Wednesday, July 27, 2011

DNA Contains Complete Sets Of Legacy Genes

Application of electrical fields to growing cells produces partial or complete reversion to one or many different ancestral patterns and forms - or sometimes creates completely new ones.

Electrostatic patterns shape all cellular growth

Everything has apparent latent comic book style superpowers to mutate into completely different and sometimes far hardier and more robust forms. You couldn't make this stuff up.

The key word here is replicatable. This is hard science, which other people can verify independently.


Joseph Dantes said...

Fascinating stuff, Tex, ahead of the curve as always, with interesting implications on your own transformation and genetic ability to adapt to electromagnetic planetary phases.

Anonymous said...

Im wondering if any credit is given to Rupert Sheldrake, who theorized these field effects surrounding, influencing, effectively controlling and possibly even generating all biology.

He predicted this 30 years ago.

This is such a profound discovery, I am amazed the man is still alive. I guess the powers-that-thought-they-were figured his ideas couldn't be weaponized, so they let him live and marginalized him. And then continued to sell us the pharmaceuticals that Sheldrake's work (if ever applied effectively) would have likely rendered obsolete.


Rowan said...

This is the single most interesting post on vault-co in the 4 odd years I've been reading it. Wheat that grows and seeds in a single month? That'd be useful during an ice age.

Anonymous said...

In my view it's not so much that DNA "contains a set of legacy genes" as that DNA resonates with the morphic field, which contains the "legacy" of every living thing that ever existed or can and will exist. All possible biological eventualities are in this higher dimensional field. (and here I mean higher dimension in the mathematical sense)
Conventional biologists describe DNA as a "blueprint," but it's more accurate to think of it like an antenna. DNA and the pineal gland are the way we interact with these higher dimensions. Another useful way to think of it is:
The double helix structure is a 3D "shadow" projected into our 4D space-time matrix of a 5D hyper-structure.
Or from a Hermetic standpoint:
We (earth) are in the crucible, waiting for the fire of transformation. Something BIG is happening, and despite the cyclical nature of time, this MIGHT be something that has NEVER happened before. This is a level of novelty that's off the charts.
The high strangeness has only just begun!

Sorry for the log post, Tex. Too much coffee I guess. Or maybe it's time I start my own blog!

Texas Arcane said...

I'm not laughing. I'm listening to you.

I've had so many paradigms shifted in the past ten years I find it hard to laugh at anything or dismiss it out of hand.

I'm not sure I know what a hermetic field is, but I sure do recognize when most of our conventional notions about DNA and evolution just got blown completely out of the water. I'm receptive to anything nowadays and will listen to any idea that sounds interesting. It can't be more ridiculous than the orthodoxy, which has more egg heaped on it's face every day.

Anonymous said...

"The double helix structure is a 3D "shadow" projected into our 4D space-time matrix of a 5D hyper-structure."

Consider my mind blown...!

Anonymous said...

Couldn't agree more.
That's why I read your blog. You are a great aggregator of (and commenter/theorist on) unorthodox ideas, which are my current obsession and just happen to be the only way out of our current problems.
If you haven't read any of Rupert Sheldrake's work on the morphic fields, I highly recommend it for you in particular Tex, that's if you have any time. I've certainly elaborated a bit (the Hermeticism stuff) on his framework, but oh, what a framework it is! And it's interesting to note that his colleague, Terence McKenna dealt with the history of alchemy (Hermeticism) during the European Reformation.


Texas Arcane said...

The incredible thing about this is that interference in "normal" development doesn't seem to produce pathology. It just seems to produce a new or prior form, also viable.

Think about how complicated gene expression would have to be to support that. Beyond our comprehension.

Interfering with genes and causing pathology by damaging the instructions makes perfect sense. That's what you would expect. Interfering and simply causing a completely different but otherwise viable form to result - that's unbelievable.

Anonymous said...

Tex 5:29

Yep, unbelievable! That's why I recommended Sheldrake. His theory, which I have melded with some others to form an unorthodox (to say the least) worldview, goes a long way toward explaining the mechanism. Even if it can never come close to actually revealing the complexity of the "source field."