________
Vampires
by Miles Mathis
First published April 9, 2021
This isn't actually about vampires. Not strictly. Not technically. But it got you in. It is about the recent Newsweek article on blood transfusions from young to old, to battle aging. I was alerted to it at Infowars, where Alex Jones is now bragging he was proved right again. Several years ago he claimed the rich were doing this, but was shot down by the mainstream as a conspiracy theorist. Newsweek doesn't admit this has been going on for a long time. In fact, they try to sell it as a new thing. Despite that, smart money would be on the fact that this has been going on for a very long time, from long before Jones came on the scene. That same smart money would also be on the probability that Jones is wrong: this has nothing to do with child trafficking, child murder, ritual murder, or Satanism.
Why do I say that? Because none of that is necessary. Whether the rich want to be transfusing this blood or drinking it, it is easy to obtain without murdering babies or anyone else. Why do I say that? Because I remember that they were running blood drives at my high school back in the 1970s. They had already been doing it for decades, I believe. They also run blood drives at most universities and colleges. I remember thinking it was ghoulish back then. I thought that growing young people in their teens needed their blood and shouldn't asked for it, especially with the sort of pressure that was applied. They made it seem like a great public service, and that you were selfish if you didn't donate. I didn't donate because I felt that I needed my blood. Plus, I knew that they would take a whole pint, which is about 1/10th of the blood in the body (1/9th for smaller people). It takes four to six weeks to restore that blood in a healthy young person. I also suspected even then that the blood might not be going where we were told it was. We were told it was going to local hospitals, for use in surgery. But I didn't necessarily believe it then and I still don't believe it.
Given that they now admit this happens, and that there are no laws against it, or against young people selling blood to rich old people, my guess is we still aren't being told the truth, by Jones or anyone else. Just ask yourself this: if you were one of these rich old people, where would you get blood if you wanted it? Would you be murdering babies or children? No. You would go where the blood is, right? The blood is at the hospitals. And who owns all the hospitals? Oh, that's right. . . rich old people. The Phoenicians own all the hospitals, which is convenient for our story here. Basically, nothing is stopping them from getting all the blood they want from the hospitals they already own. They can get all the young blood they want without paying a dime for it. How? By instructing those who are collecting blood from high schools or colleges to simply label it as such. They may even tag blood from particularly healthy or beautiful donors. Why wouldn't they? Once the blood is in storage, they pay their operatives to "borrow" it as needed. After the transfusion, they replace it with their own old blood. No one can tell the difference, and the stores aren't depleted. They are simply switched. The supplies remain identical before and after, down to the blood type. They will even claim no harm done, since most of the blood will be used in operations on older people. Those people don't need or even expect young blood, so what's the difference?
You will say I have no evidence that is happening. But, by the same token, you have no evidence it isn't. My question to you is, "Given how easy it would be, why wouldn't they be doing it?" They do illegal stuff all the time without blinking an eye, so why wouldn't they do this? There is no contract with those high school or college kids, saying the blood must be used in the hospital for surgeries. There is no contract at all. It is a paperless transaction, treated as a gift, so those people collecting that blood can do pretty much anything with it, including using it as shark bait. And even if there are laws on the books, they would be impossible to enforce. No one would be enforcing this, because no one even has any idea it is a possibility.
Which brings us to the next question: if it is happening, is it really that awful? The old people need it and the young people don't much miss it, so why not? Well, yes, it is really that awful, and here is why. It isn't nearly as awful as ritual human sacrifice for blood, so some may see it as a relief, but it is still awful because, in the case it is proven to work, we would need express agreement from young people and their parents that this was something they wanted to do. Then we would need express agreement from society that it was something they wished to see happen. Then, supposing society agreed to it, we would need a system in place to make sure that everyone had equal access to young blood; or, given that the supplies would probably not support that, we would need to allot the blood based on merit. In other words, old people that had given the most to society, and who could continue to give to society with the help of blood transfusions would be at the top of the list. NOT rich people who had been sucking from society their whole lives. Billionaire wolves and parasites would be at the BOTTOM of the list.
Which reminds us why this is really so awful: there is no way to prevent the parasitic billionaires from running the table on this, like they do with everything else. Given that these people run the government at all levels, there would be absolutely no way police this or make it fair in any way. Which is exactly why the issue has never raised its head above ground. They know we would never give them the blood nder any scheme, so they just take it in the dark of night. Like they do with most other things besides blood. And, as with everything else, they will continue to do it no matter how obvious it becomes or how much public opinion is against them.
Our only consolation is that it doesn't in fact seem to be very successful at preventing aging, much less reversing it. If it is happening, we must assume all the wealthiest old people are doing it, and they still look like garbage, as we have already established in previous papers. For instance, George Soros is about 90. If this worked, he should look about 75. Instead, he looks about 120. Bill Gates is about 65. If this worked, he should look about 50. Instead, he looks like a rough and crashing 70. So, as I have said so often, these people need to look to something else. They need to look to their souls, which have gone dark. They don't need new blood, they need light in their souls, and that can only be achieved by changing their ways drastically and immediately.
Besides, if these people really wanted to look younger, shouldn't they just ask people who did look younger how they did it? Wouldn't that be the logical thing to do? And yet no one has ever asked me that question. Not once. I have consistently been guessed at 10-15 years younger than I am my entire adult life, but no one ever asked me how it was done. I guess they just assumed it was my genes or something. But honestly I don't think my genes have that much to do with it. I believe it is mostly a function of my sleep. But the Phoenicians don't want to hear that, which is why they don't ask. They don't have time to sleep a lot, since they are too busy raping the world. And they couldn't sleep a lot if they wanted to, because their dreams prevent it. The bad conscience arises in the dreamworld, so they avoid it. Which of course takes us back to the previous paragraph. To sleep properly, these people would have to quit raping the world and start doing good. Once their souls lightened up a bit, they would be able to sleep, and they would start looking better and younger.
Oh, and pretending to be a philanthropist won't cut it, guys. No one in the spirit world is buying that, as you know. You have to make real changes, not just cosmetic ones. Moving billions into tax exempt charities didn't save Howard Hughes' soul and it won't save yours. Giving up your Dr. Evil world conquering schemes and taking up gardening also won't cut it. You have a lot to atone for and gardening won't fill that void. In the years or days left to you, you must “undo the deed”, turning your ship directly into the Phoenician wind, and sailing against the fleet. Anything less will be judged as a continuance of the failure.
________
Source: Giza Death Star
MECHANICAL "WOMBS" AND THE NEW VAMPIRISM
29 Comments | Call it Conspiracy | By Joseph P. Farrell | April 15, 2021
Today's blog is actually about two different articles sent in this week by two different people, W.G., and V.T. The trouble is (and was) that as I was going through this week's emails and articles to sort which ones to blog about, I was initially at a bit of a loss, because I wanted to blog about both of them, but with all the other articles I received, I could only do one. So which one?
At some point, the light bulb went off when I wondered if, in fact, the two stories were related? Well, today's blog is premised on exactly that high octane speculation. The first story is about Big Tech's new startups in procuring the blood of children for their anti-aging agenda, and the second is about the not-too-far-off creation of artificial wombs:
Tech Companies Put Billions Into Startups Aiming to Harvest the Blood of Children for Rejuvenation, Anti-Aging
Artificial womb improves survival rates for the very smallest
So, before we get to today's high octane speculation, let's look at the two articles and what they're saying, The first is clear enough: studies have shown that the blood of younger organisms is "revivifying" or "rejuvenating" when transfused into older versions:
Which brings me to this from the second article:
But I've become so used to seeing these moral justifications for emergent technology being used to sell them, and then later on down the line we find out that "they" have other plans for them, that I am initially skeptical about "artificial wombs". Don't get me wrong here; I think saving the lives of premature babies is a good thing. But by the same token, I also think saving the lives of babies in the womb is also a good thing and that slaughtering them in the tens of millions is a very evil thing. But in a world being run by an increasingly inhuman and anti-human Mr. Globaloney, I rather suspect in my high octane speculations that saving premature babies won't be the only use to which such technologies will be put, especially if Mr. Globaloney wants to transfuse the blood of the young in order to live a lot longer. I rather suspect - as is already the case with "organ and tissue harvesting" from aborted babies - that the technology will drastically extend the practice of "young blood transfusion" from babies specially "grown and harvested" for the purpose. Add in a dash of cloning ala some science fiction films like The Island with Ewen MacGregor and Sean Bean, where people are literally cloned and then murdered to provide organs to their archetypes in "the real world", and you literally "get the picture."
Then throw in a social credit system, and one might be talking about a world in which you might be allowed to have children "the old fashioned way", and you get an even more gruesome picture.
And of course, because the technocrats who might (and in my estimation will) do such things are such galloping materialists, we will be assured that there is absolutely no difference between the "final products". Except, as always, Mr. Technonazi will not have done any long-term intergenerational studies of the psychological and social implications of their tinkering (unless of course, they have already done so and have kept the results secret). Humanity isn't a cipher, nor a cog in a machine, nor a "resource" to be "harvested"; humanity is in the image and, with some effort and grace, can be in the likeness of God. Such technological "fixes" will thus in my view leave an indelible scar on the human soul, to the detriment of humanity itself. And as always when humanity decides to play God, the real thing often shows up...
See you on the flip side...
Source: Giza Death Star
MECHANICAL "WOMBS" AND THE NEW VAMPIRISM
29 Comments | Call it Conspiracy | By Joseph P. Farrell | April 15, 2021
Today's blog is actually about two different articles sent in this week by two different people, W.G., and V.T. The trouble is (and was) that as I was going through this week's emails and articles to sort which ones to blog about, I was initially at a bit of a loss, because I wanted to blog about both of them, but with all the other articles I received, I could only do one. So which one?
At some point, the light bulb went off when I wondered if, in fact, the two stories were related? Well, today's blog is premised on exactly that high octane speculation. The first story is about Big Tech's new startups in procuring the blood of children for their anti-aging agenda, and the second is about the not-too-far-off creation of artificial wombs:
Tech Companies Put Billions Into Startups Aiming to Harvest the Blood of Children for Rejuvenation, Anti-Aging
Artificial womb improves survival rates for the very smallest
So, before we get to today's high octane speculation, let's look at the two articles and what they're saying, The first is clear enough: studies have shown that the blood of younger organisms is "revivifying" or "rejuvenating" when transfused into older versions:
Powerful tech corporations are putting billions of dollars into startups that intend to harvest the blood of children for the purposes of rejuvenation and anti-aging.The internet has been abuzz for years about "the rich" and "super-rich" taking transfusions of young blood, and there is a whole lore built up around the substance of "adrenochrome". But the bottom line is, that there is some "science" to it, and like most modern "science", the "scientists" and technocrats pushing all of this are willing to do almost anything to bring the anti-aging vision to pass. To be honest, when I read this story, I was not only nauseated by the callous and cold-blooded nature of "fetal harvesting" and the ongoing slaughter of the innocent unborn - notice how the justifications have shifted from "women's rights" to "anti-aging" - but I couldn't help but think of the Matrix trilogy of movies with human beings being literally grown in life-sustaining pods, and their energy harvested while a "virtual reality 'life'" was played for them.
Newsweek published a profile on the growing industry, which includes injecting stem cells taken from dead mutilated fetuses into people, of humans playing God with disastrous consequences.
Stanford University neurologist Tony Wyss-Coray found years ago, with help from Saul Villeda, in 2011 and 2014 that injecting the blood of young mice into older mice had tremendously positive effects on their brain chemistry. His company Alkahest has done additional research in subsequent years.
...
Before the COVID-19 pandemic hit, billions were pouring into this new industry. Some firms want to create infusions to change blood chemistry in the elderly. Others want to alter stem cells by introducing certain proteins into the bloodstream. The NIA is getting in on the action now, planning to spend $100 million over five years to understand “cellular senescence.”
Scientists are already coming up with quaint-sounding justifications to commit atrocities.
...
Once this idea kicks off and becomes mainstream, a lucrative market will develop for children's blood as a depraved and vainglorious society becomes dependent on their blood to maintain their vitality.
Which brings me to this from the second article:
An artificial womb to enhance the chances for survival and quality of life of extremely premature babies by mimicking the conditions of a real womb. Whereas a year ago during the Dutch Design Week there was only an initial design, in the next years the focus will be on working towards the first (pre)clinical tests. Researchers Prof. Frans van de Vosse and Prof. Guid Oei of TU/e and MMC are the initiators of this research.In other words, scientists are now developing artificial wombs - note the "selling point", as always, is a promise for greater human health benefits - to ensure greater survival rate of premature babies, who in the twisted "'moral' 'logic'" of the technocrat, manage to be babies when they're born prematurely, and mere fetuses if they're aborted.
Because the lungs of extremely premature babies are not yet sufficiently developed, the artificial womb will eventually have to replace the incubator and artificial ventilation. This is much more natural, because this technique approaches the conditions of a real womb much more closely. "Using this artificial womb, we want to help extremely premature babies through the critical period of 24 to 28 weeks," says Guid Oei, gynecologist working at MMC and part-time professor at TU/e.
The chances of survival of these babies are small; about half die at 24 weeks of pregnancy. And the surviving babies often have life-long problems with chronic conditions such as brain damage, impaired lung function and/or retina problems with possible blindness as a result. "With each day that the growth of a 24-week fetus in an artificial womb is prolonged, the chance of survival without complications increases. If we can extend the fetal growth of these children in the artificial womb to 28 weeks, the risk of premature death is three times as low," says Oei.
But I've become so used to seeing these moral justifications for emergent technology being used to sell them, and then later on down the line we find out that "they" have other plans for them, that I am initially skeptical about "artificial wombs". Don't get me wrong here; I think saving the lives of premature babies is a good thing. But by the same token, I also think saving the lives of babies in the womb is also a good thing and that slaughtering them in the tens of millions is a very evil thing. But in a world being run by an increasingly inhuman and anti-human Mr. Globaloney, I rather suspect in my high octane speculations that saving premature babies won't be the only use to which such technologies will be put, especially if Mr. Globaloney wants to transfuse the blood of the young in order to live a lot longer. I rather suspect - as is already the case with "organ and tissue harvesting" from aborted babies - that the technology will drastically extend the practice of "young blood transfusion" from babies specially "grown and harvested" for the purpose. Add in a dash of cloning ala some science fiction films like The Island with Ewen MacGregor and Sean Bean, where people are literally cloned and then murdered to provide organs to their archetypes in "the real world", and you literally "get the picture."
Then throw in a social credit system, and one might be talking about a world in which you might be allowed to have children "the old fashioned way", and you get an even more gruesome picture.
And of course, because the technocrats who might (and in my estimation will) do such things are such galloping materialists, we will be assured that there is absolutely no difference between the "final products". Except, as always, Mr. Technonazi will not have done any long-term intergenerational studies of the psychological and social implications of their tinkering (unless of course, they have already done so and have kept the results secret). Humanity isn't a cipher, nor a cog in a machine, nor a "resource" to be "harvested"; humanity is in the image and, with some effort and grace, can be in the likeness of God. Such technological "fixes" will thus in my view leave an indelible scar on the human soul, to the detriment of humanity itself. And as always when humanity decides to play God, the real thing often shows up...
See you on the flip side...
________
Source: Big League Politics
Tech Companies Put Billions Into Startups Aiming to Harvest the Blood of Children for Rejuvenation, Anti-Aging
By Shane Trejo | April 7, 2021
Powerful tech corporations are putting billions of dollars into startups that intend to harvest the blood of children for the purposes of rejuvenation and anti-aging.
Newsweek published a profile on the growing industry, which includes injecting stem cells taken from dead mutilated fetuses into people, of humans playing God with disastrous consequences.
Stanford University neurologist Tony Wyss-Coray found years ago, with help from Saul Villeda, in 2011 and 2014 that injecting the blood of young mice into older mice had tremendously positive effects on their brain chemistry. His company Alkahest has done additional research in subsequent years.
Spanish firm Grifols has purchased Alkahest for $146 million, which may open up Pandora's Box with regards to harvesting the blood of children. They hope to find a synthetic fountain of youth from researching the plasma of their young volunteers. This work is changing the field of geroscience forever, for better or worse.
Until these recent breakthroughs, "people working on diseases did not think that aging was modifiable," says Felipe Sierra, who was formerly director of the Division of Aging Biology under the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
"That is actually what many medical books say: The main risk factor for cardiovascular disease is aging, but we cannot change aging so let's talk about cholesterol and obesity. For Alzheimer's, aging is the main risk factor—but let's talk about the buildup in the brain of beta-amyloid proteins. Now that is beginning to change," he added.
Before the COVID-19 pandemic hit, billions were pouring into this new industry. Some firms want to create infusions to change blood chemistry in the elderly. Others want to alter stem cells by introducing certain proteins into the bloodstream. The NIA is getting in on the action now, planning to spend $100 million over five years to understand "cellular senescence."
Scientists are already coming up with quaint-sounding justifications to commit atrocities.
"If you put this work in an evolutionary perspective, we were not supposed to live that long," says Gerard Karsenty, who is chair of the Department of Genetics and Development at the Columbia University Medical Center.
"Aging is an invention of mankind. No animal species has successfully cheated its own body—cheated nature—except mankind. Elephants may live for 100 years but they lived for 100 years a million years ago. Humans have outsmarted their own body," he added.
Please go to Big League Politics to read more.
Source: Big League Politics
Tech Companies Put Billions Into Startups Aiming to Harvest the Blood of Children for Rejuvenation, Anti-Aging
By Shane Trejo | April 7, 2021
Powerful tech corporations are putting billions of dollars into startups that intend to harvest the blood of children for the purposes of rejuvenation and anti-aging.
Newsweek published a profile on the growing industry, which includes injecting stem cells taken from dead mutilated fetuses into people, of humans playing God with disastrous consequences.
Stanford University neurologist Tony Wyss-Coray found years ago, with help from Saul Villeda, in 2011 and 2014 that injecting the blood of young mice into older mice had tremendously positive effects on their brain chemistry. His company Alkahest has done additional research in subsequent years.
Spanish firm Grifols has purchased Alkahest for $146 million, which may open up Pandora's Box with regards to harvesting the blood of children. They hope to find a synthetic fountain of youth from researching the plasma of their young volunteers. This work is changing the field of geroscience forever, for better or worse.
Until these recent breakthroughs, "people working on diseases did not think that aging was modifiable," says Felipe Sierra, who was formerly director of the Division of Aging Biology under the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
"That is actually what many medical books say: The main risk factor for cardiovascular disease is aging, but we cannot change aging so let's talk about cholesterol and obesity. For Alzheimer's, aging is the main risk factor—but let's talk about the buildup in the brain of beta-amyloid proteins. Now that is beginning to change," he added.
Before the COVID-19 pandemic hit, billions were pouring into this new industry. Some firms want to create infusions to change blood chemistry in the elderly. Others want to alter stem cells by introducing certain proteins into the bloodstream. The NIA is getting in on the action now, planning to spend $100 million over five years to understand "cellular senescence."
Scientists are already coming up with quaint-sounding justifications to commit atrocities.
"If you put this work in an evolutionary perspective, we were not supposed to live that long," says Gerard Karsenty, who is chair of the Department of Genetics and Development at the Columbia University Medical Center.
"Aging is an invention of mankind. No animal species has successfully cheated its own body—cheated nature—except mankind. Elephants may live for 100 years but they lived for 100 years a million years ago. Humans have outsmarted their own body," he added.
Please go to Big League Politics to read more.
________
This is related:
Federal Government Caught Buying 'Fresh' Flesh Of Aborted Babies Who Could Have Survived As Preemies
Debasement of the human species:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.