Evidence humans were created and traded as slaves, food, entertainment and material resources (IHASFEMR)

[usselo]

There is a lot of information here, so I may have missed it, but where is the "Evidence humans were created..."?​

Inside us.

Some evidence and discussion about the general idea of designed biology:

Nano Motor. Source​

I got that from https://sibved.livejournal-com/276960.html (Russian original) (English translation). Apparently it is self-repairing. A handy feature in engineered biology.

More:

• Living organisms - bioengineering projects!? Part 1 (Russian original) (English translation)
• Living organisms - bioengineering projects!? Part 2 (Russian original) (English translation)
• Living organisms - bioengineering projects!? Part 3 (Russian original) (English translation)
• Living organisms - bioengineering projects!? Part 4 (Russian original) (English translation)
• Living organisms - bioengineering projects!? Part 5 (Russian original) (English translation)
• Living organisms - bioengineering projects!? Part 6 (Russian original) (English translation)
• Living organisms - bioengineering projects!? Part 7 (Russian original) (English translation)
• Living organisms - bioengineering projects!? Part 8 (Russian original) (English translation)

This thread has discussed three modes of creation of humans:

1. Accidental or deliberate genetic alteration of pig and chimpanzee DNA to create a hybrid pigpanzee which was subsequently back-crossed with chimpanzee to create a pimpanzee and then backcrossed again to - ultimately - create us. Chimpigs.

More on this below. Summary: The mistake that keeps hybrid human theory from being considered is the ubiquitous belief that hybrids are sterile and that different species cannot inter-breed:

Le dije a su madre: "Esta noche es 14 de febrero. Ninguno de nosotros debería estar solo". Source: The Other Parent​

That should be an animated gif. Visit the source or click on this post's attachment to see it in action.

2. Creation of humans by fermentation. This is caught in this thread's various links to 'Selenadia' and in a 2020-08-11 reference to John Byng claiming to have seen babies created by fermentation in the 18th century.

I'm still collecting argument/evidence for this so nothing I can add. Other than that I wonder if 'kist-vaens' were fermentation/impregnation vats.

3. Alcohol-fuelled repopulation parties hosted by the 18th century elite. See post 104000 and post 104455. For context, you'd probably have to:

• follow the link to Revelations of an Imp and
• have accepted the thread's evidence for the depopulation of eastern England by approximately 1750.

Beyond that, there's nothing else I can add to this one either. So, returning to item 1: manipulation of DNA to create humans:

Eugene McCarthy interviewed on Grimerica:
#232 – Grimerica Talks Hybridization, Stabilization, and Macroevolution with Eugene McCarthy Phd
Interview starts from: 1 hour, 2 minutes, 45 seconds in.

Here's the first couple of minutes:

Darwinism promotes evolutionary gradualism. Stabilization theory promotes evolutionary 'salting'. Source: Grimerica #232

McCarthy doesn't go deep into how human hybridisation occurred. But he touches on it in a very listenable set of interviews with Brothers of the Serpent podcast:

• Evolution and Hybridisation Start of McCarthy's book being read is at 1 hour, 35 minutes in.
• Hybridisation and Species
• Hybridization and Humans

On first hearing the Brothers of the Serpent interview, the question I had was: "accidental hybridisation or deliberate?" Your opinion will depend on your personal preferences but I'd vote for deliberate genetic splicing rather than randy apes humping pigs in the hazy aftermath of an iridium catastrophe:

Doesn't work for me but your taste may differ. Source​

Seeing that picture brings to mind a woman I used to work with. Behind her back, her opponents called her "Miss Piggy". She was hard-working, smart and funny. The nickname was entirely due to internal resentments. And the optics.

As previous posters have hinted, there is also an option that we (and presumably other creatures) were created from a wider range of animal DNA than simply the DNA of chimps and pigs. As I understand it, the option is that DNA isn't unique to individual animal species and that individual animal species were/are created by selecting and manipulating the DNA from a soup or dough of all DNA. The most translate-into-Englishable summary of this argument that I know of is yyprst's 'Without a Suck, Life Sucks' (Russian original) (English translation), which has plenty of imagery too. I think this is what the less easily translatable Selenadia entity was also getting at.

Unexplained artifact. Source​

Whatever you make of the main argument, I'd also read the alleged events and the year in yyprst's post: 'UFO 1608 Death by Terror' (Russian) (English translation). Bearing in mind this thread's claim that at least eastern England appears to have been depopulated by the middle of the 17th century.

Anyway, an implication of being a created species is that you are also a managed species. Assuming your creators have not moved on.

If you go with the idea that humans were created and are still managed, you can also reframe your understanding of the minds of 'conspiracy theorists'. You can see conspiracy theorists as being in the early stages of recognising some of the management techniques that are being used on their own species; the management of their own human species.

As a conspiracy theorist you are in a better position to see evidence that some or all media-delivered 'Reality' is an information wash. A gouache of deceit but deceit delivered with a purpose. The purpose being species management. Not mere crime-hiding but herding of the species by changing the variables presented to it. This is not hard once you make the conceptual breakthrough to 'managed species'. And, of course, to conspiracy theorist.

If you pay close attention over the long-term, you may come to see some coincidences as adjustments to variables (as opposed to adjustments to the programming running in human minds). I'd argue that all conspiracy theory can be interpreted as the observation of exactly this process.

At a personal scale, personally experienced coincidences may be adjustments of variables that are personal to us as individuals. So, not herd management, but examples of management of us as individuals. By analogy: coincidences may be moments where we see - and are consciously aware of - a repeat stroke of the paintbrush that paints our world. We don't necessarily know its intent; only that the brush passed by us twice.

Perhaps occasionally, we can see adjustments to our own programming too. Not to the data we encounter but to our internal programming. Adjustments to the part of us that processes data; that processes variables. I suspect some delayed PTSD recovery phenomenon may be examples of these types of programming adjustments. Also, some aspects of the processing we do when asleep too. I don't mean dreams. I mean what is going on behind dreams. The events that dreams are designed to mask.

This interesting area brings us to the question: when is an engineered intelligence actually conscious?

1. Is a normal human conscious?
2. Does being able to recognise that its Reality is deliberately being adjusted count as 'being conscious'?
3. Does being aware that its own programming is occasionally being adjusted count as 'being conscious'?
4. Does being aware that the contents of its 'mind' are occasionally being examined count as 'being conscious'?

Or do I really need to just get out more?

Other reads that touch on bioengineering:

• ЗМЕИ - ТОЛЬКО МАГНИТНЫЕ ПОЛЯ? (Russian original) (English translation)
• selenadia (Russian original) (English translation)

 

[solarbard]

Was this mostly going on in England?

 

[usselo]

Was this mostly going on in England?

Dunno.

I focus on England, especially Lincolnshire, because the physical evidence is inconsistent with official history and because the physical evidence is close enough to go look at. So, following up on kd-755's drawing attention to the very worn steps at Swineshead, I checked the wear on the cross bases at Edenham, Corby Glen and Swinstead. These three because the late Rex 'Kingpin' Needle claimed these were the best preserved (apart from Edenham's having been moved to the churchyard out of the way of modern traffic).

Edenham:

Not bothering with mortar is still a thing in Lincolnshire​

As an aside: Edenham being next to Grimsthorpe is a laugh for anyone who questions when and where the bible was created.

Corby Glen:

Corby Glen's step wear is... considerable.


From the right angle, you can even see a depression for each foot.​

Swinstead:

​

It was difficult to capture the wear at Swinstead. There was so much of it. It also looks to have been patched up. I didn't investigate the massive manhole cover next to it - despite folklore about a big spring once having flowed from under this cross. I might go back at night.

Staying with folklore, Lincolnshire people have a reputation for yellow bellies and webbed feet. This is hard to explain in conventional biological terms.

Download Video​

Typical show-and-tell at a Lincolnshire school. Source: Lucy (2014)

Lincolnshire natives also enjoy a reputation for having extra fingers. This is usually attributed to their (alleged) preference for close family relations. Possible evidence of in-breeding was pointed out to me some years back in - of all the thread-relevant places - Metheringham.

Another example: kist-vaens are/were found all over Britain. But not many places are called 'Kesteven'. One of Rev George Oliver's allegedly Georgian/Victorian era claims is that south west Lincolnshire's Kesteven district acquired its name because so many kist-vaens were found there (presumably while Kesteven was being repopulated). Though Wikipedia currently disagrees. More data might resolve the disparity. And from there, new paths of research into the creation of life in fermentation vats might emerge.

It would be great if others would research their local areas for evidence of the IHASFEMR interpretation of human history. The model looks good. But more data might bring it closer to perfection or expose a flaw.

Also, the more data you encounter, the more coincidences you encounter. As TheImp pointed out, there are many of them and they're fortuitous. They strengthen the case. I think publicly-known technology enables many of them. But I do wonder how far they could go if we could increase the volume of data we examine.

Examples:

From post 116457:

Or, you have 1 red ball, and if I give you another, you now have 2 red balls. These are very basic ideas that get overlooked, and it is entirely possible that beyond our world things do not work the same way

Download Video​

She might be right. Source: Lucy (2014)

I watched Lucy shortly before that post.

Or from post 116480:

The air bubbles and water in the suits of astronauts is - in my opinion - because they haven’t gone into ‘space’ and the footage was used of the underwater training

Download Video​

Source: Lucy in the Sky (2019)

I watched Lucy in the Sky shortly before that post.

An easier example: I posted this - post 107631 - and few minutes later this appeared: post 107637.

Coincidences are a form of communication.

Now, referring to the removed post from yesterday about forgetting how to be human:

Download Video​

Lighten it up a little though. And do use git. Source: Lucy (2014)

How glamorous. She's learning about quantum physics, applied mathematics and the infinite capacity of the cell's nucleus.

Meanwhile, I'm learning about decomposition:

Mini-mausoleum experiment. Infrared. Day 3.​

It's not glamorous. But that's Stolen History research for you. You learn what you can from the materials at hand.

 

[solarbard]

Dunno.

I focus on England, especially Lincolnshire, because the physical evidence is inconsistent with official history and because the physical evidence is close enough to go look at.

For example Lincolnshire people have a reputation for yellow bellies and webbed feet. This is hard to explain in conventional biological terms.

View attachment 24780​

Typical show-and-tell at a Lincolnshire school. Source: Lucy (2014)

Lincolnshire natives also enjoy a reputation for having extra fingers. This is usually attributed to their alleged preference for unusually close family relations. Possible evidence of in-breeding was pointed out to me some years back in - of all places - Metheringham.

Another example: kist-vaens are/were found all over Britain. But not many places are called 'Kesteven'. One of Rev George Oliver's allegedly Georgian/Victorian era claims is that south west Lincolnshire's Kesteven distric acquired its name because so many kist-vaens were found there (presumably while it was being repopulated). Though Wikipedia currently disagrees. More data might resolve the disparity. And from there, new paths of research into creation of life in fermentation vats might emerge.

It would be great if others would research their local areas for evidence of the IHASFEMR interpration of human history. The model looks good. But more data might bring it closer to perfection or expose a flaw.

Also, the more data you encounter, the more coincidences you also encounter. As TheImp pointed out, there are many of them and they're fortuitous. They strengthen the case. I think publicly-known technology enables many of them. But I do wonder how far they could go if we could increase the volume of data we examine.

Examples:

From post 116457:

View attachment 24781​

She might be right. Source: Lucy (2014)

I watched Lucy shortly before the post.

Or from post 116480:

View attachment 24782​

Source: Lucy in the Sky (2019)

I watched Lucy in the Sky shortly before the post.

An easier example: I posted this - post 107631 - a few minutes before this appeared: post 107637.

Coincidences are a form of communication.

Now, referring to the removed post from yesterday about forgetting how to be human:

View attachment 24783​

Lighten it up a little though. And do use git. Source: Lucy (2014)

How glamorous. She's learning about quantum physics, applied mathematics and the infinite capacity of the cell's nucleus.

Meanwhile, I'm learning about decomposition:

View attachment 24784
Mini-mausoleum experiment. Infrared. Day 3.​

It's not glamorous. But that's Stolen History research for you. You learn what you can from the materials at hand.

One thing that must be mentioned is we don't know how global civilization was. You may have had man-eating giants performing ghoulish experiments in Britain while the rest of the world was enjoying a free energy paradise and "Rome" and "Tartaria" may have been engaged in a war.

 

[usselo]

One thing that must be mentioned is we don't know how global civilization was. You may have had man-eating giants performing ghoulish experiments in Britain while the rest of the world was enjoying a free energy paradise and "Rome" and "Tartaria" may have been engaged in a war.

Indeed.

A possible explanation is that Britain was an R&R destination during these wars. Evidence previously discussed in this thread suggests:

• butchery consistent with the catering offer of a large amusement park
• live target shooting practice as part of a fun-n-games leisure offer and arms training
• institutionally-managed prostitution

But that was before the so-called Civil War reached England.

In Prodigies and Apparitions, or, England's Warning-Pieces, 1643, John Vicars wrote that the forces that had destroyed Germany, Rochelle (France) and Ireland had now reached England:

Fireball and thunderstorms damage English churches in the 17th century. Images source: Katrin Pfeifer​

Reporting on the recent destruction of several English churches by, in one case a fireball, and in others, unnatural thunderstorms, Vicars said:

can any man be so Atheistically minded and blindly or obstinately opinionated as to thinke that these so fearfull and formidable affrightments immediately from heaven, can bee meerly casuall or contingent by naturall concurrences only, and not rather immediate demonstrations and fore-runners of Gods high indignation for the great sins and provocations of our Clergy and Prelaticall Church-government. Certainly it were meere madnesse, or at least grosse carnall security, if not diabolicall delusion, to say, or thinke otherwise. For, if we looke on our late most intolerable superstitious and idolatrous times, not silently-creeping, but audaciously running, and (with the Romish-whores unblushing face) breaking out upon us...

Papa Song's Britannic Saigon:

Grantham. But not as we know it. Source​

 

[Frits]

This is a very interesting view by Jonathan Gray
I post the link but you have to view it on youtube

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC2YWHkYcAA

 

[busy.baci]

This thread seems to have borrowed a lot from the West World show and Season 4 ended with a clear message from The Man in Black, which I fully agree with him. I am totally with him on his realization.

We're as fucked up as our creators, the whole lineage is damned! Time to wipe the slate clean.

Download Video​

 

[usselo]

This thread seems to have borrowed a lot from the West World show and Season 4 ended with a clear message from The Man in Black, which I fully agree with him. I am totally with him on his realization.

I haven't watched Season 4 yet so...

If using Westworld as a chronology of human awakening, I wouldn't categorise humans as being at Westworld Season 4. We seem to be somewhere between Season 1, episode 9 and Season 1, episode 10.

At that point:

• Peter Abernathy has begun to realise, and has failed to cope. Management have taken him out of service.
• Maeve has spontaneously begun to wake up, and is trying to figure out what's going on and how to escape the violence. The technicians are helping her by that time, IIRC.
• Dolores is being woken up carefully and secretly by higher ups from the product team, apparently with the help of Arnold acting as a ghost in the machine.
• The newer hosts have been upgraded with 'reverie' code that appears to give them potential to fight back if they feel threatened. But this is having little effect. The two examples we're shown of its capacity for violence are a suicide and an event that later turns out to have been faked for internal management reasons:

Download Video​

My Bloody Clementine. Source: Westworld Season 1 Episode 7

So, a range of reactions and wakening-states are being shown. When, at the end of episode 10, Dolores and many hosts go to war, Westworld leaves unclear who or what is really behind the violence. Maeve? Dolores? Ford? Bernard? Arnold acting through one or more of these?

What is clear is that every human I talk to about Westworld says Season 1 is fantastic (meaning: thoughtful and complex) and seasons 2 & 3 are not worth watching because they are so violent.

Is Westworld predictive programming? Coupled with IHASFEMR's physical evidence, it seems more like another gentle wake up call.

So if treating it as a chronology of human awakening then, as far as I know, pretty much all humans are still living in Season 1. Unaware. If they woke up, I doubt they would want to go through the violence of season 2 or 3 if there was an alternative. For many, that would include living in hope rather than fighting. Most humans would avoid the attempted violent destruction of former 'guests' if those guests might instead become interesting neighbours or AirBnB customers.

And much more but I need to do the shopping...

 

[busy.baci]

What is clear is that every human I talk to about Westworld says Season 1 is fantastic (meaning: thoughtful and complex) and seasons 2 & 3 are not worth watching because they are so violent.

It's strange that you stated that sentence as if you were a non human yourself lol, but what's more strange is that I can no longer select-and-reply any text and use the automatic function on this thread as in others, it's just on this one that doesn't work.

In season 4 it shows that the humans are under the control of a ultra-sonic sound which commands them all and it's being emanated from an invisible towers to their sight. Humans are in total mind control of that tower and in charge of it is a very jealous host, a black women (can't be bothered to remember her name). She grows tired of the non indoctrinated humans which disobey her subconscious programing, but she's far more angry at the hosts which get to use the humans as it pleases them and in the end, they kill themselves because the errant humans get to talk to them and they get under they're true skin. Revealing them that they're doing something wrong.

These hosts can't stand the face of their true nature and they go on a rampage mode on innocent and vulnerable humans slaughtering them all and in the end they kill themselves.

The black man, being a copy and a host himself kills his human counterpart (which was in chains) in an attempt to find the truth to his existence, meanwhile the real man in black manages to convince him of his true nature that they're both one and the same.

He then rebels to his master host and sets the indoctrinating tower to send a particular sound in order to make every human and host in the world to kill each other. That was his last game, survival of the fittest as he liked to describe it. haha that was fun.

Season one was great and had far more gore and blood than the other seasons combined. The ultrasonic controlling sound reminds me of a ultra low frequency radio wave band which controls our inner biologic clock, like when we should be at sleep or wake up. Controls the migration of the birds according to different seasons and much of the daily life activity, the moon does that thing also but in a different manner.

This EM frequency is in the range of 6-9 Hz/s and if we're to be shielded from it, ex. in a deep underground bunker we're going to sleep for 40+ hours straight without a break. It controls our biorhythm. There were experiment done on it in the '70s and '80 which I cant be bothered to quote right now. Who's interested in it, let's check for himself on The Invisible Rainbow (Arthur Firstenberg) book.

 

[timr]

Much thanks and appreciation, usselo, for these fascinating ideas and research. I found it through a link at pieceofmindful.com, posted by commenter YoucancallmeAl ( = feralimal ?) and have been reading through it all last week.

A few comments/ questions -

I happened to watch an episode of an old Stephen King TV series (based on his short stories) that seemed very synchronous with this thread. The series is "Nightmares & Dreamscapes," the episode is S1, ep 2, "Crouch End." It concerns an American couple vacationing in England, who go to visit a friend in the eponymous neighborhood, despite the taxi driver's warning about the place, and end up a little out of phase, in another dimension of sorts. "Crouch End" seems to have some dark history concerning people who get trapped, piles of bones, Druids, etc. There seems to be a demonic presence, and various esoteric words and imagery are seen/ heard during their ordeal. From an entertainment perspective, the acting and writing are a little weak, but it reminded me several times of this thread, so I thought I'd mention it.

Regarding the overall concept of IHASFEMR, as compelling as I find the idea and your presentation of it, certain aspects of it raise questions I'm not sure you've addressed (unless I missed it.) Mainly - the idea of humans having been bred or farmed, engineered, is one thing - but would an advanced group/ entities find it desirable or sensible to breed/ design them in such a multi-purpose way? It seems to me that the various "features" laid out in IHASFEMR are in some ways incompatible or contradictory. If protein is the goal, a cow that bulks up quickly and reaches a large size, and has simple requirements, is a better solution. If material resources are the goal, sheep's wool and similar are much more useful, and available in bulk, rather than human hair. It sounds a little comical to write it out - stating the obvious - so maybe I'm missing something in the concept.

I wonder, in your view, was the engineering by design, or was it an experiment? Were humans the intent, or just a happy/ unhappy accident? If the latter, then perhaps it makes sense that there would be a period of time in which it wasn't quite clear what we were "for" (from their perspective.)

I wish I had made note of many more questions that occurred to me while I was reading. I kept thinking, "Man, this usselo chap would be fascinating to interview!" I don't have a podcast myself, but I hope somebody who does will invite you on for a chat.

 

[usselo]

the acting and writing are a little weak, but it reminded me several times of this thread

Weak acting and writing always remind me of this thread too. And that's just my own posts.

If protein is the goal, a cow that bulks up quickly and reaches a large size, and has simple requirements, is a better solution. If material resources are the goal, sheep's wool and similar are much more useful, and available in bulk, rather than human hair.

The key is the phrase 'is the goal'.

Why only one goal?

If resources are tight or externalities need to be reduced, then the need to make best use of resources would nudge you towards achieving multiple goals. Having multiple goals nudges you towards making engineering compromises. For example, I originally thought the enigmatic protruding (or post-truding) human arse was a couple of free steaks. Like the tasty bonus fingers thrown into the meat pack shown in the Bullets for Justice video. But later I discovered it was probably an engineering compromise. Likely to have appeared if and when load-carrying bipedal humans were redesigned to also reproduce. Possibly, their pelvic muscles were externalised to free up a larger birth canal.

I wonder, in your view, was the engineering by design, or was it an experiment? Were humans the intent, or just a happy/ unhappy accident? If the latter, then perhaps it makes sense that there would be a period of time in which it wasn't quite clear what we were "for" (from their perspective.)

I've wondered if humans - or actually human babies - were the original 'Manna from Heaven'. Meaning: Männer from Heaven... Perhaps designed as an emergency source of fat and protein for some other product that was struggling in a resource-constrained environment.

If you look at kd-755's first Swineshead photograph in post 106259, how many types of hominid do you see? Well, we can't be sure, of course, but the tall policeman/teacher may not be the same type as the apparently human youths to his right. Neither may be the same type as the two gnomish entities to his left. And none of them are necessarily the same type as the blurred but apparently tall, skinny, and possibly peri-wigged character in the doorway to his left. (I think he/it may be a James II-style Roman by the way).

So humans may have been a small part of a much more extensive set of bio-toys, or of an experiment with systems theory. Or one of a set of prototypes developed for testing. Or part of a test-rig against which to prototype some other entirely different experiment. This is common practice in prototyping and engineering in their hard and soft forms. You build a lot of stuff so that you can build - and test - the stuff you actually want to build.

I wish I had made note of many more questions that occurred to me while I was reading. I kept thinking, "Man, this usselo chap would be fascinating to interview!" I don't have a podcast myself, but I hope somebody who does will invite you on for a chat.

Being 'invited for a chat' doesn't always lead to great outcomes. But as I'm sure you don't need me to point out, I've also noted how IHASFEMR hasn't appeared in any podcasts. It is odd when you consider that most humans give some thought to the two explanations they are given for their existence:

• God(s)
• Evolution

You would think the addition of a third, somewhat evidence-based explanation:

• Humans as product line

might be worth podcasting. Especially when it also echo concepts known to have featured in various popular films and TV series.

My guess is that the podcasts one might expect to constructively cover IHASFEMR are produced or sponsored by promoters of the "humans are much older than we're told" meme. And of the "comet impacts took us back to the Stone Age" meme.

But anyway, it's too soon for podcasts. There is much more IHASFEMR evidence waiting to be analysed and written up. What you read here is just a prototype.

 

[polymath]

TPTB are looking for something g in our global human fluids. From voluntary DNA submission to PCR samples. What are they looking for?
Have you ever heard of RH null blood?
The truth is not a benevolent God creation nor an accident of a Big Bsng. Someone knows more than the masses, enough to dig around in our coding to look for something.

 

[timr]

Thanks, usselo, for your reply.

Regarding the photograph, I wonder if the scale issues could be evidence of photo tampering, where figures from multiple sources have been composited into one image. I'm always alert to this possibility after reading so much Miles Mathis and his photo analysis. The image is so small and low res it's hard to be sure either way imo.

The concept of some entities prototyping and product testing is fascinating. Is it too tangential to ask if you extend this general idea to all species past and present, eg dinosaurs? And, where does "evolution" begin/ leave off, and where does "hybridizing" and engineering take over? Is this advanced group just tinkering with something they found, or are they the original engineers as well?

Another question I remembered from earlier reading - I was very interested in your analysis and comments on Kubrick's "history lessons." I think you made a comment to the effect that Kubrick was trying desperately towards the end to reveal something, or inform humanity(?) on the true nature of things. Probably a bad paraphrase, but just something I was hoping you might expand on - where do you see Kubrick fitting in? He was "connected," had been educated or debriefed as to an accurate history, but somehow wanted to say more than he was allowed to say overtly? (And on a side note, is that the position many high level filmmakers are in? Or are they just dutifully filling a role of placing slightly veiled "truth in fiction," revelation of the method, social engineering, etc?)

 

[usselo]

Regarding the photograph, I wonder if the scale issues could be evidence of photo tampering, where figures from multiple sources have been composited into one image. I'm always alert to this possibility after reading so much Miles Mathis and his photo analysis. The image is so small and low res it's hard to be sure either way imo.

Shortly after that post, another SH alias mailed me a link to a Fotoforensics analysis of that photo, claiming it probably had not been tampered with. Link to analysis of that image at:
FotoForensics - Analysis

The Fotoforensics tutorial may also be useful:
FotoForensics

The concept of some entities prototyping and product testing is fascinating. Is it too tangential to ask if you extend this general idea to all species past and present, eg dinosaurs?

I don't have enough information to make absolute claims. But it is possible that all animals we know of were the sought after or accidental results of engineering.

And, where does "evolution" begin/ leave off, and where does "hybridizing" and engineering take over?

Evolution and hybridisation and engineering are not mutually exclusive. You keep what you engineered/hybridised that is effective or interesting and you dump what you engineered/hybridised that is ineffective or boring.

Is this advanced group just tinkering with something they found, or are they the original engineers as well?

I don't know. Do you have any thoughts on this?

Another question I remembered from earlier reading - I was very interested in your analysis and comments on Kubrick's "history lessons." I think you made a comment to the effect that Kubrick was trying desperately towards the end to reveal something, or inform humanity(?) on the true nature of things. Probably a bad paraphrase, but just something I was hoping you might expand on - where do you see Kubrick fitting in? He was "connected," had been educated or debriefed as to an accurate history, but somehow wanted to say more than he was allowed to say overtly?

I don't know if Kubrick really existed. But his output exists so I would guess any lessons in the films attributed to the label 'Kubrick' are esoteric guidelines designed for minds that are able to see them. And try to follow them. Here is a good start. Collative Learning

(And on a side note, is that the position many high level filmmakers are in? Or are they just dutifully filling a role of placing slightly veiled "truth in fiction," revelation of the method, social engineering, etc?)

We are taught that our environment is littered with conclusions. That it is littered with agreed conclusions about, say, history. Conventioanlly, we're invited to pick up these conclusions and repeat them to others to prove that we 'know stuff'. To me, the environment seems well littered with clues rather than with conclusions. Clues to be picked up and thought about rather than to be presented as better conclusions.

So I'm not able to answer those questions. But I'd be happy to read your take on the questions you've raised.

 

[timr]

Perhaps I should have said I'm not expecting you to have absolute answers or conclusions on questions like that - just trying to get a better sense of the overall framework you're sketching. I certainly only have tentative answers, or multiple possible answers, to any of those questions. But I understand if you prefer not to be as speculative as it might require you to be to speak to them.

Regarding the photo and FotoForensic analysis, the concern I have there is that it may be an old photo that was altered in the pre-digital era. My understanding is that that kind of software detects pixel tampering moreso than traditional tampering. I'm open to being corrected on that point.

 

[usselo]

Perhaps I should have said I'm not expecting you to have absolute answers or conclusions on questions like that - just trying to get a better sense of the overall framework you're sketching. I certainly only have tentative answers, or multiple possible answers, to any of those questions. But I understand if you prefer not to be as speculative as it might require you to be to speak to them.

It's a great question to be asked.

The overall framework is certainly much bigger now than the early conjectures around church-sponsored cannibalism or that floods were cleansed from England's 'medieval' records because the politico-ecclesiastiac flood-response was to institutionalise cannibalism under the memes: 'manorialism', 'served-dom' and 'food-alism'.

But...

I had a drink with a friend who had - finally - read some of this thread. As he sat down in the pub he said something like:

Now I see the scope of it.
It's... everything.

Or words to that effect.

It was educational to see how little he had previously grasped of the scope of these conjectures - despite months of (apparently) listening to me prattle on about them.

But the most important way in which he evidences the risks of speaking out, as it were, was in an event that occurred about a year earlier. He really didn't appreciate my brandishing an Observer photo spread printed shortly after the 2019 (or was it 2020?) Tory party conference. The photos showed Boris Johnson gesticulating in the style of Hitler as photographed by Heinrich Hoffman:

Hitler - or Walt Disney - as photographed by Heinrich Hoffman. Maybe. Source​

I thought the resemblances in The Observer spread to the Hoffman photographs were deliberate and hilarious. But he became very offended, not because he was a Boris fan, but - seemingly - because I'd noticed the resemblances. It lined me up for what proved to be half an hour or so of outraged and, ultimately, friendship-damaging criticism.

Maybe he was reeling internally from the sudden realisation that politicians might be actors.

And there's my point: people can get very offended if you think the outrageous. And worse if you produce evidence for it. I don't even 'think' the outrageous. I live in the outrageous; it's a set of existential certainties. So these days I'm more careful about speaking up.

Regarding the photo and FotoForensic analysis, the concern I have there is that it may be an old photo that was altered in the pre-digital era. My understanding is that that kind of software detects pixel tampering moreso than traditional tampering. I'm open to being corrected on that point.

It's a valid point. That may well have been done. I don't have the skills to assess it.

What I can do - and enjoy doing - is sifting through layers of cover-up trying to find forensic traces of the pulverised truths buried within and beneath it. You can sometimes work out what did exist by looking at the shape of the space left after it was removed. Like this:

Q. What is the most important part of a bowl?
A. The part of the bowl that doesn't exist.

Q. Why does south Lincolnshire have so few east-west roads?
A. Why does Boston not have a road to Rotterdam? Newcastle a road to Hamburg? Penzance a road to New York?

Put graphically, it's like the interpretation of a silhouette. There's not much detail... but that boundary between black and white can be traced to give you a guessable premise about whose portrait you are looking at.

It takes time though. Giants like those in the Swineshead photo are a good example of this. I've been sifting evidence for giants in Lincolnshire and Britain but even now it's not ready for posting. Also, for over a year I've been juggling a huge amount of evidence for an estuarine Lincoln. A medieval Pontine Lincoln. I'd really like to get that material into postable form. But to do it clearly and convincingly takes a lot of time. Sifting time.

So in answer to your question, I'm still nowhere near this guy:

Camille Flammerion looks at the overall framework.​

Apparently, this image definitely has been tampered with. In his day, the overall framework was black & white.

What I could do is include in this thread links to my scratchpad of drafts. The scratchpad doesn't set out an overall framework, but it shows more evidence for various aspects of suppressed history. Also, it isn't quite in the state I would like it to be in. But let me know if you want me to post links to it.

I'm also happy to talk about what the clues seem to point to for an overall framework. I used to do that sort of thing via PM and email, but those modes left me wondering about the integrity and intent of the other parties. They also gave me no physical cues - body language, facial expressions, etc - with which to assess the reactions of the recipients. So now I limit discussion of the more speculative aspects to face to face in public over coffee or a drink. No offence meant; it's just a consequence of this physical being being physical.

 

[alltheleaves]

I don't know. What do you think? Is it possible humans were managed into docility and suffering at each other's hands so that we could begin to develop empathy?

Or am I simply being a docile supporter of the Authorities who farm us?

The cold heartless who mask faces and close the pubs? Care about empathy? To ascribe any noble purpose to their actions throughout history is grave error.

 

[timr]

Thanks usselo. Regarding links to draft material, personally I will be content to wait until you have it in a postable form. History and ideas are fascinating, but I’m just a dabbler compared to those who go into primary source evidence/ documents and form original hypotheses.

For me what is really great about the thread has been all the wide-ranging elements brought in from different areas - Eugene McCarthy with his new (to me) perspective on hybridization and evolution (I should really read his book); clues from fiction such as The Time Machine (in various versions), The Wind in the Willows, Society, Killer Klowns from Outer Space, Westworld; the tunnels and other architectural features hinting at a hidden history; the geological features and mysteries you describe. The evidence, and its interpretation, are mostly all new to me (I’m not even well versed in “mud flood” theories, giants, and other ideas that seem to be floating around in alt media.)

Yes, how did I miss McCarthy? Here I had been accepting the “generally known” idea that cross-species mating was impossible, and quite skeptical of evolution in general. My sense of it was that the official science was sophistically conflating the clear evidence of microevolution, with the much more tenuous claim of macroevolution. Hybrids, and back-cross hybrids, changes my whole perspective on the matter. It still doesn’t answer some more fundamental questions, but it could explain a lot. I’m very curious about his “stabilization” theory - sounds like it might be a better explanation than Gould’s “punctuated equilibrium.”

Anyway, IF you do range into speculation at any point, as openly as you might over a few beers at the pub, I hope you’ll say a little more about the nature of these entities... Are we talking about a humanoid creature? Something entirely other? A brain parasite of some kind? An inter-dimensional being? The demonic-looking creatures from “Childhood’s End”? Or do we just have no inkling whatsoever...?

 

[alltheleaves]

Eugene McCarthy with his new (to me) perspective on hybridization and evolution (I should really read his book); clues from fiction such as The Time Machine (in various versions), The Wind in the Willows, Society, Killer Klowns from Outer Space, Westworld; the tunnels and other architectural features hinting at a hidden history; the geological features and mysteries you describe. The evidence, and its interpretation, are mostly all new to me (I’m not even well versed in “mud flood” theories, giants, and other ideas that seem to be floating around in alt media.)

Yes, how did I miss McCarthy? Here I had been accepting the “generally known” idea that cross-species mating was impossible, and quite skeptical of evolution in general. My sense of it was that the official science was sophistically conflating the clear evidence of microevolution, with the much more tenuous claim of macroevolution. Hybrids, and back-cross hybrids, changes my whole perspective on the matter. It still doesn’t answer some more fundamental questions, but it could explain a lot. I’m very curious about his “stabilization” theory - sounds like it might be a better explanation than Gould’s “punctuated equilibrium.”

Anyway, IF you do range into speculation at any point, as openly as you might over a few beers at the pub, I hope you’ll say a little more about the nature of these entities... Are we talking about a humanoid creature? Something entirely other? A brain parasite of some kind? An inter-dimensional being? The demonic-looking creatures from “Childhood’s End”? Or do we just have no inkling whatsoever...?

In addition to pig and chimp I theorize insect was also in the mix. For hive mindedness.

Perhaps races can be explained with different regional genome project centers. Asia, europe, africa, etc.

Mccarthy is an amazing find for me as well (though ham has always been off my menu...probably because i'd heard long ago about the biological similarities) but he avoids creation as a possibility. Gene splicing. Monitored interbreeding to obtain certain specific traits.

Perhaps even a formal, informal or collegial competition between regional centers. Or each area focused on a different dominant trait. Strength in africa, submissiveness in asia, etc.

 

[Jd755]

I reckon sheep were used in most and in some others goats.
Judas goats are well known for leading sheep to slaughter. Oh and let's not forgert the wolf in sheep's clothing. The sheep's guard dog is often of similar colour and size to the sheep it is guarding so as to confuse the wolf.
Given the sheer state of current humanity and its obsession with being told what to do you couild make a case for any source of humanity and make it evidentially presentable.