That’s certainly one possible explanation—but now that we are armed with our breakthrough research into the Source Field, there may well be other answers that move us even closer. This galactic see-saw theory also doesn’t account for the roughly 26-million-year cycle that was originally discovered by Raup and Sepkoski. Something else has to be going on here. It does seem very likely that galactic energy fields will be responsible—and in Part Two, I’ll present a new model that neatly explains everything, and gives us a solid, scientific way to map out these changes.
Adapted from Raup and Sepkoski, Rohde and Muller graphs by David Wilcock.
We’ve already seen how living bacteria and other species, complete with their DNA, could spontaneously emerge from seemingly nonliving matter. If DNA can be “created out of nowhere,” and both Popp and Gariaev’s research proves that DNA stores and releases light, then why couldn’t DNA actually be reprogrammed and rewritten with the right light frequencies? Let’s not forget that when Gariaev zapped a poisoned rat with the wave information from a healthy pancreas, its devastated pancreas regenerated in only twelve days. Budakovski found that the hologram of a healthy raspberry plant was all he needed to transform seemingly dead tumor tissue back into a perfectly normal new plant. What we’re seeing is that coherent ultraviolet light can carry complex code that directly affects the structure and behavior of DNA—transforming diseased tissue back into full health. Are there any clues that the source code of DNA could indeed be like a jigsaw puzzle that has more than one correct solution, when given the right information? Surprisingly, the answer is yes.
DNA Is a Wave Structure That Can Be Rearranged
Many spiritually oriented people feel a great affinity with dolphins—and there appears to be much more to that story than most of us ever imagined. In 2000, NOAA scientist Dr. David Busbee discovered something truly astonishing.
It became very obvious to us that every human chromosome had a corollary chromosome in the dolphin. . . . We’ve found that the dolphin genome and the human genome basically are the same. It’s just that there’s a few chromosomal rearrangements that have changed the way the genetic material is put together.39
This is quite amazing, as humans and dolphins certainly do not look alike. Then, in 2004, the BBC News published the work of Dr. David Haussler from the University of California, Santa Cruz, and his team. When Haussler’s team compared the DNA codes of human beings, rats and mice, “they found—to their astonishment—that several great stretches of DNA were identical across the three species.” Chickens, dogs and even fish also had almost identical DNA codes to human beings as well—although sea squirt and fruit flies were less similar. Dr. Haussler said, “It absolutely knocked me off my chair. . . . It’s extraordinarily exciting to think that there are these . . . elements that weren’t noticed by the scientific community before.”40
If the DNA of humans, dolphins, rats, mice, chickens, dogs and fish are all so similar, and the DNA molecule can absorb and release coherent light, then we get tantalizingly close to the idea that all DNA is ultimately the product of a single wave, which undergoes relatively minor modifications to produce different species.
If this is true, then could we change the wave by feeding it new information—and actually rearrange one species into another, directly at the DNA level? Indeed, if we think back to Dr. Alexander Golod’s pyramid on Seliger Lake, this appears to have already happened. A variety of seemingly extinct plants began growing in the land surrounding the pyramid. Do we have any other evidence that could verify such a fascinating effect? The answer arrived in 1989, when a major chemical company known as Ciba-Geigy patented a process that allowed them to cultivate new and original forms of plants and animals. The process is deceptively simple—they place seeds between two metal plates, and run a weak DC current through them for three days as they germinate. When they zapped an ordinary fern seed using this process, they were astonished to find that it transformed into a formerly extinct species that had only ever been found in fossils from coal deposits. The “extinct” fern had forty-one chromosomes rather than the expected thirty-six. Furthermore, within four years, the original plants mutated into a wide variety of different strains of fern—some of which normally only grew in South Africa.41
When Ciba-Geigy tried the same technique with wheat, they were able to revert it back to a much older and stronger variety—from a time before it had been heavily over-bred. This wheat could be fully harvested after only four to eight weeks—and the norm is seven months. This, of course, has marvelous implications for impoverished areas where people suffer from starvation. When they tried it with tulips, they found thorns appearing on their stems—and this appeared to be an original trait that gardeners had long since bred away. The effect didn’t just work on plant seeds either. When they tried the same experiments with trout eggs, they found that a much stronger and more disease-resistant trout was formed. Best of all, they tried out the process on 200-million-year-old spores that had been found in a salt deposit 140 meters deep in the ground. Even though nothing else had been able to revive these spores, simply zapping them with the electrostatic field brought them back to life—as if the 200 million years didn’t even matter.42
Unfortunately, this was a chemical company—and a large part of their business depends on agricultural plants being weak and vulnerable, so they require chemical fertilizers. Once Ciba-Geigy realized that these plants could put them out of business, they quickly stopped pursuing this new technique. Thankfully, the original papers survived—so this information was not lost.43
Another weird discovery emerged in National Geographic News from 2009. Scientists from the University of Rennes in France drowned 120 different spiders, from three different species, in water. They probed the spiders every two hours until they appeared to be completely dead, which took twenty-four hours for the forest species and either twenty-eight or thirty-six hours for the two marsh species. Once the spiders had apparently died, the scientists left them out to dry, so they could be weighed. Amazingly, the spiders’ legs began twitching and they came back to life—with the longest time interval being two hours for the marsh species that took thirty-six hours to die. Of course, the scientists assume this is the result of a coma rather than actual death, but it raises fascinating questions.44 Life may be far more resilient than we normally give it credit for. Just like we saw in the 34,000-year-old bacteria that reanimated after two and a half months, or in Gariaev’s dead seeds from Chernobyl, if you have genetic material that is already fairly close to being alive—even if it is technically dead—a little jump-start may be all you need to reanimate it. This is obviously a much easier and faster process for the Source Field to use, rather than creating life out of otherwise inanimate molecules.
Life-forms That Rewrite Their Own Genetic Code
If we want to understand this new concept of evolution even further, we must be aware that some species can rearrange their own DNA without the use of any outside electrostatic fields—such as we saw in the Ciba-Geigy experiments. As of April 2009, a Rockefeller University study revealed that a parasite known as Trypanosoma brucei, which creates African sleeping sickness, is able to spontaneously rearrange its own DNA so it cannot be defeated by the body’s immune system. Amazingly, the parasite is able to dice up and rearrange both strands of its DNA, changing its outer coat so it can continue to avoid being detected. Though the scientists involved in this study suspected the parasite was doing this as early as 2007, they didn’t find the proof until 2009. According to their press release, adapted for Science Daily, this “suggested a common mechanism by which parasites and humans rearrange their DNA. “It was unbelievable,” Dr. Oliver Dreesen says. “One experiment after another and it just worked.”45
These scientists were apparently unaware of a similar effect that was discovered by Dr. Robert Pruitt, a geneticist with Purdue University, in 2005. Pruitt and his associates were studying a mustardlike plant called Arabidopsis, which is commonly used in labo
ratory experiments. Specifically, they were exploring a mutation in one of the genes that made the flowers clump together in an odd, misshapen way. What they found was that even when the plants inherited this mutation from both of their parents, over a three-year period of study, fully 10 percent of them reverted back to normal. They rewrote their own DNA, and fixed the mutation. The startled scientists examined the plants’ DNA and confirmed that it had been transformed back into its original, healthy form.46 This is a spontaneous DNA rewrite to fix a mutation—and it deals another critical blow to the Darwinian model. If DNA has an underlying wave component that can correct mutations, Darwin may have just lost his job. According to Dr. Elliott Meyerowitz, a plant geneticist from the California Institute of Technology, Pruitt’s finding “looks like a marvelous discovery.”47 I also like this study because it proves that no giant industrial company can ever create true “terminator seeds” that will always destroy themselves after a single generation. Nature always finds a way to repair the damage.
Another example of “marvelous” genetic repairs comes from Francis Hitching’s 1982 book The Neck of the Giraffe—Where Darwin Went Wrong. Hitching reported on his experiments with the fruit fly, technically known as Drosophila, which is one of the most common living organisms studied in biology experiments. Even though various scientists have used radiation to try to dramatically speed up the rate of mutation, “Fruit flies refuse to become anything but fruit flies under any circumstances yet devised.”48 Even more interestingly, when Hitching took away all the genetic codes from both sets of parents that would build eyes for the fruit fly, they nonetheless regrew their eyes—in roughly five generations. According to Hitching, “Somehow the genetic code had a built-in repair mechanism that reestablished the missing genes.”49 Of course, that makes us ask a much deeper question: What is the “genetic code”?
More and more, we are seeing evidence of a guiding intelligence that can somehow modify the genetic code in ways that will benefit the organism. Are there other examples where organisms rewrite their own DNA to adapt to changes in their environment? Dr. John Cairns was one of the first to discover this sort of an effect in 1988. Cairns studied a type of bacteria that cannot digest lactose, and then put them in an environment where that’s all there was. Of course, the vast majority of the bacteria starved and went into a suspended-animation state. However, after a day or two, several of his bacterial cells spontaneously evolved—rewriting their own DNA to digest lactose. And this was not a random event—if there wasn’t any lactose in the area, the “adaptive mutation” did not happen. 50 Dr. Barry Hall continued this work with a study he published in 1990—and he found that if he deprived bacteria of certain key nutrients, such as the amino acids tryptophan and cysteine, some of their offspring ended up being able to synthesize these nutrients within their own bodies. 51 Whatever the bacteria needed to survive was provided for them—by the hidden laws of Nature. Hall also suspects that this same effect explains how dangerous bacteria are able to adapt to new antibiotics so quickly.52
In 2008, another study proved that organisms can quickly rearrange their own DNA to help them adapt to the challenges of their environment. Back in 1971, biologists moved five breeding pairs of Italian wall lizards from their barren island home in the South Adriatic Sea, where they survived on insects, to a neighboring island that was lush and tropical. Up until this point, these species had never existed on the neighboring island. When the biologists returned to the tropical island beginning in 2004, they were shocked to find that the descendants of these original parents had experienced substantial evolution in a short time.
As revealed in a Daily Galaxy article, “Striking differences in head size and shape, increased bite strength and the development of new structures in the lizard’s digestive tracts were noted after only 36 years, which is an extremely short time scale,” remarks Duncan Irschick, a professor of biology at the University of Massachusetts–Amherst.”53 Each of these changes was tailor-made to help the lizards eat plants. Thanks to a very rapid DNA rewrite, their digestive systems developed cecal valves—which were never before seen in this species. These organs create fermentation that breaks down plant material. Less than one percent of all lizard species in the world have this unique feature. Their heads became longer, wider and taller, which gave them a substantial increase in bite strength—so they could more easily chew through plant fibers. Interestingly, they also stopped defending their own territory, now that they were eating by browsing rather than hunting. According to Dr. Irschick, “Our data shows that evolution of novel structures [within an organism] can occur on extremely short time scales.”54
Another classic study was performed by Rosemary and Peter Grant, who spent twenty years on an island in the Galapagos, studying and identifying every single individual bird there—beginning with four hundred when they first arrived, and surging to over a thousand during their stay. Throughout these twenty years, they continuously observed about twenty generations of finches. To their amazement, individual species made genetic changes in remarkably short periods of time. The majority of these improvements involved a change in the size and shape of their beaks. As one example, when the island went through a period of extended drought, seeds became tinier and harder to reach—so the birds evolved longer and sharper beaks to be able to eat them. The Grants also found that the birds had actually rewritten their own DNA to produce these changes. According to Jonathan Weiner, author of The Beak of the Finch: A Story of Evolution in Our Time, “Darwin . . . vastly underestimated the power of natural selection. Its action is neither rare nor slow. It leads to evolution daily and hourly, all around us, and we can watch.”55 In 2009, ornithologists announced another discovery of rapid evolution in forest birds. Soon after the forests were cut down, the birds’ wingtips became pointier—but if the forests expanded, their wing tips became more round.56
In 2009, National Geographic reported that a never-before-seen “monster fish” had been found in the Congo River, which moves through several countries in Africa. Dr. Melanie Stiassny, a fish biologist at the American Museum of Natural History, said, “What we’re seeing here is kind of evolution on steroids.”57
When we go out into the oceans, we find that the “immortal jellyfish” can completely rewrite its own DNA in the presence of starvation, physical damage or other types of crisis. According to Maria Pia Miglietta, a Pennsylvania State University researcher, “instead of sure death, [the immortal jellyfish] transforms all of its existing cells into a younger state.” The jellyfish convert their own tissues and genetic material back to their earliest stage of growth, and “the jellyfish’s cells are often completely transformed in the process. Muscle cells can become nerve cells or even sperm or eggs.” Another interesting fact was that every jellyfish of this species they found, worldwide, was genetically identical—even though the tropical jellyfish had only eight tentacles, whereas those in cooler waters could have as many as twenty-four. Drifting ocean currents could not explain how this species ended up appearing identically in so many different places around the world. Dr. Miglietta speculated that the jellyfish must be hitching rides on long-distance cargo ships.58
Energetic Evolution and Species Transformation
In 1997, another seemingly impossible genetic mystery was discovered in the oceans. In this case, Dr. Lingbao Chen and his associates found that fishes in the Antarctic and several species of northern cods had evolved nearly identical antifreeze proteins, even though there is abundant evidence from paleontology, paleoclimate research and the species’ own physical appearance that they must have evolved separately. The conclusion was that these proteins had to have appeared through what they called convergent evolution, where this seemingly random process of Darwinian mutation is now doing the same exact thing—in two totally isolated environments.59
I was particularly amazed by a National Geographic news story that appeared on February 15, 2009. The International Census of Marine Life is making a focused effort to identify
and assess all species in the ocean—past, present and potential future. In the process of assembling this vast body of data, the scientists found something astonishing—at least 235 different identical species have been discovered at the North and South Poles, and they do not exist anywhere else on earth. This includes swimming snails, whales, worms and crustaceans. There is simply no way that all these species could have been transported from one pole to the other—there are no shipping routes that go that way, and they could not survive a trip through warmer water. The scientists admitted that they were startled by this mystery.60
In 2002, Richard Pasichnyk released both volumes of The Vital Vastness— and I was particularly struck by his discussion of the so-called Lazarus Effect, which shows how species can spontaneously reappear after millions of years of extinction.
The Source Field Investigations Page 22
