarding safety concerns about the COVID vaccines.
The report was released to act as a guide for parents when it comes to deciding whether or not their child should be vaccinated against COVID-19. Bridle published the paper on behalf of one hundred other scientists and doctors who part of the Canadian COVID Care Alliance, but who are afraid to ‘come out’ publicly and share their concerns. Byram, as many others, have received a lot of criticism and have been subjected to fact checking via Facebook third party fact-checkers.
A recent article published in the British Medical Journal by journalist Laurie Clarke has highlighted the fact that Facebook has already removed at least 16 million pieces of content from its platform and added warnings to approximately 167 million others. YouTube has removed nearly 1 million videos related to, according to them, “dangerous or misleading covid-19 medical information.”
It’s also important to note that only a small fraction of side effects are even reported to adverse events databases. The authors cite multiple sources showing this, and that the median underreporting can be as high as 95 percent. This begs the question, how many deaths and adverse reactions from COVID vaccines have not been reported? Furthermore, if there are long term concerns, will deaths resulting from an adverse reaction, perhaps a year later, even be considered as connected to to the vaccine? Probably not.
This isn’t the only study to bring awareness to the lack of injuries most likely not reported. For example, an HHS pilot study conducted by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research found that 1 in every 39 vaccines in the United States caused some type of injury, which is a shocking comparison to the 1 in every million claim. It’s also unsettling that those who are injured by the COVID-19 vaccine won’t be eligible for compensation from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) while COVID is still an “emergency”, at least in the United States.
Below is the most recent data from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Keep in mind that VAERS is not without its criticism. One common criticism we’ve seen from Facebook fact-checkers, for example, is there is no proof that the vaccine was actually the cause of these events.
A few other papers have raised concerns, for example. A study published in October of 2020 in the International Journal of Clinical Practice states:
COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.
In a new research article published in Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, veteran immunologist J. Bart Classen expresses similar concerns and writes that “RNA-based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19.”
For decades, Classen has published papers exploring how vaccination can give rise to chronic conditions such as Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes — not right away, but three or four years down the road. In this latest paper, Classen warns that the RNA-based vaccine technology could create “new potential mechanisms” of vaccine adverse events that may take years to come to light.
There are a plethora of reasons why COVID vaccine hesitancy has been quite high. I wrote an in-depth article about this in April if you’re interested in learning about the other reasons.
Conversations like this are incredibly important in today’s climate of mass censorship. Who is right or wrong is not important, what’s important is that discussion about the vaccine and all other topics remain open and transparent. The amount of experts in the field who have been censored for sharing their views on this topic has been unprecedented. For example, in March, Harvard epidemiologist and vaccine expert Dr. Martin Kulldorff was subjected to censorship by Twitter for sharing his opinion that not everybody needed to take the COVID vaccine.
It’s good to see this recent study point out that the benefits of the vaccine, for some people, may not outweigh the potential costs.
Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!
One of Stanford’s Most Successful Remote Viewers Shares His Encounter With The Real ‘Men In Black’
Follow me on Instagram here. Every single year the topic of UFOs continues to gain traction with regards to credibility...
Wikileaks Document Reveals a “Secret US Base on the Moon” (VIDEO)
A US government document that was released by WikiLeaks reveals the US had a base on the moon that the...