As the documentary explains, Benveniste and Montagnier's work was pilloried by the scientific establishment and publicly declared to be bunk, and yet in the documentary, Montagnier proves that water does have an electromagnetic memory.
Scientifically, therefore, Montagnier showed conclusively that cellular activity is not a chemical process but an electromagnetic process. In any volume of water, DNA transmits the electromagnetic signal of its molecular structure. These signals are stored in nano-scale water structures around the DNA. These nano-scale structures will re-transmit the signal when agitated, creating more copies of themselves in the surrounding water. This is why the recombinant enzyme produced new DNA from the water sample in the PCR process, because it clearly needs only the electromagnetic signal to create a new DNA structure. It doesn't matter to the recombinant enzyme if that signal comes from a physical DNA structure or from a transmitting, nano-scale water structure; it's the electromagnetic signal that counts. It's a brilliant discovery. For Montagnier and Dr Fritz-Albert Popp, among others, this is not shocking news, but for biologists and biochemists in general, it certainly is.
There are many ramifications to this fundamental insight. For example, DNA can be seen primarily as a storage of the cellular blueprint when there is no water around. As soon as water is present, the DNA blueprint signal must spread everywhere in the body, as DNA is an ideal fractal electromagnetic transmitter antenna. Also, enzymes reading DNA information don't need to visit the nucleus as the signal is everywhere in the cell, for the water in the cell must contain vast numbers of the nano-scale structures storing the DNA-electromagnetic-fingerprint.
In addition, infections by viruses and bacteria do not require the actual physical bacterium to enter the host's body, but only that water with the bacterium's electromagnetic fingerprint enter the host's body. Boiled and frozen water is not a problem in this situation, as the signal is lost when the water changes state, but liquid water contaminated by the bacterium's electromagnetic signal would be a problem.
The implications of this discovery are vast. Medicine would enter a new era, where doctors only require a digital file of the right medicine, an electromagnetic transmitter and some water to treat someone. To diagnose, all they would need to do would be to take an electromagnetic reading of the patient's fluids. There would be no need for mass manufacturing of pills, expensive scanners etc. Of course, the pharmaceutical and medical equipment industries would lose vast amounts of profits if this new paradigm became established, and they're not know for their selfless compassion. They are though known for their wealth, self-serving attitude and general ruthlessness. One doesn't need to be a Nobel-Prize-Winner, like Luc Montagnier, to work out what they would do. Sadly, the sickness doesn't just lie with the patients.
Unfortunately, the British press is still giving scant coverage to our accelerating climate change catastrophe but there are television articles being broadcast in other countries. Below is a very good one from Australia. I wanted to put it in this blog because its climate scientists talk about our future in real terms. They know what's coming and they are worrying whether they should have children, because those children will experience its full ferocity. They are planning where they can live in a hotter world, and which countries they'll be allowed to move to, in order to escape deathly heatwaves. These are questions that we all need to be asking now.
It's true that discussions about stopping climate change are going on in the press now, but they are far too late and are connected with no concrete action. Also, there are discussions about reducing the climate change effect to a manageable level but these are based on wildly optimistic predictions and they also have no concrete action connected with them either. Tragically, the opportunity to stop catastrophic global climate change has gone. Feedback mechanisms, such as our warming arctic and the accompanying methane release, are now accelerating global warming forward, like a runaway train on a hill. This is no longer a time for discussion about what to do about stopping climate change. The only valid questions to ask now are 'who will survive what's to come' and 'how will they do it'?
What especially caught my eye in this paper was how often the word 'remarkable' was used. Scientific papers are almost always dry, sober reports, their authors do not want to sound emotional and flighty, and so it is illuminating that the authors saying remarkable in two particular paragraphs. Here they are:
“It has long been noted that brains of various extant and extinct primates display remarkable variation in size, organization, and behavioral output (Noback and Montagna, 1970; Armstrong and Falk, 1982; Byrne and Whiten, 1988; Matsuzawa, 2001). This is particularly true for the evolutionary lineage leading from ancestral primates to humans, in which the increase in brain size and complexity was remarkably rapid and persistent throughout the lineage (Jerison, 1973; Walker et al., 1983).” Page 1.
“It is remarkable that 17 out of the 24 primate-fast outliers [rare or exceptional genetic changes] are linked to the regulation of either brain size or behavior.”
The third ‘remarkable’ is of special significance, for it touches upon a very strange story.
This sounds, at first glance, to be a reasonable progress of development. Bigger brains enable tool use, group coordination, planning etc. The only problem is that the odds of gaining the required genetic changes to have these big brains through natural selection, in the time described, are vanishingly small.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined published reports of increased stress protein levels and DNA strand breaks due to EMF interactions, both of which are indicative of DNA damage. We also considered antenna properties such as electronic conduction within DNA and its compact structure in the nucleus.
RESULTS: EMF interactions with DNA are similar over a range of non-ionising frequencies, i.e., extremely low frequency (ELF) and radio frequency (RF) ranges. There are similar effects in the ionising range, but the reactions are more complex.
CONCLUSIONS: The wide frequency range of interaction with EMF is the functional characteristic of a fractal antenna, and DNA appears to possess the two structural characteristics of fractal antennas, electronic conduction and self symmetry. These properties contribute to greater reactivity of DNA with EMF in the environment, and the DNA damage could account for increases in cancer epidemiology, as well as variations in the rate of chemical evolution in early geologic history.
In other words, the researchers found that DNA is a lot like a radio antenna, in that it can pick up electromagnetic signals, which then alter its behaviour. What’s more, DNA also has loops within loops, which means it can pick up electromagnetic signals in multiple frequencies.
There are many thought-provoking potential consequences to our DNA being fractal antennae. For starters, as the above paper mentions, there are ‘published reports of increased stress protein levels and DNA strand breaks due to EMF interactions, both of which are indicative of DNA damage.’ In other words, there’s evidence that our DNA is very sensitive to e/m signals and will actually suffer damage if the wrong signals are beamed at it. There is an awful lot of radio-frequency traffic in our world today, particular from wireless or phone masts, and there’s evidence that it’s not good for biological organisms, as this science paper states. To be honest, the logical thing to do would be to develop a full understanding of radio-frequency signals on the DNA of living creatures first, and then stick up masts everywhere, but that’s clearly not happening.
There is another thought-provoking consequence to the above paper, something that no one has talked about yet, as far as I know. According to the science paper mentioned at the beginning of this article, DNA is surprisingly good at picking up RF and ELF signals and then altering its own functioning as a result. Not surprisingly, hitting DNA with crude or random RF signals of high intensity will trigger damage within the DNA. This is a lot like hitting a set of skilfully arrange tuning forks with very loud notes of random frequency. A lot of the time nothing will happen and some of the time a fork will overload and smash to bits.
But what if we knew exactly what RF signals to send? If that was the case, we could beam a host of carefully chosen RF signals at the DNA and it wouldn’t just do nothing, or break. Would it instead play like a musical instrument? Would it alter its genetic information in a specific way? Would it produce specific proteins, neurotransmitters or perhaps even viruses? Read More...
You Can’t Tell the People is a big book and there were several times when I skimmed pages. Bruni is very thorough in her investigation and clearly talks to many of the key players many times as she gathers the relevant evidence. It’s easy to lose count of the number of senior military, police and civilian figures she talks to. Eventually, it becomes obvious that certain things happened in Rendlesham Forest on the last week of 1980: Read More...
The date that Sweatman (and Collins) think the Vulture Stone is marking is 10,900 BC. This is a very important date because it is the date of the Younger Dryas Impact Event, when a cloud of meteorites is said to have hit the Earth, causing massive wildfires and a sudden cooling of our planet, which extended our ice-age another thousand years-or-so, before its final, catastrophic ending in 9,650 BC.
I recently wrote an article explaining how the Great Sphinx could also be a physical marker of the Younger Dryas Impact Event. The Great Sphinx was probably a Great Lion originally, and its positioning, in relation to celestial alignment, indicates that it was built to mark the date 10,900 BC, the dawning of the Age of Leo. It therefore seems that at least one ancient civilisation wanted to tell us how important 10,900 BC was in the history of our species and that of Earth. If the Younger Dryas Impact theory is correct, this is understandable, as that ancient date was when a global, cataclysmic event occurred. Read More...