DNA

[Antares]

Several years ago I was told that DNA is yin in nature; yang is energy which interacts with it.

Keeping this point in my mind, I've read about an issues with replicating the cells being mostly related to DNA in which chains are getting smaller and smaller when replication takes place - and the limit as the research revealed was 50 possible replications. When the replication occurs 50 times, it is not possible any more. So it seems like it does not recieve / have enough energy to combine all those atoms. Here the delibarate conscious "spiritual" work comes in of providing necessery energy for the molecules and cells in order to keep their functions intact and in original state. However, while energy is important, and is probably the biggest reason on how to keep body functioning perfectly and unbroken at cellural and atomic level, I don't think energy is the only factor playing role here, yet most important. Keeping the whole organism in such a perfect state takes more than that, on which we can learn from some ancient texts like from Egypt, India or China.

Did anyone worked on deliberate modification of his or her own DNA - with light (not technology)? Any experiences to share? Life as we know it works thanks to this blueprint (DNA), which is a very special combination of atoms and is in the core of how organism works and how is shaped. This means that working with it directly, rather than indirectly through external manipulation, may result in a direct control over the whole organism at will, including rapid regeneration, producing enzymes etc. With combination of glands and hormons in this way we gain mastery and control over life.

I am currently researching this subject and wondering to what degree DNA is an intelligent system which interacts - intelligently - with energy as quality, or not and then is more mechanical in nature and as such requires more details to be taken into account when trying to modify it. It's worth to note that DNA changes anyway, e.g. when in an ill state. It is a flexible mechanism. Logical analysis suggests the former, as consciousness plays a big role here. Research in progress.

[CFTraveler]

Are you talking about cell apoptosis?

[Antares]

No, I don't think so. If you are referring to the number of times of a cell that is possible to divide, it is so called Hayflick limit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayflick_limit

The main point however is to work with / on DNA. I really do not like the philosophy of modern science providing many overwhelming details without a sensible conclusion of a bigger picture; therefore I rather go with the ancient paradigms where understanding comes from "top to bottom" rather than vice versa - i.e. looking for references and clear relationships, and not mostly with labelling things discovered and isolating them. However, stating this, I do not reject science as such, as it is just another perspective. I think that quitting the assumption that development of understanding the universe / macrocosm and microcosm may go only one way may only result in benefit. It is not just interdisciplinarity between science branches; it is rather meta-interdisciplinarity between paradigms behind the knowledge development approach. This means that whatever science states what cells or atoms do or how a substance reacts to in a changed environment, in the end is not that important, because this is not a complete knowledge, but only a glimpse seen from the material perspective. The influence of energy, and particularly will / consciousness is absent in it. My understanding is that they are missing the essential point here, and as such, science is in most useless in a practical sense for a "spiritual" (so called) person. So it rather gives you explanation why you cannot achieve something because of this and that... and this and that is - again - a superficial, limited understanding of the modern scientific point of view. This in big part refers to modern, western science-based medicine, where people cannot explain and even are not eager to explain so called "miracles", but forcing the pharmacuetical business. I'm saying it because I can see many people today, also from the esoterics fields, looking with a hope into science to help them to justify their personal goals or to bring even a fragile support for their non-scientific desires; but maybe it is better to go the way the ancient people did: they simply explored the universe by themselves. Modern science has a hidden "motivation" behind it: it is technology-driven. And here comes the fundamental conflict between a personal achievement and modern science.

Instead of asking questions like: "what adding just another atom of carbon to a molecule would change in overall reaction", being then often astonished but also overwhelemed by the observed results, trying to isolate things and simplify the enivornment in which a chemical reaction occurs, in order to decrease a number of variables involved, but not really understanding what happens, I prefer to ask questions like "what is a quality of this or that substance" or "what happens when consciousness and / or energy interacts with it"; I have different motivations and goals therefore than a technologically-driven science, yet I find a scientific research results interesting. After all, we all pay for them.

[Antares]

An interesting quote from Richard Lewontin, an American genecisist:

The realization of the role played by DNA has had absolutely no consequence for either therapy or prevention… Treatments for cancer remain today what they were before molecular biology was ever thought of: cut it out, burn it out, or poison it.

[CFTraveler]

An interesting quote from Richard Lewontin, an American genecisist:

It may not be statistically significant, but it is being used as therapy. If it hadn't before it's because they still haven't figured out how to make the therapy work fast enough before the cancer kills the patient. But to say 'no consequence' seems a bit opinionated.

[Antares]

Ok. Do you have or know about any references where and how the knowledge on DNA is used in the cancer treatment?

[CFTraveler]

Ok. Do you have or know about any references where and how the knowledge on DNA is used in the cancer treatment?

No. But a good old friend of mine just died (two years ago) of colon cancer after they tried gene therapy. Unfortunately they waited until everything else failed before trying it. I can't give you any written documentation, just my own experience from talking to her before she passed.

[Antares]

DNA = Digital Nightmare Awaits

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSGK32SBzck

Worth to watch and read, if not at one sit, then in parts.

There are many companies creating vacciness for the [some famous recently virus thing]...

Does the end of humanity 1.0, mean it is the end of humanity, period? ... How we were warned about this very time, nearly 2000 years ago...

You will have to decide what it really means to live as a human. It will be the most important choice of your life...

The [situation] is a completely manufactured public relations marketing operation ... limiting our individual freedoms, the financial consequences, the food supply chain...

STAY AT HOME. DO NOT TRAVEL. SAVE LIVES. #LondonTogether

And so on. We live in the darkest times, as predicted. Keep magic working on for yourself and your close ones, one may become a victim only because of his or her choice (believing in the manipulative agenda). The common ignorance, I'd say, is a part of the mentioned manufacturing (design) of the society.

The link given below the video (I do not make it a link for a reason): anthonypatch.com/entangledmagazine/pdf/free/ENTANGLED_MAGAZINE_Volume4-6.pdf

Look at page 18 and 28 of this pdf, some summary at 41 page about how DNA of the human may be modified without the person's will and awaraness. Good bye to the world we know, we should say.

Compare also with those dreams that I recently faced - particularly notice the dream about a mental and physical mutation (!):

https://www.astraldynamics.com.au/sh...584#post169584
https://www.astraldynamics.com.au/sh...356#post172356
https://www.astraldynamics.com.au/sh...797#post172797

[Antares]

Are these genes which control us, or us who control genes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Lipton

Oh my God, you're all going the wrong way. At some point I realised that they marginalised my work because it didn’t conform to their conventional beliefs and I thought, well, they’re not even being scientists. And I just left the system. I realised the message is more important for the average person than it is to argue in the halls of science

Not a surprise, scientists are not particularly interested in his theories, ignore his thesis and continue their research quest for finding a predetermined solution - mentioned by myself a "magic pill" - i.e. the variant of genes combination which would satisfy the expectations.

But there is one scientist who commented Bruce Lipton's endeavors, David Gorski.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gorski

He makes a comparison of the Bruce Lipton's epigenetics to the law of attraction (implicitly suggesting that the latter is a nonesense). Interestingly, as many such publically selling views scientists, he is very "anti-" type of person, critisizing anything that is not accepted in main stream, including alternative medicine or the anti-vaccination movement. Is there objectivity on wikipedia? Well, I don't know what classifies as propaganda, but the movement has been classified as "Alternative and pseudo‑medicine", with an exponent adnotation, while other articles don't have such headline next to them.

Anyway, it is always worth to think for yourself, and not to follow the collective. Even scientific field experiences mile-stones thanks to people who reconsider presumed but generally accepted "truths". We know so little about the universe - macromosm, and ourselves - microcosm, that openness of mind may only bring more light against the shadows of widely popularized these days ignorance.

[Antares]

To make this explanation short and straightforward, I'd say that it does not matter what medical sciences or science in general tell you what is possible or not, because they are really amusing in making such a bold statements like those (some scientists tend to be more careful in the ultimate statements, however). It does not matter that much if a cell dies and when. What does matter is to make an independent and possibly practical point based on your own understanding of many factors that science does not take into account. This results in being a step or few steps ahead of science and gaining more true, holistic perspective. In fact, most scientists in reality does not understand truly what they are dealing with. They don't see the connections, except those strictly defined and anticipated by the "scientific system". And this really imposes a very tight, limiting framework on what you can gain from an observation of the macro-/micro-cosm. Ancient educated people were scientific as well, but their paradigms were way very much different than those hold by most of modern people. For example, my understanding of DNA is different from what an average scientist thinks of it.